Page 102 of 106 FirstFirst ... 25292100101102103104 ... LastLast
Results 3,031 to 3,060 of 3178

Thread: SpaceX

  1. #3031
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,228
    Buckle up kiddies...

    1 hour after today's successful SN-04 static fire with a 25 tonne mass simulator, the FAA issued a 2 year suborbital RLV launch license. This is for any number for Starship missions.

    License PDF: https://t.co/ksyfzc4Gj1?amp=1

    Monday's NOTAM is for up to 26,000 feet.

    Also; they'll be removing the flare stack, replacing it with a condensation unit so they can trap & liquify vented methane instead of burning it.

    Static Fire #4
    https://youtu.be/sVxt8hHzdgA

  2. #3032
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,382
    It appears to me that the vehicle is oscillating while the engine is burning, but it may be just my old eyes.

    Updating how many engines were tested and what number is selected for the first hop?

  3. #3033
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    532
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    It appears to me that the vehicle is oscillating while the engine is burning, but it may be just my old eyes.

    Updating how many engines were tested and what number is selected for the first hop?
    What you may have seen is an optical effect due to very high magnification + atmospheric effects. It can result in the same sort of distortions you get in a mirage. The video I watched definitely was suffering from just that.

  4. #3034
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,382
    Well I would not want accident while testing engines.

  5. #3035
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    3,155
    Oh boy. Another Starship prototype goes up in flames today:

    A fourth prototype of SpaceX’s next generation Starship rocket exploded right after a test at the company’s south Texas test site on Friday. Shortly after SpaceX ignited the engine on the test rocket, a massive fireball engulfed the vehicle in flames, leaving very little hardware still standing and apparently causing damage to the test site.

    The failed test comes just a day before SpaceX is set to perform an unrelated launch for NASA that will send two astronauts to the International Space Station. That historic mission will take place out of Cape Canaveral, Florida, on SpaceX’s workhorse Falcon 9 rocket, which has flown more than 100 times before.

  6. #3036
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,382
    Quote Originally Posted by schlaugh View Post
    Oh boy. Another Starship prototype goes up in flames today:
    I just saw this on TV. Not necessarily a good event. The manned launch is with a F9 rocket and I'm not sure why this was included in the blurb, but it is news broadcasters.

  7. #3037
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    532
    Big boom!

  8. #3038
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    3,155
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    I just saw this on TV. Not necessarily a good event. The manned launch is with a F9 rocket and I'm not sure why this was included in the blurb, but it is news broadcasters.
    It'd be an incomplete story to talk about the explosion without noting, even in passing, that SpaceX is holding an unrelated launch on Saturday. Or describing the SpaceX business in general if the launch wasn't taking place.

  9. #3039
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,228
    Bets are being made it was a GSE leak.

    If not that my bet would be the methane downcomer/lower dome weld.

  10. #3040
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Great NorthWet
    Posts
    15,522
    It appears to me the whole concept is seriously flawed. Or kinda stupid.
    Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

  11. #3041
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    No longer near Grover's Mill
    Posts
    5,197
    Good video of the static fire and explosion at the following link:
    Explosion is at about the 1 hour 24 minute mark.
    https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/29/sp...ine-fire-test/

    ETA: There is a considerable amount of time between the engine test and explosion - with a giant leak happening in between.
    I may have many faults, but being wrong ain't one of them. - Jimmy Hoffa

  12. #3042
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,228
    Looks like the GSE let go during de-tanking, perhaps damaged by the static fire. Once that happens a boomski is inevitable.

    On the bright side, they were going to redo the GSE anyhow to add re-condensing vented methane, there's a second test stand mostly built, and SN-05 is already stacked in High Bay 1.

  13. #3043
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    16,528
    Me to Mom, watching the news: “This is a different one, of course, the one they’re going on tomorrow is another rocket they’ve been developing for ten years.”

    Mom: “WELL, OF COURSE IT IS!”
    The greatest journey of all time, for all to see
    Every mission makes our dreams reality
    And our destiny begins with you and me
    Through all space and time, the achievement of mankind
    As we sail the sea of discovery, on heroes’ wings we fly!

  14. #3044
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    3,155
    Looks like the launch directors will take an early decision on the weather:

    The forecast for Saturday was likewise precarious. Mission managers plan to make an earlier decision on weather hazards in a bid to avoid unnecessarily wearing out the crew with another suit-up and full day of launch preparations.

    “Back-to-back wet dress rehearsals” disrupt the astronauts’ sleep cycles, NASA chief Jim Bridenstine told a Friday news conference.

  15. #3045
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,382
    Quote Originally Posted by docmordrid View Post
    Looks like the GSE let go during de-tanking, perhaps damaged by the static fire. Once that happens a boomski is inevitable.

    On the bright side, they were going to redo the GSE anyhow to add re-condensing vented methane, there's a second test stand mostly built, and SN-05 is already stacked in High Bay 1.
    I believe you to be a very knowledgably individual concerning SpaceX, however I have been looking at your post and trying to determine what GSE refers. It appears to be a system to de-tank, but I'm lost again.

  16. #3046
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,926
    Yes, it would be helpful to minimize the use of specialized acronyms and initialisms. I believe I know what it refers to, but only because I watched this Scott Manley video where he discussed the explosion:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BCUYG5SonCY

    In the video, he mentions “ground service equipment” which he says is used to load and unload propellent.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  17. #3047
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,382
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    Yes, it would be helpful to minimize the use of specialized acronyms and initialisms. I believe I know what it refers to, but only because I watched this Scott Manley video where he discussed the explosion:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BCUYG5SonCY

    In the video, he mentions “ground service equipment” which he says is used to load and unload propellent.
    Thanks, that makes sense.

  18. #3048
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,846
    Basically the connection all the propellants, power, and control lines connect through. You can see stuff start gushing out at the lower edge of the stainless steel body...but that's just a reinforced skirt, the tanks, the engine, etc are well above that. The only thing down there is the connection to the ground equipment.

    Speculation: a few tests back they had a fire that damaged control connections and prevented them from unloading propellants, and had to wait a couple days for the propellant to boil off before they could do anything with the vehicle. I wonder if they locked the vehicle-side valves in the open position to put the propellant flow entirely under the control of the ground equipment in order to prevent that from happening again. If the GSE connection then came loose, the vehicle would just dump all its propellants out, which would look pretty much like this did.

  19. #3049
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    15,719
    Quote Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
    It appears to me the whole concept is seriously flawed. Or kinda stupid.
    If there would be any other rocket design that never went up in flames, you might draw that conclusion. As they all went kaboom at one time or another and today's explosion appears unrelated to Starship itself, not so much. If rocketry were easy, everybody would do it and launch escape rockets (LES, the pointy minirocket on top of the actual rocket to blast crew to safety) would not be a thing. Starship SN4 has demonstrated to survive multiple pressurization tests, static fires, including a mass simulator (that nearly reached orbit in this explosion, look at that thing fly! 25 tons!) so the basic construction principle (welded steel) seems valid.

    With SN5 being stacked already and a second pad nearly finished, I think the delays will not be too long. Of course they'll want to be sure what caused today's spontaneous mass simulator cannon situation.
    With sufficient thrust, water towers fly just fine.

  20. #3050
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,846
    https://twitter.com/joroulette/statu...84468322811905

    Quote Originally Posted by Joey Roulette @joroulette
    Elon Musk, leaving the KSC press site just now, said of yesterday's Starship test in Boca Chica Texas: "Unfortunately what we thought was going to be a minor test of a quick disconnect ended up being a big problem," referring to the explosion.

  21. #3051
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,228
    That explains a lot...

  22. #3052
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,816
    Quote Originally Posted by Darrell View Post
    Big boom!
    Nedelin was unavailable for comment.

  23. #3053
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    15,719
    They wanted quick disconnect and they got a boatload of it.
    With sufficient thrust, water towers fly just fine.

  24. #3054
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,846
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas View Post
    They wanted quick disconnect and they got a boatload of it.
    Lots of things disconnected, very quickly.

    It's interesting to see what didn't come loose. Bonus of stainless steel construction: lots of wreckage to go over: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/in...494#msg2089494

    The tank welds look like they held up pretty well, with tears in the metal going right across them.

  25. #3055
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Great NorthWet
    Posts
    15,522
    I spent 40 years as a mechanical engineer, with the first 20 in heavy machinery where everything was welded. It's pretty much never the actual welds that fail. Most common is in the heat affected zone of the parent metal, but that can initiate a crack across the rest of the part.
    Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

  26. #3056
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    37,618
    The thing about Musk is, he's willing to bust prototypes if it means getting closer to his goals, and he can afford to throw money at it. Most space agencies answer to less dedicated powers.

    If we're going to have a Tony Stark, isn't a commercial spaceship a better end product than a suit of armor with only one authorized user?
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  27. #3057
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    2,103
    Great launch yesterday! I only wish the networks would have shown coverage of the return landing of the booster stage. I find that technological feat more amazing than the rocket launch. Nice docking job this morning too.

  28. #3058
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,891
    Speaking of rockets blowing up, that is how the Atlas was made. And every other great rocket ever.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  29. #3059
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    4,214
    What's happening with Starship now is pretty much what happened when SpaceX was first trying to recover the first stage on the Falcon 9. Tried retrieving from the water, didn't work, moved onto landing on barges with some pretty spectacular failures and you had the naysayers smugly telling everyone 'I told you so', right up until SpaceX succeeded and turned it into something that's all but routine now.

  30. #3060
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,926
    From the early SpaceX days I have taken, I think, a cautiously optimistic approach. Mainly, as I believe I said more than once, I appreciated seeing someone trying when government space and industry had been in a rut for decades. For that, I was derisively labeled a "fanboy" more than once. Old space, I was told, knows what it takes to build rockets, and it is and will always be expensive. This upstart, they said, didn't know what they were doing. I didn't much appreciate the fanboy comments, and I find it highly amusing that the people that made the comments either have shut up or dramatically changed their tune. It is now Old space that is, more often than not, looking bad, slow and too expensive. Also amusing, there are now quite a lot of people that are far bigger fans than I have ever been.

    Anyway, SpaceX has managed to do better than I, a so-called "fan" expected. I'd suggest it isn't a great idea to bet against them. Sure, maybe they will fail with Starship, and personally, I think that while their test/break/fix process has merit, maybe it wouldn't hurt to spend a bit more time doing sanity or desk checks. I get the feeling they are pushing a bit too hard right now and are running into avoidable mistakes. I also think it will take longer than they expect, but I think there is a very good chance they will ultimately succeed.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •