• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

759 Excellent

1 Follower

About Racescort666

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I appreciate that ULA has a polling graphic as they poll readiness.
  2. I used to try aerodynamic separation in KSP. Turns out, it's less parts and lighter to just use sepatrons but it was fun to experiment with.
  3. +1 for vents to allow the fairing to be pressure compensated. It seems odd that there would be scoops forward as those would pressurize the air. They look like they're a soft material so may be they do something counter intuitive during launch. My buddy at NASA said they nitrogen purge the fairings of their payloads to prevent contamination but once the payload is in space, it doesn't really matter. Here's a nice high resolution picture showing them: The other thing I was surprised by that video were the sparks coming off the tip of the fairing. I guess that explains the metallic nose.
  4. They have 3 more flights including the one in July*. The last phase 1 flight for SpaceX will be CRS-20 in March of 2020*. After that, it looks like they will continue the CRS-XX numbering scheme for future flights. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Resupply_Services *dates subject to change. I have come to celebrate this...
  5. I mean, it’s not that uncommon to have a model name and a model code. Eg. Alfa Romeo 4C has the model code: Type 960
  6. Do you think that Elon holds a design review before these tweet storms “ok guys, what’s the status of raptor? I feel like logging back into twitter today.”
  7. This is more or less the stealth arms race in a nutshell. You can’t make something truly invisible to radar, the idea is to get as close as practical so that the currently (and near future) fielded radars lose their usability. Radar technology catches up, then the next generation of aircraft are fielded and it’s a cycle.
  8. I love the Ford L9000 that ULA uses to move their rockets around. That thing is nothing but style.
  9. Hazarding a guess, they might call it "Coastal Steel" internally (using the old name happens all the time, see: Willis Tower/Sears Tower?) and the security there was told "don't talk to strangers". It seems like there's a bunch of secrecy but they really just haven't made any statements clarifying the whole mess.
  10. There is a trick to inserting images from instagram. TBH, I kind of hate social media and I'm even a millennial.
  11. I thought the docking port was ejected from the CSM side and still attached to the LEM? Regardless, the docking port was designed to have load going through it so it might still be a reasonable place to try and grab with "the klaw"* if the docking port had been jettisoned. *I know "the klaw" isn't real but some sort of grabbing or attaching mechanism.
  12. I have some with a scorpion in it. I wouldn't be real keen to drink regolith from the moon though.
  13. I would say that SpaceX has always been like that. They're (or were) a startup with the intent of disrupting an existing market, it's almost expected that they would be a little more relaxed. Most startups I've dealt with are like that. On the other hand, it's not like Boeing is entirely stuffy:
  14. If the docking port became unviable, I would think the next best place to grab would be the engine. That’s probably got the most structure of any piece on the LEM.
  15. I wasn’t sure where to put this random thought so here goes in this thread: do you suppose reusable space launch vehicles weren’t developed earlier because most early rocket development was focused on weapons? No reason to recover a booster because you’ll probably not need it again. I know that there were other proposals for hardware to be reused in a manned space program but the first effort resulting in something resembling reusability is Space Shuttle which was designed to be manned from the ground up. I just found this progression of events interesting.