avatar
Incomplete Machine @incompletemachine.bsky.social

not the exact middle, but between the two approaches.

aug 24, 2025, 12:25 pm • 1 0

Replies

avatar
Kimmo Kannala @kimmok.bsky.social

Yep. The SpaceX method works best on simpler and cheaper things. Super Heavy booster was a huge success. And up until IFT6 everything seemed to proceed well. After that, there has been no progress. And perhaps IFT8 failure or IFT9 failure could have been avoided with more carefull "ground work".

image
aug 24, 2025, 12:36 pm • 1 0 • view
avatar
Kimmo Kannala @kimmok.bsky.social

IMO: Some things like re-entry from orbital speed need to be tested in flight. But for the past 6 months, sadly no progress there. I expect tens of flights to be needed before the SShip is fully reusable. I think they hope they can start to fly payloads while they perfect the reusability.

aug 24, 2025, 12:36 pm • 1 0 • view
avatar
Incomplete Machine @incompletemachine.bsky.social

I agree that some things have to happen in test flights, which will always be expensive ventures esp. if they fail. I feel like both organisations need to have more flexibility than they're being allowed - bureaucracy on one side, ego on the other.

aug 24, 2025, 12:46 pm • 0 0 • view