I'm planning on making a very long drive to see this. Is there a viewing area? I realize it's a Big Falcon Rocket and will be probably be heard from anywhere but is there a designated spot? How close can we get?
I watched the first launch from the southern tip of Isla Blanca Park on South Padre Island and recommend that (I stood on the jetty). I also had recently watched 2 falcon launches in Florida and Starship is incredibly more powerful and awe-inspiring to witness.
Plan to get to the park entrance at least 30 mins early because it takes time to walk through to the southern end, and there will likely be a large crowd.
Stayed at Isla Grand Hotel and there were a bunch of other people hanging out the night before, have fun!
Did you just walk into the park? 30 minutes before launch is cutting it really close if you want to drive in and park. If you’re doing that, try and be there by like 4-5 AM if you can.
I was planning on making the trip but the earliest I can be there is Sunday. Nasaspaceflight's youtube channel mentions this as the best hotel to watch the launch and where they hang out.
I stayed in Port Isabell a few years ago visiting some of my wife's family in the valley. There's a big freaking bridge there that you can see the pad from. I bet that bridge would be a good place to watch as well.
The biggest scheduling point is that you probably need to get there super early, like at least 8 hours beforehand. Not sure how that's going to work out with the small children you mention in a later comment.
I went to see a launch, it was incredible. But beware, they were scheduled for a Monday but cancelled twice due to weather before ultimately launching on a Friday. Luckily I was in town (LA, pretty close to Vandenberg) all week.
I don’t feel connected to this like I did to NASA ventures. To me it’s like going to watch the launch of a billionaire’s mega yacht. Why would I want to see that?
This isn’t about exploration. It’s about profit. And there’s not an easy way to shine that.
If SpaceX wanted profit, all they need to do is team up with Lockheed/Boeing, jack their prices up 100x fold and start waiting for that sweet taxpayer dollar to come rolling in. Getting prices as low as Starship is going to achieve is not a straight forward path to profit. It's like taking an industry dominated by Geo Metros being sold for high end sportscar prices, and then introducing a car that runs like a high end sports car and selling it for Geo Metro prices.
The only way they start making meaningful profit from what they're doing is basically if the exact opposite scenario of what you're implying comes to pass - that space becomes so completely accessible and utilized that they win by scale. And that's the exact opposite of 'mega yachts.' This is explicitly about exploration, colonization, mining, and more. This is about actually opening space to the human race, beyond relying on multi billion dollar toy expeditions, for the first time ever.
To me it’s the opposite, one mans dream to initiate and achieve space travel is much more romantic than a government space programs which is more about nation building.
Making space-based human habitation profitable is the only way we will ever reach the scale of millions of people living & working in space. It's ludicrous to imagine that we would ever send more than a few explorers to space if each person's time there is unprofitable, meaning literally losing money.
This is the most advanced rocket ever built, far superior to anything any government has ever created. It’s a technological marvel and represents progress for the entire species.
You’re depriving yourself of the opportunity to appreciate a once in a lifetime event because some news outlet told you you should dislike the guy who built it.
Incumbents like Lockheed, Boeing, and ULA often face problems such as fraud, waste, and fund misappropriation. Additionally, NASA's progress is hindered by bureaucracy and red tape.
Given these circumstances, depending solely on NASA for space advancement or asteroid deflection may not be the most effective strategy. Those acquainted with federal programs can confirm these issues. Thus, your comment appears uninformed and overlooks the wider impact on American taxpayers.
It’s hard to believe you’re being objective if you think the SLS, costing over $2 billion per launch, is superior and not profit-driven, compared to Starship's estimated $40 million launch cost.
This is much more about exploration than whatever technologically obsolete moribund project NASA is able to push through porkbarrelling process at the expense of a dozen more worthy ones.
Perhaps because this is the creation from the hard work of thousands of gifted and committed people. When SpaceX started I can assure you there was no billionaire involved. Just a guy with a few million he was willing to invest to make space travel a reality for many more people.
Secondly, if you don't think NASA was about profit, you don't understand NASA. Who do you think built all the Apollo rockets? Private contractors working for profit.
Besides, what is wrong with profit? Profit is what makes things sustainable and allows reinvestment to continually improve.
The tech here is way beyond what governments have been able to do so far. It promises to be quite a show. Might blow up again, but they'll learn and build another one.
For the record, I find Musk to be a menace, but the team he put together at SpaceX is phenomenal.
Starship is funded by NASA and built by a for-profit corporation, like SLS is and like the Space Shuttle was. The difference between SpaceX and the contractors that built the Shuttle and SLS is that those contractors kept their CEOs' names out of the news, and gouged like crazy.
How is it not about exploration? And how is it about profit? Who do you think benefits most from having cheaper access to space? Society as a whole benefits way more than old musky.
A billionaire's mega yacht is for his exclusive use. Starship is definitely not that. Starship's purpose has nothing to do with any personal transportation plans for Musk himself.
Being able to do things like this is one of the things that makes me want to emigrate to the US. Healthcare is a huge showstopper though. But if it turns out that private costs more or less what I pay in taxes in Europe then maybe I'll reconsider.
If you’re earning 5 times median wages it might work out - America looks after it’s rich.
If you’re on less then not likely
But remember it’s not just your bank balance. Do you really want to live in a society where your neighbour can’t afford treatment for cancer? Or where your nephew gets weekly “active shooter” drills? Where you get two weeks a year holiday if you’re lucky?
Another PITA is that even if you have insurance you have to go to in network providers. I’m insured and went to the local CVS to get a flu and COVID shot but they said I was out of network, so insurance wouldn’t cover it. Out of pocket was $63 for Flu and $198 for COVID. I still haven’t got my shots.
It's odd to me when people generalize the whole of Europe when it comes to healthcare. The quality of welfare/healthcare in Eastern Europe for example is very different than what Nordic countries like Sweden and Norway offer (they are typically considered the highest quality of living in Europe), or Spain or France.
Likewise, the same can be said of the United States. Quality of private healthcare is going to depend greatly where you are. Remote areas and smaller towns and cities are not going to have access to top-quality physicians like larger cities will have. But, top-quality physicians will have very long waiting lists. I'm currently on the waiting list for a top-national orthopedic surgeon in the Bay Area and my total appointment wait is 5 months.
Even if you just look at healthcare, consider that in the US even the well insured can only afford to be ill once. After that, your insurance becomes expensive, and you're usually not covered for a whole set of potentially related things.
Finally, I can’t wait until they start loading these with starlink satellites and launching once a month. I’d love to make the trip to see one in person once the timing is more predictable. Seeing the progress on Starship is one of the few things that gives me hope for the future.
Absolutely insane amount of coordination and individual mission operations for each one simultaneously. I don't think enough gets said about SpaceX's launch integration systems.
SpaceX's Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy have already revolutionized the space industry with their reusable first stage boosters and rocket engines. This advance in rocket design has resulted in the cost to launch one kilogram of payload to orbit from approximately $15,000 in the pre-SpaceX era, to around $1,400 with the Falcon Heavy.
This graph shows the incredible impact of SpaceX on the volume of rocket launches, with an exponential rise in recent years:
Readit News
Plan to get to the park entrance at least 30 mins early because it takes time to walk through to the southern end, and there will likely be a large crowd.
Stayed at Isla Grand Hotel and there were a bunch of other people hanging out the night before, have fun!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1snFbRby7Ew
https://youtu.be/aWvHrih-Juk?si=rXff0jL4ln3CY14_
https://www.margaritavilleresorts.com/margaritaville-beach-r...
I stayed in Port Isabell a few years ago visiting some of my wife's family in the valley. There's a big freaking bridge there that you can see the pad from. I bet that bridge would be a good place to watch as well.
This video gives you an idea of what it was like watching from there on the first flight:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jxWJvV6OxU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPazqKRf9NM
The biggest scheduling point is that you probably need to get there super early, like at least 8 hours beforehand. Not sure how that's going to work out with the small children you mention in a later comment.
This isn’t about exploration. It’s about profit. And there’s not an easy way to shine that.
The only way they start making meaningful profit from what they're doing is basically if the exact opposite scenario of what you're implying comes to pass - that space becomes so completely accessible and utilized that they win by scale. And that's the exact opposite of 'mega yachts.' This is explicitly about exploration, colonization, mining, and more. This is about actually opening space to the human race, beyond relying on multi billion dollar toy expeditions, for the first time ever.
You’re depriving yourself of the opportunity to appreciate a once in a lifetime event because some news outlet told you you should dislike the guy who built it.
Given these circumstances, depending solely on NASA for space advancement or asteroid deflection may not be the most effective strategy. Those acquainted with federal programs can confirm these issues. Thus, your comment appears uninformed and overlooks the wider impact on American taxpayers.
It’s hard to believe you’re being objective if you think the SLS, costing over $2 billion per launch, is superior and not profit-driven, compared to Starship's estimated $40 million launch cost.
If he doesn't do it who is going to do that?
Surely NASA has has fifty years to do something like this (excepting the ISS which is).
> "billionaire’s mega yacht"
Billionaire hatred is a real thing. He will not be riding on this thing and likely never will be, so I'm not sure this is a great analogy.
Secondly, if you don't think NASA was about profit, you don't understand NASA. Who do you think built all the Apollo rockets? Private contractors working for profit.
Besides, what is wrong with profit? Profit is what makes things sustainable and allows reinvestment to continually improve.
The tech here is way beyond what governments have been able to do so far. It promises to be quite a show. Might blow up again, but they'll learn and build another one.
For the record, I find Musk to be a menace, but the team he put together at SpaceX is phenomenal.
Falcon 9 launch is $62m. NASA SLS launch is $1b.
That's 6% of the cost.
It's about lowering the barrier to launches by dramatically decreasing the cost.
A billionaire's mega yacht is for his exclusive use. Starship is definitely not that. Starship's purpose has nothing to do with any personal transportation plans for Musk himself.
Dead Comment
[0] https://youtu.be/aWvHrih-Juk
Deleted Comment
Deleted Comment
If you’re on less then not likely
But remember it’s not just your bank balance. Do you really want to live in a society where your neighbour can’t afford treatment for cancer? Or where your nephew gets weekly “active shooter” drills? Where you get two weeks a year holiday if you’re lucky?
Likewise, the same can be said of the United States. Quality of private healthcare is going to depend greatly where you are. Remote areas and smaller towns and cities are not going to have access to top-quality physicians like larger cities will have. But, top-quality physicians will have very long waiting lists. I'm currently on the waiting list for a top-national orthopedic surgeon in the Bay Area and my total appointment wait is 5 months.
Deleted Comment
Dead Comment
Dead Comment
This graph shows the incredible impact of SpaceX on the volume of rocket launches, with an exponential rise in recent years:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/yearly-number-of-objects-...
With Starship, SpaceX is striving to make rockets fully reusable, which will transform human civilization by making space vastly more accessible.
https://twitter.com/Alexphysics13/status/1724225785139986648...
Official Launch license has still been not granted. But it will likely launch on Friday.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1wcilQ58hI
T-minus 30 seconds from launch:
https://youtu.be/-1wcilQ58hI?t=2674
Highlights of First SpaceX Starship Flight Test Video (~2 Minutes):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_krgcofiM6M
This is like watching the first container ship get built. It’s going to change so much so quickly — we couldn’t be more stoked.
Deleted Comment