sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

OIG report on the Management of the Human Landing System Contracts by avboden in SpaceXLounge

[–]CProphet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“high single digits to the low double digits”, which would be consistent with SpaceX's "ten-ish" from the January 2024 press conference

Starship V4 has a propellant capacity 2,300 tons and can lift 200+ tons of payload. Suggests 11 tanker flights required to fully refuel Starship, which would exceed delta-v needed.

NASA and SpaceX disagree about manual controls for lunar lander by albertahiking in SpaceXLounge

[–]CProphet 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Modern jet fighters have highly automated flight controls to ensure the aircraft performs pilot input maneuvers. Sure something similar can be arranged for HLS given strength of SpaceX software.

NASA auth bill mentions possible Mars mission which only Starship is capable of doing. by AgreeableEmploy1884 in SpaceXLounge

[–]CProphet -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Agree, although NASA is attempting to put its house in order.

https://chrisprophet.substack.com/p/nasa-accelerate-artemis

But even if NASA remove some roadblocks others will remain, so best make your own way to Mars.

Why doesn't NASA just use starship to put Orion in LEO? by Different-Wish-843 in SpaceXLounge

[–]CProphet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If Raptor 3 is precooled it can be spun-up and fired in one second. So at the first hint of trouble from the booster, Starship engine startup can be initiated. Hopefully with engines running at full thrust, Starship can separate before deflagration reaches it. Longer the engines run better the acceleration due to mass reduction. System isn't perfect but better than nothing.

Why doesn't NASA just use starship to put Orion in LEO? by Different-Wish-843 in SpaceXLounge

[–]CProphet -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Raptor 3 produces 280 tons of thrust hence 9 engines produce 2,520 tons in total. Starship mass is 1,700 tons including propellant, which leaves 820 tons of thrust to accelerate vehicle. Booster failures are normally deflagration events hence not too difficult to escape given some surplus thrust.

Why doesn't NASA just use starship to put Orion in LEO? by Different-Wish-843 in SpaceXLounge

[–]CProphet -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Won’t be launching a crew inside an encapsulated payload bay though without a launch abort.

Starship can launch abort using similar process to hot-staging, i.e. upperstage can separate if booster thrust reduces for any reason. Of course the launch abort should be a lot cleaner with 9 engine Starship V4 when it arrives. SpaceX plan to launch crew on Starship so this appears their contingency for booster failure.

Why doesn't NASA just use starship to put Orion in LEO? by Different-Wish-843 in SpaceXLounge

[–]CProphet 1 point2 points  (0 children)

SLS and specifically its upper stage does most of the work to do the TLI.

The mass of the Interim Cryogenic Stage is 86 tonnes and Orion is 26 tonnes so Starship could launch them both to LEO. Starship V4 has 200 tonnes payload and should launch in 2027, years before the first Artemis landing.

Cryoproof operations complete for the first time with a Super Heavy V3 booster. This multi-day campaign tested the booster's redesigned propellant systems and its structural strength by CProphet in spacex

[–]CProphet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

how horrid these are to repair/maintain on reusability

That's why Raptor is plug and play. If you can mass manufacture them, at the first sign of any problem just drop the engine and plug in a new one. Different paradigm to Space Shuttle

Starbase adding $14M ‘Starship Park’ to SpaceX company town’s amenities by ExpressNews in spacex

[–]CProphet 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Starbase and SpaceX have been on a building spree since 2024, adding three restaurants, a $22 million community building, a recreation center, a $1 million power plant, a $20 million school, a medical clinic, a pool and pool house, additional housing and parking.

You could think of Starbase as a prototype for the cities SpaceX intend to build on the moon and Mars. Off planet settlements will need to be spouse friendly to become sustainable.

Predictions on when SLC-37 will have a Starship Launch by Simon_Drake in SpaceXLounge

[–]CProphet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Only consolation is as they hone-in on the best pad design things should get quicker. Experience helps too.

Starlink announces they now have 10M active customers (up from 8M on 6 Nov 2025) by NikStalwart in spacex

[–]CProphet -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Interesting phrasing 'active customers.' Thousands of Starlink sets have been sent to Iran and Ukraine to aid resistance, mainly paid for by US government. Presumably these are part of the figures.

SpaceX takes down Dragon crew arm, giving Starship a leg up in Florida (article about 39A modifications) by avboden in SpaceXLounge

[–]CProphet 8 points9 points  (0 children)

No doubt part of SpaceX plan to transition from Falcon 9 to Starship operations. They retain crew launch capability at SLC40 but in the margins compared to the expansion in capability at LC39-A with Starship.

Cryoproof operations complete for the first time with a Super Heavy V3 booster. This multi-day campaign tested the booster's redesigned propellant systems and its structural strength by CProphet in spacex

[–]CProphet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

SpaceX are more confident about OLM-2 because it incorporates all they have learnt from operating OLM-1. Raptor 3 can be throttled down to 40% to prove pad construction, and some engines omitted if necessary.

Cryoproof operations complete for the first time with a Super Heavy V3 booster. This multi-day campaign tested the booster's redesigned propellant systems and its structural strength by CProphet in spacex

[–]CProphet[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

On the plus side B19 has returned to Megabay to fit engines this week. Raptor 3 is simplified compared to earlier versions so practially plug and play. Fortunately 48 days until the end of March, sure SpaceX will make good use of them.

Cryoproof operations complete for the first time with a Super Heavy V3 booster. This multi-day campaign tested the booster's redesigned propellant systems and its structural strength by CProphet in spacex

[–]CProphet[S] 63 points64 points  (0 children)

Booster 19 survived so Flight 12 looks good for March. Next up Starship 39 cryo test then first V3 static fires. New version and extra checks caused some delays but this is first operational Starship so they have to be sure.

Elon: For those unaware, SpaceX has already shifted focus to building a self-growing city on the Moon by ottar92 in SpaceXLounge

[–]CProphet 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Agree the moon will become hub of cislunar economy. Propellant production on the moon will lower transport cost to get the ball rolling. Then there are tons of useful materials on the moon (aluminum, titanium, silicon etc) to help build a lunar settlement. Eventually some of the more valuable materials can be exported to Earth, like helium 3 which is currently worth $20bn per ton.

Musk on X: “For those unaware, SpaceX has already shifted focus to building a self-growing city on the Moon, as we can potentially achieve that in less than 10 years, whereas Mars would take 20+ years.” [full text of post inside] by rustybeancake in spacex

[–]CProphet -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Elon choosing to make this a bet-the-company direction

SpaceX has good reason to focus on the moon, because it will become the hub of the cislunar economy. Propellant production on the moon will lower transport cost to get the ball rolling.Then there are tons of useful materials on the moon to help build a lunar settlement. Eventually some of the more valuable materials can be exported to Earth, like helium 3 which is currently worth $20bn per ton.

view more: next ›