SpaceX and other space news updates

1,480,434 Views | 16317 Replies | Last: 50 min ago by will25u
Mathguy64
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
tk for tu juan said:

What's the final altitude for this satellite?


Pretty sure it's geostationary.
Kenneth_2003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Without looking up the specifics, I think you'd first look at a fully expendable F9 to GTO.
tk for tu juan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Finally got some of the camera views to cycle thru
tk for tu juan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Musk: "The outcome was roughly in what I expected, and maybe slightly exceeding my expectations, but roughly what I expected, which is that we would get clear of the pad."

Musk: "I'm glad to report that the pad damage is actually quite small" and should "be repaired quickly."

Musk: "The vehicle's structural margins appear to be better than we expected, as we can tell from the vehicle actually doing somersaults towards the end and still staying intact."

Musk: From a "pad standpoint, we are probably ready to launch in 6 to 8 weeks.'

"The longest item on that is probably requalification of the flight termination system ... it took way too long to rupture the tanks."

Musk: Time for AFTS to kick in "was pretty long," about "40 seconds-ish."

Musk: "There were 3 engines that we chose not to start," so that's why Super Heavy booster lifted off with 30 engines, "which is the minimum number of engines."

The 3 engines "didn't explode," but just were not "healthy enough to bring them to full thrust so they were shut down"

Musk: At T+27 seconds, SpaceX lost communications due to "some kind of energy event." And "some kind of explosion happened to knock out the heat shields of engines 17, 18, 19, or 20."

Musk: "Rocket kept going through T+62 seconds" with the engines continuing to run. Lost thrust vector control at T+85 seconds.

Musk: Generated a "rock tornado" under Super Heavy during liftoff, but SpaceX does not "see evidence that the rock tornado actually damaged engines or heat shields in a material way." May have happened, but "we have not seen evidence of that."

Musk: "It was actually good to get this vehicle off the ground because we've made so many improvements" in Super Heavy Booster 9 "and beyond."

"Really just needed to fly this vehicle and then move on to the much improved booster."
Musk: After AFTS, "the ship did not attempt to save itself."

Musk: Big thing for next Starship launch is "insuring that we don't lose thrust vector control" with Booster 9."

Musk: "We're going to putting down a lot of steel" under the launch tower before the next Starship flight.

"Debris was really just basically sand and rock so it's not toxic at all ... it's just like a sandstorm, essentially ... but we don't want to do that again."

Musk: "We certainly didn't expect" to destroy the concrete under the launchpad.

Musk: Speculating, but "one of the more plausible explanations is that ... we may have compressed the sand underneath the concrete to such a degree that the concrete effectively bent and then cracked," which is "a leading theory."

Musk: Reason for going with a steel plate instead of a flame trench is that for payloads in the rocket, the worse acoustic environment doesn't matter to the payload since it's about 400 feet away.

Musk: Flight was "pretty close to what I expected."

Musk: "Got pretty close to stage separation ... if we had maintained thrust vector control and throttled up, which we should have ... then we would have made it to staging."

Musk: "Our goal for the next flight is to make it to staging and hopefully succeed."

Musk: "My expectation for the next flight would be to reach orbit." Next flight profile will be a "repeat."

Musk: "The goal of these missions is just information. Like, we don't have any payload or anything -- it's just to learning as much as possible."

Musk: "Definitely don't" expect lunar Starship (under the HLS project) to be the longest lead item for the Artemis III mission.

"We will be the first thing to really be" ready.

Musk: Probably an 80% probability of reaching orbit with Starship this year, and "I think close to 100% change of reaching orbit within 12 months."

Musk: Slowed down Raptor engine production "because we've got more Raptors than we know what to do with."

Musk: Expect to spend ~$2 billion this year on Starship.

Musk: "We do not anticipate needing to raise funding ... we don't think we need to raise funding." Will do the "standard thing where we provide liquidity to employees."

"But to my knowledge we do not need to raise incremental funding for SpaceX."

Musk: For the next flight, "we're going to start the engines faster and get off the pad faster." From engine start to moving Starship "was around 5 seconds, which is a really long time to be blasting the pad." Going to try to cut that time in half.

Musk: Starship didn't get to what SpaceX thought was "a safe point to do stage separation."
Musk: "I thought the SpaceX team did amazing work."

"This is certainly a candidate for the hardest technical problem done by humans."

Musk, on environmental response: "The rocket uses non-toxic propellants and ... scattered a lot of dust, but to the best of our knowledge there has not been any meaningful damage to the environment that we're aware of."

Musk: SpaceX has yet to make a final decision on which Starship prototype and Super Heavy booster will fly the next launch.

Musk: "Going to be replacing a bunch of the tanks in the tank farm, but these are tanks that we wanted to replace anyway."

Musk: "Tower itself is in good shape. We see no meaningful damage to the tower even though they got hit with some pretty big chunks of concrete."

Musk: Starship sliding laterally off the launchpad was "because of the engine failures."
Musk is signing off, and says he plans to do another Starship update in "3 weeks-ish"
PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
fka ftc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PJYoung said:


Environmentalist will sue you if they catch you pouring soda fountain syrup downa storm drain.

If EPA and other feds get involved, then you will know a political hit job is afoot.
bthotugigem05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think SpaceX should pursue every reasonable effort to protect the local environment from harm, in addition to what is required by government agencies. In an odd way, though, the best way is for them to do as many test launches as quickly as they can so the rockets will quit exploding.

The order of operations here is they will ask a judge to prevent the FAA from authorizing any more launches until the suit is heard in court. That's why it was incredibly smart not to include SpaceX in the suit and just the FAA.
Post removed:
by user
Premium
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Bregxit said:

I was unaware of a rocket exploding in south Texas.
Since the premise of exploding "in Boca Chica" is a lie, I think the case dies right there.
Bubblez
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FWIW here is the filing:
https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/biodiversity/pdfs/SpaceXComplaintasFiled.pdf

bthotugigem05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The launchpad debris is what they're focusing on plus the SN8-11 test flights which did explode all over the launch pad.
PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
V8Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm a huge SpaceX follower and supporter. Just out of ignorance I must ask… is it not extremely concerning that the self destruct didn't work for 40 seconds?
aezmvp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm sure that these groups haven't gotten any injections of cash from Boeing or Bezos.
Post removed:
by user
carl spacklers hat
How long do you want to ignore this user?
V8Aggie said:

I'm a huge SpaceX follower and supporter. Just out of ignorance I must ask… is it not extremely concerning that the self destruct didn't work for 40 seconds?
No, not extremely concerning. Just another bug to work on.
People think I'm an idiot or something, because all I do is cut lawns for a living.
fka ftc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So the boca chica "explosion" poisoned the gulf but dumping fuel over Hawaii and the Arctic is celebrated for cool pictures?

https://apnews.com/article/alaska-sky-spiral-aurora-northern-lights-90e767058f328bb95bab62c3f5bed1cc

Its really hard to follow what gets the left riled up these days...
Kenneth_2003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Someone care to explain to me (or really anyone for that matter) the difference between Boca Chica in S. Texas and KSC/SLC in Florida?

Other than 1 is privately run and the other is run by NASA and DoD, and one is new and the other is "where we've always done it. They're both in relatively delicate coastal ecological systems.
PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
V8Aggie said:

I'm a huge SpaceX follower and supporter. Just out of ignorance I must ask… is it not extremely concerning that the self destruct didn't work for 40 seconds?

The explosives worked fine but the holes were apparently too small for such huge tanks.

Doesn't sound like a hard fix.

Kenneth_2003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I noticed the venting when we watched it live at work. I originally thought it was cold gas thrusters trying to aid in the flip maneuver for staging. Much like you see the cold gas (N2) venting on F9 1st Stage after stage separation.

Love Scott's videos. That man is incredibly smart.
TexAgs91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PJYoung said:




What explosion at Boca Chica Beach?
No, I don't care what CNN or MSNBC said this time
Ad Lunam
TexAgs91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PJYoung said:




This is misinformation. There was a comprehensive environmental review last year.
No, I don't care what CNN or MSNBC said this time
Ad Lunam
bthotugigem05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Kenneth_2003 said:

Someone care to explain to me (or really anyone for that matter) the difference between Boca Chica in S. Texas and KSC/SLC in Florida?

Other than 1 is privately run and the other is run by NASA and DoD, and one is new and the other is "where we've always done it. They're both in relatively delicate coastal ecological systems.
The land containing KSC was purchased by NASA in the same lot that included what's now called the Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge. There's really no difference other than the assessments which took place back then and the public/private aspect I guess. The military was already using that coast because it was relatively unpopulated and gave them a nice gravity boost for Minuteman missiles.

Speaking of KSC, they've had plans to develop LC-49 at the northernmost end of the Space Center for years. SpaceX has applied to create LC-49 as a dedicated Starship launch site. As part of that effort, they are conducting a full environmental review, which will take another year probably.

EDIT: adding a note here, Boca Chica was largely a swampy wasteland and Brownsville was a pretty dead town aside from the border. I think the net increase in value of the land and the amount of jobs brought to the area (SpaceX is the largest employer in Cameron County) is worth the risk to the current environment. I think there are good points to be made about SH 4 leading out to the launch pad and the frenetic pace of SpaceX not allowing for a better-suited road and parking area to be built.
will25u
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Post removed:
by user
tamfal86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Bregxit said:

Available only in certain areas.

Not in Texas….
Tamfal86
Kenneth_2003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Interesting color thank you.

I was being a little, ok maybe a lot, tongue in cheek. Both locations are very sensitive coastal environments. I think your comment about NASA vs private company is the real key. Your comments about SpaceX impacts on Cameron County are spot on as well. I'm sure there's more than a few that cannot stand to see an infusion of capital in the community, or they're upset they aren't on the take.
bthotugigem05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It's the grift of progress. I'm about as pro-space as it gets but there's still been some negative impact to that area for sure. Just needs to be balanced.
Sea Speed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
tamfal86 said:

Bregxit said:

Available only in certain areas.

Not in Texas….


Damn. Was about to order right now.
PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Starlink covers all of the United States, including Texas, but capacity is limited. As Starlink launches more of their satellite constellation, availability will improve. The best way to check for availability is to visit Starlink.com and enter in your address. Jan 30, 2023
It's available for the less populated parts of Texas which I guess is kind of the point.

https://www.starlink.com/map

OKCAg2002
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
We are right on the edge in OKC. Any idea what it runs per month for residential? And, how would starlink compare with traditional fiber and cable internet?
Demosthenes81
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
OKCAg2002 said:

We are right on the edge in OKC. Any idea what it runs per month for residential? And, how would starlink compare with traditional fiber and cable internet?
I just looked it up. Looks like $120/mo and $600 equipment one time. I don't know about any service contract on the equipment
tk for tu juan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anyone can get Starlink Roam right now which is $150/month for coverage within the same continent as the home address. Then there are two options for the Roam equipment, $600 for a portable receiver that works better when stationary or $2,500 for an in-motion receiver.
Post removed:
by user
First Page Last Page
Page 268 of 467
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.