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

SpaceX (general discussion)

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,213
Reaction score
289
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.
Your best bet to locate images of the SH is to look on the relevant threads on NASA Spaceflight Forum.

By the way the two Starship prototypes are known as the Mk1 & Mk2 dependant on location.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,918
Reaction score
269
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.
Your best bet to locate images of the SH is to look on the relevant threads on NASA Spaceflight Forum.

By the way the two Starship prototypes are known as the Mk1 & Mk2 dependant on location.
Yeah, I'm mulling over re-upping my membership to the L2 section.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,213
Reaction score
289
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.
Your best bet to locate images of the SH is to look on the relevant threads on NASA Spaceflight Forum.

By the way the two Starship prototypes are known as the Mk1 & Mk2 dependant on location.
Yeah, I'm mulling over re-upping my membership to the L2 section.
I’d strong recommend it.
 

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
918
Reaction score
15
...

By the way the two Starship prototypes are known as the Mk1 & Mk2 dependant on location.
That's something I didn't know. I thought they were both Mk1's. Is it because Texas started first and Florida, while learning from Texas, isn't tied to the Texas build methodology?

Very interesting.
 

Dragon029

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
674
Reaction score
28
...

By the way the two Starship prototypes are known as the Mk1 & Mk2 dependant on location.
That's something I didn't know. I thought they were both Mk1's. Is it because Texas started first and Florida, while learning from Texas, isn't tied to the Texas build methodology?

Very interesting.
The Mk[x] refers to model / serial number rather than (eg) developmental block number. They will almost certainly be slightly different, but those differences should mainly just be in exact manufacturing technique (welding methods, etc) rather than capability.
 

Michel Van

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,211
Reaction score
74
news and bomb shell

seems the test for Starship heatshield went good on the CRS-18 mission

in McGregor, Texas completed a static fire test today of the Falcon 9 booster that will launch Crew Dragon

At 28 August Elon Musk answer On Question This:



18 meter or 60 ft diameter Booster that NOVA class Heavy lift rocket
 

Tuna

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Oct 13, 2016
Messages
29
Reaction score
1
...

By the way the two Starship prototypes are known as the Mk1 & Mk2 dependant on location.
That's something I didn't know. I thought they were both Mk1's. Is it because Texas started first and Florida, while learning from Texas, isn't tied to the Texas build methodology?

Very interesting.
The Mk[x] refers to model / serial number rather than (eg) developmental block number. They will almost certainly be slightly different, but those differences should mainly just be in exact manufacturing technique (welding methods, etc) rather than capability.
It's of note that so far SpaceX hasn't ever managed to count past 3 while remaining on the same, consistent public version numbering system. The mess that is F9 versioning being the prime example.
 

Dragon029

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
674
Reaction score
28
To be fair, that's just for versioning; they've had a consistent booster serial number system for a while on their Falcons.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,918
Reaction score
269
...

By the way the two Starship prototypes are known as the Mk1 & Mk2 dependant on location.
That's something I didn't know. I thought they were both Mk1's. Is it because Texas started first and Florida, while learning from Texas, isn't tied to the Texas build methodology?

Very interesting.
The Mk[x] refers to model / serial number rather than (eg) developmental block number. They will almost certainly be slightly different, but those differences should mainly just be in exact manufacturing technique (welding methods, etc) rather than capability.
It's of note that so far SpaceX hasn't ever managed to count past 3 while remaining on the same, consistent public version numbering system. The mess that is F9 versioning being the prime example.
That's not a bad thing. That means progress.
 

Dragon029

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
674
Reaction score
28
What Tuna's talking about isn't really about SpaceX progress, but just how particularly for the Falcon 9 they've described the rocket variants inconsistently:

Falcon 9 "v1.0"
Falcon 9 "v1.1"
Falcon 9 "Full Thrust"
Falcon 9 "Full Thrust Block 4"
Falcon 9 "Full Thrust Block 5"

People have simply been (especially back when Full Thrust and Block 4 came out) confused as to which Falcon 9 variant was the successor to which, etc. It doesn't ultimately mean much, but it would be nice if for Starship they start off and then keep a consistent naming system (even if it doesn't have an impact on development progress, etc).
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,213
Reaction score
289

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,918
Reaction score
269
There's a high-stakes traffic issue in the space around our planet. The European Space Agency's Aeolus Earth observation satellite had to perform a maneuver to prevent collision with SpaceX's Starlink satellite 44.
Note how they paint SpaceX as the bad guy.
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,018
Reaction score
35
The ESA is being a little cheeky, it reads as if SpaceX simply came to a different conclusion on the collision risk and declined to expend the fuel to move. The issue of lacking orbital "rules of the road" is a good one they should continue to talk about. But that message gets lost when they turn it into a chance to zing SpaceX on Twitter.
 

Arjen

It's turtles all the way down
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,308
Reaction score
66
Thank you Moose.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
848
Reaction score
41
There is also the financial mattress that get in the way. Why bother swallowing the extra cost when state subsedies trump the game.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,213
Reaction score
289
Updated report on this matter.

but SpaceX says the bad communication was not intentional and that a bug in the company’s “on-call paging system” prevented the Starlink team from getting additional email correspondence from ESA.

“SpaceX is still investigating the issue and will implement corrective actions,” a company spokesperson said in a statement. “However, had the Starlink operator seen the correspondence, we would have coordinated with ESA to determine best approach with their continuing with their maneuver or our performing a maneuver.”
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,213
Reaction score
289
SpaceX has reaffirmed its prioritization of the Arcadia Planitia – a low Martian plain – and adjacent areas as some of the most promising locations for early Starship landings, tasking a NASA satellite to gather updated photos of six potential landing sites.

First discovered and analyzed by author Robert Zimmerman on August 28th, SpaceX requested the landing site prospecting images from the University of Arizona, tasked with operating NASA’s JPL-built HiRISE spacecraft. Back before Red Dragon’s 2017 cancellation, SpaceX began the process of landing site analysis, a canvassing that ultimately settled on four possible locations, of which the Arcadia Planitia was viewed as most promising.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,213
Reaction score
289

Scoop: We got ahold of some fresh FAA docs about SpaceX's South Texas launch site — where #Starship development is cooking. (But that was totally NOT the original plan, hence the FAA's double-take.) Some interesting data, plans, and pictures herein.
 

Michel Van

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,211
Reaction score
74
looking into papers show interesting thing
Starship lies horizontal, that would make thing easy for phase 1 (static test ignition)
but there one question, what or who is putting rocket vertical and move it to launch position ?

and why i have that suspicion that Elon Musk will present A new Feature on Spaceship
What include that rocket move it self in horizontal position.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,213
Reaction score
289
looking into papers show interesting thing
Starship lies horizontal, that would make thing easy for phase 1 (static test ignition)
but there one question, what or who is putting rocket vertical and move it to launch position ?

and why i have that suspicion that Elon Musk will present A new Feature on Spaceship
What include that rocket move it self in horizontal position.
They will be using very large cranes to move it upright.
 

Arjen

It's turtles all the way down
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,308
Reaction score
66
Updated report on this matter.

but SpaceX says the bad communication was not intentional and that a bug in the company’s “on-call paging system” prevented the Starlink team from getting additional email correspondence from ESA.

“SpaceX is still investigating the issue and will implement corrective actions,” a company spokesperson said in a statement. “However, had the Starlink operator seen the correspondence, we would have coordinated with ESA to determine best approach with their continuing with their maneuver or our performing a maneuver.”
I will take that as an 'Oops'.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,213
Reaction score
289

#Starship MK2 should be making the journey to KSC this month. Let's add some perspective to the journey to the river. The move will happen at night due to the need for a contra traffic approach to the water. This is the view of A1A as Starship would come to this vantage point.

They would navigate this stretch of land commonly used by locals to enjoy Indian River Lagoon fishing. The destination is the end of the footing as they travel similar to how Hopper is moved in Texas. #Starship #SpaceX

A set of river barges and tugs to secure them to the footing will await #Starship MK2 here. OCISLY or JRTI are too big to make the transfer from land to barge smoothly. Destination: the tug canal to the Banana River then north to the Turn Basin at KSC. Rough map ⚓ #SpaceX
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,213
Reaction score
289
Despite a number of technical hurdles, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk believes that the company’s next-generation Starship spacecraft could eventually be capable of pad aborts in the event of a Super Heavy booster failure before liftoff.

For a vehicle as large and heavy as Starship, this would necessitate a number of compromises, but would undoubtedly serve as a major confidence-booster for prospective passengers in lieu of an established record of reliability. If Starship were capable of pad aborts like the company’s Crew Dragon spacecraft, high-profile and high-value customers like NASA and other space agencies could be far more willing to place astronauts and payloads on what they perceive to be a bizarre but high-performance launch vehicle.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,918
Reaction score
269
I wonder why they think it's "bizarre". There have been many concepts over the years with a Shuttle being on the nose of the booster. If anything, the actual Shuttle was a "bizarre" contraption. A collection of duct tape and bailing wire if ever there was one.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,213
Reaction score
289
SpaceX isn't wasting much time now that Starhopper has completed its hover test. The company has filed an FCC communication permissions request that, as Elon Musk confirmed, prepares for test-flying the "orbit-class" Starship. The vehicle will fly much higher than its stubby predecessor, reaching an altitude of 12.5 miles before it comes back to the same landing pad used during earlier tests. It's not a true orbital test, then, but it's clearly much closer to SpaceX's goals.
 
Top