RealKerbal3x

Yesssssssssssssssssssssssssssss!

Next attempt tomorrow.

95% of the test objectives were completed, so the flight was a success. It wasn't really expected to get as far as it did (the landing was really a nice to have), so hopefully with the next prototype they can stick the landing.

As far as I can tell the reason why they weren't full was the pressurisation issue, but as I said I'm not at all qualified to comment on this Hopefully it's an easy fix.

Yeah, that's a possibility too. It'd be well deserved if that was the case.

I'm not an engineer, but I can't think of an alternative solution that would solve as many problems as the header tanks do. They provide propellant for the landing burn, minimise propellant sloshing as they're always full, and balance the COM for stable EDL. Sure, they had the fuel header pressurisation issue on SN8, but the fact that they're not immediately scrapping newer SNs probably implies that that issue can either be fixed by software or minor hardware alterations. Starship's EDL sequence is incredibly dynamic and successfully drawing sloshing propellant from the huge main tanks during the violent flip maneuver sounds like it'd be harder than simply altering the header tank system slightly. As far as I can tell, this means one of two things: They need more time to fix SN9. They need more time to scrap SN9 and bring SN10 up to speed.

The dust trail turns because the solar wind is blowing the dust away from the sun while the comet moves around the sun.

Surprise surprise, another reason SLS can't do the job it's supposedly meant for. You want to build a mothership for a Mars return mission? No problem, just start assembly five years before the transfer window.

Go to KSP/GameData/WildBlueIndustries/Snacks/LifeSupportResources and change 'Air.txt' and 'Stress.txt' to 'Air.cfg' and 'Stress.cfg'.

Honestly things are looking alright for SN9 already. They're not immediately attacking it with cutting torches, and new flaps have arrived, which suggests it's repairable.

Try Imgur. You don't need an account to upload an image.

Disregard that, I can still see damage on other photos. A new flap did arrive onsite though, it might be a replacement.

Fingers crossed nobody is hurt.... Edit: A Rocket Lab spokesperson said that the crash wasn't related to Rocket Lab operations.

Seems like SN9 got a new aft flap after the tipping incident: Disregard this, I can still see damage higher up the flap on other pics. A potential replacement flap did arrive though.

I don't want to ruin the speculation here but this is what a comet looks like in space (on the left): The diffuse grey tail is the dust tail, and the bluish straight tail is the gas tail. What we see in Jim's image is definitely a comet.

Comet tails are visible from a long way away, that one's probably orbiting the sun.

@FUN2291 Welcome to the forums! I'd love to help but I can't see your log, it says I need to request access. Could you upload it somewhere where everyone can see it?

That's one of the comets added in 1.10, but knowing Jim, he'll make it into something much scarier/more awesome...

Yay, they'll be ready to compete with Falcon 9 after it's been retired! Also, that contract is absurdly small for what it does. €33 million is ~$40 million, or less than the cost of a single Falcon 9.

You can insert a bulleted or numbered list by clicking icons roughly in the middle of the line of options above the post editor. You can then enter text for the first bullet point, and press enter to go to the next line. When you've finished writing your list, you can press enter twice to exit. The option for a table is right next to the options for a list. When you click it it'll bring up a dialog prompting you to enter your desired properties. Like this: Once you've got your table you can enter whatever you want into each box. I hope that helped

Live:

Wow! Falcon Heavy launches from the West Coast maybe?

I'd guess that the stand isn't built on site by SpaceX but rather contracted out to some other company. We see them get trucked in. Though it looks as if they made some modifications to SN9's stand on site so that they could install Raptors, and that may have contributed to the failure. We don't have any information but some are speculating that it was the pipe stands that the stand sits on that failed or fell over.

What do you mean? They're designing the rocket in a dumb way?

Actually, it seems they've further refined descent and landing since that simulation was made. In that we see the flaps moving around quite significantly and the body of the vehicle pitching and yawing slightly, but with SN8 only tiny flutters from the flaps were required to keep it almost perfectly stable. Yeah, screw-ups and dumb mistakes will always happen from time to time, no matter how well-oiled the system is. They're not indicative of a deeply flawed operation, despite what anti-SpaceX people will have you believe.