Jump to content

SpaceX Discussion Thread


Skylon

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, DAL59 said:

Exactly.  Wouldn't that be a lot simpler than a parafoil boat catching scheme?

The fairing would need a parafoil and they would need a boat to recover it anyway, so what difference does it make if they try catching it?

11 hours ago, SaturnianBlue said:

SpaceX's Propulsion Chief Technology Officer, Tom Mueller is speaking at the ISDC tomorrow. Since I'll be there, it's possible I could ask questions on this thread's behalf.

Will BFR have legs or will the landing pad have some sort of catching device?

Edited by Wjolcz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

12 hours ago, SaturnianBlue said:

SpaceX's Propulsion Chief Technology Officer, Tom Mueller is speaking at the ISDC tomorrow. Since I'll be there, it's possible I could ask questions on this thread's behalf.

Someone will certainly ask about the status of full sized Raptor testing, which is what I am interested in from him, I suppose.

What technique will Raptor use for starts/restarts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DAL59 said:
4 hours ago, sh1pman said:

Should just make the fairings waterproof. 

Exactly.  Wouldn't that be a lot simpler than a parafoil boat catching scheme?

Waterproofing would be easier said than done. It's probably a lot easier to waterproof a cellphone than it is to waterproof bespoke fairings.

1 hour ago, Wjolcz said:

Will BFR have legs or will the landing pad have some sort of catching device?

I thought Elon already said the latter.

12 hours ago, StrandedonEarth said:

Maybe confirm Merlin can still run non-densified propellants?

We know Merlin can still run non-densified propellants. Please don't ask this!

12 hours ago, SaturnianBlue said:

SpaceX's Propulsion Chief Technology Officer, Tom Mueller is speaking at the ISDC tomorrow. Since I'll be there, it's possible I could ask questions on this thread's behalf.

  1. Now that Block 5 is flying, how soon do you expect we will see more than one reflight of a booster?
  2. Is the upper-stage recovery plan intended for research or for actual reuse?
  3. Has any development been done on the auxiliary systems for BFR, like the RCS thrusters?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, sevenperforce said:

 

  1. Has any development been done on the auxiliary systems for BFR, like the RCS thrusters?

I have seen an article about people referring the BFR's RCS thusters as 'SuperDracos'. There might be a slight chance that the BFR thrusters are based on the SuperDraco engine, although i doubt it. I don't exactly know wich article i read though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, SaturnianBlue said:

SpaceX's Propulsion Chief Technology Officer, Tom Mueller is speaking at the ISDC tomorrow. Since I'll be there, it's possible I could ask questions on this thread's behalf.

It's been said that you joined SpaceX because you were getting bored. With the worlds first production Full flow stage combustion nearing completion... What's next for you? What comes after Raptor?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, SaturnianBlue said:

SpaceX's Propulsion Chief Technology Officer, Tom Mueller is speaking at the ISDC tomorrow. Since I'll be there, it's possible I could ask questions on this thread's behalf.

Can you ask if BFR will have a centrifuge? (because surely if you are going to Mars you will need a centrifuge or something)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Barzon Kerman said:

Can you ask if BFR will have a centrifuge? (because surely if you are going to Mars you will need a centrifuge or something)

Even BFR isn't big enough to house a hab ring. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Barzon Kerman said:

Thanks @Ultimate Steve. I was thinking about the planned ISS centrifuge module, and if something like that would be incorporated into the BFR.

I think the eventual plan is to use a Mars transfer that cuts the flight down to only 3 months or so instead of 6. Even at 6, it's possible for travelers to still be functional once they arrive there, especially if they have support waiting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DAL59 said:

Exactly.  Wouldn't that be a lot simpler than a parafoil boat catching scheme?

I think you vastly overestimate how easy it is to make something waterproof when it's a complex piece of equipment that also has to deal with re-entry issues. As with most things discussed here, your everyday experiences are unlikely to be directly relatable to the issues experienced by aerospace equipment. Say we could make the fairing waterproof by spraying a thick layer of plastic over it - but now the outside layer doesn't have the characteristics required whilst it's still acting as a fairing during powered ascent and we can no longer mate the two halves of the fairing in the manner in which they need to work.

Okay, so a thick layer of plastic won't work to make this thing waterproof. You have to come up with a design (as indicated above) that works *both* whilst in use during normal flight regime *and* works during re-entry *and* doesn't significantly degrade through all phases of use and means it's actually reusable. Do you have such a scheme in mind beyond believing that a lot of fairly smart people have ignored common everyday experiences?

Edited by Damien_The_Unbeliever
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NSEP said:

I have seen an article about people referring the BFR's RCS thusters as 'SuperDracos'. There might be a slight chance that the BFR thrusters are based on the SuperDraco engine, although i doubt it. I don't exactly know wich article i read though.

I remember (though I might be wrong) Elon saying that the RCS nozzles would be scaled down Raptors. How would they restart them each time they need to adjust the approach or anything? I have no idea.

Edited by Wjolcz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Damien_The_Unbeliever said:

I think you vastly overestimate how easy it is to make something waterproof when it's a complex piece of equipment that also has to deal with re-entry issues. As with most things discussed here, your everyday experiences are unlikely to be directly relatable to the issues experienced by aerospace equipment. Say we could make the fairing waterproof by spraying a thick layer of plastic over it - but now the outside layer doesn't have the characteristics required whilst it's still acting as a fairing during powered ascent and we can no longer mate the two halves of the fairing in the manner in which they need to work.

Okay, so a thick layer of plastic won't work to make this thing waterproof. You have to come up with a design (as indicated above) that works *both* whilst in use during normal flight regime *and* works during re-entry *and* doesn't significantly degrade through all phases of use and means it's actually reusable. Do you have such a scheme in mind beyond believing that a lot of fairly smart people have ignored common everyday experiences?

Waterproof, reusable and space-capable. Impossible, for sure.

SpaceX-Dragon-in-Pacific-5-31-12-Credit-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does seawater damage the composite structure of the fairing? If a fairing gets dunked in the sea, can SpaceX strip off and reinstall all the other systems, and at least save the cost of building a new shell? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Wjolcz said:

How would they restart them each time they need to adjust the approach or anythin? I have no idea.

The Raptor is ignited by sparks instead of hypergolic ignition fluids, wich means the Raptor doesn't have a very limited amount of ignitions. Using TEA/TEB makes no sense for a rocket intended to go colonize Mars. Its extremely difficult and expensive to make, (especially on Mars) and limits the amount of ignition.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41363.700

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brotoro said:

Does seawater damage the composite structure of the fairing? If a fairing gets dunked in the sea, can SpaceX strip off and reinstall all the other systems, and at least save the cost of building a new shell? 

Does not think so, water rarely damage composite, and at least the outside must handle some water as they are transported uncovered. 
C-hBZsCWsAEGECG.jpg

Now the inside however must be able keep the clean room requirements for the satellite. 
This might be the hard part 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...