SpaceX and other space news updates
1,346,555 Views |
15355 Replies |
Last: 3 hrs ago by OKCAg2002
When is the flight scheduled for?
Rockdoc said:
When is the flight scheduled for?
No schedule yet but road closures next week means it might fly then.
I'm no expert but I don't think they completed the cryo test today. Didn't get nearly frosty enough.
They are probably doing more cryo tests today (closures on the road, but no notice for residents about test firing the engines). They may not fill the main tank fully, but I do think they'll at least fill the header o2 tank.
Still no word on air space closure for a launch next week but we should know more today/tomorrow I believe.
Still no word on air space closure for a launch next week but we should know more today/tomorrow I believe.
Wondering if they may take off lighter with this one and not run all three engines as long.
So if these next ones land, do they plan to use them again?
double aught said:
So if these next ones land, do they plan to use them again?
Depends on condition I think. Its possible, but we know some pretty big design iterations are coming a few down the road, but they may take them higher and do more thermal tile and engine testing.
What makes you think that?Ag_of_08 said:
Wondering if they may take off lighter with this one and not run all three engines as long.
One challenge I think they have is that they are only putting 3 engines on it, of course, and with this (unlike for instance the 'star hopper') they can't easily just put dead ballast weight amidship to simulate anything realistic as far as the gymnastics at the end goes (putting it in what will become the cargo bay would be...problematic), so more fuel vs. less makes sense (plus the timing on the hover slam cutoff isn't quite as thin, since the T:W ratio isn't so crazy high).
If more dead weight engines were being used I could see loading it with less fuel but I assume the 'heavier/closer to full' fuel was partly to make the descent closer to real total mass in the future (including more raptors/gear etc.) More fuel also makes the 'sloshing' less of an issue.
The primary difference for SN9 vs. 8 is the 401 stainless steel, I believe.
This picture is awesome and perfectly showcases the increased efficiency of privately run projects vs government run projects.
NASA would never EVER leave the remnants of the nose cone from the last rocket that blew up a week or two prior, nor would they just have piles of dirt laying around where their rockets are being worked on. They would have it all in a warehouse, re-assembled for a 3-year forensic examination costing tens-to-hundreds of millions of dollars, sidelining any additional launches until they were 99.99999% sure their hypothesis was right and gave them confidence that their next test would be a success.
Musk comes out 30 seconds after the explosion and says, "So, we are pretty confident inert gas got into fuel line, which caused the rockets to lose thrust and it blew up. Oh, well... We will think up a solution and try it out... See you in 2-3 weeks for the next trial!"
edit: MEANT THUMBS UP!!!!
Also of note is that they just noticed the star hopper sitting around and said "well, let's just use it as a liquid nitrogen tank for storage for future starships".
Sometimes funny, but definitely not 'the nasa way.'
Sometimes funny, but definitely not 'the nasa way.'
They're apparently putting park benches and tables around it as a break area too
Wow lots of great/wild info from Musk. Can't wait to see them catch a super heavy.
I thought that was respectful of him to sort of come to Boeing's defense with the "prototypes are easy, production is hard" comment.
nortex97 said:What makes you think that?Ag_of_08 said:
Wondering if they may take off lighter with this one and not run all three engines as long.
One challenge I think they have is that they are only putting 3 engines on it, of course, and with this (unlike for instance the 'star hopper') they can't easily just put dead ballast weight amidship to simulate anything realistic as far as the gymnastics at the end goes (putting it in what will become the cargo bay would be...problematic), so more fuel vs. less makes sense (plus the timing on the hover slam cutoff isn't quite as thin, since the T:W ratio isn't so crazy high).
If more dead weight engines were being used I could see loading it with less fuel but I assume the 'heavier/closer to full' fuel was partly to make the descent closer to real total mass in the future (including more raptors/gear etc.) More fuel also makes the 'sloshing' less of an issue.
The primary difference for SN9 vs. 8 is the 401 stainless steel, I believe.
Didn't think it, just wondering. The reason they loaded it as far as they did was to allow them to slowly burn their way up to apogee, im wondering if they will make a faster ascent this time, and try not to burn the two decent engines as long in favor of saving them for relight.
Just voicing a thought more than anything
Fair, I just figure keeping the thrust to weight (at minimum 1 engine raptor throttle) as close to 1 as possible makes life easier.
This would be about the wildest thing they've tried.
https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-starship-super-heavy-booster-recovery/
https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-starship-super-heavy-booster-recovery/
Quote:
Instead, Musk says that SpaceX might be able to quite literally catch Super Heavy in mid-air, grabbing the booster before it can touch the ground by somehow slotting an elaborate "launch tower arm" underneath its steel grid fins. Although such a solution sounds about as complex and risky as it gets, it would technically preclude the need for any and all booster recovery infrastructure even including the legs Super Heavy would otherwise need.
While true, catching Super Heavy by its grid fins would likely demand that control surfaces and the structures they attach to be substantially overbuilt especially if Musk means that the crane arm mechanism would be able to catch anywhere along the deployed fins' 7m (23 ft) length. Even more importantly, it seems extraordinarily unlikely that such a complex and unproven recovery method could be made to work reliably on the first one or several tries, implying that early boosters will still need some kind of rudimentary landing legs.
In other words, much like direct-to-launch-mount landings, mid-air-crane-catch recovery is probably not a feature expected to debut on Super Heavy v1.0.
What's a direct-to-launch-mount landing?
They land it where it launched from.double aught said:
What's a direct-to-launch-mount landing?
Landing in the exact spot you need to take off from next, unbelievably precise.
Space Force update
Grab some popcorn...why the ongoing cover-up? The Phenomenon: FF to 1:22:35 https://tubitv.com/movies/632920/the-phenomenon
An est. 68 MILLION Americans, including 19 MILLION Black Children, have been killed in the WOMB since 1973-act, pray and vote accordingly.
TAMU purpose statement: To develop leaders of character dedicated to serving the greater good. Team entrance song at KYLE FIELD is laced with profanity including THE Nword..
The greater good?
An est. 68 MILLION Americans, including 19 MILLION Black Children, have been killed in the WOMB since 1973-act, pray and vote accordingly.
TAMU purpose statement: To develop leaders of character dedicated to serving the greater good. Team entrance song at KYLE FIELD is laced with profanity including THE Nword..
The greater good?
Spacex wins $150 million DoD contract.
A lot of Falcons will be launching in 2021-2022. Elon is targeting 48 launches this year; first one is on Monday. (They had 26 launches in 2020, using 11 boosters.)
A lot of Falcons will be launching in 2021-2022. Elon is targeting 48 launches this year; first one is on Monday. (They had 26 launches in 2020, using 11 boosters.)
Quote:
On average, Atlantic Ocean booster recoveries necessitate around 5-7 days at sea from port departure to port return, meaning that SpaceX's pair of East Coast drone ships could theoretically support 4-6 launches per month with zero downtime for maintenance, repairs, or at-sea weather delays. According to CEO Elon Musk, SpaceX wants to launch 48 times in 2021, meaning that the company could find itself operating its rocket recovery fleet near-continuously without the introduction of along-awaited third drone ship.
In January alone, multiple separate launch calendars forecast four SpaceX launches, beginning with Turksat 5A on January 4th, SpaceX's first dedicated Smallsat Program launch (Transporter-1) on January 14th, and one or two ~60-satellite Starlink missions in the second half of the month. To achieve its 48-launch goal, January will have to have four launches and every other month of 2021 will have to reach a similar cadence. SpaceX completed its first four-launch month ever in November 2020.
Some thoughts...
For those who like to geek out with Kerbal Space Program, you might appreciate this video. It's an edit I did of an existing video called Wanderers, which I thought would apply well to KSP.
Static fire possible today for SN9 and flight possibly within a week or so.
SN10 is completely stacked in the high bay. It will be interesting to see if they bring it over to the 2nd pad before SN9 launches. I'm guessing no due to safety concerns of landing but who knows.
SN10 is completely stacked in the high bay. It will be interesting to see if they bring it over to the 2nd pad before SN9 launches. I'm guessing no due to safety concerns of landing but who knows.
SpaceX will launch Tom Cruise aboard Crew Dragon to the Space Station this year
Quote:
In May last year NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine announced the agency will collaborate with Hollywood action movie actor Tom Cruise to film a movie at the International Space Station (ISS). "NASA is excited to work with Tom Cruise on a film aboard the Space Station! We need popular media to inspire a new generation of engineers and scientists to make NASA's ambitious plans a reality," Bridenstine stated via Twitter "Should be a lot of fun!" the founder of SpaceX Elon Musk said in response. Cruise will launch aboard SpaceX's Crew Dragon spacecraft, that will be launched into orbit atop the company's Falcon 9 rocket.
I wonder if Tom will throw one of his hissy fits if an astronaut/cosmonaut on board doesn't wear their mask to his liking too.
Edit: Tom also needs to look out for Xenu DC-8 space planes while he is up there.
Edit: Tom also needs to look out for Xenu DC-8 space planes while he is up there.
For the landing, could they put the rocket in a hover then reach out with the arm and catch it?
They're clearing the SN8 debris from the landing pad so I agree the flight is likely going to happen pretty soon, watching for TFRs, I really want to be down there for SN9.PJYoung said:
Static fire possible today for SN9 and flight possibly within a week or so.
SN10 is completely stacked in the high bay. It will be interesting to see if they bring it over to the 2nd pad before SN9 launches. I'm guessing no due to safety concerns of landing but who knows.
That's basically the theory. We don't know the mechanism exactly, but with the super heavy, unlike the Falcon 9, it's thrust to weight can be lower than 1:1 so I guess that's what he wants to go for (or very similar to it). It can't be moving down much at all to be 'caught' as it's a huge mass plus the engine cutoff has to happen about simultaneously.Bondag said:
For the landing, could they put the rocket in a hover then reach out with the arm and catch it?
One not-possible render;
I think the biggest compliment paid to Elon is that nobody immediately called him an idiot for saying they wanted to catch it, they instead just said they were excited to see how he'd pull it off.
Featured Stories
See All
A&M at risk of undercut when undertaking trip to underrated Auburn
by Olin Buchanan
48:02
22h ago
3.9k
5:59
19h ago
2.0k
16:53
23h ago
3.1k