Timeline for Why doesn't the BFR/Starship have a launch escape system?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 15, 2023 at 14:11 | answer | added | Steve Pemberton | timeline score: 0 | |
| Aug 22, 2020 at 7:07 | comment | added | Giovanni | @JörgWMittag You're right, in case of the Starship it would be better to have side thrusters like the Dragon spacecraft has. Now you could say "an engine is an engine so let's build the original engine so that it doesn't fail". But do you really think the "original" rocket/engine is built negligently if there's an additional safety system? Also, escape towers are pretty different from the "original" rocket. | |
| Aug 22, 2020 at 6:53 | comment | added | Jörg W Mittag | … compartment that doesn't have a heat shield because it is supposed to be on the leeward side of the vehicle during descent. | |
| Aug 22, 2020 at 6:50 | comment | added | Jörg W Mittag | @Giovanni: The launch escape tower is a rocket. If you can build a launch escape tower that doesn't fail, it follows that you can build a rocket that doesn't fail. If you can build a rocket that doesn't fail, it would make much more sense to build the original rocket so that it doesn't fail. Again, the launch escape tower for Starship would need to be about 5+ Falcon 9s. Or two Space Shuttle SRBs, and as we know, those never fail, right? Also, your launch escape tower needs to generate several million pounds of thrust, all of which it is blasting directly onto the part of the passenger … | |
| Aug 22, 2020 at 5:49 | comment | added | Giovanni | @JörgWMittag There's little probability a launch escape tower would fail. But if your BFR rocket will explode your life will be in jeopardy anyway. Boy will you be happy when you have a launch escape tower attached to your rocket. | |
| Aug 21, 2020 at 18:53 | comment | added | Jörg W Mittag | @Giovanni: Again, a LES is a rocket. It is a rocket that cannot possibly allowed to fail, that must work 100% under any circumstance with no exception. But, if you can build a rocket that never fails … then you don't need a LES, and if you don't trust your rocket, then "strap even more rockets onto the rocket" is by far not an obvious answer at all. Starship weighs three million pounds. A Falcon Heavy would barely be able to lift it off the ground, an actual LES would need multiple Falcon Heavys worth of rockets. | |
| Aug 21, 2020 at 18:05 | comment | added | Giovanni | @JörgWMittag The point of a launch escape tower is to fly the capsule away from a rocket that's in threat to explode. In this case it's something bigger than a capsule, but that would simply require a bigger escape tower. Alternatively the astronauts could wear parachutes during launch. There's nothing difficult about that if seats are made accordingly. | |
| Aug 21, 2020 at 17:57 | comment | added | Jörg W Mittag | @Giovanni: you are saying this as if it were self-evident, but it is not. In fact, in some sense, Launch Escape Systems are completely anti-logical: you are afraid that rockets aren't safe enough, and your answer is to stick even more rockets extremely close to the human passengers. | |
| Aug 21, 2020 at 17:16 | answer | added | SusanW | timeline score: 9 | |
| Aug 21, 2020 at 16:47 | comment | added | Giovanni | @eps Good link, but an emergency system wouldn't hurt and would make the Starship safer. | |
| Aug 20, 2020 at 3:32 | comment | added | eps | everydayastronaut.com/starship-abort and his accompanying video is a good overview | |
| Aug 19, 2020 at 21:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackSpaceExp/status/1296190225983709187 | ||
| Aug 19, 2020 at 16:35 | comment | added | Giovanni | @OrganicMarble Your answer/comment is good too. | |
| Aug 19, 2020 at 16:32 | vote | accept | Giovanni | ||
| Aug 19, 2020 at 15:28 | answer | added | Steve Linton | timeline score: 5 | |
| Aug 19, 2020 at 15:20 | comment | added | Organic Marble | Related: space.stackexchange.com/q/33837/6944 That answer quotes Musk " You know, parachutes don’t work too well and [you can’t have] some standard abort system, and just how do you abort 100 people it’s just not feasible, the key is to make the spaceship itself extremely safe and reliable, and have redundancy in the engines, high safety margins and have [it be] well tested. Much like a commercial airliner. Like they don’t give you parachutes." Basically the same rationale as shuttle, as you say. | |
| Aug 19, 2020 at 15:16 | comment | added | Giovanni | @geoffc It would be too much to have so many parachutes, for up to 500 people per airliner. But sailplanes do have parachutes. The shuttles and the Starship could (have) introduce(d) some too. If the Challenger crew had parachutes they might have saved themselves by jumping out. | |
| Aug 19, 2020 at 15:09 | comment | added | geoffc | Do commercial airliners have escape/abort systems? No parachutes for everyone for example? That is the model they want to follow. | |
| Aug 19, 2020 at 15:01 | history | asked | Giovanni | CC BY-SA 4.0 |