Topic: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name) (Read 89549 times)

Nemesis · « **Reply #300 on:** March 11, 2023, 03:00:57 pm »

Just watching the launch of the Terran 1 rocket from Relativity Space. The rocket is supposed to be 85% 3d printed.

Launch was scrubbed due to an "internal abort". Exact reason not yet announced.

Edit: Fuel pressure was 1 PSI low.

Nemesis · « **Reply #301 on:** April 03, 2023, 09:29:22 am »

Terran 1 did fly. The 2nd stage engine didn't do a full run so the flight did not achieve orbit.

The New Shepard failure has now had an explanation. Engineering changes allowed too much heat in streaks to affect the engine bell resulting in a failure.

Blue Origin claims that some would be passengers want to use the abort engine for "extra thrills" but they said no.

Nemesis · « **Reply #302 on:** April 08, 2023, 09:36:10 am »

Once again there is a date for Starship 1st launch the 17th. Now will it or won't it?

Starfox1701 · « **Reply #303 on:** April 08, 2023, 12:20:34 pm »

And this is a completed ship or another test article?

Nemesis · « **Reply #304 on:** April 08, 2023, 08:31:16 pm »

Not cargo carrying but it will be a full launch with the potential to achieve a successful reentry and both stages are to attempt a "water landing" like the Falcon 9 had to successfully do before the first recovery. A full load of engines and presumably fuel and a heat shield on the 2nd stage. Maybe even Starlink for communications. It is the last one using hydraulic gymabling the next launch will use electric. So it is a full launch but it can reasonably be termed a "test article" too.

Nemesis · « **Reply #305 on:** April 10, 2023, 10:46:13 am »

Since Virgin orbits failed launch they have entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. Not a liquidation (yet) but pretty bad.

Virgin Galactic (the space tourism company derived from Spaceship One) is NOT affected (at least directly) by the Virgin Orbit problems. But it has been a long time since their one passenger flight so it is worrisome.

ULA is looking for a buyer. Also not looking good.

Boeing is looking to take a large loss on "Starliner".

One Web on the other hand has completed the first stage of their constellation (after multiple brushes with total failure).

Vulcan Centaur 1st launch is now "June" and Starliner "July" for 1st manned launch.

Nemesis · « **Reply #306 on:** April 15, 2023, 08:19:32 am »

The FAA has issues the launch license for next week with the primary day being April 17th. SpaceX has installed the flight termination system which would seem to indicate that they expect the launch. The license covers at least Monday to Friday to allow for "slippage".

Apparently the 2nd stage will not attempt the vertical "ocean landing" but will do a belly flop horizontal impact, heat shield down. Curious. Hope we get video of both landings and an explanation. It could be to ensure a breakup so no one else can recover it or just to find out how much of an impact it can survive.

Indicators are that the 2nd stage is going to be given 3 more vacuum engines sooner than expected and be lengthened to about 60-61 meters. What this will do for payload and/or general performance is an unanswered question.

So looks like it should REALLY happen this time or at least VERY soon.

Starfox1701 · « **Reply #307 on:** April 15, 2023, 12:42:10 pm »

won't that destroy evidence on how well the heat shield holds up?

Nemesis · « **Reply #308 on:** April 15, 2023, 05:50:20 pm »

Maybe they don't expect it to? Or they could plan to have not just telemetry but telescopic high speed video from all angles. I haven't heard a reason for this and find it surprising.

Nemesis · « **Reply #309 on:** April 16, 2023, 08:55:56 am »

Quote from: Nemesis on April 03, 2023, 09:29:22 am

Terran 1 did fly. The 2nd stage engine didn't do a full run so the flight did not achieve orbit.

The valves for the fuel didn't open fast enough and there was an O2 bubble inhibiting flow so the pumps didn't work right.

Terran 1 will not fly again.

Terran R is scaled back and won't fly this year. 2nd stage not reusable. NOT going to be fully 3d printed just mostly. Will have a bigger fairing than anything currently flying (Starship is bigger but not YET flying).

Nemesis · « **Reply #310 on:** April 17, 2023, 09:19:20 am »

Starship launch - scrubbed due to a valve issue. Seems that a plastic retainer on the valve screws either came off or wasn't on and the screws became loose. Not absolutely sure how the site got that info or how accurate it is, so take it as unverified.

Launch date now Thur. morning.

Edited for date change.

Nemesis · « **Reply #311 on:** April 20, 2023, 08:42:06 am »

Starship achieved lift off and 40 KM. The stage separation maneuver failed. It also appears that not all engines were functioning (whether partial or non functional not yet clear). It is also unclear if the RUD was by the flight termination system or some form of failure.

Starfox1701 · « **Reply #312 on:** April 20, 2023, 01:15:52 pm »

Well thats not a good start As I recall they had entered a period where they couldn't afford to lose tat meany engines all at once.

Nemesis · « **Reply #313 on:** April 20, 2023, 05:25:06 pm »

They planned to lose these engines. Neither stage was planned for recovery. So that is not an issue.

They have also been making at least one engine a day for months now. 39 engines takes 39 days or less to build and they won't be launching that fast for a fair while.

I've seen a claim (without evidence) that some engines failed by concrete impacts and that the hyraulic gimballing failed causing the separation failure. Totally unsubstantiated as of yet but at least possible.

Starfox1701 · « **Reply #314 on:** April 21, 2023, 02:22:28 pm »

While I'm not an expert It is my considered opinion based on the footage I saw that the booster began venting something, probably fuel, from 2 points on the same side that caused the spin. After that proved unrecoverable they self destructed the ship. I believe that at the moment they started the role an RCS quad catastrophically failed perforating the main fuel tank.

nevermind I was wrong

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8q24QLXixo

Nemesis · « **Reply #315 on:** April 21, 2023, 07:16:46 pm »

Scott Manley is a good source. He has connections AND understanding.

Marcus House put out a quick video today with a picture of the crater under the launch stand.

Starfox1701 · « **Reply #316 on:** April 24, 2023, 12:59:45 am »

they shouldn't have gone with the lowest bidder on that one.

Nemesis · « **Reply #317 on:** April 30, 2023, 08:25:09 pm »

Starfox1701 · « **Reply #318 on:** April 30, 2023, 10:02:17 pm »

Yeah that's no where near thick enough and I dont see any rebar so not reinforced either

Nemesis · « **Reply #319 on:** April 30, 2023, 10:49:54 pm »

There is rebar showing in other photos.

Interestingly a old NASA study has been released (or maybe rereleased) showing that with big rockets a flame trench will redirect the sound waves up at the sides of the rocket potentially being more damaging. It also appears to recommend the cooled steel plate that SpaceX is working on and that a deluge system CAN'T be big enough to do the job.

I do wonder if the plate is to be level or tilted to direct away from the rocket. Maybe conical?

News:

Topic: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name) (Read 89549 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Topic: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name) (Read 89549 times)