Jump to content

SpaceX Discussion Thread


Skylon

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, sevenperforce said:

Hmm. Possible, but icing on B5 is minimal, and that lump of whatever-it-was was huge.

We have no idea how big it was. Also, a squall went past KSC before the launch, it's not impossible that some water ice accumulated someplace. What are other options? A chunk of insulation from inside the fairing? Engine area TPS?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, tater said:

That’s awesome!

Thank you! I will try to make the next launch (CRS-16) even better if possible:  a zoomed view of the 1st stage re-entry.

 

14 hours ago, Mad Rocket Scientist said:

That is a great launch video! Are you tracking the launch by hand?

Thanks! Not as good as some with their complex telemeter but hopefully better than the awful ones I was getting with my old Panasonic. The tracking is manual, but the camera is on a CH75 tripod.

 

10 hours ago, Lukaszenko said:

Hmmmm....is that a falcon? :blink:

I wish it was, but that bird was a Cathartes aura (a.k.a the "Turkey vulture"). They are abounding in this coastal area, and I have rarely seen falcon in the park.

Spoiler


Version 2


 

 

However, ospreys are pretty easy to catch in the area of Port Canaveral:

14

(Terrible lucky shot, it was in last December during CRS-13)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob Zubrin is pimping an actual mini-BFS for a mars return duties.

It significantly lower ISRU requirements....so 8 football fields of solar down to less than 1 i guess.

https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/9xogzb/im_dr_robert_zubrin_of_the_mars_society_here_to/

Anyone else like the idea?

I think I'd remove ISRU altogether for the bootstrap missions. No ice mining. No football fields of solar.

Big guy lands enough propellant for a little guy to bring you home.

Surface rendezvous.

"Twins". Apologies to Arnie and Danny DeVito.

In more detail :

BFS (tanker maybe?) lands 100 tons of methalox on mars surface.

Landing tanks would have to be resized to protect the extra propellant against boil-off). So 80t reserve tanks resize to 180 or 200t.

sFS lands couple of km away configured as a return vehicle. But no propellant left.

Crewed mission lands couple of km away in another BFR (with refueling truck onboard).

2 year mission proceeds.

Refueling "truck" (landed separately) transfers propellant from BFS to the sFS at the end of the surface mission.

When sFR has a half tank, it can fly home to earth.

Size the sFR at 1/8 or 1/10 scale of the BFS.

Empty BFS requires half-load propellant (550t) to get home.

A sFS configured with 4-5 months supplies and crew should be able to get home on less than 100t of propellant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time for a new desktop background:

32040173928_86f54bf1e8_b.jpg

 

Re: Zubrin SFS

That would be an amazing idea, but I'm inclined to think that the slight delay in getting humans to mars in developing the BFR is worth it. On the other hand, if BFR takes a lot longer than expected it may look better in retrospect. I do I like the idea of using BFR to launch a Mars Direct mission.

EDIT:

I feel bad about Zubrin being so overshadowed by SpaceX and Elon Musk too. He really was talking about all this stuff way before Musk.

Edited by Mad Rocket Scientist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zubrin has made good points regarding Mars architectures for a long time,  but he's pretty much irrelevant at this point. NASA is always going to be more risk-averse than he is, and Musk is going to do whatever he wants to do. If Zubrin wants to use SpaceX vehicles for a potential mission to Mars or the Moon, all he has to do is pay for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, MinimumSky5 said:

Someone will complain about SpaceX

That I can guaranteed.

For example, this seems to have to gone by largely unnoticed. The headline is extremely non-indicative, be sure to read in.

https://www.defensenews.com/space/2018/08/02/one-possible-job-for-spacexs-bfr-taking-the-air-forces-cargo-in-and-out-of-space/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Scotius said:

Hey, if military is willing to pay money for such development and service - awesome. Take their money i say - just make sure advancements trickle down to civilian and scientific sector ASAP.

It will, in the form of a successful BFR.

Or in the form of a more reuseable BFR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, XB-70A said:

Thank you! I will try to make the next launch (CRS-16) even better if possible:  a zoomed view of the 1st stage re-entry.

 

Thanks! Not as good as some with their complex telemeter but hopefully better than the awful ones I was getting with my old Panasonic. The tracking is manual, but the camera is on a CH75 tripod.

 

I wish it was, but that bird was a Cathartes aura (a.k.a the "Turkey vulture"). They are abounding in this coastal area, and I have rarely seen falcon in the park.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Version 2

 

 

 

 

 

However, ospreys are pretty easy to catch in the area of Port Canaveral:

14

(Terrible lucky shot, it was in last December during CRS-13)

Remind me of this 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLxz-E8oobCImVern5ljwb5md30MMlPv55&time_continue=1&v=tIxkIQqH_vM
an pigeon get shot by an cannon fire blanks 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said:

I wonder, how many more changes are they going to do...

As many as it takes.

I can only assume they are sticking with the same rough size (as they have the tooling, and have actually made a tank).  The "upgrade F9 S2" bit implies that the mini-BFR might have been meant as a testbed, but with an eye towards operational reuse, too. Now people can wonder what is "Delightfully counter-intuitive." Let the insane speculation begin! (at least we will be distracted Monday by a launch)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said:
 

I wonder, how many more changes are they going to do...

That many changes makes me a bit nervous. Do NOT want this to be "let's replace the Space Shuttle" 2.0. They're already building composite hardware, had tools made up... so whatever they're changing can't be that radical if it's going to work with what they've already done...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it's radical, but keeps the same tooling. I'm going to assume it's not for the booster as that's been mostly the same since the first announcement, so it will probably be on the BFS... A new landing leg arrangement? A new fin arrangement? Something with gliding?

I'd say "NUCLEAR PROPULSION!" really loudly but there's no way SpaceX would be allowed to do that right off the bat with an untested spacecraft with no abort system.

...An abort system, maybe? Wishful thinking...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ultimate Steve said:

 

I wonder, how many more changes are they going to do...

2017: 2 fins

2018: 3 fins

2019: BFS radially attached to booster

2020: 2 side boosters added on main booster rocket.

 

pretty rad

Edited by NSEP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Make the front canards (redundant, I suppose) as big as the fins? That would make it easier to flip...

E: It’s the usual KSP design iteration: Make or modify the design, figure it will work, run extensive simulations, and finally decide that you need to make (more) changes. 

Edited by StrandedonEarth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the BFS will land horizontally with new leg arrangement ("front canards as legs" from Stranded) and thrusters.

SevenPerforce suggested this a year or so back.

Or maybe the rear leg arrangement is reflected forward (about the mid-point) to give the BFS "horns" .... lands upside down...with thrusters.

That way the cargo would be closest to the ground.

Looking forward to the reddit ama.

This years BFR update has been a roller coaster.

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...