"Pilot to prove" vs "Scale to Fail" learning approach

Got to thinking about that splashdown in the Indian Ocean and the bouy cam...

We've assumed that's a deep spot in the Indian Ocean. I've looked for maps but haven't found anything. What's the limit for depth for bouy anchoring? At what tether length does a bouy not have the buoyancy or even the structural strength to support the weight of it's tether AND have a tether strong enough to relatively keep it on station? Do you design a bouy like an oil sand gas subsea riser? Or is that a semi autonomous bouy with stain keeping capability? Meaning there was a support boat nearby...

The anchor doesn't have to reach the floor. There are such things as sea anchors.

Also, it actually looked like to me that the "bouy" was moving towards starship. Maybe I am wrong about the moving, but it probably was using a sea anchor.

Would a sea anchor enable station keeping to an accuracy sufficient for the landing?

I like the energy in this video:

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DBERf7GuhVI/?igsh=MXJ2NHBjdGJoZzk0ZA==

Some Houston folks may want to swing by and meet Eric Berger next week as he is going to be pimping his new book there:

Join me as @SpaceHappyHour launches in Houston Weds October 30! The event is a REENTRY book promotion party. I’ll do photo-ops and book signings in front of the Apollo 17 command module at Space Center Houston. VIP experience in the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft (SCA
- 747). pic.twitter.com/8gvLb60FgO

— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) October 17, 2024

Rocket lab did static fire their Archimedes engine back in August (sorry if this was noted), and have moved to production of the first flight engines now.

Quote:

---

Starting back in early July, Rocket Lab CEO Peter Beck tweeted saying, "Successful pre burner ignition and run. We will probably play for a week or so tuning propellant timings before we open the main valves for a full stage run. These engine cycles are very sensitive to start up transients and timings so correct characterisation of all the transients and operating points is important to understand." This included an image of the engine on the test stand completing its startup. After this, a few weeks passed by until earlier this month on the 6th when he tweeted again, "Archimedes has been breathing fire! Started at low power and now cranking it up." While they didn't release any video of the test, both he and Rocket Lab later confirmed that the engine got up to 102% power and was in flight configuration.

In an official statement, they said, "Archimedes performed well and ticked off several key test objectives, including reaching 102% power, anchoring the engine's design ahead of Neutron's first flight scheduled for mid-2025 a schedule that would make Neutron the fastest a commercially developed medium-class launch vehicle has been brought to market." Arguably even more significantly they also said, "With the hot fire complete and full qualification campaign now underway, the Rocket Lab team is moving into full production of flight engines." This is quite a big deal and a massive milestone toward the eventual first launch of this rocket. Each Neutron vehicle needs 10 Archimedes engines in total, 9 on the first stage and a single vacuum-optimized engine on the second stage. The sooner Rocket Lab can begin producing these engines consistently, the faster pre-launch testing and eventual launches will take place. When it comes to new rockets the engine is often one of the most complex yet important pieces, especially when they are necessary for reusability and a propulsive landing like in this instance.

---

Timing update:

Quote:

---

Besides the news on Neutron's engine, Rocket Lab also confirmed that the planned maiden flight date is mid-2025. In other words, they are trying to get a fully flight-capable Neutron vehicle ready in around less than a year. While ambitious, they have been making a lot of progress, even beyond just the engines. For example, last month Peter Beck tweeted saying, "The engine development often steals the limelight but it is just one element of a huge system. Everyone forgets just how much infrastructure and concrete needs to go into the ground to make a high-cadence rocket program successful. Not as exciting as fire but just as fundamental." This included an image of the new water tower that was just constructed at Pad 0D. The 283 ft / 86 m tall tower has a 200,000-gallon capacity to feed Neutron's deluge system which protects the pad from the intense heat and vibration from the Archimedes engines on lift-off.

In addition, they confirmed that concrete is flowing fast on the launch mount, where a dedicated new pad for Neutron is designed to enable rapid turnaround between missions. A few images from Rocket Lab showcase this progress in action. They also confirmed that just a 5-minute drive from the pad, the Neutron Integration Facility is under construction. It's from this facility that completed Neutron rockets will roll out to the pad before taking to the skies.

---

According to WAI, IFT-6 could happen mid November. Which, interestingly, would be before the FAA had been saying IFT-5 was going to launch.



He does point out some additional scorching of the launch mount due to the landing, and mentions the possibility of a swappable launch mount for the 2nd launch tower at Starbase.

NASA was originally going to want to launch Europa Clipper on a SLS, which would probably be risky. By launching on a Falcon Heavy, they added 5 years to the mission. Would it have been better to wait a year or two and launch it with Starship?

The problem with SLS for the Europe Clipper was there simply aren't any SLS rockets available, and the few being built are all dedicated to the moon.

Also, due to the SLS using SRBs, the shaking they cause would have required the Europa Clipper be strengthened to withstand it, which meant much more cost.

Waiting on Starship might work, but with something this complex, there is always the possibility of some major technical problem cropping up and delaying it.

Edit: Stupid auto-correct.

Rapier108 said:

---

The problem with SLS for the Europe Clipper was there simply aren't any SLS rockets available, and the few being built are all decided to the moon.

Also, due to the SLS using SRBs, the shaking they cause would have required the Europa Clipper be strengthened to withstand it, which meant much more cost.

Waiting on Starship might work, but with something this complex, there is always the possibility of some major technical problem cropping up and delaying it.

---

Starship to orbit is not complicated though? That's the easy part, only full reusable is the hard part to prove out. Starship could launch huge payloads now, with an expendable Starship, and I think we will start to see that with Starlink prior to full reusability.

Premium said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

The problem with SLS for the Europe Clipper was there simply aren't any SLS rockets available, and the few being built are all decided to the moon.

Also, due to the SLS using SRBs, the shaking they cause would have required the Europa Clipper be strengthened to withstand it, which meant much more cost.

Waiting on Starship might work, but with something this complex, there is always the possibility of some major technical problem cropping up and delaying it.

---

Starship to orbit is not complicated though? That's the easy part, only full reusable is the hard part to prove out. Starship could launch huge payloads now, with an expendable Starship, and I think we will start to see that with Starlink prior to full reusability.

---

True, and it has been launching better and better each time. My only point was no on can see the future. Falcon Heavy is a proven launch vehicle. Starship is still being tested, and when the contract was signed to launch the Europa Clipper, Starship hadn't even flown once and was still being designed.

Yeah Europa clipper is huge, and waiting on starship really wouldn't do anything to help/lower risk. Starship still won't be a 'low risk' launch system this year (next 12 months), and the timeline is…hazy for when that happens. To the poster above's point, I am very curious to see when spaceX starts bidding further (I know they did on one small sat launch contract) for commercial payloads with starship. I don't think they are in a rush and don't want to do it too soon because contractually they will have to get various insurance coverages if they are not able to perform etc.

They have to initially prove they can reliably deliver starlinks via pez-dispenser, imho, and then come up with their own in-house design for a (re-entry compatible) fairing for other payloads. Dumping a satellite to the side while in orbit isn't something other rockets have done (outside of the space shuttle), to my knowledge. A neutron style clamshell might be the solution, just no real idea yet.

SLS only has a capacity to launch twice a year, and really zero flexibility on that through this decade. I do think it will eventually be cancelled but doubt it happens in this fiscal year entirely. It would be quite comical if Elon's government efficiency job targets SLS (comical thing being the meltdown in various corners).

nortex97 said:

---

Some Houston folks may want to swing by and meet Eric Berger next week as he is going to be pimping his new book there:

Join me as @SpaceHappyHour launches in Houston Weds October 30! The event is a REENTRY book promotion party. I’ll do photo-ops and book signings in front of the Apollo 17 command module at Space Center Houston. VIP experience in the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft (SCA
- 747). pic.twitter.com/8gvLb60FgO

— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) October 17, 2024

Rocket lab did static fire their Archimedes engine back in August (sorry if this was noted), and have moved to production of the first flight engines now.

Quote:

---

Starting back in early July, Rocket Lab CEO Peter Beck tweeted saying, "Successful pre burner ignition and run. We will probably play for a week or so tuning propellant timings before we open the main valves for a full stage run. These engine cycles are very sensitive to start up transients and timings so correct characterisation of all the transients and operating points is important to understand." This included an image of the engine on the test stand completing its startup. After this, a few weeks passed by until earlier this month on the 6th when he tweeted again, "Archimedes has been breathing fire! Started at low power and now cranking it up." While they didn't release any video of the test, both he and Rocket Lab later confirmed that the engine got up to 102% power and was in flight configuration.

In an official statement, they said, "Archimedes performed well and ticked off several key test objectives, including reaching 102% power, anchoring the engine's design ahead of Neutron's first flight scheduled for mid-2025 a schedule that would make Neutron the fastest a commercially developed medium-class launch vehicle has been brought to market." Arguably even more significantly they also said, "With the hot fire complete and full qualification campaign now underway, the Rocket Lab team is moving into full production of flight engines." This is quite a big deal and a massive milestone toward the eventual first launch of this rocket. Each Neutron vehicle needs 10 Archimedes engines in total, 9 on the first stage and a single vacuum-optimized engine on the second stage. The sooner Rocket Lab can begin producing these engines consistently, the faster pre-launch testing and eventual launches will take place. When it comes to new rockets the engine is often one of the most complex yet important pieces, especially when they are necessary for reusability and a propulsive landing like in this instance.

---

Timing update:

Quote:

---

Besides the news on Neutron's engine, Rocket Lab also confirmed that the planned maiden flight date is mid-2025. In other words, they are trying to get a fully flight-capable Neutron vehicle ready in around less than a year. While ambitious, they have been making a lot of progress, even beyond just the engines. For example, last month Peter Beck tweeted saying, "The engine development often steals the limelight but it is just one element of a huge system. Everyone forgets just how much infrastructure and concrete needs to go into the ground to make a high-cadence rocket program successful. Not as exciting as fire but just as fundamental." This included an image of the new water tower that was just constructed at Pad 0D. The 283 ft / 86 m tall tower has a 200,000-gallon capacity to feed Neutron's deluge system which protects the pad from the intense heat and vibration from the Archimedes engines on lift-off.

In addition, they confirmed that concrete is flowing fast on the launch mount, where a dedicated new pad for Neutron is designed to enable rapid turnaround between missions. A few images from Rocket Lab showcase this progress in action. They also confirmed that just a 5-minute drive from the pad, the Neutron Integration Facility is under construction. It's from this facility that completed Neutron rockets will roll out to the pad before taking to the skies.

---

---

We need more of this.

Blue Origin, Rocket Lab, SpaceX...more competition here the better.

30+ minutes of Starship 5 Launch and Booster Catch pron from the Everyday Astronaut

Quote:

---

Starship to orbit is not complicated though? That's the easy part, only full reusable is the hard part to prove out. Starship could launch huge payloads now, with an expendable Starship, and I think we will start to see that with Starlink prior to full reusability.

---

I doubt spaceX intends to expend starship upper stages for starlink, as it would be just wasteful. They are LEO missions and once pez dispenser works on 5 or 10 they will wind up trying to land starship afterward, imho. No reason not to, as it's not a high delta-V profile. The first deliberately expended orbital starship upper stages will likely be propellant transfer tests, and then other lunar test articles (it will be funny to hear people cry about Elon littering on the moon).

nortex97 said:

---

Yeah Europa clipper is huge, and waiting on starship really wouldn't do anything to help/lower risk. Starship still won't be a 'low risk' launch system this year (next 12 months), and the timeline is…hazy for when that happens.

---

Yes, which is why I said in the next year or two. Starship should be able to wipe out that 5 year penalty from Falcon Heavy, and may be able to provide enough delta-V to cut it down even more than SLS would have.

I'm a little curious about Starship and payload capacity. Its obvious they can now get Starship to orbit reliably, but when will they start putting some sort of cargo in? At this point, is it worth putting a few tons of water or other expendable cargo on to start testing flight dynamics with a load on top of the booster.

Also, I see the use of the pez dispenser for their Starlink missions but what kind of system will they use for larger cargo like full size satellites, moon/Mars base components etc? Do the Starships have a bay door that opens up most of the fuselage?

jkag89 said:

---

30+ minutes of Starship 5 Launch and Booster Catch pron from the Everyday Astronaut

---

Switch to 4K!

The booster coming back is mesmerizing.

I'm still going to go with robots that cannabilize the vessel from wince it came to a degree that is useful. Obviously have to get lots and lots of other materials there but, this seems like such a useful recycling of ships that most likely won't be able to leave the moon or mars until refueling station(s) and launch facilities are built.

Ag97 said:

---

I'm a little curious about Starship and payload capacity. Its obvious they can now get Starship to orbit reliably, but when will they start putting some sort of cargo in? At this point, is it worth putting a few tons of water or other expendable cargo on to start testing flight dynamics with a load on top of the booster.

Also, I see the use of the pez dispenser for their Starlink missions but what kind of system will they use for larger cargo like full size satellites, moon/Mars base components etc? Do the Starships have a bay door that opens up most of the fuselage?

---

Yes it's got a cargo bay and door. They have opened and closed it in orbit each time it's made it now.

Ag97 said:

---

Also, I see the use of the pez dispenser for their Starlink missions but what kind of system will they use for larger cargo like full size satellites, moon/Mars base components etc? Do the Starships have a bay door that opens up most of the fuselage?

---

Good question. I'm sure it's one they're working on, but I'm not sure which way they're going to go with that. Whether it's a payload bay door type thing or if the upper 3rd of ship splits open like a clam shell or what.

Ag97 said:

---

I'm a little curious about Starship and payload capacity. Its obvious they can now get Starship to orbit reliably, but when will they start putting some sort of cargo in? At this point, is it worth putting a few tons of water or other expendable cargo on to start testing flight dynamics with a load on top of the booster.

Also, I see the use of the pez dispenser for their Starlink missions but what kind of system will they use for larger cargo like full size satellites, moon/Mars base components etc? Do the Starships have a bay door that opens up most of the fuselage?

---

The answer will be the fun part, but we would be stupid to not believe they already have the plans locked up and ready to go when the time is right.

Some good points!

I did not know @MikeBloomberg was so close to the space industry and government contracting. These points are not new, and I agree with most of them, but it’s great to have someone like Mike, with a loud voice, educating people on topics they may not be as familiar with.

The…

— Jared Isaacman (@rookisaacman) October 18, 2024

Watch this video on the best resolution display you have and wear headphones! Incredible!

jkag89 said:

---

30+ minutes of Starship 5 Launch and Booster Catch pron from the Everyday Astronaut

---

The 4 sequences of slow-mo beginning at 19:40 might as well be Hollywood level production from a Kubrich or Nolan film but in real life. Simply phenomenal.

OMG

Starship flip maneuver and landing burn on its fifth flight test. Vehicle improvements ensured flaps were protected from high heating, resulting in a controlled entry and high accuracy splashdown at the targeted area in the Indian Ocean pic.twitter.com/nLIQLLVMv1

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) October 18, 2024

We really need a controlled landing in daylight. Are they ready to try to land in the Gulf of Mexico?

Beautiful. Cant wait for a real landing.

OKCAg2002 said:

---

We really need a controlled landing in daylight. Are they ready to try to land in the Gulf of Mexico?

---

They are going to catch the next(-ish) one right back at Starbase.

OKCAg2002 said:

---

We really need a controlled landing in daylight. Are they ready to try to land in the Gulf of Mexico?

---

Should but Mexico won't let them come over the country at risk of crashing.

FTAG 2000 said:

---

OKCAg2002 said:

---

We really need a controlled landing in daylight. Are they ready to try to land in the Gulf of Mexico?

---

Should but Mexico won't let them come over the country at risk of crashing.

---

Elon should tell that 3rd world country to pound sand. Are they worried that it might crash and cause thousands of dollars of improvement?