RealKerbal3x Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 Shiny! And when is Starhopper going to do its untethered hops? I can't wait for that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NSEP Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 1 minute ago, RealKerbal3x said: Shiny! And when is Starhopper going to do its untethered hops? I can't wait for that I think they are going to begin testing on June 24th and are going to fly it in July. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NSEP Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 2 hours ago, magnemoe said: 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. If you look closely you can see it appears slightly bent. But it it could very well be an optical illusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSK Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 Only Slightly Bent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 6 hours ago, magnemoe said: 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. I presume you mean East here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 1 hour ago, tater said: I presume you mean East here? Obviosly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 So, take this with a grain jug of salt, but... Probably just Musk being Musky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NSEP Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 (edited) I wonder what can be done to make it even faster. Test everything at once and once that is done piece everything together when its done, rather than doing it step by step? Also, 'Martian Technocracy' sounds epic. Edited June 23, 2019 by NSEP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 37 minutes ago, NSEP said: I wonder what can be done to make it even faster. Test everything at once and once that is done piece everything together when its done, rather than doing it step by step? Also, 'Martian Technocracy' sounds epic. You want to test stuff who can be tested individually one by one that way, engines is an obvious one. For systems who can only be tested assembled you develop and test multiple variations in parallel as you assume some works. High number of RUD is an expected part of design process. Wartime and archetype is Manhattan project, you build cities to build two types of nuclear bombs as one is likely to work. You primary goal is to speed up development, cost and failures is less important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 This time tomorrow... Looks like the S2 relight is west of Hawaii, and the next relight is over the ATL. Not sure about the fourth, think I miss all of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 5 hours ago, magnemoe said: You want to test stuff who can be tested individually one by one that way, engines is an obvious one. For systems who can only be tested assembled you develop and test multiple variations in parallel as you assume some works. High number of RUD is an expected part of design process. Wartime and archetype is Manhattan project, you build cities to build two types of nuclear bombs as one is likely to work. You primary goal is to speed up development, cost and failures is less important. Also brain interfaces so people can create things with the speed of thought @_@! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 Apparently an engine bit decided it no longer wanted to continue the relationship... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 (edited) ...assuming there’s no more fleeing turbines... Also... Edited June 24, 2019 by CatastrophicFailure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xd the great Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 So, Raptor is the most technological advanced engine there is, and SpaceX is like "we are spewing this so fast it does not even sound complex". Damn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 1 hour ago, Xd the great said: So, Raptor is the most technological advanced engine there is, and SpaceX is like "we are spewing this so fast it does not even sound complex". Damn. And then... ?!? Wait, what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 @CatastrophicFailure thanks for all the twitter stuff! (me not on twit) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 2 hours ago, tater said: No way to make methane on the Moon, sadly. Meaning that Moon missions will require a LOT of tanker launches and refueling in high orbit (how much fuel can a Starship tanker bring to high orbit?). Maybe they should switch to hydrolox and buy some RS-68 or BE-3 variants for their Moonships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotius Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 7 minutes ago, sh1pman said: No way to make methane on the Moon, sadly. Meaning that Moon missions will require a LOT of tanker launches and refueling in high orbit (how much fuel can a Starship tanker bring to high orbit?). Maybe they should switch to hydrolox and buy some RS-68 or BE-3 variants for their Moonships. Where's the will, there's a way. Moon Cow Farm TM to the rescue! First build hydroponic fodder farms. Then bring calfs from Earth. Start filtering cow gaseous waste products from the air. Now you have plenty of methane AND Moon cheese to sell on Earth for a tidy profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 I’m not a rocket scientist, but wouldn’t u just need hydrogen and carbon and energy to basically make methane? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 5 minutes ago, Dale Christopher said: I’m not a rocket scientist, but wouldn’t u just need hydrogen and carbon and energy to basically make methane? Where would you get carbon on Moon? There’s iron and aluminum silicates, titanium oxide, magnesium and calcium silicates and water ice. Any carbon will have to be brought from Earth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 35 minutes ago, sh1pman said: Where would you get carbon on Moon? There’s iron and aluminum silicates, titanium oxide, magnesium and calcium silicates and water ice. Any carbon will have to be brought from Earth. That's interesting. I suppose there might be dry ice deposits in the permanently shaded craters on the moon as well as water ice? I thought carbon was common as dirt which is why I didn't think it would be a big deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVaughan Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 58 minutes ago, sh1pman said: Maybe they should switch to hydrolox and buy some RS-68 or BE-3 variants for their Moonships. They should be fine with methalox. We had a discussion in this thread about Starships payload capacity to the moon a little over a month ago. Eg in https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/159887-spacex-discussion-thread/&do=findComment&comment=3600985 I calculated that using two fully refueled Starships (one for the lunar landing and return, and another as a tanker to refuel the first in elliptical Earth orbit, with both already refuelled in a 250 km LEO) they can land and return around 125 tons of cargo to the surface of the moon. (Most of my Starship performance figures were assumptions from an earlier post by someone else in the same discussion). 125 tons of cargo is a lot, and obviously margins improve with smaller payloads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinimumSky5 Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 31 minutes ago, Dale Christopher said: That's interesting. I suppose there might be dry ice deposits in the permanently shaded craters on the moon as well as water ice? I thought carbon was common as dirt which is why I didn't think it would be a big deal. Carbon is very common, it's the 4th most common element in the universe. It's very abundant across the solar system, with the exception of two bodies (that we know of): Mercury, and the Moon. Both bodies are depleted in lighter compounds, but the Moon is highly lacking in hydrogen and carbon. 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.