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

SpaceX (general discussion)

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
1,747
Reaction score
240
Copyright will have this pulled pretty quick. First half is mainly SLS while remainder is everything else.

 

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
1,747
Reaction score
240
Spacex and Blue Origin construction activities at KSC as observed from space.

 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,807
Reaction score
622
A launch planned for Friday from the Space Coast will test a possible solution. SpaceX will experiment with a non-reflective coating on the bottom of one satellite in its next batch of 60, scheduled to lift off from launch complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station at 11:20 p.m.
 

FighterJock

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,138
Reaction score
68
A launch planned for Friday from the Space Coast will test a possible solution. SpaceX will experiment with a non-reflective coating on the bottom of one satellite in its next batch of 60, scheduled to lift off from launch complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station at 11:20 p.m.
I hope that the experimental coating works on the satellite, it is a pity that they couldn't put it on the first lot of satellites before they reached orbit
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,518
Reaction score
587
A launch planned for Friday from the Space Coast will test a possible solution. SpaceX will experiment with a non-reflective coating on the bottom of one satellite in its next batch of 60, scheduled to lift off from launch complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station at 11:20 p.m.
I hope that the experimental coating works on the satellite, it is a pity that they couldn't put it on the first lot of satellites before they reached orbit
It's a pity SpaceX wasn't flying rockets in 1950.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,807
Reaction score
622
Hall and other astronomers said that, like SpaceX, they were surprised by how bright the Starlink satellites appeared. “What surprised everyone — the astronomy community and SpaceX — was how bright their satellites are,” Seitzer said. “We knew these tens of thousands of megaconstellations were coming, but based on the sizes and shapes of things currently in orbit, I thought they’d be maybe eighth or ninth magnitude. We were not expecting second or third magnitude.”

Both astronomers and SpaceX said they hope, as an initial step to get the Starlink satellites dim enough to not be visible to the naked eye even in the darkest skies. The next step will be to figure out what else can be done to mitigate their effects on major observatories, specifically the Vera Rubin Observatory (formerly Large Synoptic Survey Telescope) under construction in Chile. Astronomers said that wide-field telescope was particularly threatened by Starlink and other megaconstellation satellites.
 

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
1,747
Reaction score
240
Overpressure test of Starship tank. No info yet on what level damage occurred. Nasa Spaceflight refers to test as "successful" so implication is tank was tested to destruction.


Update: Failed at 7.1 Bar. 6 Bar needed for pressure and 1.4x safety factor (8.5 Bar) needed for man rating. Cause of failure located and design upgrades will be implemented to fix.

 
Last edited:

Dragon029

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
709
Reaction score
46
Hopefully now that they've achieved a safety factor of 1.18 they'll begin assembly of SN1 (and advance the safety factor to 1.4+ in later hulls).
 

Dragon029

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
709
Reaction score
46
Do keep in mind that a design goal and what will realistically happen are two different things - funding 10,000 launches a year (even if the 'stuff' you're sending and the launch cost combined is something like $10 million a launch, for $100 billion a year), will be challenging without a very pressing objective. I consider myself optimistic about human colonisation of Mars, but I think it's going to be a fair bit slower than Elon hopes.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,518
Reaction score
587
Do keep in mind that a design goal and what will realistically happen are two different things - funding 10,000 launches a year (even if the 'stuff' you're sending and the launch cost combined is something like $10 million a launch, for $100 billion a year), will be challenging without a very pressing objective. I consider myself optimistic about human colonisation of Mars, but I think it's going to be a fair bit slower than Elon hopes.
Aim high.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,807
Reaction score
622
I’d love to know the thinking that says Space X are a more risky prospect when one has established launchers to space and one doesn’t. They seem to have used the fact that Starship is a risky project to penalise them across the board.
 

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
1,747
Reaction score
240
More from Hazegrayart. Starship moon landing. Shows it using a prepared but pretty small landing pad.
IMHO the moon-equipped variant would require a special landing legs...

Interesting question. I assume both Spacex and Blue Origin landing legs have some small amount of travel to cushion landing shock but maybe not. Depends on how accurately you can control terminal descent velocity. I think the crush absorbers on Falcon 9 are there because of the unpredictable pitch/roll motion of the landing barge.
 

Dilandu

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
204
Reaction score
59
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
Interesting question. I assume both Spacex and Blue Origin landing legs have some small amount of travel to cushion landing shock but maybe not. Depends on how accurately you can control terminal descent velocity. I think the crush absorbers on Falcon 9 are there because of the unpredictable pitch/roll motion of the landing barge.
Well, personally, I would use the detachable set of landing legs specifically for Moon conditions, which then the rocket would just left. Yes, it would probably hamper payload a bit, but Starship seems to be the rocket that could afford it.

P.S. Of course, it all depend on how well the landing pad is prepared. If it is cleared, smoothed and paved, then the Earth landing legs should suffice.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
1,161
Reaction score
141
Given the relaxed gravity on the moon, they could probably afford a lean down maneuver with only a set of aft legs touching the ground at the end of the boosted recovery and a pair of mini diabolo in the front (see the little guy below).
That would probably save a substantial amount of space, fuel and payload with also the cargo bay at reach at a lower height while Starship seat horizontally on the ground.
Then, once empty, just pitch-up (Vernier/Draco or mechanical impulse) and go.

Ex :
 
Last edited:
Top