• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

SpaceX (general discussion)

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,361
Reaction score
327

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,361
Reaction score
327
From a couple of days ago. Testing the StarHopper RCS:


Drove two days from LA to shoot Starhopper’s 200m hop but road closures seem to indicate a delay to NET August 26. Here’s video of an RCS test today. Worth it.

Oh, you’re still here? I’ve just started a Patreon, please consider supporting what I do.
➡ patreon.com/jackbeyer
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,361
Reaction score
327

Can you confirm this will be the last flight of StarHopper? Onto Starship prototypes next, right?

Yes, last flight for Hopper. If all goes well, it will become a vertical test stand for Raptor.

How would it handle a RUD of an engine as a test stand? Will there need to be a big shield put in place between the engine and the tankage?

It’s quite robust
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,123
Reaction score
366
Are they shooting for 200m or 25m? I've seen both.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,123
Reaction score
366
Measured to the top of the hopper or the bottom? ;)
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,049
Reaction score
40
Scrubbed for Monday after an abort just after T-0. Trying again Tuesday.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,361
Reaction score
327
Published by Eric Ralph in News SpaceX 1 hour ago

SpaceX scrubs Starhopper’s final Raptor-powered flight as Elon Musk talks “finicky” igniters


Impressively accurate analysis!

Very strange that relatively simple circuits like the igniters (basically a square wave oscillator and a transformer) could be miswired. Very strange that there are no sensors that could check on whether the igniters were working. Also very strange that there are no comments here

Yes, rather embarrassing tbh
 

Tuna

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Oct 13, 2016
Messages
29
Reaction score
1
Measured to the top of the hopper or the bottom? ;)
From the bottom. The specific sentence is:

FAA said:
SpaceX may operate the Starship Hopper vehicle for one flight, without further FAA authorization, to a nominal altitude of 150 meters AGL or less, with a maximum propellant load of 30 metric tons at liftoff, in accordance with its application.
AGL is defined to be 0 when the craft is touched down on the ground.

Do note that I think there is basically 0 chance they will actually reach exactly 150m under this authorization. Going over even a little, even if accidentally, would be against their permit, and SpaceX is generally very careful about those. So they will leave a bit of margin on there just in case.
 

Michel Van

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,240
Reaction score
87
Today A water tower flew around with Rocketengine
and is sooo Cool to watch that !
 

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
920
Reaction score
17
A water tower w/one engine is spectacular. Starship mk1 w/three engines is going to be insane.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,361
Reaction score
327
Good job it will not be flying again as it crushed two of its feet & lost another.


 
Last edited:

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,123
Reaction score
366
A water tower w/one engine is spectacular. Starship mk1 w/three engines is going to be insane.
I'm a bit confused. Is Hopper / Starhopper the same thing? Are both the Texas and Florida sites building Starship mk1s? There are so many photoshops & unofficial renderings out there it's difficult to determine what is being built. I'd thought Hopper was Hopper and then I see, "Starhopper" pop up here and there. I'd thought both Texas and Florida were building identical designs and that they were not even prototype Starships. More like X-planes.
 

Tuna

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Oct 13, 2016
Messages
29
Reaction score
1
A water tower w/one engine is spectacular. Starship mk1 w/three engines is going to be insane.
I'm a bit confused. Is Hopper / Starhopper the same thing? Are both the Texas and Florida sites building Starship mk1s? There are so many photoshops & unofficial renderings out there it's difficult to determine what is being built. I'd thought Hopper was Hopper and then I see, "Starhopper" pop up here and there. I'd thought both Texas and Florida were building identical designs and that they were not even prototype Starships. More like X-planes.

Hopper/Starhopper refers to the same vehicle, built first in Texas. It mounted a single raptor engine, and has now flown twice, first to 20m and now to <150m.

Before the hopper was even finished, both sites (Texas and Florida) started building a new vehicle, which has been referred to as the "starship prototype" by Musk on twitter. We don't know precisely how close it will be to the real thing. Right now, both of these are basically at the point where the main hull has been (mostly) built, and most of the remaining work is either inside where we don't see it happening, or outside adding legs and wings and stuff which we very much will see soon.

On top of that, the straight part of the hull of both of the SS prototypes were built from rings that welded on the site. Neither build site stopped making those rings when need for them for the SS prototype ended. Right now the theory is that they are still making them to quickly move on to building the SH booster as soon as the welding jig is free.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,123
Reaction score
366
Thanks! :) That's basically what I figured (I know there are pictures of part of a wing on a flatbed semi) but wasn't sure. The notion of a SH booster under construction is new to me. I also wonder how the tall, fabric-covered building will be used.
 
Top