Jump to content

SpaceX Discussion Thread


Skylon

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Flying dutchman said:

I wonder why the engine wasn't producing the requested thrust on landing, plume seems alright to me..

 

This.

They need to get to grips with why the engine(s) seem to work fine on a test stand, but don't once attached to a spaceship and flown in the profile they have in mind for the thing. Unlike an aeroplane or helicopter this thing is 100% reliant on the engines working properly to make a landing. Yes I know the SNs are allocated for these testing phases but there is a cost to crashing, both monetary in cleanup; possibility of damaging other kit; regulatory and reputational costs too. I would not be surprised if the FAA once again want quite a detailed investigation into the latest crash and want to see changes made - on their terms, not SpaceX's, which will be like walking through treacle compared to if SpaceX themselves could dictate the pace of advancement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, paul_c said:

They need to get to grips with why the engine(s) seem to work fine on a test stand, but don't once attached to a spaceship and flown in the profile they have in mind for the thing. 

That's why they fly.

The only site at risk belongs to SpaceX, and the people who get the say on whether SpaceX can risk that site is SpaceX. The flights haven't come even close to risking anything else, and they're equipped with flight termination systems in the event that they might. And on the contrary, I don't think SpaceX is taking any reputational damage whatsoever from these flights. 

I don't see why the FAA would have any more problem with SN10 than SN9 (or especially SN8).

Edited by RCgothic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, RCgothic said:

The only site at risk belongs to SpaceX, and the people who get the say on whether SpaceX can risk that site is SpaceX.

No, this is not how it works. Everything that flies needs to have some kind of permission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the FAA have no reason to deny that permission based on the flights to date or they would already have denied SN9 or 10.

There isn't more risk just because the prototypes haven't stopped crashing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RCgothic said:

There isn't more risk just because the prototypes haven't stopped crashing. 

The risk is some competitor's lobbyist convincing a regulator that 'something needs to be done.'  Easiest thing in the world to do if you want to throw a wrench into a competitor's works; get the administration to put on the brakes for no good reason... other than because Sen. Sidekick or Rep. Handmeout has a 'constituent' who isn't getting paid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Spaceception said:

Is that heatshield patch bigger or about the same size as SN10s?

It's bigger.

14 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Is there anything different about the flaps? 

 

I can't tell if it is a camera angle /shadow thing or something new 

They seem the same to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Can I pick it up myself? - I've never been a fan of their delivery options 

Hehehe, this can be interpreted at least three ways off the top of my head, and all of them are gloriously humorous!

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...