SpaceX (general discussion)

TheKutKu said:
Energia was a weird case since it wasn’t supposed to bring its payload to orbit, merely a near-orbital trajectory similar to this starship’s, the payload would have had to give the last push (of about ~100 m/s), and none of the proposed Energia upper-side stage were every sanctionned and built. As far as I know the heaviest payload it was supposed to boost would have been a full-load buran at 105t, in theory a few to several tons of additional performances could be gained by removing the reuse equipment from the boosters (parachutes, landing legs, retrorockets and landing fuel), which weighted 60 tons total.

Actually got me thinking that so far there has never been a super heavy launch vehicle (>50 tons payload) capable of lifting a reference 50 tons payload to orbit in the same way smaller launchers do:

-Saturn V was designed to launch the LM-CSM duo, Skylab was a dry workshop, INT-21 never happened
-N1 was maybe the closest, it had a working fairing, but none of those built were designed to launch anything else than the L3 lunar complex, and none worked
-shuttle couldn’t launch more than 24-27 tons depending on orbiters, shuttle C never happened
-Energia lacked a fairing, adapter or orbital insertion stage, Buran could lift 30t max, none of the proposed side-fairing+stages happened
-Falcon heavy’s current second stage has important structural limits and cannot lift 50 tons, much less its
-Current SLS can only launch Orion, And IB Will only launch small co-manifested payloads. cargo SLS doesn’t look like it’s happening
-current starship is only designed to launch Starlinks and has its tiny door for that, the Starlinks it will launch are volume limited To ~40 per launch and their mass are unknown, but it can’t launch anything else, larger cargo bays and payload adapters will probably eventually happen since they have contracts for it, but certainly aren’t a priority compared to tanker, depot, starlink and HLS starship

-New Glenn will probably be the closest, with a conventional fairing and payload adapter and a 45t reusable payload that could surpass the treshold if used expendable... but they’ve never expressed their desires to do so, and there may be structural limits
-Long March 10 will be a potential candidate, but like Saturn V, will at first only be used for lunar launches.

It’s funny that this isn’t something that has ever been possible and probably won’t until several years at least, of course it’s normal, there has never been a market for 50 tons commercial satellites, or even a variety of such payloads to launch and each SHLV were made for specific reasons, but it’s funny to think about, a multi purpose SHLV doesn’t exist yet.
Click to expand...
The one-off Barbarian, that was never built, was probably the closest.

Barbarian MM

Barbarian MM
www.astronautix.com www.astronautix.com
 
Another thing bout Starship is the SHEAR FUCKING SIZE of it.

Its a Unit.

Tge Legit LARGEST (dimension wise) thing we have yet punt into space.

SLS is barely bigger then the Apollo deals which was known to be clasuphobic deals which severely limited what can be done in all categories.

A Starship size deal will allow for so much better everything its not funny.
 
https://twitter.com/x/status/1768630502456492237
View: https://twitter.com/ringwatchers/status/1768630502456492237


Starship's third flight test featured the first in-space test of the PEZ dispenser door, and it may not have gone exactly as planned. Check out our new speculative article, diving into the events during the demonstration.

->
Click to expand...

ringwatchers.com

The First Test: Starship's Payload Door on the Third Flight

The third integrated flight test of Starship achieved many milestones and fell short of some others. Truthfully, the flight test is still very fresh on our minds, and what may be believed to be true t...
ringwatchers.com ringwatchers.com
 
https://twitter.com/x/status/1768651230409076967
View: https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1768651230409076967


A dazzling glimpse of what is yet to come.
Click to expand...

arstechnica.com

After Thursday’s flight, Starship is already the most revolutionary rocket ever built

For fun, we could compare Starship as it exists today to other available rockets.
arstechnica.com arstechnica.com

After Thursday’s flight, Starship is already the most revolutionary rocket ever built
For fun, we could compare Starship as it exists today to other available rockets.

by Eric Berger - Mar 15, 2024 2:39pm GMT

One of the best things about spaceflight is its power to dazzle us.
Click to expand...
 
With this flight, the world will now visualize what is coming.
Seven Starship launches would lift all the mass taken to orbit last year. The cadence will mimic Falcon 9 with multiple flights per week. Sometimes per day. And that's just the beginning.

What will we do with all that lift capacity? Cool shit we haven't even thought of yet.


arstechnica.com

After Thursday’s flight, Starship is already the most revolutionary rocket ever built

For fun, we could compare Starship as it exists today to other available rockets.
arstechnica.com arstechnica.com
 
Seeing these amazing pictures from altitude as low as 95 km makes me wonder about the possibility of Starship-based observation satellites going as low as or even under 100 km orbits for Very high resolution observation... probably useless, but the structure may be able to survive it.
 
TheKutKu said:
Seeing these amazing pictures from altitude as low as 95 km makes me wonder about the possibility of Starship-based observation satellites going as low as or even under 100 km orbits for Very high resolution observation... probably useless, but the structure may be able to survive it.
Click to expand...
Somewhat like a gigantic Zenit soviet spysat: the one that put a camera in place of Yuri Gagarin and recovered it.
 
Energia’s flight profile perhaps less of a threat to LEO hygiene than a potential Starship RUD in true LEO?

Some discussion here:
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2kZYU5p4JrM

SuperHeavy being stainless needed no burn as Falcon cores.

Let’s imagine a stretched SuperHeavy as an ALS booster with an Aluminum second stage in a parallel arraignment with fewer engines than Starship….expendable to start with.

This is not quite stage-and-a-half.

Might a stretch SuperHeavy doing a burn not need any TPS?

I was thinking of an Aluminum second stage that is more than Buran but less than Starship perhaps less a threat to LEO?
 
Last edited:
What I found curious after watching Scott Manley's video on the IFT3 flight was his observation from the Starship's cargo-bay cameras showing that it wasn't fully vented (You could see wisps of vapour wafting around in it) after it had reached sub-orbital insertion. I would've thought that the SpaceX engineers would've ensured that it was fully vented by the time of orbital insertion, not being fully vented may help explain why it had trouble with its' "Pez dispenser" door. Imagine that there will much less time between the flights of IFT3 and IFT4 with most of the test-flight's goals being achieved.
 
publiusr said:
What about an SLS/SuperHeavy ALS/NLS deal?
All engines on ground level---stretch the cores.
SLS stretched with a minimal payload able to burn all the way to the Moon? Didn't some RS-25s burn for 700+ seconds?
Click to expand...
no, he doesn't. no mixing of these technologies.
 
TheKutKu said:
Seeing these amazing pictures from altitude as low as 95 km makes me wonder about the possibility of Starship-based observation satellites going as low as or even under 100 km orbits for Very high resolution observation... probably useless, but the structure may be able to survive it.
Click to expand...
already have been doing that since the 70s
 
This is interesting - this Reuters article describes "Starshield" as a classified spy satellite system rather than a communications system, and that a contract for 1.8 billion was signed with the NRO in 2021.


For me this fills a huge missing link to the Proliferated space architecture - there were plenty of planned and contracted satellites by SDA/MDA that cover multiple orbits and FoV for missile detection and communications across multiple bands. However, there was no proliferated EO/IR system even while it it is clear it would be pretty easy to orbit a massive constellation of commercial grade moderate resolution satellites. The only thing previously mentioned by SDA was that it was linking with commercial systems and building its own imagining satellites would be "redundant". I had took that to mean redundant with commercial satellites, which really did not make sense to me, but it now seems likely that the real meaning was redundant with NRO. If the Reuters article is correct, Starshield is in fact a series of remote sensing satellites, not Starlink like communications satellites as previously implied. It will be interesting to see what other information surfaces as the system is deployed.
 
TheKutKu said:
-current starship is only designed to launch Starlinks and has its tiny door for that, the Starlinks it will launch are volume limited To ~40 per launch and their mass are unknown, but it can’t launch anything else, larger cargo bays and payload adapters will probably eventually happen since they have contracts for it, but certainly aren’t a priority compared to tanker, depot, starlink and HLS starship
Click to expand...

I wanted to circle back to this statement for a moment - if Starship's capacity for satellite launches is volume limited to ~40 starlinks, how is that a useful volume? Were not there Starlink Falcon 9 missions with up to 60 satellites? Assume the advantage of Starship is that it could deliver to more challenging, or even multiple, orbital planes compared to Falcon but having a 150+ tons of lift seems a little pointless if the volume is not there to move more. I suppose for something like tanker duty, volume is less of an issue. Ditto very altitude or cis lunar missions. But still, it seems like a disappointing amount of volume once you subtract the fuel and header tanks.
 
Josh_TN said:
This is interesting - this Reuters article describes "Starshield" as a classified spy satellite system rather than a communications system, and that a contract for 1.8 billion was signed with the NRO in 2021.


For me this fills a huge missing link to the Proliferated space architecture - there were plenty of planned and contracted satellites by SDA/MDA that cover multiple orbits and FoV for missile detection and communications across multiple bands. However, there was no proliferated EO/IR system even while it it is clear it would be pretty easy to orbit a massive constellation of commercial grade moderate resolution satellites. The only thing previously mentioned by SDA was that it was linking with commercial systems and building its own imagining satellites would be "redundant". I had took that to mean redundant with commercial satellites, which really did not make sense to me, but it now seems likely that the real meaning was redundant with NRO. If the Reuters article is correct, Starshield is in fact a series of remote sensing satellites, not Starlink like communications satellites as previously implied. It will be interesting to see what other information surfaces as the system is deployed.
Click to expand...

Maxar is a constellation of "private" spysats with a ground resolution of 50 cm. It has done wonders in Ukraine, unmasking many russian lies and propaganda.
More constellations of this kind are coming, some with a ground resolution as low as 10 cm.
So I wouldn't be surprised something similar springs out of Starlink and its planned 42 000 satellites. What works for broadband internet - global coverage - could be useful to optical spysats.
 
Archibald said:
Maxar is a constellation of "private" spysats with a ground resolution of 50 cm. It has done wonders in Ukraine, unmasking many russian lies and propaganda.
More constellations of this kind are coming, some with a ground resolution as low as 10 cm.
So I wouldn't be surprised something similar springs out of Starlink and its planned 42 000 satellites. What works for broadband internet - global coverage - could be useful to optical spysats.
Click to expand...

I would suspect that it would be a starlink bus with an EO (or possibly some fitted for IR*) package, possibly third party developed or produced. It would be sized to fit in the same dispensers to use off the shelf systems for carriage. That would allow for rapid production and deployment. I think in this case, the exact resolution would be less important than deployment speed. Follow on satellites could make improvements, in the same way as the various Tranches of the tracking and transport layers (SpaceX deployed some satellites for these roles as well for SDA). There is a limited window in which the US has a clear advantage in launch cadence and rapid satellite deployment methods due to SpaceX. The PRC will presumably spend any amount of money to try to close the satellite deployment gap as soon as it can.

*EDIT: or upon further reflection, also SAR, and in the future even MTI.
 
Last edited:
Josh_TN said:
I wanted to circle back to this statement for a moment - if Starship's capacity for satellite launches is volume limited to ~40 starlinks, how is that a useful volume? Were not there Starlink Falcon 9 missions with up to 60 satellites? Assume the advantage of Starship is that it could deliver to more challenging, or even multiple, orbital planes compared to Falcon but having a 150+ tons of lift seems a little pointless if the volume is not there to move more. I suppose for something like tanker duty, volume is less of an issue. Ditto very altitude or cis lunar missions. But still, it seems like a disappointing amount of volume once you subtract the fuel and header tanks.
Click to expand...
As BlueAbyssal wrote above, the Starlinks that will launch on Starship are larger and heavier than those currently being launched on a biweekly basis. There are three general Starlink satellite versions, V1, weighting 300-400 kg, which used to be launched by groups of 50-60, the V2 Mini, weighting 700-750kg, which are currently launched by groups of 20-25, and then Starship’s Starlink V2

The latest Starship user guide being a bit outdated (it predates the move of one of the header - landing - tank to the nose), it’s a bit hard to tell the volume, but it should be around 600m3 of useful volume, about 4 times a Falcon 9’s fairing, and about twice those of the largest fairings in use currently (Delta IV Heavy, Long March 5....)
 
Last edited:
TheKutKu said:
As BlueAbyssal wrote above, the Starlinks that will launch on Starship are larger and heavier than those currently being launched on a biweekly basis. There are three general Starlink satellite versions, V1, weighting 300-400 kg, which used to be launched by groups of 50-60, the V2 Mini, weighting 700-750kg, which are currently launched by groups of 20-25, and then Starship’s Starlink V2

The latest Starship user guide being a bit outdated (it predates the move of the header - landing - tanks to the nose), it’s a bit hard to tell the volume, but it should be around 600m3 of useful volume, about 4 times a Falcon 9’s fairing, and about twice those of the largest fairings in use currently (Delta IV Heavy, Long March 5....)
Click to expand...

Ah, ok, I had not realized we were dealing with different satellite mass (I missed his above post). Do these different versions presumably use different satellite busses then?
 
Archibald said:
I've red the Starlink V2 will weight 2000 kg. 70 of them would weight 140 metric tons.
Click to expand...
Correct. They’re quite large as LEO satellites go.
Josh_TN said:
Ah, ok, I had not realized we were dealing with different satellite mass (I missed his above post). Do these different versions presumably use different satellite busses then?
Click to expand...
They don’t use buses in the sense that SpaceX buys a bus and modifies it to suit. They’re custom designs to maximize volume as well as mass; but yes, each version is a different design.
 
BlueAbyssal said:
Correct. They’re quite large as LEO satellites go.

They don’t use buses in the sense that SpaceX buys a bus and modifies it to suit. They’re custom designs to maximize volume as well as mass; but yes, each version is a different design.
Click to expand...

Has any reason for the size increase been given? That seems like a fairly massive LEO satellite, for something that is not a legacy NRO EO sat.

I thought SpaceX's starlink bus was something they have sold for other purposes? At a minimum, I was quite sure the SDA funded tracking layer satellites used a starlink like bus with a different mission package. But perhaps it just uses starlink adjacent technology rather than a true modular bus design.
 
Bigger satellites mean more power and bandwidth (and propellant). It’s in SpaceX’s interest to maximize both, as that means better service to existing customers, and room for more customers.

They have not sold buses so much as they’ve sold modified Starlink satellites. To my knowledge they do not sell Starlink buses on the open market.
 
Josh_TN said:
This is interesting - this Reuters article des. If the Reuters article is correct, Starshield is in fact a series of remote sensing satellites, not Starlink like communications satellites as previously implied. It will be interesting to see what other information surfaces as the system is deployed.
Click to expand...

As I recall several years ago there was talk of tracking hypersonic missiles.

What a great way to extend Link 16 to around the world and with Gig+ data rates. Now your 'loyal wingmen' can be tracked all the way from Australia.
 
Josh_TN said:
Has any reason for the size increase been given? That seems like a fairly massive LEO satellite, for something that is not a legacy NRO EO sat.
Click to expand...
A lot more power generation, a lot more transmit power, a lot more antenna, and sufficient fuel reserves to have useful lifetimes in VLEO.

Josh_TN said:
I thought SpaceX's starlink bus was something they have sold for other purposes? At a minimum, I was quite sure the SDA funded tracking layer satellites used a starlink like bus with a different mission package. But perhaps it just uses starlink adjacent technology rather than a true modular bus design.
Click to expand...

SpaceX has built more units of each of the Starlink variants than anyone else has built of any modular bus of similar size. They don't design for modularity; they design for efficient space and mass use for specific purpose, and are not shy about making major changes to support new capabilities.

That being said, a starlink sat is basically a powerful hall effect thruster, lots of power generation and cooling, attitude control, and space for lots of computers and antennas. A lot of things, including starshield, fit under that description well enough that they can just reuse what they have.
 
NeilChapman said:
As I recall several years ago there was talk of tracking hypersonic missiles.

What a great way to extend Link 16 to around the world and with Gig+ data rates. Now your 'loyal wingmen' can be tracked all the way from Australia.
Click to expand...

The tracking of hypersonic missiles is a separate program run by the Missile Defense and Space Development Agencies and is part of the Proliferated Warfighter Space Architecture. It is very well documented, with something like a couple dozen test satellites in orbit and another 100+ Tranch 1 satellites slated for orbit inside two years.

The NRO contract represents something else different from that.
 
publiusr said:
1. Energia’s flight profile perhaps less of a threat to LEO hygiene than a potential Starship RUD in true LEO?

snip

2..Let’s imagine a stretched SuperHeavy as an ALS booster with an Aluminum second stage in a parallel arraignment with fewer engines than Starship….expendable to start with.

This is not quite stage-and-a-half.

3. Might a stretch SuperHeavy doing a burn not need any TPS?

4. I was thinking of an Aluminum second stage that is more than Buran but less than Starship perhaps less a threat to LEO?
Click to expand...
1. no
2. why? what is the point?
3. what burn?
4. what doe Buran have anything to do with this? Why would it be a "less threat"
 
On 4.) Buran --and even more so STS orbiters--didn't have much in the way of propellant compared with Starship.

On 3. SuperHeavy does not need to do a burn as Falcon does---let us suppose we lengthen this and incorporate a burn for retropropulsion.

I'm trying to find a way around needing tiles (or even Starship itself) at all. SuperHeavy as reusable Energiya.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom