Speaking of fireworks, when is SN15 going to explode?

Hopefully when the weather is clearer!


They still haven't blown up as many starships as yhe Russians did R7s, we knownhow that went :-P

The pictures from Crew-2 are going to be nuts, predawn launches are always the best for the exhaust plume.

That's amazing!

We don't want to see launches. We want to see booster recoveries!

Centerpole90 said:

---

We don't want to see launches. We want to see booster recoveries!

---

Haven't found any good landing videos of today.

Not from today, but.... disaster averted on an early flight.

Landing video will come, once the recovery vehicle gets closer back to shore. 10:40CST begins the part where the crew dragon moves in close to the ISS.

His whole piece on arstechnica is great, fair use excerpt;

Quote:

---

When it comes to in-space activities, SpaceX has leaned on NASA's expertise for Crew Dragon as part of the commercial crew program. And with respect to the kinds of technologies needed for long-duration travel to Mars, through deep space, SpaceX has limited experiencethere is very little recycling of air, water, and other consumables on a Crew Dragon spacecraft. NASA, on the other hand, has been working on these problems for more than a decade with astronauts on the International Space Station.

The space agency has also been conducting studies of Moon and Mars missions for decades, said Abhi Tripathi, who worked as a systems engineer at NASA from 2000 to 2010 performing these kinds of analyses. Tripathi left NASA to work at SpaceX on the cargo and crew versions of the Dragon spacecraft until 2020, when he moved to the University of California, Berkeley.

"NASA will undoubtedly bring to bear a wealth of invaluable information, technology, and subject matter experts to help SpaceX achieve their shared goal of putting humans on Mars," Tripathi told Ars.
NASA and SpaceX collaborating this early on Starship also helps with a host of other issues not related to transportation. A government agency will be needed to facilitate the development of nuclear-based power for the surface of Mars, for example. And any human missions to Mars will raise planetary protection questions and other international concerns. Having NASA alongside SpaceX means the US government will help address all of these issues.

Suddenly, human landings on Mars about a decade from now seems a lot more realistic.

---

Full launch coverage recording:

EA with a video out today discussing why the belly flop maneuver. Have not finished yet, but it is a pretty good dive into it.

nortex97 said:

---

Landing video will come, once the recovery vehicle gets closer back to shore. 10:40CST begins the part where the crew dragon moves in close to the ISS.

His whole piece on arstechnica is great, fair use excerpt;

Quote:

---

When it comes to in-space activities, SpaceX has leaned on NASA's expertise for Crew Dragon as part of the commercial crew program. And with respect to the kinds of technologies needed for long-duration travel to Mars, through deep space, SpaceX has limited experiencethere is very little recycling of air, water, and other consumables on a Crew Dragon spacecraft. NASA, on the other hand, has been working on these problems for more than a decade with astronauts on the International Space Station.

The space agency has also been conducting studies of Moon and Mars missions for decades, said Abhi Tripathi, who worked as a systems engineer at NASA from 2000 to 2010 performing these kinds of analyses. Tripathi left NASA to work at SpaceX on the cargo and crew versions of the Dragon spacecraft until 2020, when he moved to the University of California, Berkeley.

"NASA will undoubtedly bring to bear a wealth of invaluable information, technology, and subject matter experts to help SpaceX achieve their shared goal of putting humans on Mars," Tripathi told Ars.
NASA and SpaceX collaborating this early on Starship also helps with a host of other issues not related to transportation. A government agency will be needed to facilitate the development of nuclear-based power for the surface of Mars, for example. And any human missions to Mars will raise planetary protection questions and other international concerns. Having NASA alongside SpaceX means the US government will help address all of these issues.

Suddenly, human landings on Mars about a decade from now seems a lot more realistic.

---

---

I finally got around to reading this. Really, really good stuff.

Agreed. The truth is that SLS is a death march, imho, and he is right.

Quote:

---

The Artemis Program could also plausibly morph into the SpaceX Lunar Program. How? Under the current plan, a Super Heavy rocket would launch Starship to lunar orbit. Days later, an SLS rocket would launch crew inside an Orion spacecraft, which would dock with Starship in lunar orbit. The crew would transfer to Starship and go down to the Moon. After coming back to lunar orbit on Starship, the astronauts would board Orion and fly back to Earth.

But if Starship is safe for humans to land on the Moon, why would it not be safe for humans simply to launch from Earth on board the vehicle? This would save NASA the cost of an SLS plus Orion launchabout $3 billion per mission, combinedand a tricky rendezvous and docking in lunar orbit. This is probably the future of a truly sustainable lunar exploration program.

That's good for NASA and for SpaceX, but what about the other spaceflight companies? Under the (much) more expensive plan using SLS and Orion, NASA is also funding a who's who of aerospace companies: Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Aerojet Rocketdyne, United Launch Alliance, and many, many other smaller players across the United States. Starship directly supports SpaceX, its limited number of suppliers, and... whatever company ends up building spacesuits for lunar forays.

...
In summary

With Starship, SpaceX has offered what appears to be the best technical solution to NASA's stated goal of a sustainable lunar exploration program. Starship would be able to take far more people and cargo to the Moon than any other solution for NASAand it could do the job for far less money and far more often.

Furthermore, in awarding the Human Landing System contract to SpaceX, NASA has embraced a risky yet highly rewarding technology.

But whereas NASA is a space agency, its feet remain very much grounded in the political orbit of Washington, DC's beltway. Technically, Starship may be the best solution to NASA's needs. But politically, would it be? Probably not. If NASA wants to go to the Moon and beyond, it must work with a multitude of contractors and countries, at least for now.

Ultimately, physics will win out. If SpaceX can make Starship work, eventually NASA's other options for human exploration of the Solar System may come to look ridiculous by comparison. By placing an early bet on Starship last week, NASA has increased the ultimate odds of Starship's success.

For the space agency, this is an audacious and surprising play. But the potential payoff is huge. One day it may allow us to boldly go not just back to the Moon, but far, far beyond.

---

No joke: Elon Musk to host Saturday Night Live on May 8

Road closed tomorrow 12-8

Targeting the 28th for launch;

LOL a bit at the cheap green cargo straps used to hold the rear fins in place (until I presume it's about time to load it up). They did some work last night apparently related to grounding cables but it is finished now;

Other interesting news; Sierra Nevada is spinning their space division off, have 7 cargo missions under contract for dreamchaser. I still hope they make a manned version some day. This would have the ability to do orbit re-boosts for the ISS as well I think (today, we need the Russians still for this because...Boeing.)

Given that they've secured funding and are already prototyping a space station, I don't think there will be any doubt they're going to have a manned vehicle.

What I'm curious about is what they're going to do with boosters. I cannot see then building a business model where their entire access to billion in assets are tied solely to a direct competitors willingness and ability to launch them, especially given boeings tailspin of late. Almost makes me wonder if they won't look at buying a booster design of their own

The Chinese are launching their station this week, or the core module at the least. They're aiming for something akin to MIR.

I guess it depends who buys the spin off. There aren't a lot of man rated boosters separate from ULA in the US that I can see them using unless they hitch up with SpaceX, which seems unlikely at this point (though how funny would it be if SpaceX used some of their newly-raised bond funding to just buy Sierra Space?). I think that's why they chose vulcan centaur in the first place.

We can all dream I suppose that somehow Rocket Lab Neutron evolves into a full fledged private competitor with a man rated new rocket in the F9 class and they also acquire/partner with Sierra Space.

Quote:

---

Rocket Lab also says that Neutron will be capable of human spaceflight. However, Beck says there is "not currently" a crew spacecraft in development.

"Developing a crew vehicle is different than developing a vehicle for satellites." He says Neutron is about keeping crew certification in mind from the beginning of development, to keep that market on the table for the future.

Similarly, Rocket Lab is not currently developing a cargo resupply vehicle.

"Certifying for cargo is a step down in certification from crew. But there is no product in development. The priority is to get to market to serve constellations."

That debut, according to Rocket Lab, could come as soon as 2024. But a lot of work remains to be completed before a Neutron rocket will be ready for flight, including development of a new rocket engine to power the vehicle.

---

Meanwhile, at SLC-6: the countdown to the launch of #NROL82 has begun, and the MST is beginning to roll back away from the #DeltaIVHeavy launcher.#ULA is targeting 4:46 pm ET/20:46 UTC for launch, but weather is only 40% GO due to winds. Tory Bruno says to think calm thoughts. https://t.co/qJmTV6bElP

— Tyler Gray (@TylerG1998) April 26, 2021

I'm not saying they won't launch on the 28th but the wind looks really bad that day. Much better on Friday the 30th.

Looking for a static fire today of the new raptors.

ULA launching now

I’ve been told that Jeff Bezos is livid about this, and views overturning the HLS award as a top priority for Blue Origin. https://t.co/RsmDzW3zSW

— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) April 26, 2021

One interesting point skimming through the protest: Blue Origin says its bid was $5.99 billion, a little more than twice as much as SpaceX’s winning bid. (NASA’s source selection statement only said Blue Origin’s price was “significantly higher.”)

— Jeff Foust (@jeff_foust) April 26, 2021

Static fire about to happen - 1 minute away



EDIT: seemed successful!

Sounds like initial static fire worked. Fingers crossed.

Done

So Bezos is going with the same tactics Elon did to get NASAs attention. When Elon first tried it, if I recall, NASA told him to get to orbit. When he did he gave them a cheaper option.

Bold move Jeff. A more expensive option from an organization that can't do more than sub orbital pops. Bezo's only claim to space fame was first to land a booster; a sub-orbitable class booster.

Musk confirmed static fire was good to go.

Interview discussing re-use etc. is embedded from above article at nasa space flight;

Elon on the "Holy Grail" of *rapid* reusability, including more comments on the Super Heavy booster catching launch tower (and goal of Starship being caught) allowing for a capability to fly vehicles several times a day. https://t.co/W1cQNy5n0A pic.twitter.com/63z5XiwCry

— Chris B - NSF (@NASASpaceflight) April 22, 2021

I wish they'd put out a test schedule for the McGregor facility

It's increasingly constant these days, my mom in Waco can hear the tests loud and clear.