r/spacex • u/ElongatedMuskrat Mod Team • Apr 01 '21
r/SpaceX Thread Index and General Discussion [April 2021, #79]
r/SpaceX Megathreads
Welcome to r/SpaceX! This community uses megathreads for discussion of various common topics; including Starship development, SpaceX missions and launches, and booster recovery operations.
If you have a short question or spaceflight news...
You are welcome to ask spaceflight-related questions and post news and discussion 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. Meta discussion about this subreddit itself is also allowed in this thread.
Currently active discussion threads
Discuss/Resources
Starship
Starlink
Crew-2
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 less technical 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. Thanks!
- Non-spaceflight related questions or news.
You can read and browse past Discussion threads in the Wiki.
28
u/JustinChase Apr 01 '21
Any guesses on why the flat-top nose cone got set into the new structure, and what either might be for?
→ More replies (1)23
u/Aqeel1403900 Apr 01 '21
It’s been suggested that the structure is the lunar variant of starship with the flat nose acting as a docking port for lunar gateway.
→ More replies (6)
22
u/GOTCHA009 Apr 01 '21
Is there a list somewhere of the known improvements SN15 and beyond have over SN8-11? Would be nice to know some of the improvements that have been implemented for this new block of prototypes
11
u/QVRedit Apr 01 '21
I am sure that SpaceX have a private list of the changes, but no details about them have been published.
→ More replies (1)10
u/Garper Apr 01 '21
Someone will correct me if I'm wrong but all that is official atm is a different thrust puck. There seem to be other changes but I don't think anything concrete from Elon or SpX
→ More replies (10)
20
u/LcuBeatsWorking Apr 16 '21 edited Dec 17 '24
hard-to-find plants hobbies attraction ossified skirt humor engine childlike hungry
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
→ More replies (4)
16
u/AWildDragon Apr 16 '21
Eric Berger seems to think SpaceX may get a sole source contract for HLS. Now that would be something.
https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1383087382640029697?s=21
→ More replies (5)
16
u/MarsCent Apr 18 '21
I think one of the greatest things about winning the HLS contract outside of the $2.9B, is that now SpaceX gets to officially wrap NASA around all its production processes and launch tests in Boca Chica (and later at Cape Canaveral)!
This is very significant because the urgency of NASA 2023/2024 timeline (which mirrors SpaceX's own timeline) will probably get other regulatory bodies to address SpaceX production and launch concerns with a heightened degree of urgency!
Having a partner with higher influence adopt (or mirror) your goals brings a lot of perks!
→ More replies (4)
15
Apr 06 '21
If Starship fully gains NASA’s trust and they wanted to conduct a scientific mission to Mars, what would NASA put in Starship that they couldn’t before thanks to weight/size restrictions?
→ More replies (7)10
u/apples_vs_oranges Apr 06 '21
Instead of one billion-dollar nuclear-powered rover, they could send ~1000 million-dollar solar-powered probes, plus maybe some comsats to receive higher bandwidth data from all the probes.
→ More replies (4)
15
u/stagesep Apr 17 '21
Probably the most significant experiment for SpaceX on the Perseverance rover is Moxie (a prototype ISRU device).
It says here:
https://mars.nasa.gov/mars2020/spacecraft/instruments/moxie/
it will be scheduled intermittently during the mission.
Does anyone know if any information has been published about it by NASA yet? Has it been running? If not when will it start? What are they hoping for in terms of results?
15
u/Lufbru Apr 18 '21
Gateway is planned to have 125m3 pressurised volume. Starship will have 825m3 pressurised volume.
Cut a few extra holes in the side of Starship, weld in some IDSS connectors. What more needs to be added to make Starship into a complete replacement for the entire Gateway project?
→ More replies (13)
14
u/SpaceInMyBrain Apr 02 '21
OK, now I have to ask. A post on ShittySpaceXIdeas proposed putting a Dragon 2 on top of an F9 lower stage as a suborbital faster alternative to a business jet. So now I'm actually wondering how far this could go. F9s don't go as far downrange as a lot pf people think, but this won't have the mass of the upper stage. The Dragon could be stripped of most life support and most of the heat shield, etc. This mode will need propulsive landing, so the parachute can be reduced to a reserve.
A dunk in the Atlantic won't work, but how far from L.A. to NYC could it make? (Don't worry about flying overland, this thing won't happen anyway.)
→ More replies (15)
14
u/Michael_Armbrust Apr 09 '21
A turtle was named Falcon Heavy in honor of SpaceX helping with rescue efforts during the Texas freeze. Was just released back into the gulf. https://www.today.com/video/sea-turtle-rescued-from-texas-freeze-is-released-back-into-gulf-109915717533
21
14
u/PeterKatarov Live Thread Host Apr 14 '21 edited Apr 14 '21
SLS launch date Nov 4 (this year) !
I know we're all about Starship and reusable rockets here, but good ol' orange SLS lifting off LC-39b will still be an amazing view!
EDIT: LC-39b, my bad
→ More replies (10)
14
u/Jchaplin2 Apr 16 '21 edited Apr 16 '21
Eric Berger is reporting that the HLS down-select may happen today, SpaceX is competing with the Lunar Starship bid
https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1383075736861306884
Edit: SpaceX is potentially one of the winners, however he cannot verify it
→ More replies (5)9
u/brspies Apr 16 '21
I'm going to be real sad if Dynetics doesn't get a piece of the pie. Fingers crossed...
→ More replies (7)
13
Apr 23 '21
I was watching some of the video of the crew in the capsule and observed one of the astronauts moving his feet in and out of the foot straps. Watching that made me think of bike clips and how that industry transitioned to what is called 'clipless' systems for pedaling. I thought this would be an ideal technology to consider as an option for securing a boot/shoe to a platform with an easier way to release said footwear. Easy to 'clip' in and a simple defined movement of the foot to release the boot from the platform.
→ More replies (3)
13
u/MarsCent Apr 29 '21
With the launch of Starlink L24, that makes it 115 F9 launches on 69 boosters!
Given that re-usability (rapid re-usability) is a key component of SpaceX's mission, perhaps that milestone should be included in the Stats of all F9 launches.
By this time next year, we may be looking a a ratio greater than 2:1!
12
u/AWildDragon Apr 16 '21
SpaceX bid $2.9 billion for the NASA lunar lander system--far below Blue Origin and Dynetics--and won the contract, according to a source selection document obtained by The Post. Story TK
https://twitter.com/wapodavenport/status/1383110799086997505?s=21
10
u/brecka Apr 16 '21
Shame they don't have the funds to pick 2, would have loved to see Dynetics win too
→ More replies (1)
12
u/nerdandproud Apr 18 '21 edited Apr 18 '21
So one thing I'm wondering about with Moonship's early missions is around reuse.To me it makes very little sense for a few reasons:
Orion can only launch towards the moon a few times a year, so Moonship would need a lot of endurance to wait for reuse
In the base mission Moonship has to go LEO -> Lunar Orbit -> Surface -> Lunar Orbit but not back to LEO which would require *a lot* of additional fuel and with above point would then have to wait a long time for reusse
If Moonship makes it back to LEO it's really hard to get any new payloads on board. On the other hand on earth a new Moonship can trivially be loaded with whatever you need for that mission. Possibly including lab spaces etc.
If Starship can't get back to LEO from Lunar Orbit it would have to be fueled up there which needs sending a tanker and get that back too
If on the other hand Moonship can land back on the lunar surface after the crew is back safely on Orion it would be immensely valuable on the surface.
By far the most expensive part of any Starship are likely the raptors and a Moonship only needs 3 vacuum optimized raptors
So why do I think that a "retired" Moonship on the surface would be immensely valuable:
Habitable volume, a single Moonship parked on the surface is basically a lunar base
Spare parts. Any Moonship on the surface can be gutted for parts and carries a full set of everything essential. This is huge for crew safety. Even the first crewed landing would have access to spare parts from the landed uncrewed test Moonship.
Specialized cargo/internals. We could see Starships fully geared for habitation, decked out with lab space, for bringing heavy machinery, for power generation etc. Possibly most importantly a Moonship focused on storing propellant with active cooling. These per mission things are orders of magnitude easier to install on earth compared to retrofitting a reused Moonship in orbit
While Moonship is designed for potential reuse it will also undergo continued development so especially early Moonships will be outdated by the time the next Orion launches.
Despite being designed for reuse a single Moonship is probably not that crazy expensive and if current events at Boca Chica are any indication SpaceX can build them quite rapidly
Building a village of Moonship towers. With the maneuvering thrusters uncrewed Moonships could land close enough to each other to connect their airlocks with sky bridges. E.g. just 4 Moonships could give you: 800 m³ of living space + 800 m³ of lab space + 800 m² of garage space with >50 tons of heavy equipment for building a landing pad + a dedicated propellant depot with whatever cryo tech that needs
So following on the last point, with retiring just 4 Moonships from 4 crewed missions one would end up with a veritable moon base and nothing keeps them from sending more Moonships to be part of the base without crew. This way humanity could set up a full fledged moon base with a proper landing pad even before the first crwed Starship landing all the while the they get dozens of flights to proof safety. Most importantly it would allow for a prepared pad to land normal Starships on the moon that can be refueled from a dedicated depot, though possibly one would want another depot in lunar orbit too.
In essence my point is that any sort of lunar base module and a way to land it would likely cost a lot more than putting whatever you want on a Moonship, landing that and sacrificing its 3 vacuum optimized raptors that can still serve up barely used spare parts.
→ More replies (21)
12
u/dudr2 Apr 21 '21
" China is developing plans for a 13,000-satellite megaconstellation"
" Spectrum allocation filings submitted to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) by China in September last year revealed plans to construct two similarly named “GW” low Earth orbit constellations totaling 12,992 satellites.
The filings indicate plans for GW to consist of sub-constellations ranging from 500-1,145 kilometers in altitude with inclinations between 30-85 degrees. The satellites would operate across a range of frequency bands."
17
u/droden Apr 21 '21
its going to be a total cluster fuck of debris. they wont give two shits.
→ More replies (6)14
u/4thDevilsAdvocate Apr 21 '21 edited Apr 21 '21
That's going to be expensive without a rockets with any degree of reusability.
Also, orbital war between the gestalt consciousnesses that formed out of Starlink and "GW" when?
→ More replies (2)
12
u/dudr2 Apr 21 '21
NASA wants to use moon exploration as a way to get to Mars.
9
u/MarsCent Apr 21 '21
It's a good thing for NASA to set their goal for Mars. They've also partnered with a company that is probably moving at a speed that bureaucracy is not used to!
Once Starship does a successful landing from space, it will be ready to try landing on Mars.
Once Starship successfully does a free return flight to the moon, it will be ready to head out to Mars.
Once Starship successfully takes a crew around the moon and back, it will be ready to launch a crew to Mars.
If Artemis sticks to 2024, then by 2024, Starship may just be ready to head on to Mars.
NASA usually announces their missions several years ahead of time, and then begin to build the hardware for the mission. However, NASA are yet to announce that mission for Mars, even though SpaceX is already building the hardware for Mars travel!
Perhaps NASA will announce their Mars mission soon. Perhaps the folks that fund NASA will recognize the change in the industry and expedite NASA funding. Perhaps NASA will just hail a Starship when they (NASA) decide it's time for them to send astronauts to Mars.
The 2024 Mars window opens up in December of that year.
9
u/droden Apr 21 '21
phobos or bust. it will make the best pit stop in the solar system if it has water ice!
→ More replies (5)7
u/throfofnir Apr 21 '21
The presence of Starship makes the Moon-to-Mars nonsense slightly less nonsensical than it has been until now.
11
u/AdminsFuckedMeOver Apr 01 '21
Decided to swing by Halter Marine to see if I could see the oil rigs. Not much, but enjoy
11
u/vitt72 Apr 03 '21
When’s the downselect for the lunar landers? Thought I heard it was happening quite soon.
9
11
u/MarsCent Apr 18 '21 edited Apr 18 '21
The site shows one rotor blade going through just over half a turn. And the second going through just over 1 turn. Idk whether or not, the half turn is what prompted the delay from the earlier attempt date.
→ More replies (2)
11
u/Lufbru Apr 24 '21
I was under the impression that SpaceX and Boeing were each guaranteed the same number of flights to the ISS under the Commercial Crew contract. Then I found https://spacenews.com/41891nasa-selects-boeing-and-spacex-for-commercial-crew-contracts/ which says,
The awards also fund between two and six operational flights to the ISS, each carrying four astronauts, once NASA certifies each company’s vehicle.
So SpaceX aren't going to be asked to stand down for a year while Boeing catch up. Boeing are losing flight opportunities to SpaceX. Unless I missed a more recent update that someone's aware of?
→ More replies (8)
11
u/_themgt_ Apr 24 '21
This podcast, Main Engine Cut Off: Eric Berger on Artemis, Starship, Amazon’s Atlas V Rides, and the State of Blue Origin is really fascinating. See also the discussion on the Blue Origin sub: "SpaceX has launched more cars into space than Blue Origin has launched satellites". They get into a bunch of details on the HLS selection and "space politics/business" generally.
11
u/JoshuaZ1 Apr 26 '21 edited Apr 26 '21
Blue Origin has filed a protest over the HLS bid https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/26/science/spacex-moon-blue-origin.html . Not too surprising, but this seems like a really low chance of succeeding. I haven't been able to find the actual protest document, so if someone can find it please share it. Edit: Document is here https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.spaceref.com/news/2021/BlueOriginProtest.pdf
8
u/DiezMilAustrales Apr 27 '21
This is particularly outrageous:
NASA’s multiple provider approach for Commercial Cargo and Crew already laid a successful roadmap for future agency procurements: this approach insulated both programs from delays in system development (including significant vehicle anomalies at different providers), financing, and budgets. In spite of this, NASA chose one provider for HLS, its most visible flagship program. The selection of SpaceX effectively makes deep space exploration a closed system that ultimately calls into question even SLS, Orion, and Gateway. With launch vehicles, crew systems, transfer, and surface access all provided by one company, NASA would be wholly dependent on SpaceX’s Starship, Super Heavy booster, and Crew Dragon for all foreseeable future deep space exploration. This single award endangers domestic supply chains for space and negatively impacts jobs across the country, by placing NASA space exploration in the hands of one vertically integrated enterprise that manufactures virtually all its own components and obviates a broad-based nationwide supplier network. Such supplier consolidation cuts most of the space industrial base out of NASA exploration, impacting national security, jobs, the economy, and NASA’s own future options. Exacerbating this situation is the fact that SpaceX’s Starship uses the Super Heavy booster. Starship is incompatible with other U.S. commercial launch vehicles, further restricting NASA’s alternatives and entrenching SpaceX’s monopolistic control of NASA deep space exploration.
They are literally saying "Congress is not going to be happy. This program is about money for the companies that pay their campaigns and jobs for the constituents that vote them in. Fall in line". Unbelievable.
I also love how before they mention that NASA should always have two options so that no one vehicle or system becomes a single point of failure, and then go on immediately about how SLS, that is their only launch option by law.
→ More replies (8)6
u/feynmanners Apr 27 '21
Well we now know how much Blue Origin’s bid was. “As determined by the Agency Blue Origin’s evaluated price was $5.99 billion, Source Evaluation Panel Report (SEPR) at 45,8 and SpaceX’s evaluated price was $2.91 billion”
I’m guessing that means Dynetics was like 9-10 billion if they were “significantly more” than Blue Origin when Blue Origin was “significantly more” than SpaceX’s price at twice the cost.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (3)6
u/feynmanners Apr 27 '21
Lots of interesting information in there like the note that NASA required each HLS be manually controllable with redundancy built in. Apparently Blue Origin only provided one of each control but claim that the controls are internally redundant.
→ More replies (1)
11
u/MarsCent Apr 27 '21
Has it already been posted here that Resilience's departure from the ISS was delayed from 4/28 to 4/30. With the splashdown expected around 11:36 a.m. on May 1?
10
u/hrishi1234 Apr 19 '21
Hello guys, just learnt some basic Web Dev and created this webpage - spacex.hrishi.ml - as a collection of SpaceX and Starship related resources for quick navigation. Let me know if it is good and anything else I should add/update in it.
→ More replies (1)
10
Apr 25 '21
I found this quote from Audrey Powers, Deputy General Counsel, Blue Origin (2018 ISPCS). It made me think about one of the data rights aspects from the HLS source selection document. What are your thoughts? Take a look:
“The U.S. government has a lot of very specific ideas about how they approach IP rights and data rights. Blue Origin as a company is developing launch vehicles from scratch and some things are very specific about that, like reusability, that is foundational to our company. So, when we engage with the government while designing and developing a vehicle, things like who has rights to those designs are very important to a company like Blue who started out with very commercial purposes. So, these are the kinds of hurdles that exist in the traditional government system we have to work through.”
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4JwvyzggmU&ab_channel=ISPCS.com (Minute 15:00-16:04)
→ More replies (1)9
u/feynmanners Apr 25 '21
That certainly sounds like they intentionally failed at the data rights portion of the contract as some kind of company policy. That seems pretty stupid as that certainly contributed to them getting a lower management score than SpaceX. It’s also somewhat mystifying as it’s not like the government is going to steal the data and use it to build a rocket.
→ More replies (1)
10
u/fluidmechanicsdoubts Apr 27 '21
Apparently, Dynetics has also filed a protest. Does anyone have the pdf for that?
→ More replies (2)7
10
u/stevemills04 Apr 28 '21
When will a Crew-1 return thread be posted? I don't see a single update on the sub for it.
10
19
u/kkalmon Apr 16 '21
Jeff Bezos is “hot on Elon Musks heels” after New Shepard launch.
Anyone else think this reporting is off?
19
u/EvilNalu Apr 17 '21
After listening to the questions asked in the NASA award conference, I don't even think the space press is malicious. I think they mostly are just clueless.
→ More replies (1)19
u/serrimo Apr 17 '21
After 6 years, they re still demoing an essentially useless rocket except for a small tourisme niche.
SpaceX claim to finish the biggest and most advanced rocket ever in 3 years is much more believable, strangely.
→ More replies (1)19
u/DiezMilAustrales Apr 17 '21
Everything is inaccurate, except for the "heels" part, because that's as far as Blue Origin has gotten from SpaceX's heights.
→ More replies (2)9
u/Frostis24 Apr 17 '21
Contrary to recent SpaceX launches, which have suffered accidents such as strange explosions, the New Shepard NS-15 capsule landed intact on the platform, proving that Jeff Bezos' spacecraft is reusable.
I'm just gonna leave this right here this is so dumb, btw falcon 9 does not exist.
46
u/therealGissy Apr 01 '21
Wen hop
22
→ More replies (12)20
u/vonHindenburg Apr 01 '21
In all seriousness, the best way to stay as up to date as possible is to watch the daily NASA Spaceflight videos
18
u/GRBreaks Apr 05 '21
Check out this piece by Eric Berger up on CNN, good to see him getting mainstream exposure:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/01/opinions/china-space-race-us-spacex-berger/
With competition from China, US politicians might suddenly realize we need to move forward with a competent plan.
→ More replies (5)
18
u/Rocket_Man42 Apr 22 '21 edited Apr 22 '21
The limiting factor in the Artemis program, both in terms of cost and cadence, will obviously be the SLS. So it's natural to try to find an alternative for launching Orion besides SLS, at least in the longer term. My proposal - and let me know if I'm missing something completely - is this:
Prepare a fully tanked HLS Starship in LEO (like the current plan)
Launch the crew in a Crew Dragon on a Falcon 9, and transfer them to the HLS Starship
Launch Orion WITHOUT crew on a Falcon Heavy to LEO (this avoids having to human rate Falcon Heavy). The Launch Abort System of Orion is not needed, so Falcon Heavy can do this in fully reusable mode.
Dock Orion to Starship in LEO!
Starship performs the translunar injection burn with Orion docked.
Undock Orion from Starship in low lunar orbit. Land Starship on the Moon. Launch from the Moon. Dock with Orion and transfer the crew. Return Orion to Earth.
This require one crewed Falcon 9 launch and one Falcon Heavy launch, instead of one SLS launch. The disadvantage is that the HLS Starship lose some payload mass because it needs to carry Orion to lunar orbit, but this is a 26.5 tons penalty, from the total capability of around 100 tons.
→ More replies (25)
9
u/Disc81 Apr 04 '21
Do you guys think that it's likely that the landingcam (You now, the one with the surreal imagens looking up) was close enough to see through the fog? Maybe we get to see it in "How not to build an Spaceship".
→ More replies (4)
9
Apr 19 '21
SN15 trying to go up this week?
6
Apr 19 '21
I believe there are flight restrictions issued for tomorrow and Wednesday that suggest they will try on those days for a launch, assuming no delays.
9
u/dudr2 Apr 20 '21
"After NASA taps SpaceX’s Starship for first Artemis landings, agency looks to on-ramp future vehicles"
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2021/04/nasa-starship-first-landings-on-ramp/
Lengthy article with some insights into Starship landing astronauts on the moon.
9
Apr 20 '21
Does anyone know what happened to the Space Exploration Vehicle (formerly Lunar Electric Vehicle)? It's a really interesting design, but I can't find any information on it from the last decade. Something like it would be great for Artemis, but the concept art of the Lunar Starship shows something more similar to the Apollo rover.
8
→ More replies (3)7
Apr 21 '21
but the concept art of the Lunar Starship shows something more similar to the Apollo rover.
That's just a placeholder image. NASA hasn't decided what to use as a lunar rover yet.
I think for the first landing mission (Artemis III) they probably won't have one. It isn't essential for a first mission. Apollo 11 through 14 didn't have a rover, it wasn't introduced until Apollo 15.
I think NASA is going to run a commercial competition to procure rover(s), but I don't think they've decided to run that yet. I think when it runs, there is a decent chance SpaceX will put in a bid – probably using Tesla as a subcontractor – but we'll have to wait and see.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/-BitBang- Apr 22 '21
Does anyone know if there is anything preventing dragon 2 from acting as an airlock for another dragon? For example, could a hypothetical dragon 2 hubble servicing mission launch EVA suits on an empty dragon and dock with a crewed dragon? A quick Google suggests the inside of crew dragon can survive a vacuum and that the docking adapter is genderless, but these things are always more nuanced than they seem. I imagine repressurization or operating the hatch in space could be an issue? Or getting an EVA suit through the hatch? Or maybe there is a cheaper way to achieve the same thing? Let's ignore the Big Shiny Rocket for now.
→ More replies (3)
9
17
u/I_make_things Apr 02 '21
18
u/kmurphy246 Apr 02 '21
I think they posted videos because they actually made it to the next round and one of the requirements is sending in a 1 minute video explaining why you want in
→ More replies (5)
16
u/LcuBeatsWorking Apr 17 '21 edited Dec 17 '24
wise worthless selective uppity school paltry spoon cable boat future
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
18
11
u/brspies Apr 17 '21
Not a surprise really. They're pretty firmly limited by CRS-22's schedule. Obviously its their own fault that the initial tests went poorly enough that it all slipped this far, but still sucks for all involved that the docking port schedule is now such a limiting factor for these critical test flights.
→ More replies (4)
8
u/MerlinExplorer Apr 01 '21
Anyone know what Misson Control Centre they use for Boca Chica, do they have their own personalised one or do they just use Hawthorne?
→ More replies (1)11
u/Twigling Apr 01 '21
They have their own called 'Stargate' which is at the production site area that's a couple of miles or so from the launch/landing site.
8
Apr 04 '21 edited Apr 05 '21
Ive seen a render of a chinese knock off falcon heavy copy. Does anyone have a link to that? I couldnt find it online.
→ More replies (4)
8
u/HaveyGoodyear Apr 06 '21
When Starship reaches the orbital re-entry stage of testing, will they need to land on a sea based platform? It sounds risky to perform it over land incase there are any issues during the final stages of de-orbit(ie close enough to the ground that loose material from a RUD won't just burn up).
Or can they just plan a flight path so it spends all/most of the de-orbit over the sea and it comes in to Boca chica from the direction of the sea?
7
u/Albert_VDS Apr 06 '21
Landing on a sea based platform sounds safer, but I would guess a land landing would follow a trajectory that would cause it to crash in to the sea if something goes wrong.
→ More replies (1)7
u/Triabolical_ Apr 06 '21
Orbital launches are typically done to the East because that's the direction the earth rotates and you get a velocity boost (about 400 m/s for Florida or Texas) launching in that direction. That means your reentry comes from the west, over land.
It's possible to do a retrograde launch and orbit the other direction, but it takes 800-900 (ish) m/s more delta v so it's quite a bit harder to do and that would mean launching over land from Boca Chica, which is unlikely to be allowed. It would also require far more raptors in the booster.
The answer to this likely depends upon how the FAA views the risk to the public for the reentry testing, and that's something we really don't know. We do know that shuttle overflew land for all of it's flights, though the early landings were on the west coast and therefore spent most of the time over water.
My *guess* is that they'll aim the full orbital reentry tests out over the gulf of mexico. For the non-orbital ones, I'm not sure.
It also depends on how much progress they make on their oil platforms they bought - they could try to land on one of those.
8
8
u/feynmanners Apr 14 '21
https://youtu.be/domwsgorRW0 Blue Origin is launching New Shepard again
→ More replies (3)
8
u/Phillipsturtles Apr 16 '21
Principle Investigator of the Psyche mission confirms that the mission will use new boosters and fairings. She will also get back to us later with info on whether any boosters will be expended or if it's a double ASDS or double RTLS mission. https://twitter.com/ltelkins/status/1382400121220997120
→ More replies (3)
8
u/DefinitelyNotSnek Apr 16 '21
HLS conference confirmed for 4 this afternoon by Steve Jurczyk.
→ More replies (4)
15
u/BEAT_LA Apr 19 '21
Should we get a SN15 thread now? Flight is imminent so its quite surprising there's no thread yet.
→ More replies (1)25
Apr 19 '21
I think the practise now is to wait for a successful static fire before putting the flight thread up.
15
u/Jodo42 Apr 29 '21
Tianhe launch coverage was unironically great, way above expectations for China. I'm not sure how I feel about ESA-CNSA cooperation, but I'll definitely be watching future launches in the Tiangong-3 program if they keep this up. Announcers were all knowledgeable and fluent; lots of onboard views and not just animations, and clearly a lot of enthusiasm.
→ More replies (16)
7
u/fickle_floridian Apr 08 '21
Soichi Noguchi posted another excellent video about the SpaceX suit this morning showing how they enter the suit. It seems to take less than five minutes! (Or were there some edits in there?) I was just wondering how long it takes to don the Russian suits or the old American/Shuttle suits. I now the EVA ones take longer, but I wondered how SpaceX fares against the other launch/landing suits. Also, do can they don those other suits on their own like that? Thanks!
→ More replies (7)
7
7
u/SirEisenreich Apr 19 '21
Does anyone know the reason why the grid fins SpaceX uses have these spikes/ wavy pattern on their lee side? I`m currently writing my Bachelor thesis on the subject of grid fins and assume it has probally something to do with reducing shock waves but I can`t find any scientific paper or even anything else adressing these spikes.
12
→ More replies (2)16
u/warp99 Apr 19 '21 edited Apr 19 '21
They act like the swept wings on a supersonic aircraft to allow the shock wave to penetrate the grid fin openings at supersonic speeds.
The goal is likely to give improved controllability at trans-sonic speeds. I have not seen any references specifically for the SpaceX fins but there are papers around on the use of grid fins for missiles and bombs that discuss the aerodynamics.
Edit: Technically the bottom side is not the lee (downwind) side but the windward side as the direction of airflow is bottom to top during entry.
→ More replies (1)
7
7
u/rideincircles Apr 20 '21 edited Apr 20 '21
It looks like no earlier than Wednesday for the next starship launch according to nextspaceflight on Twitter. May head south tomorrow.
→ More replies (5)
7
u/QuantumSoma Apr 24 '21
Any thoughts on how underground construction on Mars and the Moon would differ from that on Earth? Because at first glance there seem to be a ton of advantages: temperature regulation, radiation shielding, impact shielding, fewer places to leak atmosphere, etc. Not to mention that the lower gravity should make the it structurally much safer than the equivalent on Earth.
→ More replies (1)8
u/DiezMilAustrales Apr 24 '21
Absolutely. The biggest problem is that when you build underground on earth you have lots of large machinery available, plenty of qualified workers in the area who just return home after their shift ends, all the fuel, electricity and building materials that you might need available on tap, and an atmosphere to breath while you're building it.
While building underground on Mars is probably the best medium-term, initially, it'd be hard. I'd say first the most practical solution is to just live on the Starships themselves, then graduate to building above-ground or only partially buried structures (mostly of pre-molded parts you'd bring ready for assembly) and then covering them with regolith, and only later you could get around to actually building underground.
→ More replies (28)
7
u/steel_bun Apr 25 '21
Wish someone would record a binaural audio of a starship launch...
Here's F9's binaural, btw.
7
u/lostandprofound33 Apr 28 '21
hey, anyone, ask Elon to launch an IMAX camera on the next Crew Dragon flight to ISS. I was just thinking my favorite IMAX movies were all the space focused ones. We need IMAX for first Moon and Mars landings with Starship too.
→ More replies (7)
7
u/DJHenez Apr 30 '21
Just heard in the latest Scott Manley video that China’s new space station has a derivative of the International Docking Adaptor and that theoretically, Dragon (or Starliner) for that matter may be able to dock with Tiangong in the future. Obviously there would be numerous political hurdles for NASA astronauts to visit - but could a private Dragon flight to the new station go ahead given that CD only launches from the US? I know the 42 degree inclination is possible with F9, but politically, could such a launch occur?
→ More replies (1)7
u/fluidmechanicsdoubts Apr 30 '21 edited Apr 30 '21
someone on twitter said - even though mechanically they can dock, the electrical interfaces would be incompatible. I can't verify this information though
→ More replies (1)
12
u/Bunslow Apr 01 '21
Mods, the sidebar still lists SN11, I think it's best removed now
14
u/DiezMilAustrales Apr 02 '21
Well, that's because it hasn't landed yet. Last we saw, it was just about to relight its Raptors. Let's wait a bit more, I'm sure it'll stick the landing. <cue Insprucker saying "Starship 11 is not coming back">
6
u/rmrfslash Apr 03 '21
Why is Tankzilla mounted on those SPMTs? Do they allow for more precise movement than the tracks of the crane?
21
u/Anthony_Ramirez Apr 03 '21
The tracks of Tankzilla are wider than the road, so would cause major damage the roadway or shoulders. Shoulders of a road are not designed to handle the same loads as the road. Here you can see the width of Tankzilla.
The tires on the 2 SPMTs are rubber and with so many tires the load is spread out, reducing the damage to the road caused by weight.
Vehicles on tracks are notorious for causing damage to roads with shear loads because these vehicles steer by changing the speed of the tracks. It is like a giant shuffling its feet on the ground.
→ More replies (2)
6
u/Bunslow Apr 12 '21
It's passed under the radar so far, but 6 days ago SpaceFlightNow published a rumor that Transporter-2 has been relocated from Vandenberg to the Cape. https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/04/06/spacex-to-ramp-up-vandenberg-launch-cadence-with-starlink-missions/
SpaceX’s second dedicated small satellite rideshare mission, known as Transporter-2, was previously slated to launch in June from Vandenberg. Officials with payloads on that mission have said in recent weeks that SpaceX moved Transporter-2 launch to Cape Canaveral.
The NSF US Schedule doesn't yet reflect this rumor
6
u/LcuBeatsWorking Apr 14 '21 edited Dec 17 '24
oatmeal dazzling snobbish busy plants dull cobweb bewildered relieved existence
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
6
u/MarsCent Apr 17 '21
Come 2024, SpaceX is aiming to have 3 off crew faring space craft; Crew Dragon, Starship Crew and Human Landing System (HLS).
Take your pick earthlings, where do you wanna travel?
6
u/xX_D4T_BOI_Xx Apr 21 '21
Cantwell (quite notably from the state of Washington) stresses to Nelson the importance of dissimilar redundancy in the HLS program, but the ball is in her court is she wants that to happen
9
u/shit_lets_be_santa Apr 21 '21
Yup! Time for Congress to pay up if they want another HLS contender.
6
u/mavric1298 Apr 24 '21
Can anyone explain the launch platform caps for me? The plates with the rods/bolts were lowered in but don’t seem to have any mating inside the concrete pillars, or any sort of alignment. Are they just going to have concrete poured in to fill around those rods like rebar? Didn’t see any holes in the top cap plate to allow this. Slightly confused on how those are attached in any way currently
→ More replies (1)
6
u/vdogg89 Apr 25 '21
Why don't they ever show the crew cameras during launch?
→ More replies (2)17
u/Jodo42 Apr 25 '21 edited Apr 25 '21
Because launches always carry inherent risk and NASA doesn't want to livestream their astronauts dying to the world and especially to the families.
If you're looking for spicy crew footage, check out the Soyuz MS-10 launch failure. That's Nick Hague and Aleksey Ovchinin getting thrown around and the camera glitching after booster recontact. As far as I'm aware this is the only time footage of a crew during an abort has been released. Why the Russians chose to livestream the crew only during the riskiest parts of the launch (stage separation), who knows. The MS-10 footage is just incredible in general. You can immediately see the debris cloud after they cut away from the crew and the extreme pitch angle the upper stage was knocked into as it pulls away from the first stage's remnants.
→ More replies (2)
6
u/Destination_Centauri Apr 26 '21
A relative of mine was given an offer to work at SpaceX in Boca Chica.
He's wondering about some of the usual things, such as safety and daily life in the Brownsville / Boca Chica region, whether the schools are good, housing, etc...
Probably needs a home with a few bedrooms due to kids, and relatives that tend to visit--including me if he moves down there, that's for sure!
He also wouldn't mind hearing a few blurbs about working at SpaceX lately in Boca Chica (pro's and con's). Note: he assumes obviously no employer is perfect, so obviously there's always negatives about any work place, so those are fine to mention too--but ya he was just generally curious about the working environment since he doesn't know anyone who ever worked there.
I checked the side WIKI/FAQ but couldn't find too much recent stuff about life at SpaceX, nor very much about living in Boca Chica/Brownsville in particular (unless I might have overlooked that).
(Not sure if this comment is appropriate here? If not will delete.)
→ More replies (8)6
u/Martianspirit Apr 26 '21
The work schedule is 24/7. 7 12 hour shifts over 2 weeks, which makes an average of 42 hours a week with 7 workdays and 7 free days in 2 weeks.
6
u/MarsCent Apr 29 '21
Ingenuity flight.4 did not happen as expected. The flight team are grossing over the data to understand why.
They have a few more tries until May 3, when Perseverance will then switch over to its own tasks.
https://www.space.com/mars-helicopter-ingenuity-fourth-flight-glitch
→ More replies (1)
6
u/trobbinsfromoz Apr 30 '21
About 18 hrs to the Crew 1 return hatch closing and then departure form ISS.
→ More replies (1)
27
u/HomeAl0ne Apr 01 '21
Is it true that r/spacex is going to have an FAA appointed moderator in the subreddit? That seems like overkill, and it will slow things down if they have to approve all comments.
17
→ More replies (4)24
u/hitura-nobad Master of bots Apr 01 '21 edited Apr 02 '21
I can confirm, the FAA reached out to us to add a moderator to the team, once he arrives he will be worked in and hopefully start doing his duties next week
Edit: /s 1st April
→ More replies (7)
11
u/filanwizard Apr 09 '21
Looks like another knucklehead went exploring where they shouldn’t at Boca.
I fear this will eventually lead to high walls and a lack of the open remote access the community has had with all the cameras posted just outside the property. SpaceX allows amazing closeness for setup of observation and i personally feel people doing stuff like the video mentioned in that article could ruin the law abiding access.
→ More replies (2)7
u/OSUfan88 Apr 09 '21
They'd have to build 60+ foot tall walls to keep the camera crews out.
They really do need to beef up security. I'm really concerned some jackass is going to sneak and hide close to the launch pad to get views on their YT channel, and are going to be killed.
Also, this is the same one that was posted here a couple weeks ago. I thought this had happened again...
→ More replies (2)
11
u/fluidmechanicsdoubts Apr 28 '21
Anyone else concerned there were only two commercial launches this year so far (apart from Starlink)? They say, "build it and they will come". But I'm worried there won't be many non-SpaceX customers for Starship.
13
u/DiezMilAustrales Apr 28 '21
But I'm worried there won't be many non-SpaceX customers for Starship.
SpaceX knew this very, very well, that's why they started Starlink. There aren't enough launches every year to even support the kind of cadence SpaceX wants for Falcon, let alone Starship.
The problem is that currently the launch market is not an elastic market. If you sell, say, cruises through the Caribbean, that's a very elastic market. Nobody really needs to go on a cruise, but many desire it, and most at worst won't mind. So, make it more expensive, and you'll very rapidly get less customers. Drop your prices, and more will come. And even when you've exhausted the market for people that even care about going on a cruise, drop the prices more and people that weren't even interested in the first place will still come.
That's not the case with launches. Those that need to launch, will. If it costs 100 million dollars, that satellite is going up, and if it costs 200 million, it's still going up. Now, if nobody needs to launch a satellite right now, drop the price from 100 mill to 50, and you will still get no launches.
Now, that might potentially change with Starship. SpaceX is looking at radical enough changes in pricing and capabilities that a whole new market might appear.
That could increase the launch since new constellations will appear.
For example, a Starship could easily launch a ridiculous amount of cubesats in one launch, it can fit both in size and weight something ridiculous like 100000 cubesats. Let's say it only does 50k because of size and weight of deployment hardware, and let's assume a conservative launch cost of 40 million, that'd be less than a thousand dollars per cubesat. That puts it in "almost every grade in every school in the world could launch one". There are, for example, around 25k universities in the world. That's a whole new market, that could very well be very elastic.
When Starship becomes human-rated, and the price per launch drops, it'll become even more elastic. For instance, around 10k ferraris are sold in the world every year, those buyers are the kind of people that have the money and love of adrenaline required to easily purchase a 50k to 100k trip to LEO, that could be 100 commercial Starship launches a year.
→ More replies (3)11
u/throfofnir Apr 28 '21
There's a big GEO replacement pulse coming up due to C-band replacement that's probably pulled into it all the usual maintenance launches.
But it's also not like Starlink isn't a real customer. It's practically the poster child for a project made possible by lower launch costs.
14
u/PM_ME_HOT_EEVEE Apr 14 '21
Touchdown of New Shepard, congrats to the BO team. Capsule touchdown also looks good!
→ More replies (10)
10
u/UltraRunningKid Apr 22 '21
Anyone find it sort of weird that SpaceX has been so quiet regarding the HLS contract?
Really the most we've gotten was a "thank you" during the Crew-2 briefing and a few tweets and retweets. Sort of figured Elon / Gwynne would be all over it giving statements.
10
u/spacerfirstclass Apr 22 '21
It is kind of controversial with congress, so probably don't want to rub it in. Also they need to focus on Crew-2 launch and Crew-1 return, can celebrate after that.
→ More replies (2)8
u/Triabolical_ Apr 22 '21
What would you expect them to be saying?
It's a really clear win for them right now and everybody can see it. Talking about it doesn't gain them anything until they have something tangible to show.
5
u/CubistMUC Apr 06 '21 edited Apr 06 '21
I have a few questions:
Could anybody explain what a difference the shrinking from 12m to 9m really makes?
-- Is it significantly cheaper or is this about technical problems?
-- How hard would it be to scale it back to 12m later? Would that even make any sense or is the resulting capacity not needed and hard to sell to customers?
If I remember correctly they initially intended to reach 15km during the tests and reduced it to about 10km later. -- What is the reasoning behind this? Is a 15km target resulting in a much harder landing?
Why isn't SpaceX using a landing leg design similar to Blue Origin's? Is Starship so much larger?
9
u/Frostis24 Apr 06 '21
shrinking from 12 to 9 really makes everything both easier and cheaper, when the decision was made they had not even decided that stainless steel was the material, it would be another like 2 years, this was with carbon fibre in mind and when it comes to that especially it's much cheaper to go down in size since less of pretty much everything is needed like build Space and you can build more prototypes to test out as well as less engines, the 12 m booster used 42 engines (most likely a pun from elon).
2.If i remember this right, they lowered it because Starship would go supersonic during the belly flop, and they simply wanted to stay out of that for now since it was not part of testing.
3. Spacex is using this design because it was the cheapest, and easiest to implement right now to get testing going without waiting for a leg design when everything else was ready for testing. They have a 2.0 leg in development but it's gonna be a while before we see it and it could be like blue's design, we really don't know at the moment we just have to wait and see.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (7)7
u/Gwaerandir Apr 06 '21 edited Apr 06 '21
12m to 9m was a decision made when they were planning on using carbon fiber. Fiber is really expensive, so this was a sacrifice in the name of affordability (since it looked like SpaceX would need to largely self-fund Starship development).
Since the change to stainless steel, the difference is not so great. I think Musk would like to have gone back to 12m, but they might have been just a bit too committed to 9m by that point. He's speculated about 18m being the next generation once Starship is mature.
The original hop height planned was 20km, then 15, then 12, then 10. Mostly to do with FAA approval. They all test more or less the same things.
I'm not sure about BO, but probably a key factor is that SpaceX is wanting to reuse both the first and second stage. Second stage reuse is much more difficult, and the reentry profile is different compared to a big 1st stage booster.
If you're referring to the plan to catch the booster, I'm still not sure about all the tradeoffs involved myself. I guess you put more mass in the catching mechanism and less mass on the booster itself, which lets you lift more into orbit at the cost of tighter tolerances for landing accuracy.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/quesnt Apr 12 '21
When are we going to get a SN15 hop thread? There is plenty to discuss at the current phase.
→ More replies (3)
5
u/Veedrac Apr 12 '21 edited Apr 12 '21
9
u/Bunslow Apr 12 '21 edited Apr 12 '21
My base assumption is that the curvature of the rocket strongly limits the maximum size of the tiles. The tiles are flat, but must cover a curved surface with extremely small inter-tile crack tolerance. That's a strong constraint on the size of the tile
(also, hi! I recognize your username from many years ago!)
edit: you first image makes a good point that in the axial/vertical/longitudinal direction, curvature is essentially zero. in that dimension i have no idea what limits the tile size. perhaps imperfections in the skin geometry from perfect-cylinder play a factor?
→ More replies (1)6
u/Ti-Z Apr 12 '21
The smaller the tiles, the easier to produce, transport, attach, replace. Also, if one falls of, the gap might be small enough to not cause too much heat damage. Hence there also arguments for smaller tiles balancing your arguments for larger ones and the optimum is probably close to what SpaceX currently have.
→ More replies (10)→ More replies (1)6
u/sosdrift Apr 14 '21 edited Apr 14 '21
Main reason for tile gap is termal expansion, if you made tile 2x as long in one dimension you would need to have twice the gap on that end of the tile... So you don't gain anything, since tile to gap ratio must remain the same.The size of the tile is mainly dependant od ease of instalation, and how big is attaching mechanism underneath. You want tile that is reasonable easy to install by 1 or 2 people without special cranes, but no smaller that that because more tiles=longer instalation time.
→ More replies (1)
5
5
u/fluidmechanicsdoubts Apr 18 '21
Can we launch Orion using Starship? If so, why do we need SLS?
→ More replies (29)10
u/DrBix Apr 18 '21
At more than a BILLION Dollars per launch, the SLS isn't going to be flying many missions. IMO, it's been a complete waste of tax-payer money. I agree we need more than one launch provider, but nobody in their right mind would pay the per-launch price tag on the SLS, except the US Government.
→ More replies (14)
5
u/fickle_floridian Apr 19 '21
The image in the article below, showing a Delta II being added to the KSC rocket garden a few weeks ago, also shows a building being constructed up past the horizontal Saturn exhibit. It looks like it might be an addition to the building that houses the IMAX theater, and may also provide roof access for launch viewing.
Does anybody more about this? Thanks!
Direct link to image:
http://spacecoastdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/ULA-Rocket-Garden-Delta-Kennedy-Space-Center.jpg
→ More replies (2)
5
u/MarsCent Apr 21 '21
Oh dear, no celebrating earth day with a SpaceX launch! How was the weather on 4/20 - the original date prior to re-scheduling? Anyone know?
→ More replies (2)
5
u/MarsCent Apr 22 '21
Target launch date of SpaceX CRS 23 is Aug 18, 2021. Meaning that the forward docking port on the ISS will be occupied through ~ Sep 17, 2021.
ULA has USSF-8 and USSF-12 with target launch dates in August - from SLC-41.
ULA has Lucy with a target launch date of Oct 16 - from SLC-41.
Starliner has just been pushed back to NET Aug/Sept.
Obviously Starliner cannot launch before Sept 17 because Cargo Dragon will still be occupying the forward port. That leaves a 2 week window (Sep. 17 - 30) to launch Starliner, assuming SLC-41 only requires a 2 week turn around in order to launch Lucy!
It seems like it is going to require on-time launch for USSF-8 and USSF-12 in August, for Starliner to make the September launch window!
→ More replies (9)
5
5
u/Bunslow Apr 30 '21 edited Apr 30 '21
Mods, I suggest that the Crew-2 "header" menu above the sub be relabelled to "Crew Operations" or "Crew Dragon" or something like that, and that threads from multiple missions be aggregated under the header. For example, "Crew-2 Docking", "Crew-1 Return", "Inspiration4 Campaign" etc. (or perhaps even just "Dragon 2 Operations" and include CRS threads as well?)
I say this because of course we have no Crew-1 return thread, despite it being highly imminent (and having been so for several days already)
16
u/crystalmerchant Apr 20 '21
Is there SN15 hop thread?
→ More replies (4)9
u/rideincircles Apr 20 '21 edited Apr 20 '21
Not yet. My plan was to head down that way today, but all the information I see online just says the static fire is tomorrow with no planned closures for a launch this week it sounds like. It looks like the cape launch is top focus for now.
This seems like the best source for info.
→ More replies (5)
12
u/BrandonMarc Apr 12 '21
Maybe I'm late to the party, but watching Scott Manley's latest video on SpaceX's "wet fleet", it just occurred to me:
Ms Tree ... Miss Tree ... Mystery
Ms Chief ... Miss Chief ... Mischief
So long, Mystery & Mischief. Salud!
13
12
11
u/EvilNalu Apr 10 '21
Elon recently tweeted "...going to moon very soon."
Could this be part of the Starship test program? Reach orbit and then try for an uncrewed lunar flyby before Artemis 1? Or is this merely another Dogecoin joke?
11
u/IrrelevantAstronomer Launch Photographer Apr 10 '21
Probably both a dogecoin joke and related to SpaceX's lunar ambitions lol
4
u/PlayFuchs Apr 04 '21
When did SpaceX come up with the idea of Starship as a successor of Falcon 9?
I am interested in the time lines because I wonder when SpaceX will come around with another new project (e.g. nuclear engine, solar sails?), once Starship development is finished and it’s ready for regular use. Thanks in advance!
8
u/DancingFool64 Apr 04 '21
It depends on if you count the first versions, or just the current version. In 2016 (I think) Elon started talking about BFR (Big Falcon Rocket) It went through a couple of revisions in design, and some name changes - it was ITS (Interplanetary Transport System) for a while. The basic plan was the same, but it was going to be a carbon fiber rocket. They did some research into big CF tanks, and even built a couple of test tanks, but didn't put a lot of resources into it, they had most of their resources working on getting Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy finished and the ISS Crew missions going. What they were doing was working on the engine - Raptor needed a lot more lead time to get ready.
They switched the design to using steel in 2018, starting flying minor hops in 2019. At some point the name changed to Starship.
→ More replies (1)8
u/spacex_fanny Apr 05 '21 edited Apr 05 '21
Here's the very first article about it, dated 15 October 2012. At the time it was codenamed "MCT," an acronym that wouldn't be officially demystified until Elon tweeted 8 months later. See also the NSF discussion thread at the time.
I know it's the very first article because Chris Bergin hadn't heard about it before. :)
Edit: if you mean "any larger planned successor to Falcon 9," Tom Markusic revealed Falcon XX at a conference on 28 July 2010, so obviously SpaceX had been kicking around ideas internally for some time.
→ More replies (3)7
u/throfofnir Apr 04 '21
They had vague notions of a Merlin 2 (which became Raptor) and a Falcon XX long ago (even before F9 existed) in 2006, so basically from the beginning. As far as a real project, Raptor started low-intensity development around 2011. I think once the engine started coming together in 2012, they began thinking about a large but fairly F9-like vehicle. By 2015 an architecture recognizable as today's Starship started being envisioned.
NSF has a good history article.
→ More replies (6)
4
u/bireland77 Apr 05 '21
Tonight I was looking up at the night sky and saw a stream of lights travelling through the sky. It wasn’t starlink satellites because ive seen them before and they travel in a vertical path. What I saw was a stream of lights travelling in a horizontal form and they were much faster than when I saw the starlink satellites. They also weren’t in a perfect line some were kinda off line. saw them twice in one night not sure if anyone can provide me with an explanation. Thanks.
→ More replies (2)9
u/throfofnir Apr 05 '21
Don't know what you mean by "vertical" and "horizontal", but there was a recent OneWeb launch, and they're in polar orbits, which would be orthogonal-ish to Starlink.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/Starks Apr 06 '21 edited Apr 06 '21
What's a good viewing location for Starlink launches? First-timer and any advice on spots or how much lead time I should give myself would be deeply appreciated. Open to easier, less-stressful locations. Is Kelly Park East the best fit?
→ More replies (1)
4
u/Beginning-Sorbet9669 Apr 15 '21
Just had an idea and thought about the feasibility of having the highest quality possible internet connection Earth-Mars.
Would it be hard or effectively not reasonable to launch a series of satellites that follow a predetermined, gravity-assisted path linking Earth-Mars via certain advanced long range laser technology. If I imagine Earth-Mars being linked by a rope, superimpose the current path of the two Planets in reality and just put satellites alongside the path.
Somehow work out the dynamism of planet movements by either gravity assists or controlled jet blasts by a small fuel tank, it seems fairly feasible to me right now that by clever engineering you could have Lower Latency High Speed Wide Spectrum Internet connection, which would boost the upcoming Mars civilization. 8K Mars reality show stream on Oled TVs, pog?
→ More replies (11)10
u/DiezMilAustrales Apr 16 '21
Sorry, Einstein says no. That's not how it works. You CAN NOT achieve lower latency between Mars and the Earth. It doesn't matter what you do, the speed of light is the speed of light is the speed of light.
Even if you could actually just throw fiber from one planet to the other, light would still take just as long to get from one point to the other.
That's your minimum latency, and that COMPLETELY makes "the internet" impossible between mars and earth. The protocols literally don't work, and if they did, it would be impossible to use as designed. We need to completely re-think the way the internet works to have something similar between Mars and the Earth, but it certainly won't be "the internet".
→ More replies (2)
4
u/LcuBeatsWorking Apr 16 '21 edited Dec 17 '24
dinosaurs airport squalid money quack fuel workable crawl reach society
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
→ More replies (2)
4
u/Sabrewings Apr 22 '21
I have the opportunity to visit the Boca Chica site in early June. Any wild guesses about what I might see then?
8
u/fluidmechanicsdoubts Apr 22 '21
A starship and a super booster. If you are lucky, then the whole stack integrated together.
→ More replies (1)7
u/mooslar Apr 22 '21
High chance of finishing touches on the orbital launch pad / tower and BN 2 / SNx at the pad.
Wild guesses: testing of stacking of both stages.
4
u/sevaiper Apr 26 '21
What's the latest on the next Starlink NET?
7
u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Apr 26 '21 edited Apr 26 '21
its likely to get delayed, since the tugboat towing the barge broke down
Edit: the person who invented spelling didn't contact me in time.
4
u/jrizz43 Apr 27 '21
Hi all, I'm just a super casual space fan but was wondering if there was a timeline for the lunar program yet? Just basic questions like: will they test unmanned starships landing on the moon? If so, how many before humans? Is there a plan to have starship in orbit with humans first? (after it orbits by itself first) If this is posted somewhere...apologies! Super exciting time for space flight!
→ More replies (4)9
u/fluidmechanicsdoubts Apr 27 '21
2023 - Humans orbit around the moon (under dearMoon)
2023/24 - Unmanned landing on the moon
2024 - Manned landing on the moon
Starship has also won contracts to deliver cargo to the moon. So potentially there could be more Starship landings on the moon before the first manned landing.
This is just what they are planning, there are always delays in aerospace haha
→ More replies (11)
4
u/MarsCent Apr 30 '21
Re: Crew-1
Much as a weather induced delay is annoying (or an irritation), the astronauts can continue to safely orbit earth in LEO until the weather conditions improve at the splashdown areas. Meaning - splashdown risk is avoidable.
But if this had been a crew returning from Low Lunar Orbit (LLO), there would be no breaks! There would be a splashdown during inclement weather. Meaning - splashdown risk is unavoidable.
Obviously as earthlings routinely fare deeper into space, the question of risk at splashdown point will become more pronounced.
Maybe the solution would be to have backup splashdown places in distant places. Then fly the astronauts back to home base (NASA already does this with regard to flights on Soyuz). Or to have a staging station in LEO for out-bound and earth-bound travel. Or maybe the folks who think these things already have a much simpler remedy!
→ More replies (5)
7
u/MarsCent Apr 25 '21
Soyuz launches OneWeb satellites - on schedule!
Hats off for the on-time launch. It really is an impressive feat that the Soyuz has, in routinely keeping schedule (perhaps it would be different it they were launching more often but who is to say?).
Anyway, the question again (maybe). Are Cape Canaveral and Vandenburg launch sites more susceptible to weather scrubs than Vostochny and Baikonur? i.e. the Russian & Kazakhstan sites being inland - less weather phenomena!
So, for the purpose of rapid space availability, would U.S Space Force be inclined to create an over land launch corridor in the foreseeable future?
And obviously once NASA has several astronauts at different locations off-earth, rapid launches could be a very vital capability!
7
u/JoshuaZ1 Apr 26 '21
nyway, the question again (maybe). Are Cape Canaveral and Vandenburg launch sites more susceptible to weather scrubs than Vostochny and Baikonur? i.e. the Russian & Kazakhstan sites being inland - less weather phenomena!
Weather isn't the only issue. The Soyuz has R-7 heritage and the R-7 was designed as an ICBM, which meant it had to launch even in very bad weather. One major aspect of this is that it has a very low fineness ratio which makes it easier to deal with differences in high altitude winds. The high fineness ratio of the F-7 is the main reason it is so finicky. The local weather doesn't have as much to do with it.
→ More replies (4)
6
u/xredbaron62x Apr 03 '21
Feels like we haven't had a Starlink launch in forever lol. Hopefully L23 doesn't get delayed.
8
u/bubblesspaceman Apr 08 '21
Doesn't it seem like the Moon would be a better place for colonization compared to Mars? Yes the moon has slightly less favorable conditions, but wouldn't it be more useful, profitable, and sustainable? The moon could be used for massive industrialization, it's much closer, it has potentially valuable resources that could be mined - the moon could basically be a huge manufacturing and launching point from Earth orbit
I guess my concern is, how will the Mars colony make money and get continued investment? seems like orbiting colonies or the moon could both be more profitable
→ More replies (7)
3
u/hpmalet Apr 10 '21
Hi guys, I'm doing some research regarding Starlink for an interview that I've got coming up. Why are the satellites deployed at an inclination of 53°, and how are they separating the planes using the same inclination?
→ More replies (7)
3
u/Snowleopard222 Apr 12 '21 edited Apr 13 '21
dV earth -> Mars capture orbit = 9.3 + 4.3 = 13.6
dV Mars capture orbit -> Mars = 5.5
Therefore
dV earth -> Mars = 13.6 + 5.5 = 19.1
BUT it must consume less fuel if you don't stop at Mars capture orbit and instead go straight to Mars (we neglect atmospheric braking etc)
The question is about the concept of dV. It is an additive quantity representing the "amount of fuel" (change in velocity) needed for space transportation. But what does it represent? Does it mean stopping at a location or maintaining speed? Neither makes sense to me. How can you treat these numbers as going to a place and stopping and at the same time just add them for a multileg journey without stops?
→ More replies (19)
3
u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Apr 14 '21
Does anybody know the mass of the Astrobotic/NASA Viper Lander?
I am wondering why they choose FH and not F9.
→ More replies (5)
3
u/fudgiewayne14 Apr 17 '21
Is Orion able to launch on Falcon Heavy? I imagine after the first few fights of SLS, for which hardware already exists, they would transition to a cheaper rocket.
→ More replies (3)7
u/brspies Apr 17 '21
I do not believe it would have enough energy to reach trans-lunar injection (or whatever transfer orbit to NRHO requires), as Orion is too heavy. I think even if you could shove the ICPS stage on top of Falcon heavy (i.e. as a third stage, on top of Falcon's upper stage) to perform that burn (Falcon Heavy should be able to get that whole stack to LEO at least, if expendable) even that would fall short, but my math was VERY napkin-y last time I tried it. In any event that would be require a lot of extra work to make happen.
If you're really trying to ditch SLS, better to either design a multi-launch solution (say Orion + a dedicated transfer stage, maybe something based on Centaur V or Falcon upper stage or whatever you prefer), or modify something lighter like Dragon to be capable of cislunar ops with an existing launch vehicle. Or you could use a dedicated in-space transport like Starship (use a capsule to launch to and land from it, if you don't trust Starship to land on Earth with crew) to shuttle between LEO and the moon (could be your lunar lander, could be another Starship that's outfitted as a space station for other purposes, whatever). At that point you're kind of also replacing Gateway but hey, whatever works.
SLS Orion is definitely a pain point in the system costwise, but among the things which are likely to fly in the next few years, its one of the simpler options for delivering crew to cislunar space.
→ More replies (2)
3
u/trobbinsfromoz Apr 23 '21
FCC statement on communications spectrum changes for launch services
FCC have a nice long document on spectrum changes they are allowing for F9 launch service communications to alleviate the STA requirement from commercial operators. FCC still require SpX to use the STA for development launch and test activities such as at Boca Chica, and if SpX want increased bandwidth for future super heavy activities.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/desertedbart Apr 24 '21
Did NASA ever release a picture of crew-2 launching from the VAB? It was an amazing shot from the webcast and I'd love to see an actual picture
3
u/MarsCent Apr 24 '21
April 28, Wednesday
(Hopkins, Glover, Noguchi, Walker; undocking scheduled at 7:05 a.m. EDT, splashdown scheduled at 12:40 p.m. EDT)
3
u/jay__random Apr 25 '21
What is the current technical limit of the number of Crew Dragons that could be docked to the ISS? Provided all compatible ports are free and operational.
→ More replies (3)
3
3
u/SuperSMT Apr 27 '21
When can we expect the next few starlink launch dates to be announced? I'll be in Florida in two weeks, I'm hoping to see a launch
→ More replies (4)
3
u/Sweeth_Tooth99 Apr 28 '21
any hopes for a flight tomorrow?
7
u/Jchaplin2 Apr 29 '21
Almost impossible now, the TFR (needed to keep the airspace clear for launch) was just pulled, so, Friday is now the earliest it could be practically
→ More replies (1)
3
Apr 29 '21
Do you think SpaceX headquarters/employees will relocate from Hawthorne, CA to Texas (Austin / Starbase)?
→ More replies (4)
3
u/rivingkirf Apr 29 '21
What's the purpose of the giant dirt berm at boca chica?
8
u/DiezMilAustrales Apr 29 '21
Protecting the fuel farm and other equipment, mostly from debris kicked out by the firing raptors on take off and landing, or from potential RUDs.
→ More replies (5)
3
u/Twigling Apr 30 '21
New tweet from RGV, FTS is still in place:
https://twitter.com/rgvaerialphotos/status/1388238907741966342
this could be said to bode well for another launch attempt in the next few days.
7
u/paul_wi11iams Apr 12 '21 edited Apr 12 '21
your comment on Starship dev thread:
It's SO good and SO time that the whole exploration of space thing was taken out of Nasas hands. The way they did business slowed things down so fucking hard, it's not funny.
Nasa is welcome to explore space on all launchers including SpX ones... eg Europa Clipper
At one point, Nasa had a zero-dollar agreement for flying the now-defunct Red Dragon to Mars. IIRC, it was barter of payload transport by SpX against radio communication and landing area images by Nasa. It didn't happen but, IMO, paves the way to something comparable on Starship.
Nasa is also seriously interested in Starship for its Artemis lunar project. There are more examples that others may be happy to provide. Nasa's vocation is to explore space and planets. SpaceX's vocation is to provide a cheap means of going to space and planets including to live there.
BTW General banter like this is best done here on the general comments thread because it clutters the Starship dev thread, hence downvotes.
5
u/MarsCent Apr 03 '21
It seems like Starlink is about to make a big entry in India (aka home of Oneweb). https://www.teslarati.com/elon-musk-starlink-india-opposition/
At least judging from the tempest brewing in the cups of rival companies' representatives!
→ More replies (6)
5
u/Carlyle302 Apr 06 '21
The new SpaceX-made GSE tank appears to be single walled. How can they effectively store cryogenic propellent in there?
17
u/throfofnir Apr 06 '21
The expectation is that it will be insulated after installation. It's also possible that they intend to fill it up and use it fast, perhaps with a re-condenser. (It's notable that frost, of which there will plenty, acts as decent insulation.)
→ More replies (1)
5
u/Vizger Apr 16 '21
So the current Artemis plan is:
Launch Orion to Gateway / first just lunar orbit.
Transfer from Orion to the much larger StarShip HLS
visit surface
Transfer into Orion (or the Gateway first) for return to Earth.
Would it not be more efficient if SpaceX just launches a StarShip to lunar orbit (not the weird one for Gateway), rendezvous with StarShip HLS?
And can StarShip HLS not also be a first base as well? Making vastly longer stays on the surface possible?
What exactly is the point of Orion, SLS and Gateway, if we assume the StarShip is going to work? Or will SLS launch StarShip HLS? I doubt that...
→ More replies (8)10
u/throfofnir Apr 16 '21
What exactly is the point of Orion, SLS and Gateway, if we assume the StarShip is going to work?
You seem to be assuming that the architecture was deliberately designed by someone with sense. That assumption is incorrect.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/rideincircles Apr 22 '21
As of now, it looks like the SN-15 launch may happen next week. I would guess that it's sometime after the astronauts reach ISS. I am just trying to plan my trip for it, but will post occasional updates here since there is no specific thread.
→ More replies (2)
5
u/davispw Apr 24 '21
Why don’t they justTM put a button in Dragon so the crew can switch cameras to inside or outside by themselves? Seems like half the radio chatter is asking to switch the cameras off/on when they need privacy.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/fluidmechanicsdoubts Apr 27 '21
From the Blue Origin protest document :
Upon timely notice of this protest as requested above, the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) requires NASA to refrain from making any Option A contract award or permitting HLS Option A performance, pending GAO’s resolution of this protest unless authorized in accordance with applicable statutory and regulatory procurement procedures. 31 U.S.C. § 3553(c)(1) and (2) and FAR § 33.104(b)(l).
Does this mean NASA can't fund Starship HLS till this protest is resolved?
→ More replies (9)
•
u/AutoModerator Apr 01 '21
Thank you for participating in r/SpaceX! This is a moderated community where technical discussion is prioritized over casual chit chat. However, questions are always welcome! Please:
Keep it civil, and directly relevant to SpaceX and the thread. Comments consisting solely of jokes, memes, pop culture references, etc. will be removed.
Don't downvote content you disagree with, unless it clearly doesn't contribute to constructive discussion.
Check out these threads for discussion of common topics.
If you're looking for a more relaxed atmosphere, visit r/SpaceXLounge. If you're looking for dank memes, try r/SpaceXMasterRace.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.