Jump to content

ThatGuyWithALongUsername

Members
  • Content Count

    1,062
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ThatGuyWithALongUsername

  1. 10 FH launches a year out of completely nowhere seems a bit odd lol But for this year, at least, the startistics clearly seem to indicate actual contracted missions. Are we gonna see 3 FH launches this year? And actually why is the F9 launch frequency so... low (for 2020)? Is Starlink just not on here or something?
  2. DANG. They really are making sure LC-39A is the coolest looking launchpad ever, aren't they? Meanwhile in a less polished launch site: This shows that they are still working on the nosecone for SN1, even though it looks more and more likely that SN1 will not fly. I would say it's just for SN2, but isn't the whole point of SN2 is that it has better weld quality than SN1? If this was for SN1, isn't it not good enough?
  3. Why... why not? Don't tell SpaceX. Or Blue Origin, for that matter. But yeah, I understand that it isn't top priority right now. Moving away from dangerous inland launch sites definitely deserves to be the absolute top priority (for launch vehicle development).
  4. I wasn't talking about the COPV's. I heard talk about the exhaust suddenly changing color at the end of the flight and the crush cores on the legs being completely used up possibly meanjing the engine suffered a slight loss of thrust at the end. Not as dramatic as the RUD scenarios you mentioned but maybe itmeant something. Although with skin 3 times thicker than SN1, I don't honestly think they would have had a problem with filling the tanks to flight pressure, so I don't really think there would have been a reason not to fully pressurize them. I'm pretty sure they were at full pr
  5. Yes this isn't the first time this has happened and yes it only lasts a couple months (in fact, with a 2-body system, it's impossible to permanently capture a satellite like this- you need at least 3 bodies), but honestly, who cares- it's kinda fun to joke about. Just as a though experiment, though- I wonder what it would take to cheat a bit and... oh, I don't know, nudge a near-earth asteroid in the right direction and give it a small insertion burn on arrival? You know, Asteroid Redirect Mission style But ARM was way too practical. I just want to be stupid and unrealistic he
  6. Nice! I've always thought just one moon is boring, surely we can do better than that. I mean, come on, where's Minmus?! I want a Minmus! Welcome to Earth, 2020 CD3. Sorry your stay can't be longer.
  7. Isn't that what people speculated almost happened at the end, though?
  8. I kinda had the feeling this would happen... seemed a bit fishy when Musk was talking about the precision required for orbit and how SN2 was better... SpaceX is always very quick to abandon old ways if something might be better. Remember how short-lived the Falcon 1 was once F9 development got going. The good news is, of course, that they really are building these things ridiculously fast! They spent quite a bit of time working out problems with the fuel tanks on SN1, so SN2 construction could potentially go *even* faster Even without SN1, we could still be only a coupl
  9. Yes and no. This is not going to orbit, but it IS a flight prototype, supposed to launch to an altitude of 20km. It has the exact same design of the orbital starship (unless that design changes due to rapid development), but it is built to a lower standard of quality and precision since it is not going to reach orbit. This allows them to build these quicker and cheaper, make design changes quicker if they encounter a problem during construction, and build multiple prototypes (parts of SN2 are already under construction, it will be closer to orbital quality if not actual orbital quality- that's
  10. ...yeah, probably that too The whole "break a record" thing is great for marketing, too
  11. That is much better, honestlly- the smaller the Earth appears out the window, the more awe-inspiring and life-changing the experience. The more powerful the overview effect. The more clear our tiny place in the universe becomes.
  12. It's too early for speculation, but to me it sounds like this was similar to CRS-16, or maybe the comms failed instead?
  13. Mean surface temp of Venus is 462° C... but that isn't the only problem. Sulfuric Acid isn't known for being friendly to spacecraft, and radiation levels are very high as a result of Venus having no magnetic field. The pressure is also immense on the surface- far higher than 1 atm I would love a full-fledged long-distance rover or something like that too, but there's a reason it still hasn't been done despite Venus being the easiest planet to get to. And it DEFINITELY wouldn't fit in a discovery-class budget. We're talking a flagship-size mission here, and without as mu
  14. Yeah, this isn't really all that new. We've even visited one before (although it was by surprise): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/243_Ida
  15. Thing is it isn't a lander, just an atmosphere probe. Theoretically the Russians will be sending a lander... but funding is... uh... ...the mission is NET "2026 or 2031." So we'll see (Personally, my vote is for IVO and Trident, but I really wish NASA had the funding to just select all the finalists in these situations. Same goes for New Frontiers missions)
  16. I don't remember exactly who said this but I agree with whoever said that any space mission- as long as it has a visible destination of some kind- must have a camera, regardless of the scientific usefulness of it. After all, it's not like opportunities to get these cool shots are exactly common. Certainly great for making people interested in what you are doing- images have a much better "wow" factor than some numbers and a graph. So yeah, I want cool Jupiter cloud pictures! It's so weird to think about gas giants, and it's hard to process that there isn't really a surface- seeing the en
  17. Maybe something like a wiper on rails sweeping across a row of solar panels? Would that work? Eventually, the track would get clogged with dust. But, again, there are people here.
  18. Well... this is a very complicated design idea for a niche purpose, but what if we got around the plume interaction by mounting a pair of superdraco-style engine pods near the top of the vehicle, maybe under the front flaps? While a plain superdraco would obviously not be powerful enough, you only need about 110,000 lbf of thrust (490 kN) for a fully fuelled Starship to lift off in lunar gravity. A single Merlin engije would be more than ebough for that, although for this design you would want that power divided into 4 engines. I'm not saying it's a good idea (it would involve Spac
  19. Oh, that is a cool find. After some google reverse-image search, this was the March 29, 2004 issue. Years before SpaceX would even launch their first rocket. I don't have a subscription, but it should be available here: https://archive.aviationweek.com/issue/20040329 Interestingly, looking at the previews, it talks about the Falcon I being the workhorse of the fleet, while the larger Falcon 5 being used for heavier payloads and taking on Boeing. Heh. Just compare that "larger" rocket with, say, the Falcon Heavy.
  20. It already isn't, based on what we're seeing in Boca Chica.
×
×
  • Create New...