Space and Science BS Thread

I’d laugh if the Vulcan 2 flight still doesn’t make it in time since they can’t produce BE4s fast enough.

 

Huh…
https://x.com/djsnm/status/1806069853671014749?s=46

 

Interesting.

Modify a cargo dragon to be a fuel tank and launch on a FH in fully expendable to get it to station?

 

I still don't see the benefit of a large space built vessel for Mars. All the materials it would be made with would have to be brought up with a ship. Cargo would have to be brought up by ship. And then when you get to Mars it has to be unloaded back onto a ship.

I don't see their fuel source being a problem either. They load a ship with some tankers, and then head to Mars. All the fuel in the main tanks would be burnt at the beginning of the journey. The header tanks for landing could then boil off into the now empty fuel tanks and then recondensed into the header tanks as they approach Mars.

Also, apparently things aren't all sunshine and roses for SpaceX either... Those are some very large fragments pictured.

https://www.space.com/nasa-confirms-debris-spacex-crew-dragon

 

gateway is fine as an exploration base station (HALO orbit and all being able to reach lots of sites) but at some point there'll be a munar .. er lunar logistics hub with ISRU, so a Low Lunar Polar orbit would be more useful for a staging area for additional exploration.

Basically LEO > moon is just a taxi at that point.

Seems like what nasa wants - controlled deorbit, and a dragon + a booster in the trunk is fine for that. (or a dragon XL, which is in dev for gateway, anyway)

 

Dragon XL.



launch it off a FH or expendable F9, plenty of fuel for the task. High TRL since it's all existing bits or bits planned to be built anyway. Yay risk adverse nasa.

 

What does that mean? They want to fly something else sooner? That would be a good thing.

 

Not exactly the hardware rich, risk embracing approach of Spacex. We’ll have to wait and see how it turns out for Sierra Space but between DC and the LIFE module they seem to be making steady if not rapid progress.

 

mass sim means ULA is ready to go (for certification reasons, so that they can get in business) but Sierra isn't. Sierra booked a flight with Vulcan because of the discount of being an early fight.

 

As opposed to ten flights apiece shipping up expendable fuel? That makes no sense. Ships built in space stay there so they aren’t expendable like all that fuel. The fuel they do use won’t take 10 trips to bring up so all of those flights can be used to bring up infrastructure for permanent use.

 

wow. So China is still just dropping boosters with absolutely no concern for where they land!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SFRNImP7p8

 

It’s for the greater good, right?

 

Remember these guys/gals?
https://x.com/ispace_inc/status/1806300430458392617?s=46

 

This is going to be interesting… All three boosters will be expended for Clipper. No legs, no gridfins…
https://x.com/alexphysics13/status/1806347369253941629?s=46
https://x.com/alexphysics13/status/1806347372492197982?s=46

 

https://x.com/earthskyscience/status/1804885128205762961?s=46

 

Couldn't happen to a better company.

 

Happy National Sunglasses Day!
https://x.com/airandspace/status/1806357227655008502?s=46

 

I’m curious what the cost as well as performance difference is between expending side boosters and their Merlin engines vs the SRB’s used used to augment other rockets’ performance. The core still needs to throttle down for max-Q as well as gimbal for control but SRB’s must have some advantages either in performance or cost or they wouldn’t be used. I assume Spacex doesn’t because they don’t need the performance and having most boosters get reused reduces cost to such an extent that the few that do get expended aren’t worth the trouble of incorporating an additional launch system.

 

The little space probe that could:
https://x.com/senbillnelson/status/1806368316618887509?s=46

 

Haven’t listened yet…
https://x.com/nasaspaceflight/status/1806357617419211107?s=46