Space X

donspeekinglesh · 06-12-2018 1:05am

No, this: https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/12/after-26-straight-successes-spacex-fails-to-land-a-rocket-it-wanted-back/

Though it seems the rocket survived the landing.

Beeker · 06-12-2018 9:15pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFdep0qCmYA

josip · 12-02-2019 12:32pm

Raptor engines have begun testing, the grasshopper tests will be interesting.

https://newatlas.com/spacex-mars-raptor-lift-off-power/58432/

Also and not worth a new thread/finding an old thread, Mars One has gone bankrupt.

Capt'n Midnight · 12-02-2019 9:10pm

josip wrote: »

Raptor engines have begun testing,

Pressures higher than the RD-180 :eek:

Serious piece of kit.

Capt'n Midnight · 16-03-2019 10:13pm

NASA admits SLS won't be ready for 2020 lunar test launch so will have to use a pair of commercial launches instead.

So $20Billion give or take later it's an Earth Orbit Rendezvous of the Orion crew capsule and the European service module using off the shelf launchers.

So ULA and or SpaceX will get the gig at a fraction of the cost of an SLS launch.

It's embarrassing and not at all unexpected.

Beeker · 17-03-2019 8:34am

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

NASA admits SLS won't be ready for 2020 lunar test launch so will have to use a pair of commercial launches instead.

So $20Billion give or take later it's an Earth Orbit Rendezvous of the Orion crew capsule and the European service module using off the shelf launchers.

So ULA and or SpaceX will get the gig at a fraction of the cost of an SLS launch.

It's embarrassing and not at all unexpected.

I agree its the way they should have gone in the first place. SLS is going nowhere with no mission. It was and still is just a jobs program to get Congress on its side.

Leave commercial companies to the launch business and NASA can contract out when ever they want to launch a spacecraft.

Capt'n Midnight · 10-04-2019 10:28pm

2nd Falcon Heavy stream due to start at April 10, 11:30 PM

SpaceX Falcon Heavy Arabsat-6A rocket launch, live stream
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecpUjam6byA

ricimaki · 10-04-2019 10:33pm

Just to clarify the above, the stream starts at 11.30 PM. Lift off is due for roughly 1 AM Irish time.

Here's hoping they recover all 3 boosters this time!

josip · 11-04-2019 12:57am

Scrubbed

josip · 11-04-2019 10:51pm

Weather (and systems) looking ok for launch in 45 mins.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojvu2u28CIY

Ghost Train · 11-04-2019 11:24pm

Bump

T -11 minutes

josip · 11-04-2019 11:38pm

Maximum dynamic pressure passed

(no idea what that means)

expectationlost · 11-04-2019 11:46pm

seeing the two rockets come down at the same time was great

Ghost Train · 11-04-2019 11:49pm

There's something about seeing two rockets land at once, slightly unreal.
Good job SpaceX

josip · 11-04-2019 11:53pm

I could watch that landing over and over again, all night long.
Let's hope they get 3 from 3 this time.

Capt'n Midnight · 11-04-2019 11:57pm

3 out of 3 ,

and future plans to catch the payload fairings too

BoJack Horseman · 11-04-2019 11:58pm

josip wrote: »

I could watch that landing over and over again, all night long.
Let's hope they get 3 from 3 this time.

They did

Centre-core landed successfully as well

d4fea3aae529c1072308206ab372b41cd4977b36b41dedc1b268f34836316f7a.png

Capt'n Midnight · 12-04-2019 12:03am

Upper stage engine reignition - 5 mins to deployment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vF_2kYAwMGw

Capt'n Midnight · 12-04-2019 12:10am

Job done, Arabsat on it's own.

Itssoeasy · 12-04-2019 12:22am

josip wrote: »

Maximum dynamic pressure passed

(no idea what that means)

It's the maximum stress of the vehicle. If you remember the shuttle launches the main engines throttled down going through it so as to reduce the stress on the shuttle. You could tell when they were passed it, as the capcom would say "shuttle go at throttle up" meaning the shuttle engines could be throttled back up to 105%(I think that's it)

Capt'n Midnight · 12-04-2019 12:37am

The faster it goes the more pressure there is from air resistance.

But the air gets thinner as you get higher so less air resistance.

So at some point you hit maximum air resistance. The choices are to make the whole thing stronger (read heavier) to survive or take the foot off the accelerator for a few seconds.

Westernyelp · 12-04-2019 12:43am

Itssoeasy wrote:

It's the maximum stress of the vehicle. If you remember the shuttle launches the main engines throttled down going through it so as to reduce the stress on the shuttle. You could tell when they were passed it, as the capcom would say "shuttle go at throttle up" meaning the shuttle engines could be throttled back up to 105%(I think that's it)

That was called Max q in the olden days

Itssoeasy · 12-04-2019 2:27pm

Westernyelp wrote: »

That was called Max q in the olden days

Still is isn't it ?

mikhail · 13-04-2019 5:23am

Itssoeasy wrote: »

It's the maximum stress of the vehicle. If you remember the shuttle launches the main engines throttled down going through it so as to reduce the stress on the shuttle. You could tell when they were passed it, as the capcom would say "shuttle go at throttle up" meaning the shuttle engines could be throttled back up to 105%(I think that's it)

Itssoeasy · 23-04-2019 12:01am

Not a great development for space X with the dragon capsule exploding during a test over the weekend. Now the capsule was going to be used for an abort test I think, and isn’t the one that is still scheduled to bring a crew to the ISS in July.

Ghost Train · 23-04-2019 7:41am

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Not a great development for space X with the dragon capsule exploding during a test over the weekend. Now the capsule was going to be used for an abort test I think, and isn’t the one that is still scheduled to bring a crew to the ISS in July.

Looked pretty bad. Calling it an anomaly didnt go down to well when the video came out. Hopefully they can clearly explain what happened. Looked pretty catastrophic, wouldn't want something like that happening the the space station or of course with crew

Beeker · 24-04-2019 6:32pm

Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly

Itssoeasy · 08-05-2019 9:41pm

Another test has failed it seems. This info came about for a congressional committee that a parachute test failed. One of four parachutes was designed to fail to test the others. It didn't pass. Bad news for the spaceX manned flight to the ISS in July which isn't going ahead if I was a betting man. Not a hope NASA green lights that.

josip · 16-07-2019 12:35pm

https://newatlas.com/spacex-leaking-crew-dragon-explosion/60598/

Capt'n Midnight · 16-07-2019 8:58pm

titanium and nitrogen tetroxide

https://spaceflightnow.com/2019/07/15/spacex-points-to-leaky-valve-as-culprit-in-crew-dragon-test-accident/

He added that the result was surprising. Engineers did not expect a titanium, a material commonly used for decades on space vehicles around the world, could react so explosively in such an environment.

Surprising ???

It's on Page 61 of Ignition by John D. Clark which is essential reading for anyone who wants to do anything with liquid rocket propellents.

... it increased the
corrosion rate at tantalum by a factor of 2000 and that of titanium by
one of 8000.

There was a great deal of interest in titanium at that time, and as
many rocket engineers wanted to use it, the question of its resistance
to RFNA couldn't be neglected. But these corrosion studies were
interrupted by a completely unexpected accident. On December 29,
1953, a technician at Edwards Air Force Base was examining a set of
titanium samples immersed in RFNA, when, absolutely without warning, one or more of them detonated, smashing him up, spraying him
with acid and flying glass, and filling the room with NO2. The technician, probably fortunately for him, died of asphyxiation without
regaining consciousness.

...
by 1956 they were fairly clear.
Initial intergranular corrosion produced a fine black powder of
(mainly) metallic titanium. And this, when wet with nitric acid, was
as sensitive as nitroglycerine or mercury fulminate.

josip · 29-07-2019 9:57pm

Half a fairing recovered recently.

https://www.space.com/spacex-reuse-payload-fairing-starlink-launch.html

They'll eventually try to recover the exhaust gasses...

Westernyelp · 29-07-2019 10:07pm

Mr Steven is a mad looking yoke. Private companies are obviously the future of space exploration. For the US at least. It would be great though if we could remove Geopolitical constraints somehow and work together as a species. Imagine what we could do then

vargoo · 29-07-2019 11:49pm

Westernyelp wrote: »

Mr Steven is a mad looking yoke. Private companies are obviously the future of space exploration. For the US at least. It would be great though if we could remove Geopolitical constraints somehow and work together as a species. Imagine what we could do then

Imagine what the US Defence budget could do!

tjhook · 31-07-2019 9:16am

Westernyelp wrote: »

It would be great though if we could remove Geopolitical constraints somehow and work together as a species. Imagine what we could do then

I wonder if the opposite also applies though - Could Kennedy could have started a 8-year Apollo programme to go to the moon ("and do the other things") without the cold war and the competition that sprang from it?

In many ways it was a reckless programme, but it delivered what may very well be the peak of human achievement so far.

Capt'n Midnight · 31-07-2019 8:42pm

vargoo wrote: »

Imagine what the US Defence budget could do!

2001 A Space Odyssey cost about $10m to make, Kubrick pointed out that NASA were spending that much every day.

Apollo cost $25.4 Billion

The US spent more on Economic and Military aid to South Vietnam ($28.5 Billion) during the war.

Including that the direct cost fo the war was $168 billion. Add multiples of that for interest costs and support for veterans.

Apollo was a casualty of Vietnam. And as one comment said like a dog cocking it's leg at a car, they'd put their mark on the moon and had no more interest in it.

Oddly enough the computer boom from the minimization for Apollo came about because NASA fired everyone after Apollo was canned. So they went in to industry.

Capt'n Midnight · 14-08-2019 6:13pm

SpaceX have caught another payload shroud. The fairings cost a couple a million a go which adds up.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/08/14/spacex_falcon_9_atlas_v_and_ariane_5_soar_while_vector_returns_to_earth_with_a_bump/

One half of the payload shroud was caught in a net strung across the top of the Ms Tree recovery vessel. The other half landed in the ocean.

The capture marked the second time SpaceX had netted a fairing half. The next step will be to catch both (using different ships) for easier reuse

josip · 29-08-2019 11:43am

Water tower lift off.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYb3bfA6_sQ

Stan27 · 24-10-2019 11:33am

josip wrote: »

Water tower lift off.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYb3bfA6_sQ

Cant wait to see the starship when its finally built

FFVII · 01-11-2019 2:33am

Stan27 wrote: »

Cant wait to see the starship when its finally built

https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2019/10/29/the-spacex-starship-is-a-very-big-deal/?utm_source=digg

read for anyone wanting to know what comes next

josip · 21-11-2019 11:23am

Gonna need a stronger Starship

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=9&v=3nTSubYzQOM&feature=emb_logo

A little background.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-50500980

Westernyelp · 21-11-2019 6:40pm

That's what testing is for I suppose. I don't think it's a huge setback

Capt'n Midnight · 21-11-2019 7:14pm

Westernyelp wrote: »

That's what testing is for I suppose. I don't think it's a huge setback

Capt'n Midnight · 23-07-2020 4:22pm

This should make each mission a little cheaper.

SpaceX pulls off an incredible catch, netting both halves of its Falcon fairing as they fell Earthwards after latest launch

Cold nitrogen thrusters on each piece are used to stabilize it and create a predictable descent. Then location equipment using GPS is turned on and five miles above the ground a steerable parachute is deployed to both slow it down and help guide it.

Meanwhile on the ocean below the Ms. Tree and Ms. Chief (Mystery and Mischief) ships – each equipped with 3,700 m2 nets on extended arms, got into position and caught the falling fairings before they hit the ocean.
...

But just as importantly, it comes with big cost savings, as each fairing costs around $6m to manufacture.

Westernyelp · 03-08-2020 10:33pm

Looks like they are going for the 150m hop with SN5 tonight at ~12 midnight

namloc1980 · 05-08-2020 10:04am

And it flew

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1HA9LlFNM0

josip · 05-08-2020 12:22pm

Damn, I was up last night and when I checked I thought it had been scrubbed for a 2nd night.
Questions, some of which I could google, others not

It seemed to get quite a few degrees off the vertical early on, would it have been close to irrecoverable in anyone's opinion?
Afterwards the diamonds seemed to be also quite a few degrees off vertical, would that have been due to wind shear?
It looked from the video that there was only 1 motor? How many motors will this thing have when complete and how many of them will be used to land it?
Are the Starship Motors the same as in the Falcon?

Hmmzis · 05-08-2020 12:33pm

josip wrote: »

Damn, I was up last night and when I checked I thought it had been scrubbed for a 2nd night.
Questions, some of which I could google, others not

It seemed to get quite a few degrees off the vertical early on, would it have been close to irrecoverable in anyone's opinion?

Afterwards the diamonds seemed to be also quite a few degrees off vertical, would that have been due to wind shear?

It looked from the video that there was only 1 motor? How many motors will this thing have when complete and how many of them will be used to land it?

Are the Starship Motors the same as in the Falcon?

The motor (Raptor engine) is off axis in this vehicle, hence the odd looking flight profile.
The full Starship configuration will have 6 engines, 3 sea level and 3 vacuum optimized.
The Starship motors are called Raptor(s) and they are an entirely different beast than Merlin(s). Raptor uses methane and LOX, while Merlin uses RP-1 and LOX, Raptor is also a lot more efficient due to its full-flow staged combustion cycle with much higher chamber pressures and is bigger and therefore more thrust is produced.

namloc1980 · 05-08-2020 1:57pm

Hmmzis wrote: »

The motor (Raptor engine) is off axis in this vehicle, hence the odd looking flight profile.
The full Starship configuration will have 6 engines, 3 sea level and 3 vacuum optimized.
The Starship motors are called Raptor(s) and they are an entirely different beast than Merlin(s). Raptor uses methane and LOX, while Merlin uses RP-1 and LOX, Raptor is also a lot more efficient due to its full-flow staged combustion cycle with much higher chamber pressures and is bigger and therefore more thrust is produced.

In addition the full Starship configuration will have 31 Raptor engines in the first stage known as SuperHeavy. SuperHeavy is the rocket to get Starship to orbit.

jogdish · 05-08-2020 10:09pm

Hi,
I am just a bit confused after googleing with all the names. So there seems to be:
1) the tank section that flew yesterday
2) A section that will have people/payload

Then I see images of how it will be used to land on the moon, but that's called Artemis ? Is there an easy guide as to what starship/falcon heavy/Artemis all are?

Westernyelp · 05-08-2020 11:24pm

jogdish wrote: »

Hi,
I am just a bit confused after googleing with all the names. So there seems to be:
1) the tank section that flew yesterday
2) A section that will have people/payload

Then I see images of how it will be used to land on the moon, but that's called Artemis ? Is there an easy guide as to what starship/falcon heavy/Artemis all are?

Artemis is the name of the NASA moon mission (she was Apollo's sister) aiming to return astronauts to the moon by 2024.

SpaceX has been contracted to work on a Starship variant to be used as a moon lander.

The Tank section you seen yesterday will have a payload cone section on top and will all sit on top the super heavy launch system to get Starship to orbit.

https://www.spacex.com/

Starship https://www.spacex.com/vehicles/starship/

Artemis https://www.nasa.gov/specials/artemis/

Space X

Comments