SpaceX (general discussion)

Michel Van

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,466
Reaction score
2,665
New on launch tower
Connections for Starship
FE4-LDeXEAMc1gE
 

Silencer1

That now I am the Ruler of the Queen's Navee!
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
685
Reaction score
227
Watching launches of astronauts on Crew Dragon, two questions come to me, that hopefully, could be answered in this thread:
1) have been any back-up crew members planned for any launch - in case of sudden inability of any person to perform duties? Such things have been common in early days of space exploration. But now when Covid is still in effect - are "spare" astronauts trained/ready for quick replacement?
2) from the yesteryear, first 'Crew Dragon" launch we could see the crew convoy in "Teslas", guarded by armored car. And it's inside the such restricted area, as Cape Canaveral. Are such demonstrative security precautions exists in a days of first manned launches, Saturn era and Space Shuttle? Or it's the mark of our time?
Although such questions could be irrelevant to the SpaceX activity, I would like to knew the opinion of the forum' members.
 

Michel Van

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,466
Reaction score
2,665
NASA have backup crew
oddly only two astronauts for backup if problem happens
Inspiration4 had no backup crew

The security at KSC was increased in 1970s because threat’s of terrorist attack on Apollo missions
became lax in 1980s and 90s after 2001 terror attacks and several incidence
KSC has maximum security now
 

Silencer1

That now I am the Ruler of the Queen's Navee!
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
685
Reaction score
227
NASA have backup crew
oddly only two astronauts for backup if problem happens
Inspiration4 had no backup crew

The security at KSC was increased in 1970s because threat’s of terrorist attack on Apollo missions
became lax in 1980s and 90s after 2001 terror attacks and several incidence
KSC has maximum security now
Thanks for clarification!

Perhaps the need for backup crew lowered due to more options to launch rockets: as the launchers itself became less expensive and easily available? I guess, the replacement of "Saturn V" couldn't be made easily and quickly.

Concerning security: I found the documentary about Space Shuttle Discovery STS-120 Launch 23 October 2007
View: https://youtu.be/_zh1e3Phikk?t=53

The convoy of "AstroVan" (transporting the astronauts to launch complex) with certain other cars has included black security vehicle, however, without any visible armament.
My point was that security measures now are more demonstrative and more serious.

Curiously, modified MRAP would been used as "emergency transport" if something going wrong on launch pad.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUMXCZVmL0Q
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
4,806
Reaction score
4,320
@Silencer1 : Armored Crew vehicle with blast resistant protection is certainly something that would not be seen as a luxury if available for cheap as they are today for US administrations. Think about closing to the launch pad where a gigantic rocket is fully fueled.
 

UpForce

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
289
Reaction score
224

I haven't meticulously followed this discussion but it doesn't seem this has come up yet. A companywide email states that Raptor engines can't currently be manufactured at a pace that comports with SpaceX's financial sustainability, even in the near term. The article ties this development up with the departure of their vice president of propulsion but this seems more of an educated guess than anything else. On paper at least Musk himself has become immensely wealthy during the last couple of years so it's a bit hard to imagine the situation as entirely dire but of course at least some of his "net worth" does ride on these engines. In any case the haste points to an immensely ambitious schedule, much more so than could've been superficially gleaned from their progress so far, be that existential for SpaceX or not.
 

mkellytx

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
254
Reaction score
285

I haven't meticulously followed this discussion but it doesn't seem this has come up yet. A companywide email states that Raptor engines can't currently be manufactured at a pace that comports with SpaceX's financial sustainability, even in the near term. The article ties this development up with the departure of their vice president of propulsion but this seems more of an educated guess than anything else. On paper at least Musk himself has become immensely wealthy during the last couple of years so it's a bit hard to imagine the situation as entirely dire but of course at least some of his "net worth" does ride on these engines. In any case the haste points to an immensely ambitious schedule, much more so than could've been superficially gleaned from their progress so far, be that existential for SpaceX or not.
A few thoughts; motivation, focus, pressure. A bit of all three for the Raptor team, you don't send a company wide email with out the expectation that it will shortly be public. Commitment to delivery for investors, while Elon surely could self fund, it sends the wrong message to his investors. They expect a certain rate of return, with a $300K minimum buy-in for the last round who wouldn't? These aren't day traders so no-delivery would have a bit of an adverse impact on any later rounds...
 

publiusr

The Anti-Proxmire
Joined
Sep 24, 2011
Messages
445
Reaction score
232
Now, there was this thing called Delta 3 that was a gap filler. Ugly bird. Now, SpaceX was looking at a five core Falcon super heavy. Maybe that or a cluster version could be topped with a methalox 'centaur' with only one vac Raptor..to finish Starlink and buy time?
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,741
Reaction score
3,708
Now, there was this thing called Delta 3 that was a gap filler. Ugly bird. Now, SpaceX was looking at a five core Falcon super heavy. Maybe that or a cluster version could be topped with a methalox 'centaur' with only one vac Raptor..to finish Starlink and buy time?
A ten year diversion to "buy time"? You work for the government?
 

Michel Van

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,466
Reaction score
2,665
So far the Musk Email (he not dispute or confirmed it's his)
He mention that management was replaced (most likely fired ?)
and that management screw up (they were definitive fired !)

now Musk mention in Email
if we cannot achieve a Starship flight rate of at least once every two weeks next year
one moment ?
the FAA permit for Starbase has only 5 Orbital test lights for 2022 !
Yes the FAA made clear they restricted the launch from Starbase because is a Private site, not a State installation
(same goes for Sea Platforms)

Guess what
At KSC Launch pad 39A began construction workers to dismantle the abandon BFR launch installation.
Musk tweeted about this
Construction of Starship orbital launch pad at the Cape has begun
Kennedy space center is a State installation, means SpaceX can fire so many rocket as they wish
With speed they build that launch complex in Texas, it will stand in 2022 at Cape
That would solve the Starlink problem, but only if the first Starship/Superheavy launch from there are disposable!
what explain the problem with Raptor production.

this artwork was posted several weeks ago
FFsc4x4XIAQXT82
 

publiusr

The Anti-Proxmire
Joined
Sep 24, 2011
Messages
445
Reaction score
232
And they're off! Right out of the gate. I'd love to see an SLS build upper stage with SRBs on Super Heavy :)
 

Similar threads

Top