Ultimate Steve Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 2 hours ago, DAL59 said: Hey @Ultimate Steve you are always complaining you can't watch spacex launches due to youtube being blocked at school. However, you can get past this without hacking or downloading vpns and breaking your school device agreement- simply go to Khan Academy, watch a video there, put it to full screen, then click the title of the video- it will open up youtube The problem is not that YouTube is blocked - it isn't, and we can watch most videos - the problem is that restricted mode is enabled, which means that most livestreams are blocked. NASA TV is usually okay, but that's the only one I've found. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barzon Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 Can you not ask if they can unblock it? Because surely they would consider it educational? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 49 minutes ago, Barzon Kerman said: Can you not ask if they can unblock it? Because surely they would consider it educational? Looks like Restricted Mode content is managed by YouTube directly. However, there is a page to give feedback over stuff that ought not be blocked, and nothing SpaceX seems an obvious violation of their constraints. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealKerbal3x Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 So, what happened to Starhopper's nose cone? It didn't appear to be there when they tried to fire the Raptor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rakaydos Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 (edited) 15 minutes ago, RealKerbal3x said: So, what happened to Starhopper's nose cone? It didn't appear to be there when they tried to fire the Raptor. It fell over in a windstorm a month or two ago. Instead of replacing it they're working on the orbital prototype directly. Edited March 29, 2019 by Rakaydos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 3 minutes ago, Rakaydos said: It fell over in a windstorm a month or two ago. Instead of replacing it they're working on the orbital prototype directly. Yes so the dropped the nose, surprised me quite a bit as I assumed that would be required for the 5 km jump and similar. As hopper is now it don't look very aerodynamic stable. Yes you can compensate with the engine but it will also have to run without trust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 NOTAM TFRs issued for Saturday, Sunday, and Monday at Boca Chica. Still might see this thing light up soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 10 minutes ago, tater said: NOTAM TFRs issued for Saturday, Sunday, and Monday at Boca Chica. Still might see this thing light up soon. This thing and the Falcon Heavy static firing at once would sure be a PR tour de force. Ain’t gonna happen, but still... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 The stated timeline for hopper testing was March/April, and for the orbital version in June. They're very likely to hit the first milestone on schedule, but June will clearly also depend on the current hopper tests not resulting in an RUD so they can get the data they need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 So this just came thru the twit-pipe... Apparently, and most ironically, expendable Starships might eventually be a thing. But not that daft if they really can just slap them together in a few weeks in an open field. What’s described sounds even less complicated than the StarHopper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 (edited) 31 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said: expendable Starships Blasphemy! UPD. Also, (if I didn’t screw up my calculations) it appears that a fully refueled Starship in a highly elliptical orbit (~GTO) can send ~100t to Pluto. Unreal. Edited March 29, 2019 by sh1pman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 Numbers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultimate Steve Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 1 hour ago, sh1pman said: Blasphemy! UPD. Also, (if I didn’t screw up my calculations) it appears that a fully refueled Starship in a highly elliptical orbit (~GTO) can send ~100t to Pluto. Unreal. Is that on a standard Hohmann transfer orbit? If so, I'd imagine that they'd sacrifice payload capacity for speed in the case of Pluto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotius Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 Now. Let's imagine lightened up Starship - no fins, heatshield tiles removed, number of engines decreased significantly. Then we send this Starship to the Moon's surface. And back to LEO for refuelling and new payload. And to the Moon again. Would we ever need a specialised lunar lander anymore? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultimate Steve Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, sh1pman said: Numbers! Egad, that's 12.6-7km/s of Delta-V if they can get the mass that low! But with the sats, it may be quite a bit more mass. Edited March 30, 2019 by Ultimate Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 Hot damn. What does he mean by MR 2? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 2 hours ago, sh1pman said: Blasphemy! UPD. Also, (if I didn’t screw up my calculations) it appears that a fully refueled Starship in a highly elliptical orbit (~GTO) can send ~100t to Pluto. Unreal. How much to Europa? Enceladus? Titan? 24 minutes ago, Scotius said: Now. Let's imagine lightened up Starship - no fins, heatshield tiles removed, number of engines decreased significantly. Then we send this Starship to the Moon's surface. And back to LEO for refuelling and new payload. And to the Moon again. Would we ever need a specialised lunar lander anymore? Do you hear that still, soft ringing in the distance? That’s SLS’s deathbell if Starship works even half this well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serpens Solidus Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 :O Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotius Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 Deathbell? Nay! It is the sound of PROGRESS! And apparently, finally - a progress in the right direction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 1 hour ago, Serpens Solidus said: :O To be fair, that was already true of FH B3/4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 39 minutes ago, sevenperforce said: To be fair, that was already true of FH B3/4. As I recall FH's C3 was pretty close to Delta IV H when fully expended. Perhaps block 5 even beats that recoverable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 (edited) 19 hours ago, Rakaydos said: It fell over in a windstorm a month or two ago. Instead of replacing it they're working on the orbital prototype directly. The true Kerbal way. If the nosecone is too light, replace it with a stage. 3 hours ago, Scotius said: Let's imagine lightened up Starship - no fins, heatshield tiles removed, number of engines decreased significantly. Then we send this Starship to the Moon's surface. And back to LEO for refuelling and new payload. And to the Moon again They were telling, it's a naive early sci-fi... Spoiler Spoiler ... But this was it. Edited March 30, 2019 by kerbiloid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 6 hours ago, sh1pman said: Blasphemy! UPD. Also, (if I didn’t screw up my calculations) it appears that a fully refueled Starship in a highly elliptical orbit (~GTO) can send ~100t to Pluto. Unreal. Thought of that profile myself, single raptor and empty tanks as injection stage, hypergolic forth braking stage, optionally an fifth if payload is small. Refuel starship and kick stage in LEO, burn starship to GTO or higher, "probe" out of bay and on its way, Starship returns to base, might do an second orbit or two to line up with landing zone. Perfect for stuff like Uranus / Neptun orbiter and Europa sample return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racescort666 Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 14 hours ago, sh1pman said: Blasphemy! UPD. Also, (if I didn’t screw up my calculations) it appears that a fully refueled Starship in a highly elliptical orbit (~GTO) can send ~100t to Pluto. Unreal. I can hear Alan Stern rustling up his Pluto lander paperwork. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.