SpaceX (general discussion)

Deino said:
Just again a question to the missing tiles!?

Will they be added when both are stacked or do they leave them (I don't think so)?

I have to admit, I don't really understand this procedure at the moment ... why not finish SN20 first and then stack both?
Click to expand...
This was a fit-check, no reason to delay that until the TPS installation reached 100%. Plenty of more work ahead before final stacking and launch, and plenty of time to finish the tile job.
 
Michel Van said:
i hear Bezos screams: SMITH !!!

Behold the biggest Rocket ever build
One rocket to rule them all...

E8HDNwYX0AMVLuY
Click to expand...
GOOD GRIEF !! It is REAL at least. REAL.

Unbelievable. Only five years since Musk disclosed his plans - September 2016.
 
sferrin said:
BAROBA said:
Holy ****
I was thinking why did they use a smaller rocket to transport the tip ( StarShip) to the bigger one...
Oh man, this is amazing :D
Click to expand...
And that's just a prototype with 29 engines. The production version is to have 33 engines with more than double the liftoff thrust of the Saturn V. :eek:
Click to expand...
And those engines will have 230 tonnes of thrust with Raptor 2
 
sferrin said:
I'm not seeing the significance of 27 engines across three boosters vs if they were in a single booster. If anything I'd think that would make an engine failure MORE likely as there are more interfaces. Lastly, the booster can be static fired. It's not like it's going to get five feet off the pad and go TU. It will be well-tested before the first flight.
Click to expand...

The issue is that you can get coupling between the noise and vibration of engines firing simultaneously and the flow of propellant through the feed lines. It can lead to effects in the propellant lines that are sort of analogous to a combustion instability in the sense that they can lead to instabilities in the propellant feed that can lead to pogo effects. Pogo effects can cause the loss of engines or in worst cases scenarios, tear the structure apart.

These issues have all already been resolved in the Falcon 9 boosters. Connecting three such boosters together as in the Falcon Heavy can lead to some cross-over of noise/vibration effects, but it's typically not as big an issue because dealing with the effects of reflected noise and it's impacts on individual boosters have already largely been dealt with.

Naturally, the likelihood of unexpected vibration coupling effects goes up with the number of engines and the complexity of the plumbing. You have to either model their effects accurately, or build propellant systems that can absorb/compensate for those effects. You need to make sure conditions don't change substantially if you loose engines etc.

And then of course they do static tests, to make sure they haven't missed anything and that the booster isn't going to tear itself apart just after it leaves the pad.
 
jeffb said:
The issue is that you can get coupling between the noise and vibration of engines firing simultaneously and the flow of propellant through the feed lines.
Click to expand...
That was down fall of N1 rocket (also had bad engines)

Noise is serious issue, the Saturn V was loud, very loud you could hear the rocket 10 miles away at 128 Dezibel.
But that was nothing against the Shuttle SRB, who were much louder, so loud that sound damage the launch pad !
NASA had to modified there Saturn V water deluge system to fit Shuttle launches to damping the sound

How SpaceX will damping the sound for Superheavy blast off ?
i guess that they will use water in some way either deluge system in Launch platform
or flood the ground under Launch platform
 
It is possible that they might try to use some form of electronic active noise cancellation for the sound dampening, though unlikely.
 
SpaceX prefers cheap and simple solutions where possible, so they'll likely just rely on a water deluge and see how that goes; if the martyte under the pad gets damaged, then they'll throw in a thrust diverter.

As for noise to the surrounding populace, there's nothing really that can be done other than launching it at sea (which they intend to do for some large portion of flights once land-based test flights have verified the vehicle design, etc). Even if you used the world's largest water deluge, a giant active noise cancellation array, berms, walls, etc they're useless once the vehicle climbs a couple hundred metres. SpaceX could try and pay for all nearby residences to get sound insulation installed in buildings, but that's never going to satisfy some percentage of the population.
 
jeffb said:
And then of course they do static tests, to make sure they haven't missed anything and that the booster isn't going to tear itself apart just after it leaves the pad.
Click to expand...

SpaceX does do static firings. Usually they're fairly brief. I don't know how long one needs to be firing to wring out all the possibilities. A 10 second, 33 engine static fire would be awesome to behold but I'd think it would be more like a few seconds.
 
sferrin said:
jeffb said:
And then of course they do static tests, to make sure they haven't missed anything and that the booster isn't going to tear itself apart just after it leaves the pad.
Click to expand...

SpaceX does do static firings. Usually they're fairly brief. I don't know how long one needs to be firing to wring out all the possibilities. A 10 second, 33 engine static fire would be awesome to behold but I'd think it would be more like a few seconds.
Click to expand...
Well again, it probably depends on how comfortable they are with their modeling. For the Saturn S-1C stage below, NASA ran it at least once for a full three minutes, which is longer than its normal full flight time of 150 seconds. But then SpaceX isn't NASA.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rP6k18DVdg
 
SN20 just return to High bay for completion of the Heat-shield
the Vac Raptors were remove

Musk mention Raptor2 during this Tour video two
must be same what they dit with Jupiter engine S-3D to H-1 of Saturn IB
A dramatic simplification of the Engine

Next to that the production method change for Nosecone
 
Some says Elon Musk is the Howard Hughes of our times - an intellectual prodigy and visionary with a bit of megalomania, eccentric behaviour, defiance from government but still working for them; average health, semi-traumatic childhood, bad sleep, stormy private life... at least he isn't a germ-phobic.
 
Archibald said:
Some says Elon Musk is the Howard Hughes of our times - an intellectual prodigy and visionary with a bit of megalomania, eccentric behaviour, defiance from government but still working for them; average health, semi-traumatic childhood, bad sleep, stormy private life... at least he isn't a germ-phobic.
Click to expand...
Not that being a germophobe would necessarily be a bad thing these days though...
 
wouldn't it make more sense to user drone swarms for such ads? Like the one below?


Seems like a way cheaper way to achieve a similar thing...
 
A sat swarm could issue tsunami warnings to the unplugged…no thanks to Seda.

The photo of the workers out in the open. Forget the 1950s. That had a WW II look.

Be safe Elon. Rest.
We need you.
 
Michel Van said:
There some rumours
That SpaceX will launching a Satellite to Display Billboard Ads in Space.

I'm not sure but had Capitol Hill not forbid the launch of those sats in 1990s ?

Source
Click to expand...
As the article says it's just a small display with a camera to capture imagery of the ad with the Earth in the background; it won't be visible from the ground (it'd take something like a large cloud / constellation of giant reflectors to create an ad visible from the ground; the ISS is hard enough to spot without deliberately looking for it).
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom