— Waleed Mumtaz (@WaleedMumtaaz) January 18, 2022
A whole bunch of port-a-cans too. That would ruin your day!OnlyForNow said:
Those trucks were "in the zone" so dunno if that was planned.
In the comments it sounds like they don't tow cars that are left on a closed road.OnlyForNow said:
Those trucks were "in the zone" so dunno if that was planned.
I'm curious too, my first thought was that it might be methane since the rumors are that the methane tanks they have aren't sufficient.YellowPot_97 said:
Was that LOX?
Back to the moon soon
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 19, 2022
Frank & Beans pic.twitter.com/xJfuW6HKs4
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 20, 2022
Quote:
In other words, SpaceX is on track to demonstrate the ability to launch anywhere from 56 to 66 times annually by actually sustaining that cadence for two or even three months in a row. In July 2020, SpaceX completed a new environmental assessment of its two East Coast launch pads with the FAA, revealing plans and permission for as many as 64 Falcon launches per year in 2022 and up to 70 from 2023 onward. However, it's one thing to claim or plan for 60-70 launches per year but another thing entirely to actually demonstrate the ability to achieve those numbers over multiple months.
Prior to 2021, the most SpaceX had ever launched in a two-month period was eight times at the end of 2020. In 2021, SpaceX managed to launch 20 times in just the first half of the year demonstrating an annual cadence of 40 launches per year if repeated in H2 2021. However, Starlink satellite production ran into major hurdles as SpaceX grappled with semiconductor shortages and attempted to move from V1.0 to a new V1.5 design. As a result, SpaceX only launched three times in Q3 and skipped July and October entirely.
However, Starlink production appeared to recover in Q4 and SpaceX managed to launch another eight times in the last two months of 2021. More importantly, SpaceX actually launched five times in December 2021 and six times between November 24th and December 21st less than four weeks. Heading into 2022, SpaceX has shown no signs of slowing down. On January 4th, a statement from the US Space Force implied that SpaceX was aiming for five Falcon 9 launches in the first month of 2022. Two weeks later, SpaceX has completed three Falcon 9 launches and has two more scheduled on January 27th and 29th. NROL-87 will kick off February on the 2nd and, barring delays, could be SpaceX's 11th launch since December 2nd.
Unofficial manifests suggest that SpaceX has as many as 40 commercial launches tentatively scheduled in 2022, one of which has been completed. In H1 2021, SpaceX further demonstrated the ability to build and launch approximately 1800 Starlink satellites (30 launches worth) in a single year. Of course, issues can and will arise and delays are the norm in spaceflight, so there's a good chance SpaceX will have slow months where customer and Starlink missions both run into delays. Nonetheless, all evidence currently available currently suggests that SpaceX could smash its annual launch record (31 in 2021) with anywhere from 40 to 60+ launches in 2022.
Catching might need more propellant than saved legs mass. 10s at 20m/s² = 100m/s actual dv + 100m/s gravity losses. Suiciding = 5s at 30m/s² = 100m/s actual dv + 50m/s gravity losses -> 50m/s delta at ~200t and 335s Isp = 3t propellant + hovering prop. https://t.co/BjaQK1Qthx
— Aeneas (@Phrankensteyn) January 20, 2022
Quote:
Since at least late 2020, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has been floating the idea of catching Starships and Super Heavy boosters out of the sky as an alternative to having the several-dozen-ton steel rockets land on a basic concrete with legs. This would be a major departure from SpaceX's highly successful Falcon family, which land on a complex set of deployable legs that can be retracted after soft landings. The highly flexible, lightweight structures have mostly been reliable and easily reusable but Falcon boosters occasionally have rough landings, which can use up disposable shock absorbers or even damage the legs and make boosters hard to secure.
As a smaller rocket, Falcon boosters have to be extremely lightweight to ensure healthy payload margins and likely weigh about 25-30 tons empty and 450 tons fully fueled an excellent mass ratio for a reusable rocket. While it's still good to continue that practice of rigorous mass optimization with Starship, the vehicle is an entirely different story. Once plans to stretch the Starship upper stage's tanks and add three more Raptors are realized, it's quite possible that the Starship vehicle will be capable of launching more than 200 tons (~440,000 lb) of payload to low Earth orbit (LEO) with ship and booster recovery.
One might think that SpaceX, with the most capable rocket ever built potentially on its hands, might take advantage of that unprecedented performance to make the rocket itself also likely to be one of the most complex launch vehicles ever simpler and more reliable. Generally speaking, that would involve sacrificing some of its payload capability and adding systems that are heavier but simpler and more robust. Once Starship is regularly flying to orbit and providing lots of flight experience and data, SpaceX might then be able refine the rocket, gradually reducing its mass and improving payload to orbit by optimizing or fully replacing suboptimal systems and designs.
Instead, SpaceX appears to be trying to substantially optimize Starship before it's attempted a single orbital launch. The biggest example is Elon Musk's plan to catch Super Heavies and maybe Starships, too for the sole purpose of, in his own words, "[saving] landing leg mass [and enabling] immediate reflight of [a giant rocket]." Musk, SpaceX executives, or both appear to be attempting to refine a rocket that has never flown. Unfortunately, based on a simulation of a Super Heavy "catch" Musk shared on January 20th, all that oddly timed effort may end up producing a solution that's actually worse than what it's trying to replace.
Based on the simulated telemetry shown in the visualization, Super Heavy's descent to the landing zone appears to be considerably gentler than the 'suicide burn' SpaceX routinely uses on Falcon. By decelerating as quickly as possible and making landing burns as short as possible, Falcon saves a considerable amount of propellant during recovery extra propellant that, if otherwise required, would effectively increase Falcon's effective dry mass and decrease its payload to orbit. In the Super Heavy "catch" SpaceX has shown, the booster actually appears to be landing just on an incredibly small patch of steel on the arms instead of a concrete pad on the ground.
Aside from a tiny bit of lateral motion, the arms appear motionless during the 'catch,' making it more of a landing. Further, Super Heavy is decelerating rather slowly throughout the simulation and appears to hover for almost 10 seconds near the end. That slow, cautious descent and even slower touchdown may be necessary because of how incredibly accurate Super Heavy has to be to land on a pair of hardpoints with inches of lateral margin for error and maybe a few square feet of usable surface area. The challenge is a bit like if SpaceX, for some reason, made Falcon boosters land on two elevated ledges about as wide as car tires. Aside from demanding accurate rotational control, even the slightest later deviation would cause the booster to topple off the pillars and in the case of Super Heavy fall about a hundred feet onto concrete, where it would obviously explode.
Quote:
SPACEX'S STARSHIP MAY do a lot, but it won't do everything.
The company's under-development rocket, first outlined in 2017, is designed to send humans to Mars and beyond. But at its unveiling, CEO Elon Musk said that he wanted "one booster and ship that replaces [the existing] Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, and Dragon." That means a ship that can also launch satellite constellations like Starlink.
But in an interview with Inverse, Rocket Lab CEO Peter Beck suggested that this vision might be a step too far. Speaking after the latest updates to its Neutron rocket project, Beck explained that the Starship wouldn't help build satellite constellations of the future.
"If you want to populate Mars, then the Starship is the vehicle to do that," he says. "If you want to deploy a bunch of constellations and spacecraft in low Earth orbit, 100 tons of payload is just not going to help you."
The comments pour cold water on an often-touted feature of the Starship. Where the Falcon 9 can launch around 16 tonnes to low-Earth orbit in reusable configuration, the Starship can launch over 100 tonnes.
Beyond Musk's comments at the unveiling, he has mentioned after that he plans to use the Starship for satellite launches. In June 2021, he wrote on Twitter that Starlink missions would move to Starship.
Current Falcon 9 rockets launch up to 60 Starlink satellites at a time, which could mean a large increase in launch capacity.
But Starlink isn't the only mega-constellation on the horizon. Amazon's Project Kuiper and rival Telesat also plan to use hundreds of satellites in low-Earth orbit for internet access.
Rocket Lab designed its Neutron, set for its first flight in 2024, to launch eight tonnes. Beck argues that a smaller capacity rocket is better for building out constellations because you can target multiple orbital planes with deliveries to orbit.
"If you want to put the constellation in one orbital plane, then that's fine, but that's not particularly useful," Beck says. "Having multiple planes is generally more useful."
Ag_of_08 said:
Yes, you can target multiple planes with multiple launches that cost more and carry less, or you can build the rocket to be so cheap you launch everything you need in that plane in one go, and keep launching.
I mean, spacex has clearly been locked into one orbital plane as it is right...
As are Rocket Lab's rockets. (Probably more so, since at least Space X has a history of many successful launches to go off of)bmks270 said:Ag_of_08 said:
Yes, you can target multiple planes with multiple launches that cost more and carry less, or you can build the rocket to be so cheap you launch everything you need in that plane in one go, and keep launching.
I mean, spacex has clearly been locked into one orbital plane as it is right...
Costs and logistics of starship are still unknown.
LIVE! JWST L2 Insertion Celebration - James Webb Tracker! #NASA #WEBB https://t.co/RhAWEkV78Z | @YouTube
— Tomasz Milewski (@Log_Lord) January 24, 2022
The James Webb Space Telescope has reached its final destination in space. In one piece. In working condition. Oh my! https://t.co/O4pBf9ZsNO
— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) January 24, 2022
What a star looks like when it dies pic.twitter.com/cORTO8Z6WM
— Space Porn (@redditSpacePorn) January 24, 2022
