Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Falcon Heavy has 27 engines, Starship 33. Its not that different. And if anything Starship has a simpler engine configuration. This is not some unsolvable problem.


Falcon Heavy has 3 packs of 9 engines, each pack is thoroughly tested. They can treat the whole package as 3 sources of thrust, manipulating them as a one (which they actually do). Every booster has its own fuel tanks, lines and so on.

Also, I don't remember a single engine failure during Falcon Heavy launches. Today we had 8 (?) of them.


Falcon Heavy as complete system is still far more complex. You still need to coordinate all these cores. There is a reason every designer goes to single core as systems grow larger. SpaceX actually had initially planned to do a very large 3 core and then rejected it.

And Falcon Heavy was building on 10 years of Falcon 9 knowlage and an incredibly reliable engine.

Falcon Heavy was launching from a perfectly designed launch pad that didn't throw up huge chunks of debris everywhere.

Its incredibly that people are way to fast to jump to doomsday conclusion from one test.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: