Jump to content

SpaceX Discussion Thread


Skylon
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Nothalogh said:

NASA hamstrings such programs so as to make them infinite development programs for the various contractors to farm tax dollars from.

That's a nice narrative you constructed that neatly absolves SpaceX of all guilt in CCrew delays and deflects all the blame to NASA and the eeeevil oldspace mafia.

Shame it isn't true.

Edited by jadebenn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t understand why NASA are still essentially ignoring Starship when it’s so much more capable and so much cheaper than SLS - a rocket made from Shuttle leftovers that’s politically hanging in the balance. I guess, as @tater said a couple of pages back, that they’ll sit up and take notice when Starship delivers a payload to orbit before a single SLS has been assembled.

Edited by RealKerbal3x
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nothalogh said:

They're the only one with hardware that isn't effectively a mock-up.

No other contender even comes close.

There are only two "contenders", and they are pretty much exactly at the same state of program completion.

4 hours ago, tater said:

Boeing had their own LES issue as well, minus the leaked video, or indeed any transparency at all.

Enough transparency that it was discussed here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, RealKerbal3x said:

I don’t understand why NASA are still essentially ignoring Starship

They aren't though. They want to study the Raptor exhaust interactions with regolith and fuel transfer with SpaceX. Crew Dragon has no need for those.

Btw, I know this is the further bashing of SLS, but isn't it basically a 1980s project? The only reason why it wasn't flying 40 30 years ago is because the engines were.

Edit: orange rocket bad

mlsmmsrb.jpg

Edit 2: this looks familiar:

nlsmmss.jpg

Edited by Wjolcz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, RealKerbal3x said:

I don’t understand why NASA are still essentially ignoring Starship when it’s so much more capable and so much cheaper than SLS - a rocket made from Shuttle leftovers that’s politically hanging in the balance. I guess, as @tater said a couple of pages back, that they’ll sit up and take notice when Starship delivers a payload to orbit before a single SLS has been assembled.

but it could go down like the Hindenburg, until we see them flying their true capabilities are just guesstimates. Not that I think it will fail, I'm behind SpaceX 110% they are really remarkable.  

Presentation excitement continues*

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Wjolcz said:

They aren't though. They want to study the Raptor exhaust interactions with regolith and fuel transfer with SpaceX. Crew Dragon has no need for those.

I said 'essentially ignoring'. They want to do studies on those, yes, but they still haven't really acknowledged that SS/SH is economically so much better for long-term deep space exploration. Throwing away a super-heavy launch vehicle each time just isn't sustainable.

2 minutes ago, Dale Christopher said:

but it could go down like the Hindenburg, until we see them flying their true capabilities are just guesstimates. Not that I think it will fail, I'm behind SpaceX 110% they are really remarkable.  

That's a possibility, but as long as SpaceX has a figure like Elon Musk at the head and no political masters behind (other than NASA with Commercial Crew) trying to stop it, I'm 90% certain that Starship will fly before SLS has left the hangar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RealKerbal3x said:

I'm 90% certain that Starship will fly before SLS has left the hangar.

I wouldn't be so sure. A lot can change. Especially since SLS is threatened* by the Starship. They might boost the whole program, though I think that's something that would be really hard unless politicians are willing to throw money at it. However, if that happens I will have a reason to suspect hands were greased.

*I used "threatened" in the context of public opinion. I'm pretty sure it will fly a couple of times before the Starship reaches its full maturity, LEO capability and is man-rated but I give it max 3 flights before it is retired.

Edit: Now that I said it I want to clarify that I think some version of the Starship WILL fly before the SLS, it just won't be the final one.

8 minutes ago, GearsNSuch said:

So what do they have left to install on the craft? Avionics? Engines? Legs?

Pretty sure there's still a lot of work to do. It's just the outer shell for the looks and the presentation.

The legs are missing, the flaps probably don't move yet either. It wouldn't surprise me if they took it apart again to work on the insides some more.

Edited by Wjolcz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Wjolcz said:

Pretty sure there's still a lot of work to do. It's just the outer shell for the looks and the presentation.

The legs are missing, the flaps probably don't move yet either. It wouldn't surprise me if they took it apart again to work on the insides some more.

Maybe that’s what that rabbit hole is for...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Wjolcz said:

I wouldn't be so sure. A lot can change. Especially since SLS is threatened* by the Starship. They might boost the whole program, though I think that's something that would be really hard unless politicians are willing to throw money at it. However, if that happens I will have a reason to suspect hands were greased.

The last 40 years of NASA and its attendant contractors shows an entrenched bureaucracy devoted not to tangible results, but to budgetary farming via a human centipede of development programs.

At this point I'm convinced that the only reason STS ever flew was because the military had a serious stake in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Nothalogh said:

The last 40 years of NASA and its attendant contractors shows an entrenched bureaucracy devoted not to tangible results, but to budgetary farming via a human centipede of development programs.

At this point I'm convinced that the only reason STS ever flew was because the military had a serious stake in it.

Bureaucracy can lead to good things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dale Christopher said:

but it could go down like the Hindenburg, until we see them flying their true capabilities are just guesstimates. Not that I think it will fail, I'm behind SpaceX 110% they are really remarkable.  

Presentation excitement continues*

 

I say the only critical fail as in starship does not work at all is that the heat shield is to heavy. its various ways to negate that. They has not mounted the heat shield yet, they might wait until don't the first jump tests. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

I say the only critical fail as in starship does not work at all is that the heat shield is to heavy. its various ways to negate that. They has not mounted the heat shield yet, they might wait until don't the first jump tests. 

What about the reentry aerodynamics? If 1 winglet/airbrake/plasma deflector shield fails, I doubt if Starship can reenter and land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peace, brothers and sisters. We're all space nerds here. SpaceX, ULA, BO - does it matter who puts who where and when as long as it actually happens? Boots on the surface of another world it's the only thing that should matter to us. Let's not dive into turf wars - hmmkay? :)

As for the Starship - i fully expect it to fail. Probably in a very spectacular way :) It's a prototype after all - it's why we build them. Next one will be better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

Enough transparency that it was discussed here.

What caused it? I recall hearing that they said an "anomaly" occurred, no details. We likely know more about the Crew Dragon event (aside from the leak) simply because they keep flying stuff, and every single press conference, Hans gets asked about it (and he answers).

6 hours ago, RealKerbal3x said:

I don’t understand why NASA are still essentially ignoring Starship when it’s so much more capable and so much cheaper than SLS - a rocket made from Shuttle leftovers that’s politically hanging in the balance. I guess, as @tater said a couple of pages back, that they’ll sit up and take notice when Starship delivers a payload to orbit before a single SLS has been assembled.

I said they'll notice it when it exists. Because it's being built so very differently, they are not taking it as seriously---though they have mentioned it as a possible LV in some docs now, precisely because they have started actually bending metal. They would have been foolish to decide to base mission planning on it before hand. We've watched it happen fast, but it's no less difficult, there are likely nasty RUDs in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, jadebenn said:

You know, the fact that people seriously still think this is going to happen shows how divorced from reality that segment of the fandom is.

There are two things here, one you are right about---that the politics of how things get paid for is utterly disconnected from anything in Musk's control, and SLS will be funded until it's not. The second is a little different (you're still right about a segment of the SpaceX fandom). I'm a fan of SpaceX, no question (I'm wearing a SpaceX F9tee shirt (from their store) right now, lol.) I think that SS has every chance of completely obviating SLS, and I think it has a chance of doing so within the time frame of early Artemis missions. Does that mean SLS is cancelled? Nope. Does it mean that NASA would be fiscally incompetent to not use it for all launches for which it is best, even if it means not launching SLS at all?  Yeah, it would mean that---but there is no reason to expect them to function that way. We could easily be in a situation where NASA still flies SLS at 4+ billion per launch---annual program costs plus 1 B$ per Orion (more, the SM is an ESA in kind contribution, but it must have a dollar value), and around the same per SLS. SLS might fly until long after it looks silly, that sort of depends when Shelby kicks the bucket, frankly.

And I still think Bridenstine's tweet was... a word the forum would filter. I'll reiterate that virtually no one pushing Crew Dragon forward to launch is also working on Starship, and Bridenstine knows this, which makes the comment he made particularly crappy.

EDIT (this tweet happened after this post, but the best place to insert it is here):

Looks like the average reduction was in fact more like 40%, only 2012 was a more than 50% reduction.

 

 

Look ma, no cranes!

 

Edited by tater
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...