Space and Science BS Thread

It seems like a conscious effort to move in the direction of rapid, robust, and repeatable which would be hard to do that cleanly on the moon or Mars. I like the attitude of “start as you mean to go on”.

 

At an extra 100 feet they almost certainly would need a taller tower to handle the center of gravity, especially with a payload, but they'll most likely leave the current tower and build the second one taller before modifying the first one.

While the benefits are good, more satellites and fewer refill missions, its crazy their math says it will handle the extra strain this will cause the structure of the rocket on re-entry, let alone the flip maneuver...

 

Yeah, I can see maybe another 15 meters of cable run but not lowering the lift points that much as well, especially after they start lifting ships with payloads or fitted out for crews. Then there’s the proposed increase in diameter either as well or instead which would require replacing the OLM. Those things seem like down-the-road and after some record of success has been established but it’s hard to say. They need a lot of infrastructure very soon but have to have a stable iteration to build it for.

 

listening to the Spacex update.

1200 tons delivered to orbit last year. Starship will do 100tons with a path to 200 tons while staying reusable. That means Starship could eventually do in 6 launches what took them 96.

He estimates it will take about a million tons to Mars to be fully self sufficient. That's at least 5,000 Starships. If they can get to a point of building Starship as fast as Boeing produces aircraft (3-600/yr), which is their stated goal, it will take 10-20 years minimum to achieve that.

He said they will be launching from one tower while upgrading the other. He also said the lengthening isn't coming until V3.

Apparently Starship attempt 2 would have made it to orbit if it had a payload. The failure to reach orbit was because of them venting oxygen they didn't need.

the 3rd launch they want to test firing an engine in orbit, tipping point header to main propellent transfer, and test the payload door for the pez dispenser.

Ambitious goal is to proof starship refueling by the end of this year, but will "definitely be solved by next year"

 

Current speculation is between Suborbital Pads A and B.

*cough* @Hunterdc1 *cough*

 

Not sure exactly what you're asking but Dragons and Payloads are both processed in booty,smock, hair/beard covering clean rooms, in that regard they are probably the best. We are talking 60 year old Air force facilities that are antiquated at best and dilapidated at worst. They've been talking about building a new processing facility for years but we are talking about a $1.5 B investment there. The NRO(EPF) cost a bil in 07 when it was built and its exactly what X needs. 4 bays with seperate access to each so you can have classified payloads without worrying about getting people/support in and out.

 

Props to Astrobotic:
https://x.com/nasawatch/status/1746918028233552008?s=46

 

I question his veracity on making it to orbit since it would have been lower and slower at every point in time with a payload.

 

https://x.com/meithan42/status/1746974985829093844?s=46

 

If it had a payload, there would have been a higher throttle and the LOX would have been used at a higher/consistent rate. With no payload, they had excess LOX, so they dumped it. It had the unintended consequence of starting a fire/explosion that caused the RUD.

Also, he had the teleprompter there in front of him. I highly doubt he was saying something that his engineers did not already tell him or have put in the teleprompter. He has no reason to lie.

 

Something like that, yes. I think @PzTank was talking about the first Falcon Heavy flight though?

 

And yet he does it all the time for reasons undisclosed. He’s a hype man and says what he wants, reason enough. Payload and higher throttle means they run out of fuel but doesn’t guarantee orbit. No payload and lower thrust didn’t get there either. I’ll believe what he says when it does what he says. Did they have more than 150 tons of excess LOX? Then that seems a pretty large error in flow mixing or they did it on purpose and he left that bit out. If less then that it would substitute for payload and it should have reached orbit by his logic. What he failed to explain was why they had it and had to dump it. I trust they’ll get there, I don’t trust what comes out if his mouth on a day to day basis.

edit- if dumping the fuel caused a problem then it’s still a problem. If they didn’t use full thrust then they need to use full thrust with a payload and prove it. Talking doesn’t get anything to orbit.

 

I must not have seen the original statement. I don't have Hangar X access so I dont know what level of cleanroom it is or isnt.

 

I was referring to the work at Boca Chica more specifically rather than KSC or McGregor and how it appears different from Artemis assembly buildings.

 

Boca Chica is the wild west thats for sure. But I'm watching ML2 sub-assembly begin day by day pretty close to my shop and I can assure you its very much open air just the same way it is out there.

 

*I've been off the map for a few days

Are they building them there and shipping to Boca Chica or did I miss something and this second tower was the one that was going in @ KSC?

 

It’s the one that’s been parked at Robert’s Rd KSC. They barged a tower section and water tank from Port Canaveral to Brownsville.

 

Ahh! Thanks. I'd thought/assumed they'd started assembling at KSC

 

They did build a Starship tower at Pad 39A but stopped there. No launch mount or any ground support equipment.

 

Right, but the Artemis crew capsule will be in a clean room, right?

It was 2 methane tanks. they took those to Masseys for static fire testing.

I'm pretty sure there are OLM legs...