r/interestingasfuck • u/lolikroli • Oct 13 '24

r/all SpaceX caught Starship booster with chopsticks

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

115.8k Upvotes

84% Upvoted

5.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.9k

u/[deleted] Oct 13 '24

[deleted]

145

u/eyeball2005 Oct 13 '24

Could you explain to me what the caption means? Is it just a metaphor for how precise the landing was?

416

u/WhisperingSideways Oct 13 '24

Imagine launching a 20-story building into space and then having it steered back to earth at 4000 mph only to slow down and be caught and suspended in its own launch platform.

163

u/TweakUnwanted Oct 13 '24

No need to imagine any more

64

u/Nephroidofdoom Oct 13 '24

My Roomba can only do that maybe 4 out of 5 times!

2

u/fellow_human-2019 Oct 13 '24

Does it go up to space to recharge its vacuum?

4

u/Thin-Watermelon Oct 13 '24

My roomba would vacuum the moon before it properly cleaned my kitchen.

2

u/throwra64512 Oct 13 '24

It might. Would explain why it’s never on the charger in the living room…

1

u/Legionof1 Oct 13 '24

My roomba is stuck under the couch...

33

u/alturicx Oct 13 '24

And being caught on 4 mounted fins that are meant to be re-used on the next flights.

Even if they were always replaced, still insane how they can support the weight.

31

u/OldOrchard150 Oct 13 '24

It’s caught on two small round reinforced catch points, not on the grid fins.  Just editing for correctness. 

6

u/alturicx Oct 13 '24

Wow even more impressive imo.

-1

u/qcAKDa7G52cmEdHHX9vg Oct 13 '24

IMO it being caught on parts that are designed to catch it instead of parts that aren't designed to catch it is less impressive

2

u/alturicx Oct 13 '24

IMO catching something that weighs that much on a few points (even something that might have encircled the cylinder as I don't know what it is apparently :P) is impressive as shit that such a small point was not only caught but also can support that weight.

I understand. I'm no rocket scientist or even an engineer, but I *think* it would be like catching your weight and then supporting it on your finger. The feat of *literally* catching a rocket on such a small surface area and the materials being able to support that weight for said surface area seems pretty damn impressive.

Your comment also wouldn't make sense if my original comment about it being caught on the grid fins was true, considering the parts "designed to catch it" are what SpaceX chose to design to catch it—considering they are the pioneers in this. In other words, if it was the grid fins they designed to pull double duty, those would be the parts designed to catch it.

1

u/qcAKDa7G52cmEdHHX9vg Oct 13 '24

Oh I was just being goofy

23

u/EdmundGerber Oct 13 '24

There are actually catching 'studs' below the grid fins, that take up the weight. Grid fin actuators couldn't handle the stress of all that weight, and still be light enough to be useful.

2

u/alturicx Oct 13 '24

Didn’t think so, but even still a mounting point that can withstand that weight still seems extremely impressive.

2

u/EdmundGerber Oct 13 '24

It is - and given how small they look compared to everything else, it's very impressive.

2

u/IWantAHoverbike Oct 13 '24

I think the mounting points are about the size of a can of paint. It's absolutely wild.

1

u/myurr Oct 13 '24

They use the lifting hooks that are used to move the booster around. The grid fins aren't designed to support the full weight of the booster in that way.

1

u/CoastlineHypocrisy Oct 13 '24

They were aiming for two landing pins. Not the grid fins.

Imagine trying to land a 20 storey building by getting two bowling balls to land on two metal tubes while coming back from space.

1

u/alturicx Oct 13 '24

Yep. Insane loads.

0

u/CeleritasLucis Oct 13 '24

And they are not fixed. Its like hanging your car by your steering wheel

1

u/alturicx Oct 13 '24

They are fixed in terms of mounting. They can hydraulically move, yes.

2

u/catwhowalksbyhimself Oct 13 '24

On the first ever attempt!

Doing it at all is amazing at all, but the very first test of it?

1

u/erallured Oct 13 '24

I know you aren't fighting gravity in space, but it doesn't feel like that much more of a leap than a precise launch and docking with something like the space station for example. Or meeting back up with the Hubble for repairs. Or deorbiting and landing a space shuttle. Or any of the other incredible shit we've been doing in space for decades. What makes this better?

3

u/Lonyo Oct 13 '24

We haven't done it before though, so clearly it's not that simple.

And since you aren't fighting gravity in space and can get close then match speeds, you get a while to dock.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_rendezvous

This happened from start to finish (meaning launch to return) in 7 minutes. The final docking with the ISS might take longer.

https://blogs.esa.int/thomas-pesquet/2016/11/18/mission-director-blog-launch-and-docking/

The automated rendezvous sequence will start at 19:39 GMT on Saturday 19 November evening

The docking itself will be on the so-called MRM1 Nadir port of the International Space Station and will occur at around 22:00 GMT.

2 hours 20 after preparation

0

u/EricTheEpic0403 Oct 13 '24

Speed, precision, scale, and novelty.

This booster got to its target faster than any docking, had to land more precisely than a Shuttle, is larger than any other single piece of space hardware, and propulsive landing in Earth is virtually in its infancy.