Space and Science BS Thread

https://x.com/nasa_johnson/status/1732428788967920034?s=46

 

I’m inclined to “normal” as well, sort of a signature. It just attracted my attention so I started thinking about where it might be coming from. Right after ignition you can see a strong jet at the top of the booster LOX tank and methane tank.
https://m.youtube.com/shorts/x67ku2zLgTs
This venting continues to be visible from both stages in drone footage ~ 11:30 & 11:45
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ReXZvXPak4U&pp=ygUGc3BhY2V4
I can’t rule out CO2 flushing since the thrust puck venting is impossible to distinguish in the videos but these other sources certainly are.

 

Those are the booster tank pressurization vents. They are most likely activated at launch to relieve excess pressure in the tanks that is no longer needed for ignition.

The CO2 flushing vents is at the very bottom of the booster just above the engine skirts. If you look at some of the close ups, you can see small ports between each of the outer 20 engines, except where the chines are.

 

A quote worthy of a bumper sticker
https://x.com/nasahubble/status/1732488513570930940?s=46

 

That’s what I assumed. Because of the OLM you can’t see the CO2 vents at ignition or soon after because of the exhaust but since they’re arranged around the entire circumference I’d think if they were the source the smoke would be uniformly distributed. Thanks, I didn’t know about the additional vents but those are O2 so shouldn’t be venting smoke or combustibles either. I’ll revisit Tim Dodd’s slo mo footage to see if I can see anything more. After a few more launches I expect it will be pretty well defined or otherwise ignored.

 

Who remembers?
https://x.com/nasahistory/status/1732422147279090082?s=46

 

Absolutely. Overreaction Monday isn’t just a football thing. But you can’t ignore problems and expect complete success either. Foam strikes were one such problem. It’s still astounding what the shuttle program was able to accomplish in spite of the tragedies. They won’t be the last unless we quit trying altogether. In other space news…
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KGc6_KVc9Ho

 

https://x.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1732510112508469569?s=46

 

https://x.com/nasahistory/status/1732731688189337688?s=46

 

https://x.com/nasahubble/status/1732802827364262397?s=46

 

Must see. Includes on-board footage! https://x.com/spacex/status/1732824684683784516?s=46

 

I’m an auditing and oversight proponent https://x.com/usgao/status/1732827355205255647?s=46

 

https://x.com/nasahubble/status/1732832366719033833?s=46

SM1 kicked ass
https://x.com/nasahistory/status/1732837383828050114?s=46

 

Me too. My understanding is most of the delay was pad repairs and mishap report filing and then FWS had to see the results of deluge testing. The agencies together took much less of the time than Spacex alone. Given what’s at stake they acted promptly.

 

And now for the

 

From this week’s ARS Rocket Report:

Also taking another look at booster longevity ... From one launch four years ago to three the next year and 12 the following year, SpaceX expects about 30 liftoffs by the end of this year. For 2024, the rate could jump to 50, then rocket to 100 in 2025. "Next year, we’ll be launching about once a week, but the plan, in about two years, is about every three to four days," Janzen said. Additionally, next year, SpaceX will re-evaluate and conduct analysis with an eye toward certifying the first-stage boosters for 25 to 30 flights, he said.

 

Good news for the Merlin and second stage production plants.
Doesn’t sound to me like they’re phasing it out but it does mean they won’t need a lot of new boosters, only enough to keep up with those expended plus a few to rotate in as well as a new second stages for every launch. They’ll need a lot of second stages though which means a matching 2 Merlins a week as well plus the 9 on every expended booster.

 

Unless he is talking about launching the same booster every 3-4 days, this doesn't make sense. SpaceX has had 91 launches this year (they wanted 100, but there's still time). With 342 days gone, that equates to a launch every 3.6 days. It also means they're already producing second stages that fast.

 

Ambitious, right?

Also, they include Starship with the annual launch counts and have had 100 launches over the past 365 days.*

*I read this in an article, I haven’t added them up.

 

https://x.com/arstechnica/status/1733299029386076258?s=46