Space X

jogdish · 28-01-2021 10:31pm

AMKC wrote: »

Just how many rockets and variants of rockets has Space X got?
Elon Musk must really be going full steam ahead with this. Why do we not hear anything about it in the mainstream media? IE: Sky, BBC, EURONEWS, RTE etc.

Because nothing is happening, a falcon putting a sat. in orbit meh done before loads of times, all these new rockets , SN8 exploded and constant delays with SN9 and none of these are anywhere near being usable even for cargo.
SLS hot fire didn't make the news either. I know it's easy to get sucked into the bubble, my friends are sick of hearing me talk about 'the rocket'

Crew one had media attention, had a specific goal and easy to understand. BBC world news reported SN8 for a few hours that evening, but it honestly makes sense.

FFVII · 28-01-2021 10:36pm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX#Hardware

jogdish · 28-01-2021 10:41pm

FFVII wrote: »

Their does be.

Mainstream media is a lost cause in fairness though.

It's like complaining the media wont cover everything, there are loads of amazing developments in loads of areas everyday, just cause your one isn't covered does not mean the media is a lost cause.
Crew was SpaceX's most recent acheivement that you can actually explain to someone, everything else with Starship is not ready for prime time.

FFVII · 28-01-2021 10:46pm

jogdish wrote: »

It's like complaining the media wont cover everything, there are loads of amazing developments in loads of areas everyday, just cause your one isn't covered does not mean the media is a lost cause.
Crew was SpaceX's most recent acheivement that you can actually explain to someone, everything else with Starship is not ready for prime time.

Brexit and Covid * 4 years.

Anything else you had to go looking to find whats happening in the world.

Shlippery · 28-01-2021 11:14pm

Yeah, I'm telling everyone about this but hard to convince em. The belly flop maneouvre is just nuts. Such high pace development and general excitement amidst the pandemic!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8JyvzU0CXU SN9 is huge and it's only a small section of the finished goods.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KycyWcxWTcY <- Starship plumbing and animation of how it lands - real sci-fi stuff.

Elon also casually mentioned that they're hoping to eventually catch it at the launch tower - https://twitter.com/smvllstvrs/status/1344444938591866889

Hopefully the FAA stuff gets sorted, really wanna see the belly flop again

https://twitter.com/ErcXspace <- good twitter for some cool SpaceX renders.

jogdish · 28-01-2021 11:33pm

Can anyone answer me this, so SpaceX , Electron, and Blue Origin to a certain extend all over high quality live streams, twitter updates etc to the public. All of this is not free, so what's in it for them? It's not like any or us are in the market for getting things to orbit and those that are Im guessing you don't have a load of choice in the provider.

Like I'm not complaining but why do they advertise like this? For Musk I assume ego is a large part, ULA, Electron less so

jogdish · 28-01-2021 11:38pm

And Mary tweeted she's been asked to evacuate for tomorrow (28/1) also

Capt'n Midnight · 29-01-2021 1:22am

jogdish wrote: »

Can anyone answer me this, so SpaceX , Electron, and Blue Origin to a certain extend all over high quality live streams, twitter updates etc to the public. All of this is not free, so what's in it for them? It's not like any or us are in the market for getting things to orbit and those that are Im guessing you don't have a load of choice in the provider.

Like I'm not complaining but why do they advertise like this? For Musk I assume ego is a large part, ULA, Electron less so

Good PR. Petty videos to show where all billions in state aid went. Gotta keep the pork barrels going.

The retail throwaway price for a non-reused SpaceX Falcon Heavy is $150m
And can put nearly 64 tonnes into LEO.

The volume price of a non-reusable Space Shuttle Main Engine is $145m each.
SLS uses four of them and Solid Rocket Boosters and can put 69 tonnes into LEO.

Blue Origin still hasn't done anything noteworthy in the getting to orbit game.

Shlippery · 29-01-2021 5:12pm

Well, at least they put us out of our misery good and early today.

https://www.spacex.com/vehicles/starship/
Next attempt as early as Monday Feb 1st.

Curiously they've also dragged SN10 out of the highbay!

Edit: https://twitter.com/thejackbeyer/status/1355271960096370688/photo/1

beauty

jogdish · 31-01-2021 11:24pm

Didn't hear anything yet but last week they mentioned monday 1/2 might be SN9 hop day, or not. This FAA thing seems odd.

Shlippery · 01-02-2021 11:27am

https://twitter.com/Erdayastronaut/status/1356035080511234053

this is about the best we have to go on..so potentially tomorrow, but yeah, the FAA stuff is bonkers.

That being said, it will be quite impressive to see SN9 take off with SN10 beside it!

irishgeo · 01-02-2021 11:49pm

Shlippery wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Erdayastronaut/status/1356035080511234053

this is about the best we have to go on..so potentially tomorrow, but yeah, the FAA stuff is bonkers.

That being said, it will be quite impressive to see SN9 take off with SN10 beside it!

Are they not worried about it crashing in to it?

AMKC · 02-02-2021 12:39am

irishgeo wrote: »

Are they not worried about it crashing in to it?

Oh can you imagine. Well at least it would make the news. I have heard some people say the FAA keep delaying it because they do not want Elon Musks Space X to get to Mars first but NASA instead. How true that is I do not know. What have NASA done recently? They seem very quiet.

Shlippery · 02-02-2021 10:49am

Well, looks like they're giving it another go today - https://www.spacex.com/vehicles/starship/ 'As early as Feb 2nd'

NASA are ticking along with the Artemis stuff and getting people to the moon again. Think they're waiting on a new Admin as Jim Bridenstine stepped down with Biden taking over. They've the new Perseverance rover due to land on Mars in 2 weeks or so which will be cool.

I guess they're confident in SN9 to land on the button, they seem to have the accuracy down..all the F9 landings on the droneship are more or less pinpoint accuracy aside from the few times they blew up while testing.

Hopefully SN9 can stick the landing.

Westernyelp · 02-02-2021 11:42am

irishgeo wrote:

Are they not worried about it crashing in to it?

The landing pad is a bit further away. So they should be safe enough even if it ends in a RUD

jogdish · 02-02-2021 12:19pm

I see Mary got the evac, but high winds and no word on the FAA yet today - I feel another very long NSF live stream sadly ending in a simple cryo test for SN10.

Shlippery · 02-02-2021 12:33pm

jogdish wrote: »

I see Mary got the evac, but high winds and no word on the FAA yet today - I feel another very long NSF live stream sadly ending in a simple cryo test for SN10.

https://twitter.com/wapodavenport/status/1356566130056433664

Hot off the press 30 seconds or so ago.

Hopefully the weather cooperates!

jogdish · 02-02-2021 1:07pm

oh wow cool!, so lets think what else will go wrong

High Winds, range violation, depress vents 30,20,5,1 and 10 sec before launch

Kidding hope she flies and sticks the landing!

jogdish · 02-02-2021 2:43pm

The latest tweet from Davenport, is interesting - Seems space X didn't pay attention to the FAA regarding SN8. Which being realistic seems like the most Elon thing ever and explains the childish rage tweet about FAA the last day.

MonkieSocks · 02-02-2021 3:16pm

Shlippery · 02-02-2021 6:29pm

MonkieSocks wrote: »

So far so good...all seems to be on track. Don't think they've a T-0 yet.

Looking forward to this

josip · 02-02-2021 6:41pm

Shlippery wrote: »

That being said, it will be quite impressive to see SN9 take off with SN10 beside it!

Just saw that now for the first time, it looks so surreal.
The maddest thing I've seen since rockets started landing I think.

AMKC · 02-02-2021 6:47pm

Shlippery wrote: »

Well, looks like they're giving it another go today - https://www.spacex.com/vehicles/starship/ 'As early as Feb 2nd'

NASA are ticking along with the Artemis stuff and getting people to the moon again. Think they're waiting on a new Admin as Jim Bridenstine stepped down with Biden taking over. They've the new Perseverance rover due to land on Mars in 2 weeks or so which will be cool.

Yes that will be cool.
I actually thought it was happening last week lol there was a preview thing on You-Tube about it but it was only when I went to watch that I realised what it was and was dissapointed. Any chance of it getting there a day earlier than planned? That would be great. Looking forward to it anyway.

Shlippery · 02-02-2021 7:01pm

AMKC wrote: »

Yes that will be cool.
I actually thought it was happening last week lol there was a preview thing on You-Tube about it but it was only when I went to watch that I realised what it was and was dissapointed. Any chance of it getting there a day earlier than planned? That would be great. Looking forward to it anyway.

Was supposed to be last week but there were issues with FAA (flight authorities) - resolved now.

Should within the next 90 minutes or so all going well, but jus a guess, these test flights are ...very changeable. You gotta learn not to get your hopes up til the bloody thing leaves the ground.

edit:
https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1356683171086041090 potentially 45 minutes or so...maybe 8pm!

Quantum Erasure · 02-02-2021 9:16pm

About 10 mins to go

MayoForSam · 02-02-2021 9:33pm

Ah well, SN10 had a great view and should learn from that RUD

Shlippery · 02-02-2021 9:33pm

SN10 is probably ****ting itself after that.

Awesome to watch though.

Hmmzis · 02-02-2021 9:36pm

Looked like engine 2 didn't light, engine 1 did have a better burn this time on landing I think (no green exhaust).

AMKC · 02-02-2021 9:37pm

Awe what an ending but that was awesome. I think it came down too fast.

Mrmoe · 02-02-2021 9:39pm

Definitely had a tendency to lean

Nate--IRL-- · 02-02-2021 9:43pm

https://twitter.com/DJSnM/status/1356703226737745921?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Nate

Shlippery · 02-02-2021 9:49pm

Yea, looks like the second engine didn't light at the very end, so not enough to straighten her up

dalyboy · 02-02-2021 10:05pm

SpaceX should be renamed “fireworX”

Specialists in a series of failures and explosions.

Kinda hilarious at this point

jogdish · 02-02-2021 10:12pm

dalyboy wrote: »

SpaceX should be renamed “fireworX”

Specialists in a series of failures and explosions.

Kinda hilarious at this point

How so? Two experimental rockets crashed, and their Falcon has a 100% success rate for paid missions. They are a very reliable company.
It's a test campaign, we normally don't see these things - moreover they are a private company who are not accountable to tax payers so a quick fail and try again can be faster at this early stage compared to need it to be perfect day 1.

Shlippery · 02-02-2021 10:22pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UsCCRGLP0Q& It's crazy to see how far they've come in the one year of Starship testing.
SN1 was last February.

jogdish · 02-02-2021 10:31pm

Scott Manly seems to have noticed that one of the raptors on descent failed to ignite. The launch, cut offs roll all looked smoother than last time, hopefully 10 can get it sorted.
SN10 should be ready by months end.... but we said the same about SN9

josip · 02-02-2021 10:37pm

I understand it's only testing, but I thought there was some redundancy built into the design so that it could tolerate 1 engine failure and still land?
Or does it only have 2 working engines at this point in time?

Shlippery · 02-02-2021 10:44pm

josip wrote: »

I understand it's only testing, but I thought there was some redundancy built into the design so that it could tolerate 1 engine failure and still land?
Or does it only have 2 working engines at this point in time?

https://twitter.com/Erdayastronaut/status/1356710355737726981?s=20
If you look, it just leans a bit too far, needed the second engine to give it that little kick to the upright position...

But, I'm sure they've enough data to plan for that and work it into SN10

jogdish · 02-02-2021 10:44pm

josip wrote: »

I understand it's only testing, but I thought there was some redundancy built into the design so that it could tolerate 1 engine failure and still land?
Or does it only have 2 working engines at this point in time?

No, it currently has three and needs all three - the eventual will be able to tolerate some engine loss but currently its the concept, can you ignite burn, stop, re ignite control and land. No sense having extra raptors there to only get destroyed when you have yet to have a 100% perfect hop.

There are three engines (raptors) needed to lift, and it needs two to gimbal to control landing, but extra engines extra weight. This is probably the optimal config for testing.

Capt'n Midnight · 03-02-2021 1:27am

dalyboy wrote: »

SpaceX should be renamed “fireworX”

Specialists in a series of failures and explosions.

Kinda hilarious at this point

This comment about the recent failed SLS engine test.
https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2021/02/01/nasa_sls_hotfire_2/

In contrast to the first moon landing, SLS up till now has relied on research and design whereas Apollo relied on building, testing, and flying bigger and bigger rockets. After 11 years Apollo made it to the moon while after 10 years the SLS has yet to launch.

jogdish · 03-02-2021 1:48pm

The slow pace of SLS and fast pace of Apollo is apples and oranges,
In the time of Apollo the public were less up to date on day to day budget spending and hearing shock reports about so many millions being 'wasted' on this or that, so money votes were less hard to pass, Also you had a cold war media thing to win so that made any legal hurdles that much easier to clear.

Give Nasa the time and the money and they will do the best currently since they have the experience and facilities, the martian probes and their landing systems show this as well as all the other probes. SpaceX is hoping a tin can at the moment the pace is of course faster, it will slow down to a crawl when they want to get cargo certs.

I am not a spaceX hater or anything and I personally think a star ship vehicle is the future for cargo to orbit. They will partner with NASA for lunar and Mars - if only because of political reasons and the shear amount of money/risk and the training/knowledge that something like that will need.

Renault 5 · 03-02-2021 1:50pm

Im addicted to the Starship project

Renault 5 · 03-02-2021 2:44pm

dalyboy wrote: »

SpaceX should be renamed “fireworX”

Specialists in a series of failures and explosions.

Kinda hilarious at this point

When at first you dont succeed.

Try, try again

Capt'n Midnight · 03-02-2021 7:43pm

jogdish wrote: »

The slow pace of SLS and fast pace of Apollo is apples and oranges,
In the time of Apollo the public were less up to date on day to day budget spending and hearing shock reports about so many millions being 'wasted' on this or that, so money votes were less hard to pass, Also you had a cold war media thing to win so that made any legal hurdles that much easier to clear.

Give Nasa the time and the money and they will do the best currently since they have the experience and facilities, the martian probes and their landing systems show this as well as all the other probes. SpaceX is hoping a tin can at the moment the pace is of course faster, it will slow down to a crawl when they want to get cargo certs.

I am not a spaceX hater or anything and I personally think a star ship vehicle is the future for cargo to orbit. They will partner with NASA for lunar and Mars - if only because of political reasons and the shear amount of money/risk and the training/knowledge that something like that will need.

SLS started out with flight proven hardware sitting in warehouses. And they didn't start from scratch either as they inherited the work done for Constellation including Aries and Orion

SLS means buying in some of the difficult bits - based on the ESA ATV that used to deliver cargo to the ISS. Europe will be building a further three service modules for the US space agency's (Nasa) Orion crew capsule.

jogdish · 04-02-2021 11:37pm

Seems SN10 will have a three raptor re light on the flip and turn off one should all three work hopefully giving some redundancy, according to an Elon tweet.

jogdish · 10-02-2021 11:44am

SN10 was installed with a refurbished raptor from SN9's failed static fire - interesting as this might point towards raptor production issues. According to Elon they wanted one every 12hrs by this point ( yes I know an Elon tweet promise is worthless ) but they are not as quick as they would like.

Come boosters (which eventually want 28/ship) they will have issues, im sure it will be solved but for the moment the starships might be being made faster than the raptors.

silverharp · 15-02-2021 12:36am

Thunderf00t ripping into Space X on the basis that it isnt that cheap

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TxkE_oYrjU

xper · 15-02-2021 3:04pm

jogdish wrote: »

SN10 was installed with a refurbished raptor from SN9's failed static fire - interesting as this might point towards raptor production issues. According to Elon they wanted one every 12hrs by this point ( yes I know an Elon tweet promise is worthless ) but they are not as quick as they would like.

Come boosters (which eventually want 28/ship) they will have issues, im sure it will be solved but for the moment the starships might be being made faster than the raptors.

I have no more idea than anyone else whether their raptor production rates are meeting realistic or Elon expectation levels but this one instance doesn't tell us anything really one way or the other.
They had an engine with a fault on a flight ready vehicle, they swapped it out, have apparently fixed the issue and it has been returned to the line. Happens in aviation all the time, which is sort of the model Space X are chasing. One would hardly expect them to have thrown it in the skip if it was repairable.

jogdish · 15-02-2021 3:08pm

xper wrote: »

I have no more idea than anyone else whether their raptor production rates are meeting realistic or Elon expectation levels but this one instance doesn't tell us anything really one way or the other.
They had an engine with a fault on a flight ready vehicle, they swapped it out, have apparently fixed the issue and it has been returned to the line. Happens in aviation all the time, which is sort of the model Space X are chasing. One would hardly expect them to have thrown it in the skip if it was repairable.

Yes I agree but it has been mentioned a few times that the raptors themselves are evolving so I would have thought they would bin the old ones to concentrate on getting data from the newer ones - assuming the star ship body is not the main issue.

donspeekinglesh · 16-02-2021 9:30am

Starlink launch earlier this morning. Booster failed to land on the drone ship: https://youtu.be/L0dkyV09Zso

Space X

Comments