Jump to content

SpaceX Discussion Thread


Skylon

Recommended Posts

This is quite insane

https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-surprise-falcon-heavy-booster-landing-distance-record/

Spacex moved the landing of the centre core for the stp-2 mission fro 40 to 1260kms ( braking the last record of 975 kms by a gigantic margin). I think that the people at the defense  department  are getting  bit paranoid with  the margin, or maybe it will allow for a 2nd stage deorbit instead of passivation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 6/21/2019 at 5:18 AM, Flavio hc16 said:

This is quite insane

https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-surprise-falcon-heavy-booster-landing-distance-record/

Spacex moved the landing of the centre core for the stp-2 mission fro 40 to 1260kms ( braking the last record of 975 kms by a gigantic margin). I think that the people at the defense  department  are getting  bit paranoid with  the margin, or maybe it will allow for a 2nd stage deorbit instead of passivation

Expand  

At that rate they’ll soon replace OCISLY with Spain.

Maybe Musk really should buy the Stratolauncher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 6/21/2019 at 5:18 AM, Flavio hc16 said:

This is quite insane

https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-surprise-falcon-heavy-booster-landing-distance-record/

Spacex moved the landing of the centre core for the stp-2 mission fro 40 to 1260kms ( braking the last record of 975 kms by a gigantic margin). I think that the people at the defense  department  are getting  bit paranoid with  the margin, or maybe it will allow for a 2nd stage deorbit instead of passivation

Expand  

People at the DoD: What the hell we agreed to 40km? Not 1260km?

Musk: !. my rocket can do it. 2. This is my company. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 6/21/2019 at 2:35 PM, Xd the great said:

People at the DoD: What the hell we agreed to 40km? Not 1260km?

Musk: !. my rocket can do it. 2. This is my company. 

Expand  

I'm pretty sure most of that was customer driven (government customers like to pile on requirements at the last minute.  Contractors rarely want last minute changes).  That said, if KSP is any indication, long sideways coasting is ideal for reducing velocity and making such landings easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 6/21/2019 at 10:13 AM, DDE said:

At that rate they’ll soon replace OCISLY with Spain.

Maybe Musk really should buy the Stratolauncher.

Expand  

They should, so they can test their Earth to Earth transport capabilities early :sticktongue:. I'd be happy to volunteer as their first passenger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 6/21/2019 at 2:35 PM, Xd the great said:

People at the DoD: What the hell we agreed to 40km? Not 1260km?

Musk: !. my rocket can do it. 2. This is my company. 

Expand  

Think 40 km was the previous launch there they could not use the ground landing pads because the dragon blew up. 
And yes more down range equal more dV to the upper stage, it will come in very hot however. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 6/21/2019 at 3:19 PM, wumpus said:

I'm pretty sure most of that was customer driven (government customers like to pile on requirements at the last minute.  Contractors rarely want last minute changes).  That said, if KSP is any indication, long sideways coasting is ideal for reducing velocity and making such landings easier.

Expand  

I find if I do a long shallow aerobrake through the atmosphere I build up more heat than a short, quicker deceleration. 

Might just be a Kerbal thing o_o, though if that’s true for real life too then that rocket might get a little toastier than usual!

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be surprised if it was a test run, to see how toasty rocket can get, how it will affect the structure and how engines\steering will deal with hot reentry. Remember - at this point Falcon 9 is slowly becoming a mere stepping stone for the Starship. Also - by now SpaceX gathered enough used stages to not be at a risk if one of them RUD's during reentry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 6/21/2019 at 9:31 PM, Scotius said:

I wouldn't be surprised if it was a test run, to see how toasty rocket can get, how it will affect the structure and how engines\steering will deal with hot reentry. Remember - at this point Falcon 9 is slowly becoming a mere stepping stone for the Starship. Also - by now SpaceX gathered enough used stages to not be at a risk if one of them RUD's during reentry.

Expand  

Keep in mind, tho, this is a Falcon Heavy core. It’s significantly different than an F9 booster, and right now they don’t have any spare Heavy cores, since they’ve seemed bound and determined to go visit Davey Jones upon landing. Or shortly thereafter. 

  On 6/21/2019 at 7:31 PM, Dale Christopher said:

Might just be a Kerbal thing o_o, though if that’s true for real life too then that rocket might get a little toastier than usual!

Expand  

AFIAK this is true in real life. Quick, aggressive decelerations result in less heating at the cost of much greater structural loads. Makes sense, since you lose speed much faster and minimize that time in compression heating.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 6/21/2019 at 9:44 PM, CatastrophicFailure said:

Keep in mind, tho, this is a Falcon Heavy core. It’s significantly different than an F9 booster, and right now they don’t have any spare Heavy cores, since they’ve seemed bound and determined to go visit Davey Jones upon landing. Or shortly thereafter. 

AFIAK this is true in real life. Quick, aggressive decelerations result in less heating at the cost of much greater structural loads. Makes sense, since you lose speed much faster and minimize that time in compression heating.  

Expand  

I was thinking more suborbital hops where you can't jettison the capsule (such as the first launch in career).  I'm not sure that a booster will get a "quick aggressive deceleration" without firing the engine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 6/22/2019 at 3:19 AM, wumpus said:

I was thinking more suborbital hops where you can't jettison the capsule (such as the first launch in career).  I'm not sure that a booster will get a "quick aggressive deceleration" without firing the engine.

Expand  

It will get a "quick aggressive deceleration" when it hits the ground. 

Jokes aside, how does the core even manage that much heat?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole thing is crazy lol, before SpaceX I wouldn’t have thought you could maintain a stable flight flying engine bell first but it doesn’t seem to matter @_@! I wonder how much drag that contributes overall... it’s not very aerodynamic!

P.S.

It would explain why they have no windows and also means they don’t go to waste as something that is only used for testing. At the same time the tankers will probably only ever experience LEO re-entry stress so the construction techniques don’t need to be super perfect as for something needing to aerobrake from interplanetary velocities!

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 6/22/2019 at 3:19 AM, wumpus said:

I was thinking more suborbital hops where you can't jettison the capsule (such as the first launch in career).  I'm not sure that a booster will get a "quick aggressive deceleration" without firing the engine.

Expand  

Depends on mass and aerodynamics. Alan Shepard hit nearly 12g on his suborbital flight. Dunno if an F9 could take that, but I’d think the aero forces would damage it first, hence the entry burn. That negates both the worst of the compression heating and aero deceleration.

  On 6/22/2019 at 6:55 AM, Xd the great said:

Jokes aside, how does the core even manage that much heat?

Expand  

Entry burn. They use the engines to slow down just enough before hitting the “denser parts of the atmosphere” that it’s all manageable. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It kind of looks like Starship East has a simulair weird shape as Starship West from that angle. Maybe it is actually a design choice rather than sloppy manufacturing, or im just seeing things that aren't there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 6/22/2019 at 8:39 PM, NSEP said:

It kind of looks like Starship East has a simulair weird shape as Starship West from that angle. Maybe it is actually a design choice rather than sloppy manufacturing, or im just seeing things that aren't there.

Expand  

Who weird shape? Only i noticed in the BC one is the top hole for the rcs block looks a bit dented. 

And yes finish on west looks better. Note that this might be because of lighting or angle as irregularities stands out very well on an mirror surface.

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...