Starlink launch landing failure

[KathyNS]

It looks like last night's Starlink launch did not stick the booster landing. In the video, at the predicted time of landing, there is an orange glow from a distance away, and some seagulls on the barge take off, but no landing.

https://spacenews.com/spacex-launches-s ... ing-fails/

[John Fitzgerald]

We don't need all that junk in orbit, spoiling our views of the natural sky. I hope they go out of business.

[smp]

Here's another article from Ars Technica:
"Just as a Falcon 9 rocket was due to land, the horizon began to glow"

https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/02 ... -attempts/

smp

[goldstar]

Much as I admire Musk's efforts, I do harbor a secret longing that given enough destructive failures with StarLink and StarShip that he may give up.
Pssst! Don't tell anyone I said this.......

[notFritzArgelander]

Much as I admire Musk's efforts, I do harbor a secret longing that given enough destructive failures with StarLink and StarShip that he may give up.
Pssst! Don't tell anyone I said this.......

I’ll keep your secret if you keep mine....

[John Fitzgerald]

Much as I admire Musk's efforts, I do harbor a secret longing that given enough destructive failures with StarLink and StarShip that he may give up.
Pssst! Don't tell anyone I said this.......

I think there would be a lot of Schadenfreude in the astronomy community.

It would be justice-based schadenfreude to me.

[Doug James]

I live in a very dark area in Canada it takes me 45 min. to get to are store and post office. I'm not seeing a big difference in the night sky with the starlink stuff.

[AstroBee]

Much as I admire Musk's efforts, I do harbor a secret longing that given enough destructive failures with StarLink and StarShip that he may give up.
Pssst! Don't tell anyone I said this.......

I'm also not super thrilled about the number of Starlink sats he is hoping to launch but at the same time, there are tons of people around the world that don't currently have access to the internet that this is going to open the world up to.
Also, he is hoping to use the funds raised by the monthly subscriptions to Starlink to fund the mission to get us to Mars. A worthy goal.
I have to admit, I've been "Starlinked" a few times on my astrophotography outings. It's really no big deal and easily eliminated with sigma clipping in the stacking process. Anyone that's tried to take an image of the Orion nebula knows you can't get a single exposure of it without picking up at least one of the geostationary satellites that are up there already.

[helicon]

SpaceX may spinout Starlink as a separate company that has a public offering. SpaceX will then eventually go public and may be a trillion dollar company like Apple. Musk indeed may become the world's first trillionaire. I actually met him in 2000 when he was fundraising for X.com, he had a lot less hair then he does now. As far as the satellites go they are a definite annoyance. But I agree with you Greg that it is a worthy cause, just wish there was another way to achieve it then polluting the skies.

[AntennaGuy]

Re:

We don't need all that junk in orbit, spoiling our views of the natural sky. I hope they go out of business.

AND

Much as I admire Musk's efforts, I do harbor a secret longing that given enough destructive failures with StarLink and StarShip that he may give up.
Pssst! Don't tell anyone I said this.......

I’ll keep your secret if you keep mine....

Will y'all forgive me for signing up for Starlink today?
It promises an enormous improvement over the otherwise very slow internet available to me where I live.
Don't hate me... at least, no more than you could hate Kelly Le Brock, ok?

[John Donne]

The starlink system is NOT about internet for the third world or any other part of the world for that matter. Any advance to that public cause is ancillary to the objective of the stake holder.

[bearnard00]

We don't need all that junk in orbit, spoiling our views of the natural sky. I hope they go out of business.

Starlink as a project has a great consept but it has a lot of mistakes. I guess Space X just needs more time to improve all stuff that doesn`t work now or have some glitches. I think that in the future Starlink will work properly.

[AntennaGuy]

The starlink system is NOT about internet for the third world or any other part of the world for that matter. Any advance to that public cause is ancillary to the objective of the stake holder.

?? Not sure where you're heading with that. In my case, as I already mentioned, it sure looks like Starlink is (eventually) going to be providing me with a connection to the internet, from my home in a semi-rural area of East Texas, that is superior to alternatives currently available to me. East Texas is definitely a "part of the world." I have no objection to fairly compensating, in a 100% voluntary transaction, a company that honestly provides me with a product that I want to purchase, in accordance with agreed-upon terms. Do you have some reason to expect Starlink to not fulfill its contractual obligations and/or to not treat its customers in good faith? I mean, I probably wouldn't make such a deal with Darth Vader...

[notFritzArgelander]

The starlink system is NOT about internet for the third world or any other part of the world for that matter. Any advance to that public cause is ancillary to the objective of the stake holder.

?? Not sure where you're heading with that. In my case, as I already mentioned, it sure looks like Starlink is (eventually) going to be providing me with a connection to the internet, from my home in a semi-rural area of East Texas, that is superior to alternatives currently available to me. East Texas is definitely a "part of the world." I have no objection to fairly compensating, in a 100% voluntary transaction, a company that honestly provides me with a product that I want to purchase, in accordance with agreed-upon terms. Do you have some reason to expect Starlink to not fulfill its contractual obligations and/or to not treat its customers in good faith?

Pardon my butting in.... There is some concern that Starlink is planning on heavy subsidization of its costs by US DoD entities. So a large part of its revenue will not depend on users like yourself but be at the whim of bureaucrats in the Pentagon. Should they so choose their whim could render Starlink uneconomical.

[AntennaGuy]

The starlink system is NOT about internet for the third world or any other part of the world for that matter. Any advance to that public cause is ancillary to the objective of the stake holder.

?? Not sure where you're heading with that. In my case, as I already mentioned, it sure looks like Starlink is (eventually) going to be providing me with a connection to the internet, from my home in a semi-rural area of East Texas, that is superior to alternatives currently available to me. East Texas is definitely a "part of the world." I have no objection to fairly compensating, in a 100% voluntary transaction, a company that honestly provides me with a product that I want to purchase, in accordance with agreed-upon terms. Do you have some reason to expect Starlink to not fulfill its contractual obligations and/or to not treat its customers in good faith?

Pardon my butting in.... There is some concern that Starlink is planning on heavy subsidization of its costs by US DoD entities. So a large part of its revenue will not depend on users like yourself but be at the whim of bureaucrats in the Pentagon. Should they so choose their whim could render Starlink uneconomical.

Interesting. Well, if the DoD does subsidize it, then I hope it provides useful value (and sufficient value to justify the expense) toward our national defense. If not, then it will indeed be a poor investment by US taxpayers.

[notFritzArgelander]

?? Not sure where you're heading with that. In my case, as I already mentioned, it sure looks like Starlink is (eventually) going to be providing me with a connection to the internet, from my home in a semi-rural area of East Texas, that is superior to alternatives currently available to me. East Texas is definitely a "part of the world." I have no objection to fairly compensating, in a 100% voluntary transaction, a company that honestly provides me with a product that I want to purchase, in accordance with agreed-upon terms. Do you have some reason to expect Starlink to not fulfill its contractual obligations and/or to not treat its customers in good faith?

Pardon my butting in.... There is some concern that Starlink is planning on heavy subsidization of its costs by US DoD entities. So a large part of its revenue will not depend on users like yourself but be at the whim of bureaucrats in the Pentagon. Should they so choose their whim could render Starlink uneconomical.

Interesting. Well, if the DoD does subsidize it, then I hope it provides useful value (and sufficient value to justify the expense) toward our national defense. If not, then it will indeed be a poor investment by US taxpayers.

It is under evaluation, whether to use Starlink or not. You might find this interesting. https://arstechnica.com/information-tec ... itary-use/

"To use LEO broadband like Starlink the Army will need flat-panel antennas to track thousands of satellites. The cost of equipping Army units with new ground terminals will be one of the issues that the CRADA will investigate," SpaceNews wrote. As one would expect, the Army will also evaluate security as part of its testing.

So it's not exactly plug an play with existing HW. In a few years we'll know more.

[John Donne]

The starlink system is NOT about internet for the third world or any other part of the world for that matter. Any advance to that public cause is ancillary to the objective of the stake holder.

?? Not sure where you're heading with that. In my case, as I already mentioned, it sure looks like Starlink is (eventually) going to be providing me with a connection to the internet, from my home in a semi-rural area of East Texas, that is superior to alternatives currently available to me. East Texas is definitely a "part of the world." I have no objection to fairly compensating, in a 100% voluntary transaction, a company that honestly provides me with a product that I want to purchase, in accordance with agreed-upon terms. Do you have some reason to expect Starlink to not fulfill its contractual obligations and/or to not treat its customers in good faith? I mean, I probably wouldn't make such a deal with Darth Vader...

Not "heading" anywhere.
I was simply saying what one can read on this subject.

The use of this vast satelite network will of course have the added benefit of internet connection, for a cost of course as you mention. I am in the same boat that you are in as far as "quality" of connection. I am at the end of an old technology dialup speed connection with intermittant capability of "streaming" at best. For me this will be a benefit as it will be for you. There is no question about this.

But the speed of the transactions will also facilitate the global financial sector in ways that will seamlessly connect the global economy and monetary system. And this is the financial value in the venture for the "stake holder". It is the financial markets that will be the first customer. The revenue from this business model will underwrite the consumer use of this new technology.

I make no value judgement in this if that is what you thought.
The "stake holders" are the folks who have financial interest in the venture. I was simply pointing out that the popular notion that this is all about serving the global consumer internet market is incomplete.
I hope this clarifies my earlier post.

[notFritzArgelander]

The starlink system is NOT about internet for the third world or any other part of the world for that matter. Any advance to that public cause is ancillary to the objective of the stake holder.

?? Not sure where you're heading with that. In my case, as I already mentioned, it sure looks like Starlink is (eventually) going to be providing me with a connection to the internet, from my home in a semi-rural area of East Texas, that is superior to alternatives currently available to me. East Texas is definitely a "part of the world." I have no objection to fairly compensating, in a 100% voluntary transaction, a company that honestly provides me with a product that I want to purchase, in accordance with agreed-upon terms. Do you have some reason to expect Starlink to not fulfill its contractual obligations and/or to not treat its customers in good faith? I mean, I probably wouldn't make such a deal with Darth Vader...

Not "heading" anywhere.
I was simply saying what one can read on this subject.

The use of this vast satelite network will of course have the added benefit of internet connection, for a cost of course as you mention. I am in the same boat that you are in as far as "quality" of connection. I am at the end of an old technology dialup speed connection with intermittant capability of "streaming" at best. For me this will be a benefit as it will be for you. There is no question about this.

But the speed of the transactions will also facilitate the global financial sector in ways that will seamlessly connect the global economy and monetary system. And this is the financial value in the venture for the "stake holder". It is the financial markets that will be the first customer. The revenue from this business model will underwrite the consumer use of this new technology.

I make no value judgement in this if that is what you thought.
The "stake holders" are the folks who have financial interest in the venture. I was simply pointing out that the popular notion that this is all about serving the global consumer internet market is incomplete.
I hope this clarifies my earlier post.

Hmmm.... pardon my pedantry.... it's about to go full monty.

The folks who you refer to as "stake holders" defined as "the folks who have financial interest in the venture" are not stakeholders in the sense economists use. They are in fact "shareholders". The stakeholders in the enterprise as used by economists include the customers to be served (like AntennaGuy) and the community at large such as the irritated night sky observer investigating the option of shooting these things down out of the sky. Not that I have anyone in particular in mind, you know..... :Pirate:

[John Donne]

?? Not sure where you're heading with that. In my case, as I already mentioned, it sure looks like Starlink is (eventually) going to be providing me with a connection to the internet, from my home in a semi-rural area of East Texas, that is superior to alternatives currently available to me. East Texas is definitely a "part of the world." I have no objection to fairly compensating, in a 100% voluntary transaction, a company that honestly provides me with a product that I want to purchase, in accordance with agreed-upon terms. Do you have some reason to expect Starlink to not fulfill its contractual obligations and/or to not treat its customers in good faith? I mean, I probably wouldn't make such a deal with Darth Vader...

Not "heading" anywhere.
I was simply saying what one can read on this subject.

The use of this vast satelite network will of course have the added benefit of internet connection, for a cost of course as you mention. I am in the same boat that you are in as far as "quality" of connection. I am at the end of an old technology dialup speed connection with intermittant capability of "streaming" at best. For me this will be a benefit as it will be for you. There is no question about this.

But the speed of the transactions will also facilitate the global financial sector in ways that will seamlessly connect the global economy and monetary system. And this is the financial value in the venture for the "stake holder". It is the financial markets that will be the first customer. The revenue from this business model will underwrite the consumer use of this new technology.

I make no value judgement in this if that is what you thought.
The "stake holders" are the folks who have financial interest in the venture. I was simply pointing out that the popular notion that this is all about serving the global consumer internet market is incomplete.
I hope this clarifies my earlier post.

Hmmm.... pardon my pedantry.... it's about to go full monty.

The folks who you refer to as "stake holders" defined as "the folks who have financial interest in the venture" are not stakeholders in the sense economists use. They are in fact "shareholders". The stakeholders in the enterprise as used by economists include the customers to be served (like AntennaGuy) and the community at large such as the irritated night sky observer investigating the option of shooting these things down out of the sky. Not that I have anyone in particular in mind, you know..... :Pirate:

Thank you for the correction in terms, Fritz.
You are correct .

[Richard]

Interesting but does anyone know how well it will work when there are adverse weather conditions , ie thunderstorms, snow etc ?
We still use satelite TV here in RSA which performs poorly in summer during thunderstorms