tater Posted November 1, 2022 Share Posted November 1, 2022 Can't wait til Feb 2023 gels up. I'm gonna be in FL in early Feb with my wife for a medical meeting where I am supposed to attend—though I told her I will rent a car and bail for any launch that happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pthigrivi Posted November 1, 2022 Share Posted November 1, 2022 Damn those landings. What percentage of launches would you all estimate carry military payloads? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted November 1, 2022 Share Posted November 1, 2022 41 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said: Damn those landings. What percentage of launches would you all estimate carry military payloads? Under 5%. Maybe well under. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piscator Posted November 1, 2022 Share Posted November 1, 2022 I'm not a 100% sure I remember this correctly (well, actually not even 90%), but the difference in timing of the two boosters might only seem more pronounced this time, because they accidentally showed footage from the same booster on one of the previous occasions. The external footage of the two boosters coming down didn't seem much different from earlier flights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted November 1, 2022 Share Posted November 1, 2022 Also, another extremely cool view of today's double landing I hadn't seen before Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted November 1, 2022 Share Posted November 1, 2022 1 hour ago, Piscator said: The external footage of the two boosters coming down didn't seem much different from earlier flights. It seemed very different to me. The ground tracking cam showed the entry burn on one booster starting at approximately the same time the other started, and the landing burn of one was visible from the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted November 1, 2022 Share Posted November 1, 2022 Those double landings are extremely cool. I still remember the sense of awe I had when that first FH launch gave us that first double landing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted November 1, 2022 Share Posted November 1, 2022 I wonder if the entire 3,750 kg payload is being placed into GEO or if parts of it broke off in transit (in LEO or GTO). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeSchmuckatelli Posted November 1, 2022 Share Posted November 1, 2022 3 minutes ago, sevenperforce said: I wonder if the entire 3,750 kg payload is being placed into GEO or if parts of it broke off in transit (in LEO or GTO). 23 hours ago, tater said: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piscator Posted November 1, 2022 Share Posted November 1, 2022 Yeah, it looked very different to me in the wide angle view as well. I guess both boosters slowing down so much before touchdown gave me a wrong impression. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted November 1, 2022 Share Posted November 1, 2022 The space force has just declared the mission a success Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted November 1, 2022 Share Posted November 1, 2022 24 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said: 28 minutes ago, sevenperforce said: I wonder if the entire 3,750 kg payload is being placed into GEO or if parts of it broke off in transit (in LEO or GTO). On 10/31/2022 at 6:30 PM, tater said: From that article it looks like everything went to GEO together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeSchmuckatelli Posted November 1, 2022 Share Posted November 1, 2022 4 minutes ago, sevenperforce said: From that article it looks like everything went to GEO together. Satellites with Satellites? (I'm guessing the big thing had the ability to move itself somewhere) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 3 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said: Satellites with Satellites? Escorts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuky Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 I love it how in few short years we went from "will they make the landing" to "how close to the center will the booster land" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 Some new info from the article, in addition to what was said during the conference: - the 7 raptors per week target was hit a quarter ago - the second Starship launch NASA is tracking after the maiden one features a tank-to-tank propellant transfer inside a single starship - the third Starship launch NASA is tracking features a ship-to-ship propellant transfer, to mimic a tanker/depot mission - the fourth and last launch NASA is tracking features a long duration flight, mimicking the duration of the HLS in-space time - the HLS demo mission on the moon, targeting Q4 2024 (i.e. 2025) but dependant on the other flights listed above, will return to lunar orbit after the completion of the landing and the associated tests. This was quite likely, but not yet 100% sure because NASA didn't include it in the HLS demo flight objectives Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 4 minutes ago, Beccab said: the second Starship launch NASA is tracking after the maiden one features a tank-to-tank propellant transfer inside a single starship Oh, that's smart. They'll still be able to utilize a low-level continuous settling burn to effect the transfer. Unclear, however, how a settling burn will operate if they are docking side-to-side now instead of tail-to-tail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 2 minutes ago, sevenperforce said: Oh, that's smart. They'll still be able to utilize a low-level continuous settling burn to effect the transfer. Unclear, however, how a settling burn will operate if they are docking side-to-side now instead of tail-to-tail. I assume that having both ships translate towards the same direction at the same time would work even side by side, though throttled to take into account the different mass of the two spacecrafts. Either that or they dock side by side and only one of them translates laterally, but going forward or backwards seems less complex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 (edited) On 11/2/2022 at 11:52 AM, Beccab said: I assume that having both ships translate towards the same direction at the same time would work even side by side, though throttled to take into account the different mass of the two spacecrafts. Either that or they dock side by side and only one of them translates laterally, but going forward or backwards seems less complex I think it depends to some degree on the internal plumbing, no? If I recall correctly, this is the propellant fill adapter that the Quick Disconnect arm interfaces with, right? According to the renders I've seen, the fill lines run up the inside of the skirt and go directly into the methane downcomer and the LOX tank, respectively: So if you were to connect two starships back-to-back (which I will call "Thing 1" for no reason whatsoever), open all the valves between these fill lines, and start your settling/prop-transfer burn, the tanker can only fill the depot (or other recipient ship) until the levels are equal. On the other hand, if you connect the ships with one inverted (we'll call this "Thing 2" for absolutely no reason again) then you can transfer as much as you want: The other possibility would be to have some sort of positive displacement pump involved so that the "Thing 1" position could work. This would require an entire new system. However, it might be necessary if the "spray it into the empty portion of the tank" approach in the "Thing 2" position would create too much evaporation. Edited November 3, 2022 by sevenperforce Edits of redactions of edits Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 (edited) On 11/2/2022 at 1:38 PM, sevenperforce said: You forget that the tanks are pressurized, if pressure is larger in the tanker than target fuel will flow, you want some trust for settling but you are not afraid of bubbles other than it reduce the pressure difference. Benefit of [SNIP1] is that you could have two docking ports for added rigidity, it will be some torque as the center of mass is shifting. Edited November 3, 2022 by Gargamel Quote and Portions Redacted by Moderator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 (edited) On 11/2/2022 at 2:09 PM, magnemoe said: You forget that the tanks are pressurized, if pressure is larger in the tanker than target fuel will flow, you want some trust for settling but you are not afraid of bubbles other than it reduce the pressure difference. Benefit of [Thing 1] is that you could have two docking ports for added rigidity, it will be some torque as the center of mass is shifting. Ah, yes, you're absolutely right. A little thrust to provide consistent settling, and then the recipient Starship can vent to lower its tank pressure and thus accept flow from the donor Starship. Depending on the viscosity of liquid methane and liquid oxygen, the constant settling might not even be necessary; once it gets flowing it should stay settled and the tank pressure differential will do the rest. Edited November 3, 2022 by sevenperforce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrandedonEarth Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 1 hour ago, sevenperforce said: Ah, yes, you're absolutely right. A little thrust to provide consistent settling, and then the recipient Starship can vent to lower its tank pressure and thus accept flow from the donor Starship. Depending on the viscosity of liquid methane and liquid oxygen, the constant settling might not even be necessary; once it gets flowing it should stay settled and the tank pressure differential will do the rest. The venting from the recipient tank could easily provide the thrust needed for settling the propellants. Exquisitely simple, like the Soyuz boosters venting oxygen to provide separation thrust… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 2 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said: The venting from the recipient tank could easily provide the thrust needed for settling the propellants. Exquisitely simple, like the Soyuz boosters venting oxygen to provide separation thrust… Yes, but that would cause rotation around the pitch axis because you'd only be venting from one of the vehicles and so you'd have off-axis thrust. OTOH, I wonder if an alternative way to settle the propellants would be to get them rotating together in a penguin roll. Would the centrifugal force then assist in settling the propellant? Hard to know, I think...lots of CoM shifting going on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 Meanwhile, it's apparently launch day (again). Because steamroller... 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.