Comment on Second SpaceX Starship launch ends with explosion. What happens next?
JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 11 months agoSpaceX turned around a falcon 9 booster in 9 days. No way they did a full rebuild in that time.
Comment on Second SpaceX Starship launch ends with explosion. What happens next?
JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 11 months agoSpaceX turned around a falcon 9 booster in 9 days. No way they did a full rebuild in that time.
drdabbles@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Yeeeah, so, you didn’t read your own link I guess? Because it says, on a Tesla simp blog, that it was a refurbishment. Not an inspection.
Here’s a nice write-up from NASA on what the SRB refurb process was. Feel free to read it.
llis.nasa.gov/lesson/836
JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
Again, I’m not trying to say these words have a single defined meaning. I’m saying that SpaceX’s reusable rockets are in a different category compared to SRBs. Call those reusable and refurbishable if you like, or call them anything else. I just use the reusable refurbishable terminology because that’s what everyday astronaut uses.
Do you know the turn around time on an srb? I couldn’t find it in your doc or in the wiki.
drdabbles@lemmy.world 11 months ago
The only difference is propulsive landing. You’re obviously attempting to backpedal here, and it’s not working. SpaceX also refurbishes their units, you’re just bullshitting at this point. It’s painfully transparent.
JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
NASA stopped refurbishing their SRBs because it costs more to do so. SpaceX is able to drastically lower it’s launch costs because of the immense savings they can realize by a quick turnaround for reuse. That’s the difference.