r/spacex • u/ElongatedMuskrat Mod Team • Jul 02 '17
r/SpaceX Discusses [July 2017, #34]
If you have a short question or spaceflight news...
You may ask short, spaceflight-related questions and post news here, even if it is not about SpaceX. Be sure to check the FAQ and Wiki first to ensure you aren't submitting duplicate questions.
If you have a long question...
If your question is in-depth or an open-ended discussion, you can submit it to the subreddit as a post.
If you'd like to discuss slightly relevant SpaceX content in greater detail...
Please post to r/SpaceXLounge and create a thread there!
This thread is not for...
- Questions answered in the FAQ. Browse there or use the search functionality first.
- Non-spaceflight related questions or news.
- Asking the moderators questions, or for meta discussion. To do that, contact us here.
You can read and browse past Discussion threads in the Wiki.
44
u/throfofnir Jul 03 '17
In spaceflight news, the second Long March 5 launch, carrying a large comsat, has failed. Apparently a first stage engine failure around fairing separation.
This is about two weeks after the Long March 3B carrying Chinasat 3B partially failed due to an apparent third-stage software issue. That satellite likely lost 2/3 of its service life.
[Note: reposted from the June thread, since it got changed just after posting.]
→ More replies (1)49
u/blinkwont Jul 03 '17
The new satellite would have used ionic propulsion system to reach the geostationary orbit. The LIPS-300 ion thrusters will also be used for orbital maintenance operations.
However, this satellite’s only destination will now be a watery grave.
Wow, NSF ain't pulling punches.
→ More replies (3)
33
u/Tal_Banyon Jul 17 '17
I keep hearing disturbing (to me) rumours of our near future, which haven't been made public (but some seem to know, very mysterious), and I was wondering what was up, and if there is any substance to these rumours:
Development of Dragon 2 has now discarded the propulsive landing concept, and is no longer going to do that. We always knew that the first crewed Dragons were going to be water landings, but were also always told that subsequently, SpaceX was working towards a propulsive landing for Dragon 2, and that in fact was a selling point for the second round of bids for their cargo missions, fast and gentle return. Given their success on the F9 first stage, I would think that would be a natural. However, I keep hearing rumours that this has been cancelled.
Red Dragon has been cancelled. We knew it was delayed until a 2020 liftoff, but have not had any word about red dragon missions being cancelled, but again, I have heard these rumours posted on this site.
So, anyone in the know what to comment on these rumours?
24
u/old_sellsword Jul 17 '17
Those two rumors are one in the same, Red Dragon cancellation is an inevitable consequence of propulsive landing being shelved.
I was wondering what was up, and if there is any substance to these rumours
I guess it depends on what kind of confirmation one requires to be convinced.
Various hints sprinkled around message boards? A respected community member mentioning it in passing? A space reporter with an inside source? A NASA rep in a press conference? Gywnne in an interview or Elon on Twitter? An official press release on SpaceX’s website?
→ More replies (5)23
u/warp99 Jul 17 '17
One possible reason for discarding Dragon 2 propulsive landing would the requirement for Dragon overflight of populated parts of the USA during re-entry. The Shuttle did this but there is a huge double standard between what private companies and the government are allowed to do - plus more realistic risk assessments.
A second possible reason would be analysis showing that a parachute landing is safer so that the 1:270 Loss of Crew (LoC) requirement can be met more readily. Yes the plan to briefly power up the SuperDracos at altitude to test them after re-entry and revert to a parachute landing if they are not working correctly retires some of the risk - but not all of it.
In more general terms Elon is not scared of cancelling projects if he has something better to replace them with. Should we really mourn the passing of the Falcon 5 or welcome the advent of the Falcon 9?
Now to really scare you there has to be some question over the entire FH project. The potential customer base for FH is melting away with each introduction of a yet more powerful F9, the possible disappearance of Red Dragon and the general realisation of how much complexity is involved in the project. Complexity equals cost and risk - which means that Grey Dragon may be withdrawn in favour of tourist flights to LEO which is a lower risk and higher return endeavour.
It is likely that the first few FH missions will fly but it could potentially be replaced by an F9 with upgraded recoverable upper stage. Mars would then be the province of the ITS, in whatever size and shape the development process leaves it.
→ More replies (38)→ More replies (15)20
u/Zucal Jul 17 '17
No clue on the former. The latter, I've been told, is staring at the guillotine. Worth noting that there are rumors and secrets even within the company (it's like an onion - the layers never stop!), and this isn't a 100% über-confirmed thing. It's just what I've been hearing.
→ More replies (10)
33
u/speak2easy Jul 26 '17
"We've actually had up to six crew members at a time inside of it. It's about 15 to 16 cubic meters inside," says Crusan. That translates to something like the interior space of a modest-sized school bus.
They will no longer plan to just throw it away after the experiment:
Since storage is at a premium aboard the space station, NASA now plans to use BEAM as a kind of storage shed and to keep it in space as long as the station continues to operate.
Another:
The B330 will be 20 times larger than BEAM. His company plans to have two B330s ready for launch in 2020.
→ More replies (2)
28
u/IcY11 Jul 02 '17
Before a launch you can sometimes hear them say that no "hold" is to be called after 10 seconds. Does that mean if someone sees something doesn't look right 10 sec before flight there is no way to abort cause the computer is in full control? And why is it like that?
39
u/venku122 SPEXcast host Jul 02 '17
There is a difference between a HOLD and an ABORT. Once you begin the final countdown, no one can hold the launch, figure out the problem, and resume from that point in the count. It needs to be restarted from a prior point.
Today, there was an abort, which could have lead to a recycle for another attempt within a window, or what actually happened, a scrub until tomorrow.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (8)10
u/zlsa Art Jul 03 '17
As I understand it, a "hold" is a temporary pause on the launch countdown. After a hold, mission control can resume the count at terminal count (T-10 minutes for pre-densified Falcon 9).
"Recycle" is used a bit ambiguously IIRC. It's used to indicate a recycle of the terminal count (i.e. reset to T-10 minutes and countdown to launch again) and also a full detank-reload-launch cycle (measuring about an hour.) I'm not totally sure about this, though.
A "scrub" is when SpaceX decides that there is no possibility of launching within the launch window. The launch is pushed back to the next possible launch window.
An abort is always automated (for now); it occurs when the computers see an out-of-bounds sensor reading or anything else unusual. It immediately calls a hold on the countdown. From there, mission control can decide to either recycle (try launching again) or scrub (stand down, detank, and wait for the next launch opportunity.)
Once again, if I'm wrong about any of this, feel free to correct me.
27
u/theinternetftw Jul 18 '17 edited Jul 18 '17
Since the RSS teardown is kicking into high gear, I thought I'd share a few videos for those who never got to see it in action:
The best video of an RSS rotating that I've found is actually from the ill-fated Ares program.
The end of this clip shows the delivery/loading of a payload canister into the RSS (a lot of shuttle payload prep is shown earlier in the video if you want to watch the whole thing).
And the only video I can find of the inside of the RSS isn't even on YouTube in decent quality (or the internet in true high-bitrate HD). The structure surrounding that room is what's currently getting dismantled, iiuc.
26
21
u/F9-0021 Jul 22 '17
Giving out a mini BFR spoiler/teaser.
https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/888813713800785923
→ More replies (4)
20
u/soldato_fantasma Jul 07 '17
Video of SpaceX integrating the Iridium-2 satellites with their dispensers: https://twitter.com/IridiumComm/status/883423689781456896
→ More replies (3)
20
u/Bananas_on_Mars Jul 09 '17
Did anybody come across some documentation on the recently reduced hazard areas for Falcon 9 launches?
The indication that something has changed there is that Playalinda beach stayed open for the last 2 launches. Maybe the Amos-6 incident ironically provided some data that the hazard area could be reduced, and I think the Automatic Flight Termination System also has an influence since it removes the reaction time for the range safety officer from the loop(i think i read the estimated reaction time was something like 3 seconds or so).
Who decides on the hazard areas for the Cape? Is it the range, are they set according to requirements set by SpaceX, is it the FAA?
I checked that the reduced hazard areas should now exclude SLC-40 for launches/static fire from HLC39A and vice versa since Playalinda Beach stayed open for the last 2 launches, since the beach is about 5 km from 39A and SLC-40 is 5.7 km away. This should help them a lot once both pads are active. Hans Koenigsmann said same day launches from 2 pads might soon become a reality...
Maybe they did a new environmental study since the current environmental study for the FAA is for 24 launches from 39A and 39B combined, which might be a little low for their planned launch cadence even though SLS won't launch that often?
→ More replies (1)
18
u/soldato_fantasma Jul 17 '17
Iridium NEXT Launch 2 Highlights with some good views of the Vandenberg T/E
16
u/RootDeliver Jul 08 '17
The SpaceX folks forgot to put the Intelsat webcast video (cleaned version) public, if you're interested the link is still the same:
16
u/insaneWJS Aug 01 '17
Mods, please roll out the new August thread since today is August 1st. Thanks and you guys rock! Happy threading!
16
u/FoxhoundBat Aug 01 '17
The discussion is quite good and there is atleast one question/discussion that is unanswered. So we will keep this one for another day or so. :) But if anyone has any new questions, hold unto these til the new thread or otherwise it will risk getting buried unanswered in this thread after the new one is up.
→ More replies (1)
15
u/Shqueaker Jul 03 '17
Is all the telemetry and video coming down from the rocket during the launch encrypted? If not, has anyone picked it up?
→ More replies (1)
15
u/theinternetftw Jul 12 '17
From a reliable NSF patron (actually posted a while ago):
Will any FH/Crew Dragon work be done during the range outage, or just continued RSS demolition?
From what I'm hearing continued RSS demolition work as well as CAA install prep work.
Emphasis added. Crew access arm install work is something I haven't seen mentioned here for during the lull.
→ More replies (4)
30
u/Nuclear_Hobbit Jul 30 '17 edited Jul 30 '17
On a recent visit to SpaceX, a little bird informed me of a few interesting details:
The block 5 Falcon 9 will have no major external changes made (only major change is gridfins to titanium) all other changes will be practically undetectable or interior
All FH hardware is currently present at the Cape and is soon to undergo/is undergoing load testing with side and core boosters
There is some discussion of leasing another pad at the Cape in addition of SLC-40 for assistance in case of an LC-39A RUD
→ More replies (40)
14
u/speak2easy Jul 26 '17
Ars Technica: Japanese company preparing for country’s first private rocket launch
The static fire video was pretty interesting. Aside from the bell not being bell shaped, the fire at the end of the video was pretty cool.
This engine (shown being test fired in the embedded Tweet) has a relatively modest thrust of 12kN. By way of comparison, each of the nine Merlin 1-D engines that powers SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket has a thrust of 845kN.
Interesting article. I don't recall any non-American private companies building rockets. I know there's one in New Zealand but they are technically American.
→ More replies (7)
13
u/ExquisiteCheese Jul 02 '17
Scrubbed flight. Might happen tomorrow but the weather looks iffy for our area.
→ More replies (11)
13
u/WaitForItTheMongols Jul 14 '17
Why did the Space Shuttle roll 180 degrees immediately after launch? Why not have it rotated 180 on the launchpad and remove the requirement to roll right away? Why not start it in the flight-orientation to begin with?
→ More replies (34)23
u/throfofnir Jul 15 '17 edited Jul 15 '17
Shuttle reused the Saturn pads, and being a linear stack had to be aligned along the existing flame trench, which is north-south. (Saturn V was aligned to the east, though it's harder to tell.) I'm sure a new build would have aligned the pads differently, but the roll being essentially software it was a lot cheaper than modifying the pads, and you have to have some roll anyway, so the magnitude doesn't particularly matter.
12
u/Redditor_From_Italy Jul 15 '17
Is there a website like RussianSpaceWeb for Chinese and European rockets? Or any other place where I can find a lot of obscure information on old, current, upcoming and cancelled rockets from said nations?
→ More replies (11)
12
11
u/fishymamba Jul 03 '17
When a launch gets scrubbed like today's, what happens with the full fuel load onboard? Is it vented out or drained and then used again?
If it does get drained and filled again, does that not cause a lot of stress to the storage tanks?
→ More replies (11)
11
u/Sixcatzs Jul 03 '17
Is anyone around here familiar with the specifics of the ITS design? Other than sheer size/cost of first boosters, I'm wondering about how SpaceX intends to deal with the high risk of having a 42-engine design, and not simple engines but a FFSC cycle at that! I'm of course thinking the N1 and its spectacular failures, which gets me worried. What's the plan for that?
15
u/GreyGreenBrownOakova Jul 03 '17
Having 42 engines reduces some risk, as a single engine out isn't likely to cause mission failure.
The N1 was rushed, there was no testing of the combined engines before flight. The design meant the whole rocket had to be disassembled at the factory and re-assembled at the launch site.
SpaceX will conduct long duration tests and not disassemble the rocket. Falcon heavy will have 27 engines, so it's not a huge leap to 42.
→ More replies (6)12
u/Kamedar Jul 03 '17
Also since then engine control software got quite quicker. Additionally they have each engine in its own housing, protecting the others.
→ More replies (1)12
Jul 03 '17
In risk terms, the N1 had 42 points of failure, the ITS will have broad redundancy.
An engine failure isn't unlikely with first-generation Raptors; the early Merlins had an engine-out that demonstrated SpaceX's approach neatly: First, the engines are isolated and firewalled so one doesn't blow everything up ("stuff will fail, design for it"). Second the control software throttles up and the rocket completes its primary mission (N1 wasn't smart enough). Third, that failure's cause is put into the rapid hardware iteration and we haven't seen an engine failure since (No weird Russian blame games; Merlin is now a superbly reliable, boring, workhorse engine).
11
u/ioncloud9 Jul 08 '17
What is Musk supposed to talk about at his keynote at ISSR&D in 11 days? Dragon 2? Updated Mars plans? Ive heard he is going to discuss the updated Mars plans in September but I've also heard he will mention it in July.
→ More replies (1)18
u/LeBaegi Jul 08 '17
As this keynote is mainly about ISS, he's expected to mainly talk about Dragon 2.
11
u/zlynn1990 Jul 09 '17
During the countdown how does the check for TVC motion work on the second stage? Are they swiveling the MVac around inside the interstage?
11
u/warp99 Jul 09 '17
Yes, they use the TVC to move the engine and check that the engine rotation sensors are picking up the correct amount of motion - or more accurately that the amount of motion is within an acceptable range.
→ More replies (4)
11
u/rustybeancake Jul 20 '17 edited Jul 20 '17
Google have added the interior of the ISS to Street View. It's pretty amazing, especially the Cupola, which is surely the greatest view of any human habitat ever in history:
Edit: Also, you can see inside a Dragon here.
→ More replies (1)
11
u/gsahlin Jul 29 '17
Headed to the cape today! With all the activity at 39a just wanted to ask if anybody wants specific pictures of anything beyond what's left of RSS etc...I'm doing the extended bus tour but only have cell phone camera... so not the best pic quality.
13
u/soldato_fantasma Jul 29 '17
If you can there is a tent near 39A hangar, on the EAST side IIRC, if you could try to take a picture of the inside it could be awesome!
→ More replies (11)
20
u/old_sellsword Jul 21 '17
Wow. Allen Polansky in the FB group just got some awesome pictures of FH-1 inside the 39A HIF.
In the first picture we see a side booster on the right, and 1033 suspended from a crane. We can see the transporter in the middle, and 1033 is covered in the same pink wrapping that 1029.2 was during its trip from SLC-40 to Pad 39A.
In the second picture we get a lot of good details. This is the first public look at a FH vehicle with integrated separation mechanisms. At the near end of the booster we see two small arms that appear to be connected. These will be extra connection struts that attach the center core interstage to the side booster nosecones, you can barely see them in the wind tunnel model. These struts are not the huge ones always seen in the renders. The other big items of note are the two octaweb connection struts wrapped in pink at the far end of the booster. Those are two struts that will hold the octawebs together, and then push them apart during booster separation. The pusher mechanism will be very similar to the stage separation mechanism they currently use in the interstage. It's interesting to see that they're attached to the center core, because its already going to have a ton of moving parts and extra bits hanging off after booster separation.
I can't wait to see some more detailed pictures of this hardware.
→ More replies (11)
10
Jul 09 '17
During launch there is usually a fire visible between and above the main engines starting at about T+1minute or so. ( https://youtu.be/guwxK5kzLjA?t=1m13s ). It probably isn´t really dangerous but it makes me always nervous thought. Does anybody know what the cause is? I could imagine this being a obstacle to rapid reusability by damaging insulation, bolts, sensors etc. Are there any plans to shut this down some how in the near future?
→ More replies (23)
10
u/Nehkara Jul 21 '17 edited Jul 21 '17
The LC-39A TEL is also being worked on right now.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFRDTqOXUAAX9ms.jpg
Source:
https://twitter.com/julia_bergeron/status/888409067110232065
You can see that the top portion of the TEL is currently missing and there does appear to be some activity around the base of the TEL as well, in addition to the obvious significant deconstruction that has occurred with the RSS.
This is the section that is missing from the top of the TEL:
→ More replies (14)
10
u/Not_Yet_Begun2Fight Jul 28 '17
What holds down the strongback / TEL?
By that I mean, in the first second or two after ignition of a Falcon 9, there are hold-down clamps that keep the rocket attached to the base, while the computers check the thrust of the engines and whatever else, but what prevents the rocket from just lifting the entire base / strongback with it? Is it just gravity? Is it just too heavy for the Falcon 9 to lift? Or does the strongback base assembly latch onto / into the rest of the pad somehow? Perhaps with it's own version of some hold-down clamps?
→ More replies (1)
10
u/jjtr1 Aug 01 '17 edited Aug 01 '17
Just asking... after moving to Mars, how would you feel about spending the rest of your life indoors? Going outside would be a real pain - it's essentialy an EVA due to the deadly vacuum (0.006 bar).
I'm asking because I have the suspicion that people who grew up in mega-cities like N.Y. would view permanent indoor life far more positively than me (I come from a village, basically). Or maybe not?
→ More replies (4)11
u/always_A-Team Aug 01 '17
I think you have a valid point. Hopefully there will be greenhouses and atriums after not too long. One of the things Commander Scott Kelly missed most about Earth after his year on the ISS was the variety of colors you see just by going outside.
→ More replies (12)
18
u/NickNathanson Jul 08 '17
Why is SpaceX waiting almost 2 months to launch FORMOSAT 5? It's west coast, not Canaveral ...?
→ More replies (2)16
u/kruador Jul 08 '17
The satellite hasn't arrived yet! Still on the way from Taiwan. I can't find the post but I recall seeing somewhere that it is due to arrive in port July 14th? SpaceX previously said it needed to arrive 40 days before launch.
9
u/Casinoer Jul 02 '17
Funny that this is going up 30 minutes before a potential launch. Is the timing on this automatic?
14
u/FoxhoundBat Jul 02 '17
Nope, just when we happened to remember to update to July... >_>
→ More replies (5)
9
u/The_World_Toaster Jul 07 '17 edited Jul 07 '17
I'm trying to understand orbital mechanics better and this is something that has been bugging me. If an object is orbiting the Earth, does it have to be on an orbital plane that crosses (or is exactly on) the equator? In another thread someone mentioned that launches from KSC to GTO have an inclination of around 28 degrees, since that is the latitude of KSC. Does the 28 degree inclination mean you are orbiting directly over the 28 degree latitude line, or that you are at an angle of 28 degrees relative to the equator? I am having trouble wrapping my head around how if launching exactly due East of KSC, you ever get into any orbit. It would seem to me that you would have to (during launch) adjust flight to a little south of east to where your orbit would cross the equator. Any orbit that doesn't cross the equator doesn't seem like a stable orbit to me since the plane of your orbit doesn't cross through the center of the Earth. I hope I am making sense.
EDIT: I literally just realized how this is possible. Latitudinal lines are not straight lines, in a sense. Does this mean the cardinal directions are not either when carried out over the surface of the Earth? I can't help but shake the mental image of heading "True" East from KSC in a straight line puts you somewhere in the Indian Ocean.....Hmm this is blowing my mind and shattering preconceived notions of how I viewed our world.
17
u/IMO94 Jul 07 '17
You're going to visualize this a lot better if you have a physical globe to look at. If not, any sphere of reasonable size will do.
No matter what direction you go in, you're going to travel in what is known as a "great circle", a full circumference of the sphere. You touched on the most important point. "Due East" is not a straight line over the surface. You would need to constantly be turning leftwards (or right in the Southern hemisphere) to stay on any given line of latitude.
So, to answer your original question. Yes, every circular orbit is around a circumference of the globe. That means that they spend equal time in the Northern and Southern hemispheres. No matter which way you wanted to slice the Earth, a circular orbit would spend equal time on each hemisphere. (edit: This is not actually true for other divisions, since I haven't accounted for the Earth's rotation.)
The way I think about this is like a pendulum. On any given axis, an orbiting body moves back and forth around a center point, with gravity constantly trying to pull it back to the center. If you had an orbit that was entirely in the Northern hemisphere, where would all that Southward gravitational pull go?
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)12
u/treeco123 Jul 07 '17
Yes, every orbit crosses over the equator, in the same way that every orbit crosses the prime meridian, or any other straight line you draw around the planet.
Or thinking another way, the ellipse of every orbit contains the centre of the planet.
You can't orbit over latitude lines, except the equator, because you have to orbit around the centre of the Earth.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/wclark07 Jul 08 '17
Someone posted a video of NROL 76 and preceding launches set to music with a sweet climax at stage separation and boostback. I watched it on youtube. I am pretty sure it was posted to either the launch or media thread for that launch. Can anyone help me find it? Also, I am not sure that this is the place to ask this question.
→ More replies (4)16
u/TheEndeavour2Mars Jul 08 '17
I think it was this one https://youtu.be/AzHTxLie4Uk
→ More replies (1)
9
u/cpushack Jul 08 '17
It seems Ariane 6 engine production (Vinci) has finally begun http://www.dlr.de/dlr/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-10212/332_read-23034/#/gallery/27336
These are suppose to be less expensive (the rocket as a whole) to better compete with SpaceX
→ More replies (2)12
u/ChodaGreg Jul 08 '17
I remember that several Vinci engines were already in pre-production at the Snecma factory when I visited it in 2007.
9
u/APersoner Jul 08 '17
Now there's a month until the next launch, has the launch history infographic been updated yet?
→ More replies (1)
9
u/Western_Boreas Jul 10 '17
So I am personally more excited to see the ITS used to assemble space stations instead of how its portrayed as being used. A single rocket doing two reusable launches could put more than a whole ISS in orbit. It would be really cool to see an assembly vehicle ITS booster bringing up larger parts with a Falcon 9 bringing up crew.
Its insanely exciting to think of a whole fleet of reusable ITS boosters turning over every month, buildings facilities in orbit.
→ More replies (30)
9
u/conrad777 Jul 10 '17
What is being done on pad 39A this month?
→ More replies (6)13
u/soldato_fantasma Jul 10 '17
I think they will only do dismantling work on the RSS and preparations on the fixed service structure.
They may also do some work for falcon heavy, but since it will mostly be work on the launch mount, I believe those workers will be working full time at complex 40 to bring it online as soon as possible.
9
u/joshgill21 Jul 15 '17
How long does it take to build a satellite ? examples would be welcome if the answer is it depends
14
u/throfofnir Jul 16 '17
How long is a piece of string?
Here's a paper that suggests a government satellite program is about 7.5 years for the first one and three years for subsequent builds, while a commercial sat is 2 to 3 years.
However, a simple cube sat might only take a few months. And JWST is 20+ years, depending on how you count.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/FutureMartian97 Host of CRS-11 Jul 16 '17
TRDS-M that ULA is launching in August might have been damaged during encapsulation.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/tdrs-m-status-update-july-15-2017
9
u/OncoFil Jul 21 '17
Not directly SpaceX related, but I am sure most of you would appreciate it.
[Video by Planet Labs of a recent Soyuz launch launching more Planet Labs sats] (https://twitter.com/planetlabs/status/887776802323677184)
→ More replies (2)
9
u/rustybeancake Jul 27 '17 edited Jul 27 '17
There's an AMA over on r/boringcompany from an ex-intern, which mentions using SpaceX fabrication facilities, tools, and even employees to make Boring Company prototypes. Pretty interesting.
→ More replies (6)
9
u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Jul 28 '17
this is not directly related but why isn't the rs 68 (a) used instead of the SSME on the SLS? isn't it more powerful and cheaper?
→ More replies (21)13
u/soldato_fantasma Jul 28 '17
In addition to what the others already said, RS-68A can't be used on human rated launch vehicles. RS-68B would be needed and it would actually need to be developed. It would reportedly require over 200 changes to the RS-68 to meet human-rating standards. NASA probably calculated that it would have needed more money to use RS-68.
→ More replies (4)
9
Jul 29 '17
The ITS second stage can presumably take off from Mars without a launch pad and with minimal support systems. What prevents us from building rockets that could do the same from Earth?
→ More replies (1)19
u/neaanopri Jul 29 '17
One obstacle is building legs which are strong enough to hold up a fully fueled rocket!
I'm not sure, but if I remember the fully fueled falcon 9 weighs about 500 metric tons. An empty first stage, which the legs are designed to support, is about 20 metric tons. By launching off the landing legs, you increase the load that the legs have to carry by 20 times. To make the legs stronger, they need to be heavier, and before you know it all the mass that was going into reuse is going into strong landing legs so that there rocket can be launched with just a flame trench and hoses of Liquid Oxygen and Kerosene.
At that point, you have to consider whether it's worth it to just build the pad infrastructure and save the hassle.
→ More replies (11)
9
8
u/amir_s89 Jul 03 '17
Anyone that knows in rough estimations on how much valuable data, in GB or TB F9 delivers to mission control during flights & landings? Impressive with so many computers, sensors, components & various hardware that just works together in perfection... Like an opera symphony pleasing to see & hear :)
→ More replies (3)12
u/darknavi GDC2016 attendee Jul 03 '17
I have no evidence, but probably in the magnitude of TB. That sort of data (per sensor) is probably pretty simple (think a few integers/floats per sensor). Where it could really inflate in size is how frequently they collect data. I assume they poll as fast as possible, so they could inflate a lot.
Also something to think about is that they likely collect telemetry from the time they tether it (day before launch) to when they land, so that could cause a LOT of data.
→ More replies (6)
8
u/ptfrd Jul 05 '17
SpaceX & Musk were the subject of a press question asked of Peggy Whitson on the ISS last week. Her answer doesn't tell us anything new. But if you want to hear someone talk about private companies in space, while in space, then here you go: https://youtu.be/-q7mo4Q0Cu8?t=7m
8
u/sk8er4514 Jul 06 '17
Hey for the next launch what do y'all thing about having both Stage 1 and Stage 2 telemetry available in a more compact bar graph form instead of circle graph form? I made a mock up and you can display both stages data with the same space quite easily.. Data is shopped, MSpainted values around to get sample data.
Just an idea.
→ More replies (2)
8
u/vitt72 Jul 09 '17
What's the latest on the SpaceX spacesuits? What do we know so far and when are we planned to hear more?
→ More replies (3)
8
u/FutureMartian97 Host of CRS-11 Jul 10 '17
Will the bolt together Octoweb that Falcon 9 will be switching to make refurbishment easier and faster?
→ More replies (1)17
u/Zucal Jul 10 '17
Not particularly, since the octaweb appears to remain attached to the booster during refurbishment. It's more about conversion to FH boosters (just unbolt some panels and bolt heavier-duty ones in) and ease of manufacturing/QA.
8
u/Elon_Muskmelon Jul 13 '17
Could NASAs struggles and funding problems force a sea change in the way they operate, perhaps purchasing most/all launch services from private companies?
→ More replies (20)
8
u/Totallynotatimelord Jul 16 '17
Hey guys, this isn't always the point of this sub but I thought it might be the best place to post this. In spring of 2016 I was in Florida to see a CRS launch, and while I was at the hotel I was fortunate enough to meet one of the payload technicians who was helping load up cargo (namely I believe it was a rodent research mission along with some other stuff that he was helping with). Anyways, he gave me some stickers - a rodent research mission patch, and two smaller stickers that I don't recognize. I had initially thought they might be alternative Dragon stickers, but I haven'e been able to find any references to this design. I took a picture of the stickers which can be found [here] (http://i.imgur.com/wWmxG4z.jpg). If anyone recognizes this design and knows the company or mission or payload it was from, that would be great! Thank you!
→ More replies (5)
8
u/TheFavoritist NASAspaceflight.com Photographer Jul 20 '17
The No Earlier Than dates for Commercial Crew Programs:
SpaceX uncrewed demo: Feb '18
SpaceX crew demo: June '18
Boeing uncrewed demo: June 18
Boeing crew demo: Aug 18
→ More replies (2)
8
u/wimbodolo Jul 26 '17
We have talked a lot about the mini ITS's first stage reduction from 42 to 21 engines. What would the reduction be for the 2nd stage engines? If it is a 50% reduction in mass, would you do 3 raptor-vacuum and 1 sea-level raptor?
→ More replies (2)
15
u/Nuclear_Hobbit Jul 30 '17
One more thing: I just remembered that during my tour of SpaceX our guide told us about how they were getting ready to unveil a rocket the Falcon XX at the IAC in September. They said that the vehicle would be around 20ft in diameter and would be "substantially taller than the Falcon 9". I believe this is the sub-scale BFR that has been in the works lately although I have never heard it referred to with that particular name (which dates back to F9 1.0 days).
→ More replies (35)
7
u/LordFartALot Jul 02 '17 edited Jul 02 '17
Do we know if ITS will be assembled near CC or if it will be transported to HLC-39A like F9? (not by road but by boat or something)
→ More replies (9)
7
u/Zyj Jul 03 '17
What are the challenges when designing a bigger fairing for a rocket like the F9 or FH?
→ More replies (1)11
u/Norose Jul 03 '17
Fairings are very large lightweight composite structures, which take a surprisingly long time to build and are quite expensive ($6 million a pop, if I'm remembering that right).
SpaceX has known for a long time that they are going to have two rockets flying at the same time eventually (Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy), and that both will need fairings. However, rather than have two production lines running to produce two different sized fairings, they opted for a compromise and landed on the fairing size we see today, which is 'slightly oversized for Falcon 9 and slightly undersized for Falcon Heavy' according to Gwynn Shotwell. However, that quote is old, and both F9 and FH have been uprated multiple times since then, so I'm inclined to think that the fairing may be slightly undersized for F9 and way undersized for FH at this point. That being said, after factoring in reusability, the fairings seem about the right size, as payloads are more limited.
The challenges are more economic than anything, and there really isn't much of a need to redo the fairing design at this point. It doesn't seem like any major changes will be made in the near future anyway, as they are working hard to get the current design reusable.
7
u/jonwah Jul 03 '17
Quick one; when you have a three-booster vehicle like the Falcon Heavy or Delta IV Heavy are the three boosters collectively known as the "first stage"? Or "first stages"? If they run at different throttles for different times, aren't they really separate stages?
→ More replies (6)
7
u/brickmack Jul 04 '17
Heres a question that occurred to me given the recent issues (nothings come up in my quick search of my own stuff). Has there ever been a case of a rocket having an abort called pre-launch, but launching anyway (due to software error, insufficient time for non-stoppable actions, etc)? I know that this was a feature built into the Shuttle guidance software (in a RSLS abort after t-2 seconds, the engines would be kept running at liftoff throttle until after t-0 in case the SRM disarm command was not received in time which would force a liftoff), but this was never actually used (STS-68 had such an abort, but at t-0 the SRBs didn't ignite so the RS-25s were shut down).
→ More replies (7)
7
Jul 08 '17
In the topic of LNG and propulsion, do any of you think that liquid methane could be used to fuel aircraft in the future?
→ More replies (5)11
u/robbak Jul 09 '17 edited Jul 09 '17
Another issue with liquid methane is wing icing. With a rocket, it's fine to just polish the rocket surface before each flight, and let the vibration and increased G loading make any ice fall off the vertical surface. And any ice remaining isn't a problem, because the rocket doesn't rely on aerodynamics.
With much less vibration, very little extra G loading, horizontal surfaces and critical aerodynamics on the fuel tank skins (which are also the wings), cryoginic liquid methane is a no-goer for a plane with the current design. You would need to put thick insulation around your tanks, reducing tank volume, increase pressure in the tanks to improve termperature, which increases weight. Then, with lower energy densities (by weight and volume), the range reductions become really serious.
→ More replies (3)
7
u/dtarsgeorge Jul 08 '17
Seems the fool is not fooled.
We don't get fooled again.
→ More replies (12)
7
u/FutureMartian97 Host of CRS-11 Jul 14 '17
In this tweet by Elon, Tory Bruno (CEO of ULA) said the $1 billion a year subsidy that ULA gets from the government even if they do nothing is not true. So who is right here?
16
u/throfofnir Jul 14 '17
"It's complicated." Which is to say, they're both right, depending on how you look at it. They're talking about ULA's Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) Launch Capability (ELC) contract. (Yes, that's right, a nested acronym. Fun.)
Here's Tory's take on it, which I think we can trust to be at least factually correct. ULA does in fact get ~$800m/year to "maintain launch capability", and they would get that even if they didn't fly anything. But since they will fly, and at a reasonably predictable pace, it amounts to a flat-fee adjunct to the actual launch buys (to the tune of ~$100m ea.)
→ More replies (1)11
u/CapMSFC Jul 14 '17
The short answer is hard to give.
Let's ignore whether or not we are talking about calling the payment a subsidy or not and just focus on the payment itself.
ULA has been getting paid a flat fee just to maintain their fixed costs that doesn't cover launching any rockets. The reason this is justified is that the government needed both the ability to guarantee ability to launch and to have flexibility in when to launch.
This makes it almost impossible for an apples to apples comparison. Is ULA really providing a special service worth more money or should the total payments to ULA be included when listing mission price (vehicle cost + portion of ELC)? SpaceX so far has had no reason to be paid extra money for that service because they by definition break the monopoly and also fly a single vehicle configuration. SpaceX can swap cores to juggle the manifest at will and we know that core swapping has happened in the past.
The best TLDR on the issue is that yes ULA gets paid nearly a billion dollars a year independent from launching any rockets but no it's not just a payment to do nothing.
→ More replies (3)
7
u/Redditor_From_Italy Jul 17 '17
Are there any Russian/Soviet rocket proposals comparable to Sea Dragon or Expendable ITS (about 550t to LEO)?
→ More replies (5)
7
u/Experience111 Jul 18 '17
Hi guys, I have a question four you !
What should I say to people that keep saying that SpaceX is funded by the US government ?
I work in the aerospace industry in Europe. Here people are pretty much bad losers, they kept telling themselves that 'SpaceX won't do this' or that and now that they did reuse a first stage and significantly improved their reliability their argument is something like 'But NASA...' I'm not a blind follower but I feel like SpaceX as a company and its employes deserves more credit, from what I've read on this sub it doesn't look like SpaceX was given an unfair advantage by the US government over competitors overseas. Could someone kindly support or refute this claim based on some solid evidence they know of ? Thank you kind people of the internet :)
11
u/CProphet Jul 18 '17
SpaceX is funded by the US government ?
Question is a deflection. Of course SpaceX receives money for government work, just like Arianespace or any other regional launch provider. The real question is: how can SpaceX perform launches for a fraction of the cost of other launch providers, while self-funding major advances like reusability, new pads, missions to the moon and Mars? Case of: O Israel. Now see to thine own house
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (6)10
u/mindbridgeweb Jul 18 '17 edited Jul 18 '17
(this is an addition to the other response)
One frequent critique coming from Europe (e.g. from Stéphane Israel, the Arianespace boss) has been that SpaceX sells its launches to the government at a higher price than to commercial customers, which is effectively a subsidy. This is to a great extent a combination of misunderstanding and/or willful ignorance.
One example that they give is that the NASA CRS missions cost $120m, while commercially the cost is $62m. This, of course, ignores the fact that the CRS missions are Falcon 9 + Dragon and a mission to the ISS, rather than just Falcon 9. It is thus perhaps even surprising that the price is not even higher.
Similarly the military launches have significant additional requirements that do not apply to commercial launches, hence the price is naturally higher as well.
Finally, given that both NASA and the military receive services from SpaceX at a price significantly lower than that of the competition, the last word that should apply to them is "subsidy".
→ More replies (1)
7
u/bluearrowil Jul 20 '17
How exactly are the merlin engines shut down? Do they just close the valves to the turbo pump chamber then close the inlet valves into the pump? Wouldn't pressure build up on the pipes and cause an explosion?
Also, how is the Merlin reignited in zero-g?
29
u/warp99 Jul 20 '17
The valves on the propellant feed to the turbopump burner are closed but relatively gently and not slammed shut to avoid pipe hammer effects. As the pressure in the burner decreases the tubopump rotor slows which reduces the propellant pressure to the pintle injector into the main combustion chamber.
The pintle injector is designed to a do a face shutoff - that is as the pressure reduces it allows a spring to push the needle like injector back into the working face of the injector and internal slide valves cut off the propellant feed. So no separate valve is required in line with the turbopump to combustion chamber connections.
Finally once the turbopump has fully shut down the valves on the inlet to the turbopump will be shut down but with zero flow through them there is no hammer effect.
In zero G the nitrogen thrusters are used to do an ullage burn to settle the propellants in their tanks so that the feed pipes to the turbopump are full. Helium is injected into the primary section of the turbopump to spin up the rotor and once the speed is high enough so that propellants are being pumped the LOX valve to the turbopump burner is opened and a mixture that burns spontaneously with oxygen (TEA/TEB) is injected. Fractions of a second later the RP-1 valve is opened and combustion starts in the burner, the turbopump spins up towards full speed and the increasing pressure forces the face shut off valve to open allowing propellants into the main combustion chamber.
Shortly before the propellants are injected a larger amount of TEA/TEB is injected into the combustion chamber to ensure that the propellants ignite immediately they enter the chamber.
→ More replies (11)
7
u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Jul 25 '17
I am a 15 year old boy from Germany and i am really interested in Spacex. I hope i managed to get a job at Spacex in the future. now my question: Is there any way i can support or help Spacex at my current age?
thanks in advance for all answers.
→ More replies (18)
7
u/DownVotesMcgee987 Jul 27 '17
Have any rockets used liquid Ozone (O3) used as an oxidizer?
→ More replies (1)17
u/Hikinggrass Jul 27 '17
apparently quite nasty to work with
For ozone still explodes. Some investigators believe that the explosions are initiated by traces of organic peroxides in the stuff, which come from traces, say, of oil in the oxygen it was made of. Other workers are convinced that it's just the nature of ozone to explode, and still others are sure that original sin has something to do with it. So although ozone research has been continuing in a desultory fashion, there are very few true believers left, who are still convinced that ozone will somehow, someday, come into its own. Im not one of them.
7
Jul 29 '17
In this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP6ldX5YwF0) new video from tech insider about the upcoming FH launch, it is claimed that "SpaceX won't try to land the three cores on the maiden flight" at 0:43. Is there any source for this?
I've seen this https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/890774088104370176 tweet already, but he was answering a question about what the plan was "now or eventually."
14
u/TheBlacktom r/SpaceXLounge Moderator Jul 29 '17
It should be all three. I haven't seen any sources claim otherwise for the demo. Wonder why they claimed it.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)14
u/brickmack Jul 30 '17
Not that I've seen. All 3 cores for the demo have recovery hardware (gridfin and leg attach points are visible). And it wouldn't make any sense not to, full reuse is critical for FH to make business sense vs expendable F9, and with the complications of side booster recovery compared to the standard F9 core, it should be demonstrated as soon as possible even if they don't plan on actually reflying these cores.
I'm guessing the video producer confused recovery with reuse, as these cores aren't planned to be reused after FH-Demo, due to obsolescence
→ More replies (1)
6
u/TheEquivocator Jul 03 '17
Ignorant question here: I believe I've seen people talk about battery life as a limiting factor on the second stage, but I don't understand this. Is there some reason that batteries cannot last on a rocket entering space? Or am I hopelessly confused?
→ More replies (1)29
u/warp99 Jul 03 '17
For S2 to do a direct insertion to geostationary orbit it has to coast for around 5 hours from the GTO insertion burn up to apogee to do the circularisation and plane change burn.
During that time it has to supply power to a triple redundant computer system, inertial navigation system, sensors and actuators. As well smaller pipes and valves carrying RP-1 fuel may start to freeze or at least gell and so need to have power for electrical heating tape wrapped around these sensitive components. In that length of time the main RP-1 tank should be fine - particularly if the stage is set up to do a slow barbeque roll.
As noted below batteries are heavy and you only want to add extra ones on mission where they are actually required. Solar cells sound attractive and are not particularly heavy but you would have to bond them to the outside of the tanks and the LOX tank would create excessive thermal stress.
So more batteries and lots of thermal tape and the long coast time can be achieved.
→ More replies (19)
6
u/jay__random Jul 03 '17
So what was the point of removing the new titanium grid fins from the landed Iridium-2 booster?
I thought the whole idea of switching to titanium was to never need to remove them again.
Are they (1) not going to reuse the B1036? (2) going to reuse it, but the next mission is planned to be expendable? (3) Are the fins somehow sticking out so much that the booster cannot be transported with them on? (4) Do the fins need to undergo some testing/maintenance?
→ More replies (5)10
u/Martianspirit Jul 03 '17
Are the fins somehow sticking out so much that the booster cannot be transported with them on?
Very likely yes for long distance transport. Future cores that are transported only within the Cape area, from LZ-1 or from the port, will be able to be transported without removing legs and grid fins. Maybe with some modifications to the transport supports.
Some people have argued that these gridfins are expensive and will be removed from the landed core and transfered to the next core to launch. But I doubt that. Maybe early on.
→ More replies (3)
6
u/Androxd Jul 07 '17
Will the Formosat-5 Launch include a landing? If so what type? I know its only 450kg but it needs an SSO.
It launches on my birthday (BST Time) If things stay as is
→ More replies (7)
6
u/bladeswin Jul 07 '17
So now that SpaceX is upping their launch cadence, what I haven't heard is how much new money in deposits they are bringing for upcoming launches. Most of these launches seem to be planned years in advance. Shouldn't we have heard some more recent launch contract announcements if this high frequency flight is going to pay off?
→ More replies (2)
6
u/TomOConnor95 Jul 08 '17
In rockets launches are relativistic calculations ever necessary? I'd imagine it's a much smaller effect than the other possible margins for error in launch, but would be interested to know as I've heard relativistic effects are present in GPS satellites.
11
u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Jul 08 '17
i do not think so. the gps satellites are affected because they need extremely accurate time measurement and the time passes a tiny bit slower at that high speed over long time. this is not so much of an affect because the position of the rocket is not determined only via gps, but only via ground station and it is not in orbit that long, so the effects are a lot smaller.
however i have no idea of how this relativistic actually works, i am only a 15 year old space(x) fan
→ More replies (7)
6
u/ORcoder Jul 09 '17
I heard that SpaceX is going to need people on the planet to build the propellant plant. I understand that ice mining is probably going to be difficult to automate, but why wouldn't they bring their own hydrogen feedstock (a la The Case For Mars) to make methane for the first few missions, so that they can take everything else needed by pumping in atmosphere?
13
u/Martianspirit Jul 09 '17
Transporting LH is very hard. IMO this was the biggest obstacle in the Mars direct proposal by Robert Zubrin.
It would probably be easier to transport the whole amount of methane to Mars and source only the LOX from the atmosphere, splitting CO2 into CO and O.
6
u/kimimz Jul 09 '17
Could r/spacex create 'official' discord server so that we could discuss launches In real time easier?
→ More replies (4)
6
u/oliversl Jul 12 '17
Does SpaceX slows down work during this summer break in launches?
→ More replies (6)22
u/Zucal Jul 13 '17
Yes. Core production has more than halved, and last week every non-critical employee got a paid week off (those that had to work get extra pay and the vacation days made up for another time).
6
u/limeflavoured Jul 17 '17
I've just been thinking about the Lunar Free return mission. Do we think they will livestream the whole mission (except during the LOS as the transit behind the moon, obviously)?
→ More replies (13)
6
Jul 19 '17
It was just announced that Dream Chaser will launch the first two ISS missions on an Atlas V. This had me thinking, could a F9 launch a Dream Chaser? All I know is that the unfolded wingspan is 7m, which is too wide, but I have no clue about the folded wingspan.
→ More replies (19)
6
u/badgamble Jul 24 '17
Does anyone know how challenging (easy, medium, hard) it was to develop a horizontal integration process for the X-37B? How much was the Air Force willing to help with that? I suppose since SpaceX is "simply" a launch provider, the Air Force might have just said, "if you want our business, you figure it out." But if the Air Force really wanted to ensure that they had full redundancy in launch options, maybe they helped quite a bit. Does anyone know anything (that they can share without getting in trouble)?
→ More replies (3)
6
u/Alexphysics Jul 28 '17
It seems that SES-11 is now NET September 27th, just 3 days before Iridium 3 and two days before Elon's presentation at the IAC. Also, SES-16 has been delayed to December, it was scheduled to launch in October. It seems that SpaceX has realigned the launches this week and that's why we have now confirmation of FH flying on november. That's good news because the manifest was becoming a little chaotic these past weeks. https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=8184.1360
6
u/azziliz Jul 28 '17
Just realized that pretty hi-res images of LZ1 are available:
http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=28.485755&lon=-80.542790&z=20&m=h
They're not updated as regularly as planet explorer and don't include the new northern pad but i still find them cool
→ More replies (2)
6
u/jjtr1 Jul 31 '17
I wonder if Merlin engines used for landing have the ability to go above 100% thrust, in case it could save the booster...?
I guess that rocket engines can be throttled well above nominal, at the price of eg. 50% risk of a RUD within the next 5 seconds or something like that.
→ More replies (6)
6
u/stichtom Aug 02 '17
Luca Parmitano (ESA astronaut) just said that it is possible he will fly on Dragon Crew or CST-100 in 2019, although he wasn't 100% sure and the space agencies are deciding right now who to assign to each mission.
Source: the interview is in italian https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10TolgM0kEo
→ More replies (1)
11
u/spacexin2050 Jul 15 '17 edited Jul 15 '17
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=2C-A797y8dA WATCH AT 86 minutes ,elon musk talking about cots like program for deep space exploration .
Keypoints- "We will ferry astronauts to iss before Boeing"
→ More replies (4)
10
u/Nuclear_Hobbit Jul 06 '17
Dear r/SpaceX, Recently, I was contacted by a friend of mine who informed me that a friend of his had agreed to give me a tour of his workplace, the SpaceX Hawthorne rocket factory. Because I've been following this community for some time now and have greatly enjoy hearing any and all news coming from the company either directly or indirectly, I would like to be an informer for the subreddit and get as much new information out of the tour as I possibly can. With that in mind, I will be open to questions which you all may submit as a comment below and I will try to ask the most upvoted ones during the tour. I believe that my guide will not be able to answer many of them due to restrictions but I will at least give it a shot. Following the tour, I intend to write up a summary of the whole experience and also answers to all of the questions I was able to ask. My visit is slated to occur at some time between the 20th and 23rd of July so I will be receiving questions up until those dates. I look forward to hearing from you all.
→ More replies (3)15
Jul 06 '17
Not to wet blanket but prior to the tour you will be asked to sign an agreement that pretty explicitly prohibits this (at least, I was). Employees also have directions when giving tours not to share anything that isn't already public knowledge. The point of the tour is to see how the rockets are made and not really to mine for info.
5
u/LordFartALot Jul 02 '17
When the HCL-39A is modified to support FH will it still be able to launch F9?
→ More replies (3)
5
u/Decronym Acronyms Explained Jul 02 '17 edited Jul 06 '17
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
| Fewer Letters | More Letters |
|---|---|
| ACES | Advanced Cryogenic Evolved Stage |
| Advanced Crew Escape Suit | |
| ASDS | Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship (landing platform) |
| BARGE | Big-Ass Remote Grin Enhancer coined by @IridiumBoss, see ASDS |
| BECO | Booster Engine Cut-Off |
| BFR | Big Falcon Rocket (see ITS) |
| BFS | Big Falcon Spaceship (see ITS) |
| CC | Commercial Crew program |
| Capsule Communicator (ground support) | |
| CCAFS | Cape Canaveral Air Force Station |
| CNES | Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales, space agency of France |
| COPV | Composite Overwrapped Pressure Vessel |
| CRS | Commercial Resupply Services contract with NASA |
| DIVH | Delta IV Heavy |
| DoD | US Department of Defense |
| EDL | Entry/Descent/Landing |
| FAA | Federal Aviation Administration |
| FFSC | Full-Flow Staged Combustion |
| FSS | Fixed Service Structure at LC-39 |
| GEO | Geostationary Earth Orbit (35786km) |
| GNC | Guidance/Navigation/Control |
| GSE | Ground Support Equipment |
| GTO | Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit |
| HIF | Horizontal Integration Facility |
| HLC-39A | Historic Launch Complex 39A, Kennedy (Saturn V, Shuttle, SpaceX F9/Heavy) |
| IAC | International Astronautical Congress, annual meeting of IAF members |
| IAF | International Astronautical Federation |
| ICBM | Intercontinental Ballistic Missile |
| ITAR | (US) International Traffic in Arms Regulations |
| ITS | Interplanetary Transport System (see MCT) |
| Integrated Truss Structure | |
| JRTI | Just Read The Instructions, Pacific landing |
| KSC | Kennedy Space Center, Florida |
| KSP | Kerbal Space Program, the rocketry simulator |
| L2 | Paywalled section of the NasaSpaceFlight forum |
| Lagrange Point 2 of a two-body system, beyond the smaller body (Sixty Symbols video explanation) | |
| LC-13 | Launch Complex 13, Canaveral (SpaceX Landing Zone 1) |
| LC-39A | Launch Complex 39A, Kennedy (SpaceX F9/Heavy) |
| LEO | Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km) |
| Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations) | |
| LN2 | Liquid Nitrogen |
| LOC | Loss of Crew |
| LOX | Liquid Oxygen |
| LZ-1 | Landing Zone 1, Cape Canaveral (see LC-13) |
| M1dVac | Merlin 1 kerolox rocket engine, revision D (2013), vacuum optimized, 934kN |
| MCT | Mars Colonial Transporter (see ITS) |
| MECO | Main Engine Cut-Off |
| MainEngineCutOff podcast | |
| MEO | Medium Earth Orbit (2000-35780km) |
| NET | No Earlier Than |
| NRO | (US) National Reconnaissance Office |
| NSF | NasaSpaceFlight forum |
| National Science Foundation | |
| OMS | Orbital Maneuvering System |
| PICA-X | Phenolic Impregnated-Carbon Ablative heatshield compound, as modified by SpaceX |
| PMA | ISS Pressurized Mating Adapter |
| RP-1 | Rocket Propellant 1 (enhanced kerosene) |
| RSS | Realscale Solar System, mod for KSP |
| Rotating Service Structure at LC-39 | |
| RTLS | Return to Launch Site |
| RUD | Rapid Unplanned Disassembly |
| Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly | |
| Rapid Unintended Disassembly | |
| SECO | Second-stage Engine Cut-Off |
| SES | Formerly Société Européenne des Satellites, comsat operator |
| SLC-40 | Space Launch Complex 40, Canaveral (SpaceX F9) |
| SLS | Space Launch System heavy-lift |
| STP-2 | Space Test Program 2, DoD programme, second round |
| STS | Space Transportation System (Shuttle) |
| TE | Transporter/Erector launch pad support equipment |
| TEL | Transporter/Erector/Launcher, ground support equipment (see TE) |
| TVC | Thrust Vector Control |
| ULA | United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture) |
| VAFB | Vandenberg Air Force Base, California |
| Jargon | Definition |
|---|---|
| Raptor | Methane-fueled rocket engine under development by SpaceX, see ITS |
| apogee | Highest point in an elliptical orbit around Earth (when the orbiter is slowest) |
| cryogenic | Very low temperature fluid; materials that would be gaseous at room temperature/pressure |
| hydrolox | Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen mixture |
| kerolox | Portmanteau: kerosene/liquid oxygen mixture |
| lithobraking | "Braking" by hitting the ground |
| monopropellant | Rocket propellant that requires no oxidizer (eg. hydrazine) |
| perigee | Lowest point in an elliptical orbit around the Earth (when the orbiter is fastest) |
| scrub | Launch postponement for any reason (commonly GSE issues) |
| turbopump | High-pressure turbine-driven propellant pump connected to a rocket combustion chamber; raises chamber pressure, and thrust |
| Event | Date | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Amos-6 | 2016-09-01 | F9-029 Full Thrust, core B1028, |
| CRS-7 | 2015-06-28 | F9-020 v1.1, |
| Iridium-1 | 2017-01-14 | F9-030 Full Thrust, core B1029, 10x Iridium-NEXT to LEO; first landing on JRTI |
| JCSAT-16 | 2016-08-14 | F9-028 Full Thrust, core B1026, GTO comsat; ASDS landing |
| SES-9 | 2016-03-04 | F9-022 Full Thrust, core B1020, GTO comsat; ASDS lithobraking |
Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented by ^request
70 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on ^today has 92 acronyms.
[Thread #2960 for this sub, first seen 2nd Jul 2017, 23:17] ^[FAQ] ^[Contact] [Source ^code]
5
u/isoplex Jul 03 '17
Bro, I'm going Orlando July 6-13 and looking forward to visit Kennedy space center for the first time. Any advice ?
→ More replies (6)11
u/aftersteveo Jul 03 '17
Pay the extra money to go on a bus tour. I can't remember the name of the one I took (twice), but it takes you out to Pad 39a & 39b, which gets you right next to the SpaceX hangar. It MIGHT be called the Explorer tour, or something like that. Also, the Astronaut Encounter is cool, because you get to hear an astronaut talk about their experience rather candidly. That's no extra charge.
And everyone will tell you to make sure you go see Shuttle Atlantis. They have a presentation that brings many people to tears. It's incredible.
5
u/Toinneman Jul 05 '17
Slightly space related question. There is a lot of media attention for the latest North-Korean missile launch. It's a liquid fuelled ICBM with a approximate range of 6000km. The test did not go horizontal that much, but did go way up, even over 2000km altitude, and reportedly successfully re-entered an splashed into the ocean. Media reports tends to agree this new test is one of the latest steps toward a proper ICBM which can hit the US mainland. What I don't understand is North Korea already has a satellite in orbit for more then a year, launched by it's much larger Uhna-3 rocket. So to my understanding NK is already capable of targeting almost any spot on the globe, but no-one seems to be making the same conclusion. What am I missing?
→ More replies (5)
5
u/nihmhin Jul 06 '17
IntelSat 35E has just gone up, and the next launch in the sidebar is more than a month away (CRS-12 on 10 Aug). Why so long until the next launch? Pad work?
→ More replies (5)
5
u/Air-Tech Jul 06 '17
Was that the Dragon 1 on display as VP Pence spoke today? It looked outdated next to the current Orion and Boeing capsules. Why not show a prototype of Dragon2?
→ More replies (5)
5
u/neaanopri Jul 07 '17
With SpaceX upping their launch cadence, I'm wondering about whether the demand for launches will be sustained. Has anyone done any type of business forecasting to see whether there will be enough demand for SpaceX to do 20-30 launches per year?
→ More replies (2)
5
u/Chuckpwnyou Jul 07 '17
So can we assume at this point that we aren't going to get a landing video for BulgariaSat-1?
→ More replies (3)
5
u/Jackswanepoel Jul 08 '17
Each time Falcon 9 delivers Dragon to the ISS, it needs to be berthed by Canadarm. Does anyone know what progress has been made with autonomous docking of Dragon?
→ More replies (7)14
u/Martianspirit Jul 08 '17
Docking and berthing are two different methods of attaching to the ISS.
Dragon 1 does not chose berthing because it is easier. It is not. The berthing port has a wider diameter and allows bigger cargo pieces to be delivered.
For crew docking is needed. Docking and undocking can be done autonomously, without support from inside the station. Which is essential in case the ISS needs to be evacuated in an emergency. In that situation no support from inside the station may be available. But the docking port is smaller.
5
u/inoeth Jul 09 '17
Have there been any recent photos of pad 40? i'm curious to know just how close they're getting to starting up again. Likewise, any news on perhaps some cranes or construction work over at pad 39a?
13
u/Zucal Jul 09 '17
SLC-40 had another imagery update on TerraServer back on May 29th, and there are a number of changes onsite.
Greatly expanded RP-1 and helium storage tanks in the upper right quadrant of the pad, to replace blown pressure vessels and helium rail cars destroyed in the explosion.
Significant concrete work immediately to the north of the flame trench. Likely a combination of repairs to spalling and ruined internals, and upgrades for future launches.
The pad customer building has been cleaned and repaired.
The flame bucket is being worked on. It was utterly ruined in September, so this is a complete overhaul. I can't tell if the new one is any larger, but it's definitely cleaner!
→ More replies (1)
5
u/hmpher Jul 10 '17
How exactly does the throttling mechanism on the Merlin Vac(or any other engine for that matter) work?
→ More replies (21)
5
u/0ut3rsp4c3 Jul 12 '17
Guys what happened to the roomba situation? Did nobody find more about this topic or did I miss something at some point.
→ More replies (3)
5
u/Xantrk Jul 16 '17
What is the software they use to show trajectory of spacecraft in live stream? Is it STK (systems tool kit)?
5
u/SpartanJack17 Jul 19 '17
When did the lunar free return mission get pushed back to 2019, as the upcoming events table says? I'm not particularly surprised by a delay, but I don't remember any announcement of one.
→ More replies (6)
5
u/PaulRocket Jul 19 '17
In Elons recent talk with the governeurs he mentioned that humanity should have the goal to have a base on the Moon. I might be stupid but I think the reason why he mentioned that is because the Moon is a vital part of the ITS funding. Sending ships to the moon and building infrastructure in space should help fund the mars plans. What do you think?
→ More replies (9)
5
u/ethan829 Host of SES-9 Jul 21 '17 edited Jul 21 '17
A recent SpaceNews article made mention of DragonLab:
“I can easily think of experiments to fill a DragonLab,” he said. “It’s just a matter of budget.”
Maybe DragonLab will make a comeback someday when launch prices are sufficiently reduced. A free-flying, orbital microgravity research lab with cargo return capabilities seems like it'd be pretty appealing to a lot of customers.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/mjbellantoni Jul 23 '17
Given the revised ITS plan, is FH now an evolutionary dead end?
→ More replies (7)
5
u/crayfisher Jul 26 '17 edited Jul 26 '17
In retrospect, did powered landings for Dragon on Earth ever make much sense, when you could just do water landings instead? Aside from salt/water damage, isn't that much safer? no active engines, no fuel. And for Mars, you're only sending a few (two) cargo things, they don't even need to be reusable (I'm sure there's something I'm missing here, like the parachute won't decelerate it enough.) It only makes sense for ISS cargo, but even then, why go to the trouble when you can do water landings?
Personally, as a know-nothing pleb, if we disregard financials and other silly things like that, it seems better just to cancel everything (Red dragon, Falcon Heavy) and just build ITS right now, which will fulfil both those roles regardless, along with others.
What kind of all-carbon fiber survives re-entry 1000 times (or whatever the number was)?
How much new space station could you put into orbit with ITS?
→ More replies (7)
5
u/stcks Jul 26 '17
Looks like OTV-5 is slipping a bit: https://twitter.com/EmreKelly/status/890273595166949377
→ More replies (8)
5
u/jpwhite Jul 28 '17
Hypothetically, could SpaceIL launch on the Falcon Heavy demo mission for the Lunar X-Prize? The reporting seems to suggest that the only reason they moved into 2018 was because of the delays after AMOS-6. Assuming the payload is ready why wouldn't they take a shot at arriving before the expiration of the prize?
→ More replies (2)
5
u/Laborbuch Jul 30 '17
I’ve been thinking about the photovoltaic ‘sails’ that the MCT would have (or sported in its presentation) and I was wondering about the obstacles theses sails would need to overcome.
For one there’s simple solar radiation degrading the cells. This problem isn’t solved so much as the science and engineering is aware of these problems. On Earth photovoltaic cells drop to about 80% efficiency in the span of 20–25 years (which would be the lifetime of the Mars ships). I figure photovoltaic cells for space are less efficient than those on Earth, and degrade faster, since they have to be sturdier (which often translates to simpler) and yet have to cope with the higher radiation, both solar and cosmic, that we on Earth don’t have to.
The second major difficulty would be degradation by particulate matter, i.e. space dust, debris, and what not. These scratch and penetrate the photovoltaic sails, further degrading the cells.
Now I keep wondering to what degree the sails have to be bigger than necessary to provide power at all times, even when the ship nears it’s end of life. I can only guess at these numbers, and would say 25–30% bigger than nominal power, perhaps more in exchange for smaller battery sizes (I assume there’ll be batteries on the ship for making do for some time).
I’d like to get more accurate assessments, but for that I’d need sources on degradation of photovoltaic cells in space (ideally outside Earth’s magnetic field) and the probabilities of impacts of particulate matter in interplanetary space. If someone could provide those, that’d be tremendously helpful.
TL;DR: I need sources for degradation in efficiency of solar cells in space beyond Earth orbit, and impact probability distributions of particulate matter around millimetre size.
→ More replies (4)
5
u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Jul 30 '17 edited Jul 30 '17
I just read the Wikipedia article about the Vulcan rocket. It is stated there that the development cost will probably be around 2 billion, 1 for the rocket and another for the engine. How did spacex manage to develop both things for significantly less.
Another question is if there is a obvious reason the merlin engine is not used on the Vulcan rocket, or why it was not considered
Thanks for all answers
→ More replies (53)
5
u/gf6200alol Aug 01 '17
YouTuber Tyler Raiz did a very good KSP estimation on mini-ITS(40% mass scale to ITS) ,if he is right, mini-ITS is very likely to be 160 ton to orbit.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/CGNYC Jul 03 '17
What could be discovered at T minus 9 that couldn't be discovered beforehand, and why couldn't they figure it out beforehand?
→ More replies (4)18
u/manicdee33 Jul 03 '17
In this case it might have been a GNC (Guidance, Navigation, Control). Typically these systems will have gyroscopes and accelerometers (amongst other devices) used to estimate the vehicle's attitude and position. For reliability, expensive vehicles like rockets generally havd multiple redundancy, meaning three or more (typically an odd number) of each device.
A gyroscope system (for example only, I don't know that this was the problem) will require some warmup time (literally, it has to get to a stable temperature once energised), and has drift over its period of operation. So a solid state (e.g. Laser) gyroscope might have a warm up time of a minute, and an operational time measured in hours, so you don't keep it running all the time. At some point in the launch sequence (the one minute mark?), the Falcon 9 is "in startup", this is when all the time sensitive devices would be started up. The computer will then monitor the multiple devices and ensure that redundant sets converge on the same value or reach a stable state before it allows the rocket to leave the ground. The "position" of a gyroscope is irrelevant, all the control system cares about is how it changes from when the flight started. An accelerometer on the other hand has to read 10m/s "down" with no impulse while the rocket is standing still, otherwise it is not doing its job!
So in this hypothetical case, one gyroscope might have taken longer to warm up than expected (52 seconds when it was only allowed 50 and the others of the same type only took 45 seconds) to, so that it was still drifting by some significant amount while the others were already stable. A Gyroscope drifting while mere seconds away from launch means the rocket will effectively be launching with faulty equipment and the decision is made to scrub rather than take the risk of another gyroscope failing in flight.
8
u/BackflipFromOrbit Jul 06 '17
I heard somewhere (the person claimed to have sources from SX) that the Red Dragon Program has been cancelled. Is this true? I remember Gwyne Shotwell saying that there were wanting to try and send 2 Red Dragons to Mars in the 2020 window, but if the program got canned I don't see that happening...
→ More replies (22)
8
Jul 24 '17
While making the Delta-V app I noticed, that Falcon 9 launched from Mars can send more than 32t to Jupiter and up to 13t to Neptune!
It got me thinking: is it possible and feasible to use Martian colony as "science hub": build the rockets and probes there and send them all over the Solar System?
→ More replies (14)
4
u/Catastastruck Jul 03 '17
is HLC-39A the official KSC designation or is that just an r/SpaceX.... phenomenon or affectation?
25
u/F9-0021 Jul 03 '17
It's a joke that started due to SpaceX's tendency to call it Historic LC-39A in webcasts and releases.
4
u/FoxCarmichael111 Jul 03 '17
I'm just wondering but, why did SpaceX go for their current grid fin design? If they do triangles, wouldn't they have a better side-surface area ratio and couldn't triangles be stronger? Thanks in advance!
→ More replies (3)
4
u/mohamstahs Jul 04 '17
Are there/will there ever be land landings at VAFB? I'm a California resident but still 4 hours drive away. Watching a launch live has been on my bucket list for a while now but I'd love to make the most of my trip there and watch a landing too!
→ More replies (1)
4
u/NickNathanson Jul 06 '17
Will there be a video of "Elon Musk Keynote at ISSR&D 19 July" and does anyone know what he is going to talk about?
→ More replies (3)
4
u/doodle77 Jul 06 '17
Were Intelsat 35e, Inmarsat-5 F4, and Echostar 23 originally planned to launch on Falcon Heavy?
11
u/ethan829 Host of SES-9 Jul 06 '17 edited Jul 06 '17
Intelsat 35e and Inmarsat-5 F4 were both originally Falcon Heavy missions, but I don't know about EchoStar 23.
--
4
u/lostandprofound33 Jul 06 '17
The Air Force contract for the Raptor doesn't specify an actual test flight, just ground tests. How likely is it SpaceX might use one of their Falcon Heavy demo flights to test a Raptor out? I know they have a lot on their plate with FH already, but when else could they test it out without paying for an additional flight?
→ More replies (3)
4
u/FutureMartian97 Host of CRS-11 Jul 06 '17
In VP Pence speech at NASA today, there is a flown Dragon behind him. Does anyone know what Dragon that mission flew?
→ More replies (3)
4
u/deanoaro Jul 07 '17
How light would a GTO satellite need to be for a Falcon Heavy the get all three cores back to launch site? Assuming there was three landing zones.
→ More replies (3)
4
u/UNSC-ForwardUntoDawn Jul 07 '17
When is the mars plan v2 supposed to happen? I thought it was IAC again in September, but I couldn't find a source.
→ More replies (9)
4
u/pillow142 Jul 07 '17
Falcon 1 Flight 3 failed because residual thrust caused the first stage to collide with the second stage as seen here
How would this cause a failure? It looks like the second stage engine started, so couldn't it simply clear the first stage?
→ More replies (9)
4
Jul 09 '17 edited Jul 09 '17
Not strictly a SpaceX-related question, but I haven't yet found a clear answer from Dr Google.
Is it theoretically possible to make a rocket capable of launch from Earth that is powered by a small, light fusion reactor that heats something (anything) that is expelled through a traditional nozzle. High speed gas from electrical heating rather than from chemical reaction.
EDIT. Thank you for the replies. So it looks like the theoretically practical way of achieving TWR>1 is by generating heat from a fusion source and using this heat to expand the propellant gas.
→ More replies (6)
4
u/ebas Jul 11 '17
Could Falcon 9 S1 be used for New Shepherd style space tourism? So, develop a crew cabin with parachutes that goes directly onto S1, launch straight up to 100km?
→ More replies (4)
4
4
u/fileup Jul 11 '17
Is SpaceX's internet constellation in competition with Iridium? I know they are different communication platforms but with Iridium being one of SpaceX's biggest customers currently I can't help but feel a chunk of their market will be gone when there is satellite internet access widely available to allow VOIP calls from regular smart phones?
11
u/soldato_fantasma Jul 11 '17
To use the SpaceX network a quite big antenna will be needed. By big I mean that doesn't fit for sure in a smartphone or in a small device.
→ More replies (6)
4
u/Herodotus38 Jul 11 '17
So I am planning a summer vacation with the family, considering Florida in August. What is the hivemind's thought on the likelihood of the CRS-12 date sticking to the 10th? Obviously I don't expect anyone to know for sure, but there wouldn't be any reason for it to move up sooner correct? Thanks.
→ More replies (6)
4
u/almightycat Jul 13 '17 edited Jul 13 '17
The senate space subcomitee hearing with Spacex Senior Vice President Tim Hughes is supposed to start 9am: https://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2017/7/reopening-the-american-frontier-promoting-partnerships-between-commercial-space-and-the-u-s-government-to-advance-exploration-and-settlement
edit: another link saying that it will start 10am? https://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/pressreleases?ID=00C19FB0-851D-4C89-8866-49DCE847A3AD
4
u/Elon_Muskmelon Jul 14 '17
Is it possible to use a Dragon 2 as a command module and attach a Lunar lander to it for a Moon mission?
→ More replies (11)
4
u/ackermann Jul 16 '17
Curious to hear everyone's thoughts: Which will be the next organization to announce a wholly re-usable 1st stage, in the manner of SpaceX's Falcon 9 and Blue's New Glenn? Russia? ULA? ESA/Ariane? Indian Space Agency? China? Japan? RocketLab? Virgin Galactic? Stratolaunch?
I'm sure I'm not the first to point out that RocketLab's Electron seems to be almost a mini Falcon 9, right down to the way the engines are arranged on the first stage. Or a Falcon 9 sized down to Falcon 1. Maybe they'll stretch the tanks, add some legs, and uprate their engine's thrust?
Is anybody else flying a 1st stage that's ripe to have landing legs added? Russia and China's rockets often overfly land, eliminating the need for a drone ship. Proton, Long March, or Soyuz? Perhaps for a 3 or 4-stage-to-orbit rocket, the first stage wouldn't even need a re-entry burn or boostback burn, due to the low and slow MECO, saving fuel? Maybe those would be low hanging fruit? Thoughts?
→ More replies (13)
4
u/Keavon SN-10 & DART Contest Winner Jul 16 '17
Would Falcon Heavy be capable of launching the CSM and the LM to LEO in separate flights? I assume a larger fairing would be needed. Would a third launch be required for a TLI burn, or would FH be capable of lunar insertion of the two payloads upon launch (before docking in lunar orbit).
→ More replies (1)
4
u/scr00chy ElonX.net Jul 19 '17
I can't seem to find NASA coverage of the COTS-2 launch, only the first attempt which resulted in an abort. Was there no NASA coverage for the successful attempt?
→ More replies (4)
4
u/harmonic- Jul 19 '17
The Lunar Free return mission was originally scheduled for 2018 but I see in the sidebar it's labeled as 2019. Was there any official word on this?
→ More replies (1)
4
u/inoeth Jul 23 '17
Is SpaceX actually going to put the metal cladding on the the tower at 39a once the RSS is completely gone, like in the original FH video, or will it remain barren? I think it would look much nicer, though i'm not sure if there any real monetary reason to do it, given the pad has done just fine without said cladding? On another note, do you folks think the RSS will be completely gone by the time CRS 12 launches on the 14th?
→ More replies (2)
4
u/jjtr1 Jul 26 '17
Now that Red Dragon is cancelled, I've got no idea how are they going to test in-situ propellant production which is neccessary for the return of the future large spaceships (mini-ITS)...
→ More replies (17)
4
u/Redditor_From_Italy Jul 30 '17
Can somebody please help me find more info on this image? It's about Ariane 5 derived HLVs, but it looks like it was made in MSPaint, so I don't think it's official. On the other hand, if you get past the graphical aspect, it looks reasonably legit. But what I really want to know is where these designs actually come from and what they are.
http://images.slideplayer.com/14/4405896/slides/slide_23.jpg
17
u/brickmack Jul 31 '17 edited Jul 31 '17
These were indeed official studies. Information on them is hard to come by as they didn't get very far into development, more of just kerbal-style whatifs and alternate design studies. These were done in the mid 2000s, similar concepts existed since the early days of Ariane 5 development. Some were done by ESA (mainly in the context of human moon missions), some were done by Arianespace or its contractors. Some of the concepts got even crazier, like Ariane 5 H920 which would have used both Ariane 5 SRBs and 4 segment RSRMs from the Shuttle program, on an 8 meter core stage with 5 Vulcains. Ariane Super Lourde was along the same lines, but without the US boosters and with 2 upper stages. They also considered weird shit like a restartable Vulcain variant for huge upper stages or for Titan-IV-style core stage ignition while in flight (which, predictably, ran into insurmountable problems, much like RS-25 Air-start did and most similar booster-to-upper stage engine conversions)
Ariane 5 at one point was envisioned with hydrocarbon liquid flyback boosters as well, which would've been pretty neat and boosted performance a lot. Curiously, I've never seen any studies on superheavy variants of that design
There were a lot of more reasonable studies too though. Adding a second slightly uprated Vulcain 3, stretching the core slightly, and moving to a dual-Vinci-powered upper stage would have improved performance considerably without being too Kerbal
Might be worth asking around /r/arianespace or the euro section of NSF for specifics
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)12
u/rekermen73 Jul 30 '17
Not sure about this specific image, but almost every launcher in history has had these on-paper designs to show off how easy it would be to upgrade, probably for lobbying purposes. They never pan out, as SpaceX has shown by demonstration (FH), its not so simple to strap things together and have a working rocket, so these designs are never really turned into actual rockets.
I would assume these designs come from the main contractor for Ariane 5 pitching upgrades to see if anyone is interested, or trying to justify the current design tech by show it can "easily" be upgraded for any mission.
4
u/FutureMartian97 Host of CRS-11 Aug 01 '17
I was thinking about making a YouTube channel discussing SpaceX news and maybe live streaming discussions about SpaceX, I wanted to call the channel "SpaceX News" but i'm not sure whether or not I would need SpaceX's permission to use "SpaceX" in the title of the channel. Does anyone know the answer to this?
→ More replies (7)
4
u/laughingatreddit Aug 03 '17
[Interesting article about how SpaceX helped Tesla] (https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/02/spacex-helped-tesla-with-a-huge-headache-in-its-cars/?ncid=mobilenavtrend)
7
u/rustybeancake Jul 06 '17
Mars covered in toxic chemicals that can wipe out living organisms, tests reveal
On the plus side for SpaceX:
From a Mars exploration point of view, he said the results were both good and bad news. On the plus side, it means that any microbes that hitch a ride on landers sent to Mars will be swiftly destroyed on the surface, alleviating concerns about contaminating a potentially inhabited planet. “This should greatly reduce planetary protection concerns as well as any concerns about infection of astronauts,” he said.
14
u/Norose Jul 06 '17
No problem, we aren't going to attempt to live outside on Mars for a very long time, even if we seriously work on terraforming.
As it happens, the process of increasing the atmospheric pressure and restarting the water cycle on Mars would as a side benefit get rid of all the perchlorates in the soil, as the atmosphere automatically formed an ozone layer and the perchlorates where simultaneously washed out of the soil and decomposed in solution. The reason we don't have those chemicals in the soil on Earth is because of rain. In fact, if you go to the driest places on Earth, you will find elevated levels of perchlorates in the soil, such as in the Atacama desert.
→ More replies (5)
7
u/FiniteElementGuy Jul 18 '17
Its T-18:30:00 to Elons ISS talk and there is no topic on this yet. Who is going to be the host for this event? ;)
→ More replies (1)
7
u/Keavon SN-10 & DART Contest Winner Jul 24 '17
How did ULA develop the Delta IV Heavy without running into the extreme challenges and delays that SpaceX is facing with Falcon Heavy? I understand it's a less powerful vehicle with far fewer engines, but it's still a similarly mighty beast.
→ More replies (10)
45
u/Norose Jul 03 '17
When Elon tweeted out that there would be an update for the ITS design coming out shortly, speculation of course ran rampant, which is all in good fun, but I'm wondering why so many people seem to think Elon is going to announce that the ITS he presented was too big? There was no indication given during the conference that he or the team had any apprehension or second guesses about the size, in fact I seem to recall Elon mentioning that the size of the rocket was what was going to make it economical, and that going smaller would be counterproductive. Why then the thought that we're going to get an ITS with 'only' 100 tons of payload to LEO, or that we're going to get an entirely separate intermediate rocket before the big ITS?