Jump to content

RCgothic

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,872

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by RCgothic

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted

    1 hour ago, tater said:

    In his article on teslarati, he mentioned they'd otherwise need to buy off the shelf 100,000 gallon tanks (there are some available for sale in McGreggor, TX google shows me).

    Hard to find prices (sites here allow you to get a quote), but google results say 100,000 gallon water tanks run around $1/gallon to purchase. Alibaba has 100,000 gallon liquid propane tanks available for $26,000, less in quantity.

    SpaceX need not build tanks for more than they can just buy them...

    I estimate that GSE tank is ~2000m3, or about half a million gallons.

    The Flying Manhole

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted · Edited by RCgothic

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_depth

    Newton's Impact depth approximation implies it'd struggle to escape the atmosphere.

    It has to move through all space occupied by all the mass in its way, which must move faster than it to get out of the way.

    But by conservation of momentum it can't give more velocity than it starts with to an equal or greater mass without coming to a complete halt.

     

    The approximations look reasonable. Blunt body. High velocity. Non-cohesion of the impacted material.

    The Flying Manhole

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted

    There's about 10 tons of air above every square metre. The plate at 100mm thick (4in) has an area of ~1.25m2 or ~1.2m diameter.

    It'd therefore need to move between 11t and 1.1t out of the way on its way out of the atmosphere depending on how it tumbled.

    If it survived it would necessarily be going a lot slower by the time it reached space.

    Boeing's Starliner

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted

    On 12/10/2020 at 2:16 PM, Codraroll said:

    End of March 2021? That's almost four months into the future, so ... hang on, gotta check the table ...

    If a space launch event is said to happen in ... ... it will most likely ...
     ... more than two years from now ...  ... never happen at all.
     ... 6-24 months from now ...  ... be delayed up to two years at a time.
     ... 1-6 months from now ...  ... be delayed by 50 %, relative to the date of the announcement.
     ... less than  1 month from now ...  ... be delayed up to two weeks at a time.

     

    ... mid-late May, then?

    So announced 3-4 months from now means a delay to 5-6 months time. Sept-Oct time. Let's see if that's how it happens.

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted · Edited by RCgothic

    So not on target. FTS would trigger in that instance. That's actually less bad than an uncontained engine RUD IMO.

    Scott Manley's hot take (based on Elon's "crater in the right place") was that FTS would be safed for landing, therefore tank rupture caused by engine RUD.

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted

    It's not the oversight I have an issue with. Obviously there needs to be a regulator. And the fact Space X breached the terms of its launch license for SN8 should be expected to have consequences.

    But...

    A basic level of timeliness ought to be expected. Everyone knew before Friday that a scrub would likely mean a backup day of Monday. This wasn't hard to predict.

×
×
  • Create New...