SpaceX’s Super Heavy booster came within a second of aborting a “catch” landing attempt on the latest Starship test flight, according to audio posted online, apparently inadvertently, by Elon Musk.…
The SpaceX officials in the audio said they were “trying to focus on booster risk reduction versus ship envelope expansion” for the next flight.
For the “ship envelope expansion”, do you think they will/should do an in-space engine relight test? Or are the seemingly successful flip-landing maneuvers on flights 4 and 5 sufficient? (Has this been covered elsewhere?)
The setting stage, Starship, needs to do in space engine relights.
Starship is supposed to go all the way to the moon. They need to demonstrate that refueling in space is possible, that the engines relight multiple times in orbit and after multiple days, and that it’s capable of landing safely on the moon.
Should they do an orbital test next? Or continue with the previously used ‘almost orbit’ trajectory that ensures the second stage re-enters safely with no need for a relight?
For the “ship envelope expansion”, do you think they will/should do an in-space engine relight test? Or are the seemingly successful flip-landing maneuvers on flights 4 and 5 sufficient? (Has this been covered elsewhere?)
The setting stage, Starship, needs to do in space engine relights.
Starship is supposed to go all the way to the moon. They need to demonstrate that refueling in space is possible, that the engines relight multiple times in orbit and after multiple days, and that it’s capable of landing safely on the moon.
Should they do an orbital test next? Or continue with the previously used ‘almost orbit’ trajectory that ensures the second stage re-enters safely with no need for a relight?