JoeSchmuckatelli Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 I'm actually kind of impressed they chose to do a 50% throttle. Proves both that it works and minimizes the potential for damaging the launch table and tower. I'm kind of assuming they have some kind of sensor data from the launch clamps and are inspecting the whole thing and can extrapolate from the test what a full / 90% power burn will do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AckSed Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 "Okay, let's start things off with 90%. Three, two, one..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AckSed Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 There's the shivers I've been missing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 50 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said: I'm actually kind of impressed they chose to do a 50% throttle. Proves both that it works and minimizes the potential for damaging the launch table and tower. I'm kind of assuming they have some kind of sensor data from the launch clamps and are inspecting the whole thing and can extrapolate from the test what a full / 90% power burn will do. Why not 100% throttle on liftoff? I guess 90% is standard max trust and 100% is kind of redlining it. Or its not needed as SS has no payload. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCgothic Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 I'd have expected 100% throttle. Less just invites gravity losses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 6 hours ago, snkiz said: Is it just me or does the booster look like a MK3 tank from above? More like the 3.75 meter tanks who I assumed you thought of as they have an round tank top and a outer edge coming up for the next part. And the need room for the tank dome and the grindfin controls but this take up less relative space on an 9 meter hull than an 3.5 meter one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snkiz Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 6 minutes ago, magnemoe said: More like the 3.75 meter tanks who I assumed you thought of as they have an round tank top and a outer edge coming up for the next part. I know it's round. But the decoupler hardware gives the inside silhouette flat edges, like the mk3. At least that was the first thing that came to my mind when I saw it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 (edited) 20 hours ago, sevenperforce said: It's so large that despite having the same T/W ratio as SLS and STS, it'll probably look like it's lifting off slower. Will definitely look faster than the similarly-sized Saturn V, though. Doesn’t help that pretty much every Saturn V video ever is in slo-mo… 18 hours ago, sevenperforce said: Spalling will ruin your day. With the raw energy coming off 33 raptors, steel would melt and be sprayed away faster than it could conduct heat away. A copper plate would be able to conduct heat faster, but it is soft and would be absolutely shredded by the exhaust coming out of the engine at nearly Mach 10. You’d need a 10” tungsten plate to be able to handle the heat and forces, and even then you might have problems. Then again a 10” tungsten plate Can’t find it again but I saw a tweet the other day of some hardware at the launch site labeled FLAME DIVERTER or similar, but looked like deluge tubing. Take w/ a grain o salt. Tho a giant tungsten slab would be pretty awesome in general. 4 hours ago, tater said: Edited February 11, 2023 by CatastrophicFailure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 39 minutes ago, magnemoe said: Why not 100% throttle on liftoff? I guess 90% is standard max trust and 100% is kind of redlining it. Or its not needed as SS has no payload. 33 minutes ago, RCgothic said: I'd have expected 100% throttle. Less just invites gravity losses. 90% throttle means the rocket has an even larger engine redundancy without changing at all the trajectory, whch helps - and as all that thrust definitely isn't needed for a test flight with no payload, it gives a higher chance of mission success overall. A second possibility is throttling up when they're a few km above the ground, where the engine redundancy has already increased by itself (you can lose more engines if you lose them later) and the GSE is safe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealKerbal3x Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 4 hours: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 Live and currently go Both stages nominal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 Landed. SECO-1 Nominal orbit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 New pad turnaround record! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 15 minutes ago, Beccab said: New pad turnaround record! Hard to believe 5 days ago I was watching a launch from the same pad in person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flavio hc16 Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 (edited) https://ibb.co/wQPTY8V [REDACTED] prototype rolling out at Starbase. Smooth, no flaps, no tiles, no opening, wonder what it can POSSIBLY be? /s Edited February 12, 2023 by Flavio hc16 Image not showing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AckSed Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 I wonder how much mass removing the TPS and Elonerons and cargo capacity saves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeSchmuckatelli Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 I'm totally lost as to what the previous two posters are talking about. Care to explain? @Flavio hc16 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 (edited) Just now, JoeSchmuckatelli said: I'm totally lost as to what the previous two posters are talking about. Care to explain? @Flavio hc16 I assumed @Flavio hc16 was making some sort of comment about the HLS version of the Starship spacecraft. Edited February 12, 2023 by mikegarrison Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 8 minutes ago, mikegarrison said: I assumed @Flavio hc16 was making some sort of comment about the HLS version of the Starship spacecraft. 10 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said: I'm totally lost as to what the previous two posters are talking about. Care to explain? @Flavio hc16 Not HLS, S26 is a depot/tanker prototype. The REDACTED thing comes from Senator Shelby's famous quote, where in the early 2010s he threatened to "cancel the whole space technology program" if he heard the words "propellant depot" from NASA again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 Just now, Beccab said: Not HLS, S26 is a depot/tanker prototype. The REDACTED thing comes from Senator Shelby's famous quote, where in the early 2010s he threatened to "cancel the whole space technology program" if he heard the words "propellant depot" from NASA again OK, thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 19 minutes ago, tater said: Is it stretched? It looks stretched. 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.