totm nov 2023 SpaceX Discussion Thread

[magnemoe]

4 hours ago, Beccab said:

They already have built 2 prototype cargo doors, and starlink is unlikely to fly on it before the end of the year at best. I doubt that is going to delay stuff much, if at all

Have they build prototypes of it? 
I don't like the whale mouth much, yes it looks cool but it makes deploying groups of satellites hard unless you just blast them out forward. 
I would go side opening, either shuttle style barn door or more likely an single hinge.
Now how do you load the whale mouth on the ground, you either have to remove it or use some robot arm to load the payload from top and side. 
Side opening has two benefits, it give you an long hinge for opening on the ground, you just extend the payload into the bay and lower it onto the payload adapter. 
In space you might want to rotate the stack to launch more. Downside is that you have to eject sideways, not an problem for smallsats who is used to this, but with starship any falcon 9 payload is secondary payloads  
Second issue is that the loading area will not be an clean room, solution is to simply put your satellite into an lightweight container, Starship is not weight limited launching groups of satellites. 
Guess they make an sort of warehouse of satellites in boxes who might just be plastic film, a frame, an zipper or rip cord for the door and something making the satellite move sideways to eject it, you will get this back after the launch, if the deployment fails you get the satellite back who is an change. 

[magnemoe]

5 hours ago, Beccab said:

They already have built 2 prototype cargo doors, and starlink is unlikely to fly on it before the end of the year at best. I doubt that is going to delay stuff much, if at all

Have they build prototypes of it? 
I don't like the whale mouth much, yes it looks cool but it makes deploying groups of satellites hard unless you just blast them out forward. 
I would go side opening, either shuttle style barn door or more likely an single hinge.
Now how do you load the whale mouth on the ground, you either have to remove it or use some robot arm to load the payload from top and side. 
Side opening has two benefits, it give you an long hinge for opening on the ground, you just extend the payload into the bay and lower it onto the payload adapter. 
In space you might want to rotate the stack to launch more. Downside is that you have to eject sideways, not an problem for smallsats who is used to this, but with starship any falcon 9 payload is secondary payloads  
Second issue is that the loading area will not be an clean room, solution is to simply put your satellite into an lightweight container, Starship is not weight limited launching groups of satellites. 
Guess they make an sort of warehouse of satellites in boxes who might just be plastic film, a frame, an zipper or rip cord for the door and something making the satellite move sideways to eject it, you will get this back after the launch, if the deployment fails you get the satellite back who is an nice change. 

Now we are some years from full commercial use, starlink is easier and we might see starllink launches on starship this year if lucky. It still has the same loading isues. 

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

I just wrote them an email suggesting they let the whole front end peel back like a banana.  Eagerly awaiting the response and my royalty checks!

 

[kerbiloid]

Did you attach one for scale?

[Rakaydos]

1 hour ago, kerbiloid said:

Did you attach one for scale?

What do you think it is, an art exibit?

[insert_name]

Decent chance the second stage from the DISCOVR launch back in 2015 will hit the moon in the coming months

https://www.projectpluto.com/temp/dscovr.htm

[CatastrophicFailure]

5 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

I just wrote them an email suggesting they let the whole front end peel back like a banana.  Eagerly awaiting the response and my royalty checks!

 

You mean like this? 

Yeah, be real careful about them royaly checks... especially the video game... 

5 minutes ago, insert_name said:

Decent chance the second stage from the DISCOVR launch back in 2015 will hit the moon in the coming months

https://www.projectpluto.com/temp/dscovr.htm

Gotta wipe out the Chinese rover after it discovered the Moon House... just make it look like an accident... 

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

54 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

You mean like this? 

Yeah, be real careful about them royaly checks... especially the video game... 

Gotta wipe out the Chinese rover after it discovered the Moon House... just make it look like an accident... 

Yes - and that's the view Russian and Chinese satellites should see just before the end...

(Oh wait, aren't we supposed to keep that part of SS's mission parameters  sooper sekret?)

Edited January 26, 2022 by JoeSchmuckatelli

[tater]

 

 

[Beccab]

10 minutes ago, tater said:

 

 

Three RTLS in less than a month. This is awsome 

[tater]

 

5 hours.

 

[Beccab]

For comparison, sn15 nosecone:

Note that the nosecone above is likely a pathfinder, usually they are covered in insulation while still inside the tent

[tater]

Weather seems pretty garbage for today's launch.

[Beccab]

32 minutes ago, tater said:

Weather seems pretty garbage for today's launch.

What's the secondary launch window, next day + a few minutes?

[Beccab]

Lunar Starship updates

Also:

 

[tater]

24 hour delay on today's launch.

 

[tater]

 

 

[tater]

 

[KSK]

I have to say that all the ASAP comments - at least the ones on those tweets - are perfectly reasonable and not particularly surprising. Personally I'm also reassured that SpaceX have submitted an integrated master schedule because that sounds like they've got their mulch together.  On the other hand I'm sufficiently clueless about this process that I'm probably reading too much into this.

 

[kerbiloid]

Early 1940s

Spoiler

40% exploded

Early 1960s

Spoiler

A project. 0% exploded.

 

Late 1960s

Spoiler

100 % exploded.

 

Early 2020s

Spoiler

Moar nozzlezz.  Moar popcorn.

[tater]

You missed:

Late 2010s

Spoiler

0% exploded

 

 

 

[kerbiloid]

1 hour ago, tater said:

You missed:

Late 2010s

I didn't. These aren't a single pack.

They have been tested separately by 9 engines, the acoustic characteristics of every block are known, so they are 3 units, not 27.

While the listed (including the V-2 with multiple pre-chambers) have several tens of vibration sources at once.

[tater]

Just now, kerbiloid said:

I didn't. These aren't a single pack.

They have been tested separately by 9 engines, the acoustic characteristics of every block are known, so they are 3 units, not 27.

While the listed (including the V-2 with multiple pre-chambers) have several tens of vibration sources at once.

Still firmly strapped together, which is why they start the engines offset in time differently than just F9.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

Revisiting the NASA award: how much 'substantial progress' can we realistically expect when they're still prototyping a return-to-earth SS that does not include a working cargo-bay?

I'd look at SX's ability to land something with cargo on the moon a bit more favorably if we knew they had a craft that functioned in orbit as a cargo vessel.  But - my banana peel snark above, aside - does SX not have a problem in that the ring-section steel tube-sections are structural and part of their whole "low-weight low-cost" solution?  Further, to build a ship with a hatch system and cargo area and deployment system will necessitate a redesign, not just to add doors that open, but also the structural supports to take up the job that the homogenous ring used to do - and the added weight and torque of the required mechanicals?

(I get that these are 'engineering challenges')

So - am I wrong to see the current SS builds as nothing more than 'proof of concept' and 'command and control software and systems' prototypes, but that actual, usable, StarShips will have to be significantly different from the cheap 'lets learn how to do this' stuff?

Edited January 28, 2022 by JoeSchmuckatelli

[Rakaydos]

50 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Revisiting the NASA award: how much 'substantial progress' can we realistically expect when they're still prototyping a return-to-earth SS that does not include a working cargo-bay?

I'd look at SX's ability to land something with cargo on the moon a bit more favorably if we knew they had a craft that functioned in orbit as a cargo vessel.  But - my banana peel snark above, aside - does SX not have a problem in that the ring-section steel tube-sections are structural and part of their whole "low-weight low-cost" solution?  Further, to build a ship with a hatch system and cargo area and deployment system will necessitate a redesign, not just to add doors that open, but also the structural supports to take up the job that the homogenous ring used to do - and the added weight and torque of the required mechanicals?

(I get that these are 'engineering challenges')

So - am I wrong to see the current SS builds as nothing more than 'proof of concept' and 'command and control software and systems' prototypes, but that actual, usable, StarShips will have to be significantly different from the cheap 'lets learn how to do this' stuff?

SpaceX is laser-focused on getting a cheaply reuable orbit capable craft, before they worry about making it useful.

However, I dont see it being terrible difficult to install a side dispensor for small payloads or for deploying small moon rovers. The larger "chomper" concept probably would require a redesign of the forward structure bracing, but that's a problem for "future" spaceX.