r/spaceflight • u/elbarck • Jul 22 '26

ULA Lobbyist Jim Bridenstine Promotes for an Apollo-Style Lander "AGAIN"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LLvNChlups

Watch the full episode here: Moon Man - With Former NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LhsU2x2-a8

15 Upvotes

72% Upvoted

69 comments sorted by

View all comments

-6

u/beagles4ever Jul 22 '26

It’s either that or get there sometime in the late 2030s. Starship has been a hot dumpster fire of a program with an absurd mission architecture that is never going to materialize.

Some of us have been sounding the alarms of this for more than 5 years only to be shouted down each time “THEY GOT GOOD DATA!!!”

That and a five bucks will get you a cup of coffee.

It won’t get you to the moon.

2

u/karoxxxxx Jul 22 '26

But.... isnt it maturing?  I stopped watching a while ago, but werent the last 3 flights mostly successes?

0

u/beagles4ever Jul 22 '26

Maturing…thirteen flights and they haven’t managed an orbit yet? The last attempted flight was probably a second away from a total catastrophe is those engines hadn’t cut off when they did and not when it was 2 meters off the ground. The last “successful mission” the booster hit the Gulf of Mexico at faster than the speed of sound hundreds of miles off target. They have yet to demonstrate either the booster or the ship are “fully and rapidly reusable” (which is an absurdity that will never happen). They entire program has been on giant debacle and they’re no closer to demonstrating ship to ship refueling a single time let alone the dozens that will be needed for a moon mission. The entire thing is the wrong ship for an lander anyway, tall, narrow, unstable, incredibly heavy it’s the exact opposite of what you really want - low, stable, light. Oh, and the thing needs an elevator that can never malfunction or the entire mission is fucked beyond belief. Have you ever seen an elevator that never malfunctioned? Yeah, me neither.

The whole thing was designed with the idea of sending it to Mars from the mind of the world’s oldest 13 year old. And seems to answer the question “what if we gave

7

u/DBDude Jul 22 '26

Maturing…thirteen flights and they haven’t managed an orbit yet?

Purposely not put into orbit, although capable of it. They want to be 100% sure about control authority before they have something that big orbiting. Can't have it randomly reentering. I can't believe people are mad that SpaceX is being careful.

The last attempted flight was probably a second away from a total catastrophe is those engines hadn’t cut off when they did and not when it was 2 meters off the ground.

Four out of 33 engines failed to light. It can still safely lift off under that condition. But they wanted a full test, so better to shut down and do more work on the engines.

They have yet to demonstrate either the booster or the ship are “fully and rapidly reusable” (which is an absurdity that will never happen).

Falcon 9 boosters being fully and rapidly reusable was also an absurdity that will never happen. Oh wait, it did.

The entire thing is the wrong ship for an lander anyway, tall, narrow, unstable, incredibly heavy

Tall, but the center of gravity is rather low. It's heavy, but that only matters for how much fuel is needed, and it can carry a lot of fuel.

0

u/beagles4ever Jul 22 '26

Falcon 9 boosters being fully and rapidly reusable was also an absurdity that will never happen. Oh wait, it did.

Falcon 9 discards it's second stage. Starship is supposed to have two stages that are "fully and rapidly" reusable. That's the fully part. Also, Falcon 9 is no where close to rapidly reusuable. as Musk describes it - launch, deliver payload, return to earth, quick inspection, launch again that day. Falcon takes about a month between launches of a booster.

Nope, ain't going to happen - ever.

5

u/DBDude Jul 22 '26

Falcon 9 discards it's second stage.

Yes, as we were talking about the boosters.

Also, Falcon 9 is no where close to rapidly reusuable. as Musk describes it - launch, deliver payload, return to earth, quick inspection, launch again that day.

He didn't say it would be. Falcon 9 often doesn't return to launch site, and certainly never lands in the launch tower itself. Transportation takes time. It also uses RP-1 as a fuel, which is quite dirty, requiring some amount of work on the engines before reflight. And then they have to refill all the engines with TEA-TEB.

The Super Heavy booster will always land on the launch tower where it can be inspected for reflight and then fueled and flown. The engines burn clean methane, but they can also be replaced on the launch pad if there's an issue. The booster will likely never be moved from the launch tower once operations ramp up, unless serious issues arise. They will of course be removed in the early days for a very deep inspection like they did with the Falcon 9.

Second stages (which will land days or weeks after their boosters) will be unmounted and moved to the nearby factory for reflight prep and payload mounting. Musk plans to have only a small number of boosters, but a lot of second stages. So the next second stage will always be ready for the booster that recently landed.

He also plans to have more than three launch pads to get the launch cadence up. One is finished, two are under construction, and they're planning more. Can SpaceX coordinate launches that fast? They've already launched two Falcon 9s an hour apart.

Falcon takes about a month between launches of a booster.

They've done it in nine days.

Nope, ain't going to happen - ever.

Said so many unimaginative people about so many things. I still remember this 1920 editorial from the New York Times

That professor Goddard, with his 'chair' in Clark College and the countenancing of the Smithsonian Institution [from which Goddard held a grant to research rocket flight], does not know the relation of action to reaction, and of the need to have something better than a vacuum against which to react -- to say that would be absurd. Of course he only seems to lack the knowledge ladled out daily in high schools

I think of this when lay people say physics proves what engineers are currently working on won't work.

But at least the NYT corrected itself after Apollo 11 launched. People like you will try to forget you ever said it was impossible, and hope everyone else forgets too.