Space and Science BS Thread

Are you saying the Starship version is going to be shorter?
https://youtu.be/bvim4rsNHkQ?feature=shared

 

CO2 doesn’t augment flames, it suppresses them.

 

Intentionally?

 

We're all talking these, right? Because those are not flames. That's frosty air from the super cooled prop lines in the engine bay and/or the CO2 coming out of the vents in the engine skirt.

 

Yes, so you don't have to deal with the propellants boiling off on just one side. They did it with Shuttle

 

I certainly hope so. They can do any number of water landings but can they afford even one “it’s just a scratch, shit’ll buff out” failed catch attempt? I’m hoping they can develop the targeting using a buoy and a VR tower but something that doesn’t “bob” would be better.

 

Cool, still seems odd they didn’t correct it prior to reentry.

Illuminating, thanks! So nothing happens to the methane streaming from the vents on both stages when it encounters the exhaust plume? Does this mean the majority of what is seen coming from the tank vents on both stages isn’t actually methane or LOX vapor but air & water condensing around the super chilled exhaust as it does over the still full portions of each tank?

 

And Apollo…

 

I’d think it would be more effective for the shuttle and starship to simply face the heat shielded side towards the sun. Apparently not. Spin related to fuel sloshing control as well?
Was curious and looked this up. Apollo missions were timed to land soon after lunar sunrise to maximize detail shadows for landing. I thought maybe it might have to do with service/command module sun exposure during approaches with different moon phases but no.
https://www.amnh.org/research/hayde...nding site required,a specific lunar phase.]

 

Scott was prepared!
https://youtu.be/8htMpR7mnaM?feature=shared

 

It all depends. With a 2nd catch tower, no launch pad under it, you reduce the risk to critical infrastructure.

 

'zackly!! No way are they going to jeopardize the only functional launch mount..

 

I agree but they seem to have other plans.

 

So was the issue with oil rigs in general or something about Phobos & Diemos in particular? Because a shortened, catch only rig would seem to alleviate a lot of the risk even if you could only recover Raptors.

 

Tank vents are still the respective elements. However, it's not going to do much because it mixes with the atmosphere in an uncontrolled manner.

 

I think it was more a logistics thing. Transportation and such.

 

Seems to me they need to start iterating faster. They’ll be able to do that with a more resilient OLM and a catch tower at BC. I think they’ll use these primarily as they get Starship operationalized.

Getting other mounts and recovery locations/means will come down the line.

 

Getting KSC finished at 39A will help with that. And getting the crew access arm at 40 will help SpaceX with that too. They will be able to work on it finally without having to stop every other day.

 

I don't think they ever gave an explanation. Could have been the cost to maintain and store until use exceeded their value. Or the cost to repurpose them wasn't worth it. Oil rigs have a TON of infrastructure that is of no use to them. I'm betting an oil rig manufacturer could make a special purpose built rig for them at a similar or cheaper price.

 

Gives a better sense of the rotation. Doesn’t seem pre-planned IMHO:
https://x.com/ophello/status/1768481359209849070?s=46