Space and Science BS Thread

As @PzTank said, 39A/B are on Kennedy Space Center (KSC) proper, and 40 and 41 are on Cape Canaveral.

Look up Cape Canaveral on google maps. Zoom in, and you can see all the launch facilities.

IIRC, the Cape was developed first, handling the early rocket launches. As the program grew and became Apollo, more room was needed, so they expanded north, and developed KSC. KSC was not the original name - at the moment, I don't remember what the name was.

 

Ahh didn't think about the separation of Cape Canaveral & KSC. Makes sense now.

 

WATCH LIVE: STARLINK MISSION

SpaceX is targeting today, Friday, August 12 for a Falcon 9 launch of 46 Starlink satellites to low-Earth orbit from Space Launch Complex 4 East (SLC-4E) at Vandenberg Space Force Base in California. The instantaneous launch window is at 2:40 p.m. PT (21:40 UTC), and a backup opportunity is available on Saturday, August 13 at 10:40 p.m. PT (05:40 UTC on Sunday, August 14).

The first stage booster supporting this mission previously launched Crew-1, Crew-2, SXM-8, CRS-23, IXPE, Transporter-4, Transporter-5, Globalstar FM15, and one Starlink mission. Following stage separation, Falcon 9’s first stage will return to Earth and land on the Of Course I Still Love You droneship stationed in the Pacific Ocean.

You can watch the live launch webcast starting about 5 minutes before liftoff.

 

As far as I know, before it was KSC it was all considered the Cape.

 

It was always the Cape - and still is.

Also called Cape Kennedy. But I think this was slang, before KSC was the official name.

 

"On November 28, 1963 President Lyndon B. Johnson announced in a televised address that Cape Canaveral would be renamed Cape Kennedy in memory of President John F. Kennedy, who was assassinated six days earlier. President Johnson said the name change had been sanctioned by the U.S. Board of Geographic Names.

Executive Order Number 11129, issued by President Johnson on November 29, 1963 decreed that the NASA Launch Operations Center (LOC), including facilities on Merritt Island and Cape Canaveral, would be renamed the John F. Kennedy Space Center, NASA. That name change officially took effect on December 20, 1963.

The Air Force subsequently changed the name of the Cape Canaveral Missile Test Annex to Cape Kennedy Air Force Station (CKAFS). That name change took somewhat longer, but became official on January 22, 1964."

 

@Hunterdc1 do you do any of the tank refurbishment for X?

 

Negative those seem to be out of state guys based on license plates I see at their pad.

 

Ah, ok. I just saw a flyover update on the Starship launch tower and the methane tank refurbishment was mentioned.

 

Looks like a beautiful afternoon at Vandenberg.

Another successful launch and booster landing.

Interesting - at about the 9:39 minute mark with the globe where they show the trajectory, you could see lines for a launch and booster landing from Florida. Those lines didn't cross over from the other side of the globe but it made me wonder how that graphic works...

Someone posted it on Reddit:

 

Just for shits/grins and to piss off Bezos & Branson I’d like to see a crew dragon launch from either coast and land with the capsule still attached, preferably on the other side of the planet(say, the Med or Sea of Japan) on a drone ship named “Guess What’s Next”. If suborbital and not Leo is the goal is there enough fuel to stick the landing capsule included if the capsule doesn’t need to be fueled for orbital insertion?

 

I wonder if the F9 could withstand having the capsule still attached at landing?

Me, I’d want the abort test experience

 

Speaking of launch pads…
https://twitter.com/harry__stranger/status/1558437080962703360?s=21&t=1DOmjxIriFHRuowym_VmCg

 

Do you mean like keep the second stage affixed to the first stage and land the whole thing?

I feel like a Ship without the Booster would be a better option for that. Almost a SSO kind of thing.

 

If it can handle takeoff then why not landing? Me, I’d want the 50’s sci-fi landing in a rocket.

Yes, not saying what’s better just that by throttling back early it might could coast a lot further down range than BO or VG. Spacex has a crew certified capsule so why can’t it go someplace other than ISS? It wouldn’t be occupied, but a wake up notice nonetheless. EM keeps talking about using rockets to transport people around the globe so why not send one.

 

I'm guessing the current retractable landing legs are not up to that task.

 

Could be some sort of rule that makes, what is essentially an ICBM, internationally illegal.

 

https://twitter.com/nasagroundsys/status/1558493922288144385?s=21&t=vYTL4GqguvKLX_oybxV5nQ

 

Still have 24+ hours of Scape to do fueling the Aft skirts starting the 24th. Should get some good pics then.

 

I don’t think that’s the case. ICBM’s use all their fuel to reach a maximum velocity leaving none for descent retro burns save whatever method is used for mirvs. If But if it’s ever going to happen there will be designated paths just as for airline traffic. For starters I’d be cool with just a hop from Vandenberg to Hawaii in say, an hour? Less?