Skylon

SpaceX Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, tater said:

It hit the ocean at 300 mph.

The 2 side engines failed to ignite (they ran out of TEA-TEB).

The way I heard it, they had ignition of one side engine but not the other. I'm not entirely sure how the plumbing is set up.

27 minutes ago, RCgothic said:

After rewatching, the abruptness of the ASDS getting swamped and then cutting out fits with a nearby splashdown at 300mph. Nothing new beyond the outer engines ruining out of igniter.

It hit close enough that it damaged two of the ASDS's engines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, KSK said:

Woah - take it easy.

Sorry ! Bad choices of my wording at the start, didn't mean to insult or imply unknowing...

 

But I get why SpaceX empties the second stage. The car payload is simply almost too light on it's own. So to get the correct maximum they just burned the fuel entirely to empty.

Maybe if they could fit two cars, I guess those are the limit for direct-TMI reusable launch.

Also, given they play around with the second stage for hours, they want to prove their upper stage can deliver propellant-less satellites.

3 hours ago, sevenperforce said:

From the views I saw, it looked like the center core was already throttled down when it cleared the towers:

I think wiki (or some other source) said it was throttled down as soon as the rocket moved significantly. I watched the events from CNN's coverage and I did note that by 1 km height the middle plume is far shorter than the rest. Can't be from vortex as they're quite far from each other !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tater said:

TEA-TEB

?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, DAL59 said:

?

Triethylaluminum and triethylborane. A mixture of the two reacts spontaneously with liquid oxygen and is used as an ignition source in RP-1/LOX engines like the Merlin 1D.

Edited by IncongruousGoat
Fixed boron to borane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I misheard/read side for both instead of just one. Bottom line is that at least one engine didn't ignite. and it was like a near miss bomb (which still did loads of damage back when bombs landing nearby ships was common (ww2)).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, IncongruousGoat said:

Triethylaluminum and triethylboron

Hmm, wasn’t it triethylborane?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, YNM said:

Sorry ! Bad choices of my wording at the start, didn't mean to insult or imply unknowing...

But I get why SpaceX empties the second stage. The car payload is simply almost too light on it's own. So to get the correct maximum they just burned the fuel entirely to empty.

Maybe if they could fit two cars, I guess those are the limit for direct-TMI reusable launch.

Also, given they play around with the second stage for hours, they want to prove their upper stage can deliver propellant-less satellites.

I think wiki (or some other source) said it was throttled down as soon as the rocket moved significantly. I watched the events from CNN's coverage and I did note that by 1 km height the middle plume is far shorter than the rest. Can't be from vortex as they're quite far from each other !

No worries - but thanks for the apology. :) It's been interesting - and informative - reading some of the commentary about this on other websites.

 

Edited by KSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Verge’s video on FH launch, in case someone didn’t see it:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, tater said:

Maybe I misheard/read side for both instead of just one. Bottom line is that at least one engine didn't ignite. and it was like a near miss bomb (which still did loads of damage back when bombs landing nearby ships was common (ww2)).

Think I heard this too. The opposite engine would immediately shut down to balance the thrust I reckon, leading to two engines out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, DAL59 said:

He's planning on 2024.  How could something get delayed by a factor of 5, especially now that he just proved the FH works?  

What does FH have to do with sending people to Mars? Have you been listening to Musk for the last 12 months? Red Dragon has been cancelled, because the idea of astronauts spending 3+ months in a tin can is ridiculous and certifying a capsule with stuff popping out of its heatshield (hell, designing it) is more hassle then it's worth. We won't see human Mars exploration until they finish ITS, and 2024 is an optimistic date, it could be delayed until 2030 or more. Remember ITS has new, untested technologies everywhere in its concept, delays and mishaps can and WILL pop-up, hell, they already did as they had problems with the composite fuel tank. Hell, FH has been not only delayed but also cancelled several times, because it doesn't really offer much cost saving to LEO in reusable mode when compared to an expandable Falcon 9 launch. Most of Falcon Heavy launches we'll most likely see will be near maximum payload weight and won't be recovered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wear headphones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, tater said:

Wear headphones.

Played it on my Bose sound bar in the living room. That was... fantastic.

 

Should I be worried about my neighbors calling the police?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, m4ti140 said:

What does FH have to do with sending people to Mars? Have you been listening to Musk for the last 12 months? Red Dragon has been cancelled, because the idea of astronauts spending 3+ months in a tin can is ridiculous and certifying a capsule with stuff popping out of its heatshield (hell, designing it) is more hassle then it's worth. We won't see human Mars exploration until they finish ITS, and 2024 is an optimistic date, it could be delayed until 2030 or more. Remember ITS has new, untested technologies everywhere in its concept, delays and mishaps can and WILL pop-up, hell, they already did as they had problems with the composite fuel tank. Hell, FH has been not only delayed but also cancelled several times, because it doesn't really offer much cost saving to LEO in reusable mode when compared to an expandable Falcon 9 launch. Most of Falcon Heavy launches we'll most likely see will be near maximum payload weight and won't be recovered.

FH doesnt really have much to do with putting people to mars as you said. BFR will be much more useful for that.

But the point is that Musk/SpaceX have once again proved that if they say they will do something, they will get it done. Maybe not in the original schedule but they will do it eventually...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, m4ti140 said:

Red Dragon has been cancelled, because the idea of astronauts spending 3+ months in a tin can is ridiculous

FYI, there were never plans to send people via Red Dragon, it was envisioned as a way to start sending cargo/science! ahead of human arrival. 

1 hour ago, m4ti140 said:

certifying a capsule with stuff popping out of its heatshield (hell, designing it) is more hassle then it's worth.

This was a bureaucratic issue, not an engineering one. NASA wouldn’t have accepted it without a ridiculous amount of verification, but the Space Shuttle worked just fine with far more holes in its heat shield (also Gemini tests and the Soviet VA did this).

If BFR ends up significantly delayed, I think we may see a return to these very concepts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, m4ti140 said:

What does FH have to do with sending people to Mars? Have you been listening to Musk for the last 12 months? Red Dragon has been cancelled, because the idea of astronauts spending 3+ months in a tin can is ridiculous and certifying a capsule with stuff popping out of its heatshield (hell, designing it) is more hassle then it's worth. We won't see human Mars exploration until they finish ITS, and 2024 is an optimistic date, it could be delayed until 2030 or more. Remember ITS has new, untested technologies everywhere in its concept, delays and mishaps can and WILL pop-up, hell, they already did as they had problems with the composite fuel tank. Hell, FH has been not only delayed but also cancelled several times, because it doesn't really offer much cost saving to LEO in reusable mode when compared to an expandable Falcon 9 launch. Most of Falcon Heavy launches we'll most likely see will be near maximum payload weight and won't be recovered.

Falcon Heavy demonstrates that SpaceX's ability to model experimental rockets is sound. That they can handle lighting dozens of engines at once. That their ability to control boostback, entry, and landing burns is superb.

Yes, BFR is currently a paper rocket. But proving that they could launch Falcon Heavy tells them how to build BFR.

There was never a plan for astronauts to spend 3+ months in a Dragon 2 spacecraft on the way to Mars. Red Dragon was canceled, not because it couldn't be done, but because they decided BFS was a better way to pursue offworld retropropulsive landing.

Falcon Heavy was (almost-ish) cancelled three times not because it won't save on costs; Elon was very clear about that yesterday. The problem was that they simply weren't sure it could be done, not with recoverability. Obviously they proved otherwise yesterday. Block 5 Falcon Heavy will be far cheaper than Block 5 Falcon 9 expendable.

I do not anticipate near-max payloads for Falcon Heavy. SpaceX will not develop a reinforced upper stage, upgraded PAF, and enlarged fairing if they don't have to. Falcon Heavy's extra performance will be used for heavy GTO and even direct-to-GEO payloads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Technical Ben said:

SpaceX reuploaded the cast video with a correction on booster 2 camera. :)

[edit]

Ah, the good old 1.3.1. I've been trying to "force" this kind of thing with mechjeb with action keys and toggling on/off engines. I should really learn KOS. :wink:

I hadn't realised they built it horizontal and cranked it upright like the Russians rather than building it vertical like most other American ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ringkeeper said:

someone put together 4 different landing angels and synced the audio .

Careful with headset on loud!!!

 

 

So that's how they manage to do it ... they get help from landing angels?

Edited by mikegarrison

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, YNM said:

Also, given they play around with the second stage for hours, they want to prove their upper stage can deliver propellant-less satellites.

My understanding, from usually reliable sources, is that certain DOD/TLA payloads require a long coast phase - and that yesterday's coast was a demonstration of FH's capability to meet those requirements.  (If you haven't figured it out yet - that's FH's raison d'être.  Gaining SpaceX solid entry into the National Security Payload business.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

 

Awwwwwwwwwwww yissssssssssss... :0.0::cool:

Pic of the year, hands down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now Tesla can claim they have the fastest car in the world.
How long until they also can claim most mileage? standard world record is 4.8 million km with ordinary driving. 
On the counter its probably the least fuel economic and most polluting car ever, pollution might depend a bit on how you factor it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

Now Tesla can claim they have the fastest car in the world.
How long until they also can claim most mileage? standard world record is 4.8 million km with ordinary driving. 
On the counter its probably the least fuel economic and most polluting car ever, pollution might depend a bit on how you factor it.

4.8 million km is less than 10% of the way to Mars at closest approach.

Its "fuel economy" is currently very poor, but it is getting better every second!

31 minutes ago, DerekL1963 said:

My understanding, from usually reliable sources, is that certain DOD/TLA payloads require a long coast phase - and that yesterday's coast was a demonstration of FH's capability to meet those requirements.  (If you haven't figured it out yet - that's FH's raison d'être.  Gaining SpaceX solid entry into the National Security Payload business.)

Direct GEO insertion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what's the next big milestone for SpaceX?

First Block 5 flight?

First Block 5 reflight?

First third reflight of any orbital-class booster?

First Block 5 reflight in under 7 days?

First flight of Dragon 2?

Share this post


Link to post
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.