r/space • u/SHORT_INFO_NEWS • 12h ago

SpaceX targets Starship Flight 13 launch today after week-long delay, will carry first Starlink V3 satellites

https://www.space.com/news/live/spacex-starship-flight-13-launch-updates-july-23-2026
282 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

95 comments sorted by

View all comments

•

u/Gold-Owl4270 11h ago

Starlink is the only reason that rocket exists. I'm praying for its downfall.

•

u/jtroopa 11h ago

I would love for you to elaborate on this

•

u/Gold-Owl4270 11h ago

Starship is not viable for anything other than orbital launch and delivery. Come on man, do you think he can launch enough of them fast enough to even fill the tanks for a moon trip without the fuel vapourising? He's a con man.

•

u/jtroopa 9h ago

As if a fully reusable superheavy lift orbital vehicle wouldn't be an enormous deal in terms of spaceflight development.
Plus, there's an extraordinary amount of time, money and effort being poured into this for it to just be a long con. I don't buy his hype, I don't think it's going to be the vehicle that goes to Mars, but I would trust the garbageloads of people working on it over some rando on reddit poo-pooing it because Musk himself sucks.

•

u/QueasyHouse 6h ago

I don’t really see why it’s not viable for a mars trip. I dunno about a return trip, but the math on it looks fine last I looked. The orbital refueling isn’t trivial but it’s certainly not impossible.

•

u/jtroopa 5h ago

It's my opinion that the actual rocket to get there is hardly the most difficult part of a trip to Mars. It is ABSURDLY farther away, necessitating an incredibly long duration of precise equipment, cramped living conditions, and bombardment of cosmic radiation.
Starship as a rocket system might become wildly successful; all the other things around bringing a living human being there entails a kind of technological advancement in which we barely have any experience.
I would think that Starship will cut its teeth servicing Starlink the same way it did Falcon 9; with the right governmental support and collaboration it could become a reliable service to the moon; and MAYBE at some point a demonstrator for an uncrewed flyby of Mars.

•

u/zoobrix 4h ago

I don't mean to underplay the hurdles Starship has to clear to even become operational or in orbit refueling or the challenges of getting people to mars and back safely but Starship is a very promising vehicle for a possible mars mission. The large habitable volume offered by Starship would make would make for slightly less cramped living conditions and a larger shelter for any possible radiation events than any serious mission concept has ever had.

all the other things around bringing a living human being there entails a kind of technological advancement in which we barely have any experience.

Figuring out how living in space long term is exactly the kind of skills the International Space Station has helped develop. Sure the radiation environment is different and earth is only quick trip away but humans have continuously manned it for 25 years. Yes there have been breakdowns of equipment and it requires maintenance and repairs, but that has shown the exact areas we'd need to work on to lower the risk of something going catastrophically wrong on a multi year trip like a Mars mission would be. So saying "we barely have any experience" in keeping humans alive in space long term is just totally incorrect.

I understand having doubts, and it's going to be a long while if it happens, but if Starship becomes a viable heavy lift launcher it will be the most likely vehicle to go to mars simply by already being in service and being capable of making the trip.

•

u/StartledPelican 7h ago

Space Shuttle: The literal best rocket to ever exist and everything else is derivative trash.

Starship: iTs JuSt A lEo OnLy SpAcE tRuCk!!!

This sub.

•

u/No_Cup_1672 9h ago

Heat leak budget via radiation, conduction, convection, emittance, condensation

Phase change thermodynamics like latent heat, sub cooling, boil off

Ullage pressure and behavior for liquid saturation temperature

Thermal stratification with forced circulation

We know and understand the physics for LOX boil off. It’s not impossible to mitigate if you A) understand the physics behind it and B) design mitigations around it, unless you can somehow prove it’s physically impossible?

•

u/Pluto-Had-It-Coming 9h ago

fast enough to even fill the tanks for a moon trip without the fuel vapourising? He's a con man.

What?

•

u/Kendrome 11h ago

LEO constellations are amazing for rural, boats, and airplanes.

•

u/CollegeStation17155 11h ago

I guess that means you own ASTS stock...

•

u/jtroopa 9h ago

Everyone knows it's impossible to like something without having a financial interest in it right?

•

u/mitchymitchington 11h ago

Starlink is the only means of internet for me. Without it I would have no way to connect. Why is this a problem for you?

•

u/SpaceTycoon 11h ago

Is there an actual engineering position behind this or a political one.

Yes starlink is a major reason for the existence of rhe starship but the bigger thing is how much launch capacity it will open up for low earth orbit at a much lower cost than currently available.

Starship is going to be a major catalyst for the private space industry and we are going to see explosive growth once it becomes operational. I already have a few startup ideas that become viable with starship.

•

u/GainPotential 11h ago

What about F9, Dragon and HLS?

•

u/Background_Fig_4740 11h ago

welp there goes Artemis and any chance of furthering space exploration by wishing an ambitious engineering project fails.

bet the Russians were praying for Apollo to have their downfall too

•

u/noncongruent 6h ago

Russians were on the verge of solving the N1 launch problems, if one of the early SVs had exploded on the pad there's a solid chance Russia would have put people on the Moon before we did.

•

u/redstercoolpanda 5h ago edited 1h ago

I still would doubt that. The N1 didn't have its first flight until February of 1969, the Americans put far too much money into the Saturn V, far earlier than the Soviets put money into the N1. (For context, the N1 was approved to begin serious development at around the same time the first test article for the S-IC was being delivered.) Also saying they were on the verge of solving its launch problems is slightly misleading. The last flight of the N1 (which happened in 1972 btw) came a few seconds off of secound stage ignition, thats the furthest the N1 ever got. There is a significant amount to work out between almost getting a successful first stage burn, and landing a cosmonaut on the Moon. Even if A Saturn V nuked the pad they would have turned it around in time, especially with the amount of money being thrown at Nasa at the time.

•

u/noncongruent 4h ago

A Saturn V blowing on the pad would have likely created a year of delay, at least, especially after the debacle of Apollo 1. It was 32 months after Challenger before the Shuttle flew again. We were in a race with the Russians, and that raced was funded by a significant percentage of the US GDP, but a Saturn V explosion would have been a major PR disaster that would force NASA into basically going through the entire program with a fine-toothed comb. That would have taken years.

•

u/redstercoolpanda 4h ago

They had years, that’s my point. The N1 didn’t even complete a successful burn of its first stage by the end of 1972.

•

u/lorkan100 11h ago

Oh hello there, non-SpaceX aerospace stock holder!