Wjolcz Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Ricktoberfest said: What about putting some Super Draco’s higher up on the fuselage? Can act as a landing engine high above the surface and also an escape system if the craft could be split away from its fuel tanks somehow SuperDracos are one use only now. Edited July 31, 2019 by Wjolcz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultimate Steve Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 Let's hope this doesn't end like the other amos... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geonovast Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 Just now, Ultimate Steve said: Let's hope this doesn't end like the other amos... You mean with the booster in a couple thousand pieces? Yeah... me too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wjolcz Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 (edited) I was about to say how impressed I am by the turnaround time between CRS-18 and AMOS-17 but then I remembered this launch is expendable. Edited August 1, 2019 by Wjolcz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 17 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Au conter counter contry I disagree. While Dave Scott certainly did thump it down, the nozzle didn’t actually contact the surface, it buckled due to (relevant subject!) firing so close to the lunar surface, as mentioned here (about 10:00 in): Hence why the whole subject needs further study. Either way, still wouldn’t wanna take off with it. You got over-pressure at the nozzle end because of blowback from ground. And nozzle was flimsy like vacuum nozzles tend to be. For an single use nozzle this was not an serious issue outside of fail of nozzle and offset trust during touchdown but then they would just kill engine and land 1 m/s harder than planned. 16 hours ago, Listy said: If a lunar base is ever established, it also sounds like NASA & SpaceX would both be keen to get a better handle on how best to stop everything nearby (habitats, rovers, equipment, astronauts etc) from being turned into a sieve every time a rocket lands or takes off nearby and starts flinging dirt around at 3km/s in an environment where there's no air to slow the debris down. http://www.planetary.org/blogs/guest-blogs/2014/0419-forensic-ballistics.html " The exhaust of the Shuttle’s solid rocket boosters pulled several thousand bricks from the wall of the launch pad’s flame trench, slammed them into each other, creating many thousands of fragments, and blew them as far as a kilometer from the pad." Landing near an base on the moon will give some challenges because of hypersonic dust who would do bad things to space suits and solar panels. Two options land in an crater or land on an pad, probably both down the line Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zolotiyeruki Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 I think erecting a berm between the landing site and the base might be a good option. Although that raises the question of "how do you get a bulldozer to run on the moon?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geonovast Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 2 minutes ago, zolotiyeruki said: Although that raises the question of "how do you get a bulldozer to run on the moon?" You use a Tesla bulldozer that runs on the power of the sun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinimumSky5 Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 The first lander doesn't need to worry about damaging projectiles, so just send the equipment to make to make the berm first. Also, the moon isn't a flat, featureless sphere, you can land on one side of a hill, and have the base on the other side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 53 minutes ago, zolotiyeruki said: how do you get a bulldozer to run on the moon? We already have two, one just happens to be on Mars and the other is leaving for there shortly. Just scavenge a spare chassis, which almost certainly exists, strap a blade to the front, and send it off. The first Starship to the Moon could carry dozens, even. Might not be very fast but they can run nearly constantly and it’s a proven, in-situ tested design. 52 minutes ago, Geonovast said: You use a Tesla bulldozer that runs on the power of the sun. Or this. Just be sure someone double-taps the stalk first to turn on Autopilot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 30 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Or this. Just be sure someone double-taps the stalk first to turn on Autopilot. Tesla + Solar Roof + Steel blade made scrap metal at Boca Chica = MoonDozer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperFastJellyfish Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 Dig an underground flame trench that ends in a gun barrel shaped shaft, and you can probably blast small payloads back towards lunar orbit with the exhaust. Like a small scale version of Pascal-B's test shaft in Operation Plumbbob. Quote Propulsion of steel plate cap During the Pascal-B nuclear test, a 900-kilogram (2,000 lb) steel plate cap (a piece of armor plate) was blasted off the top of a test shaft at a speed of more than 66 km/s (41 mi/s; 240,000 km/h; 150,000 mph). Before the test, experimental designer Robert Brownlee had estimated that the nuclear explosion, combined with the specific design of the shaft, would accelerate the plate to approximately six times Earth's escape velocity.[8] The plate was never found, but Dr. Brownlee believes[9] that the plate did not leave the atmosphere, as it may even have been vaporized by compression heating of the atmosphere due to its high speed. The calculated velocity was sufficiently interesting that the crew trained a high-speed camera on the plate, which unfortunately only appeared in one frame, but this nevertheless gave a very high lower bound for its speed. After the event, Dr. Brownlee described the best estimate of the cover's speed from the photographic evidence as "going like a bat out of hell!"[8][10] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 41 minutes ago, SuperFastJellyfish said: Dig an underground flame trench that ends in a gun barrel shaped shaft, and you can probably blast small payloads back towards lunar orbit with the exhaust. Like a small scale version of Pascal-B's test shaft in Operation Plumbbob. Sure, sure, start digging big holes in the moon then blowing stuff out of them and pretty soon this happens: Spoiler Unintended consequences, people! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Weather is crappy Sunday, it's a 70% chance of a weather violation as of today, 10% better Monday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 (edited) You know the sad thing... we could have been building spaceships like this in the 70s... it’s a stainless steel water tank in a field... And yet it’s 2019 and it’s going to disrupt the whole space industry. Having said that though, maybe the avionics for automated retro-propulsive landings wouldn’t have been there back then. But having said that! I think the Apollo flight computer was capable of some impressive degree of automation for the time, as well as inertial positioning o_o! I’m not an Apollo guy but I watched a vid about the puter... Edited August 1, 2019 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotius Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Are those big, giant slabs of styrofoam acting as windbreaks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Spoiler At least one of them hides the levitating metal disk from neighbors' eyes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Spoiler Wait... The right one is... Oh...! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Spoiler 4 hours ago, Scotius said: Are those big, giant slabs of styrofoam acting as windbreaks? Or the number “8” intended to be viewed from space @_@! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 5 hours ago, Scotius said: Are those big, giant slabs of styrofoam acting as windbreaks? Yes, and they are containers, you see one is open. I guess they painted them while to not heat up so much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 (edited) Spoiler 2 hours ago, Dale Christopher said: Or the number “8” intended to be viewed from space @_@! They use mods. Spoiler 2 hours ago, Dale Christopher said: viewed from space By the player. Edited August 1, 2019 by kerbiloid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealKerbal3x Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wjolcz Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, tater said: What exactly is this thrust structure we are looking at? The aft section where the engines will be? I'm guessing the holes are for all the engine plumbing. Also, yep, those are white containers. Edited August 1, 2019 by Wjolcz 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.