Recent Posts

61

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by knightstorm on June 04, 2024, 12:57:39 am »

The starliner is starting to feel uncomfortably similar to the Apollo 1.

62

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on June 02, 2024, 01:57:08 pm »

Starliner delayed till June 5th (the 1st delay was a ground computer issue, this delay may be a continuation of that, I haven't seen a why yet)

Starship IFT4 delayed till June 6th,  Why?  I don't know. 

Looks like in May SpaceX had at least 15 launches.

63

General Starfleet Command Forum / Re: Learning Klingon with Rosetta Stone.

« Last post by Starfox1701 on May 31, 2024, 05:21:07 pm »

well how about that

64

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on May 28, 2024, 05:49:23 pm »

Looks like during IFT3 the hot staging came off and the controls were programmed with that mass in place couldn't adjust and that is why the grid fins seemed unable to control the booster.  Also not all the engines ignited on schedule once again due to fuel filter blockages.  Hopefully this time the fixes will work.   They plan to eject the hot staging ring.  The ring is about 9 tons (I knew it was heavy but didn't think it was that heavy) which explains why its loss threw off the programming. 

Starship is not going to do an in space Raptor restart but does plan to do the "ocean landing" like the booster and the early Falcon 9 landing tests.  The vents for attitude control have both been increased in number and have heating elements to stop the freezing that caused the tumble last time.

This may be the last "block 1" flight.  The next booster/starship combo may be of upgraded "block 2" design. 

Lets hope for a flawless flight.

65

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on May 24, 2024, 11:51:21 am »

Seems that the date may be/may have slipped to June.  Looks like the IFT3 mishap report hasn't been filed with NASA yet.

IFT 4 now seems to be June 1st.

There has been a simple mention of the construction of another megabay.  Not an announcement just a mention. 

UPDATE:
Starliner is now also June 1st time about 12:25PM.  The launch window for IFT4 ends at noon.  I guess that if IFT4 launches that Starliner won't have many watching whether it launches or not.

Another Update:

Starship delayed to June 5th (Wednesday) again launch window ending at noon. 

66

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on May 22, 2024, 02:55:19 pm »

Seems that the date may be/may have slipped to June.  Looks like the IFT3 mishap report hasn't been filed with NASA yet.

IFT 4 now seems to be June 1st.

There has been a simple mention of the construction of another megabay.  Not an announcement just a mention. 

UPDATE:
Starliner is now also June 1st time about 12:25PM.  The launch window for IFT4 ends at noon.  I guess that if IFT4 launches that Starliner won't have many watching whether it launches or not.

67

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on May 18, 2024, 02:00:16 pm »

50 Falcon launches so far this year.  A 21st booster landing has occurred.

An "anomaly" in testing on a future Starship resulting in damage of the "race way" for pipes and electrical components on the exterior of Starship may delay the next launch (or may have been responsible for the delay to June) as they ensure it won't happen during IFT4.  They weren't testing with methane so there was no danger of ignition. 

An upgraded forward Starship flap has been sighted with a revised shape (labelled block 2).

The Boca Chica star factory is now seen to be connected to one of the mega bays right next to the automatic welding system for welding rings together.  It looks like the rings can be moved directly to the megabay for assembly without going outside at all. 

Components for the next launch tower that have been waiting at a port are on the move again so assembly of the 2nd tower could begin soon.

The FAA has agreed not to wait for the mission report for IFT3 before approving IFT4 as long as SpaceX reports that there were no dangers to the public from the issues with IFT3, so flight approval could come soon.

There are also reports that SpaceX may build their own highway at Boca Chica to reduce road closures.  When and where is still a mystery.

68

General Starfleet Command Forum / Learning Klingon with Rosetta Stone.

« Last post by Panzergranate on May 13, 2024, 03:42:44 pm »

You can now learn Klingon with Rosetta Stone, apparently.

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

However, Kzinti still isn't taught, yet.....

69

Engineering / Re: Voyager 1

« Last post by Tulwar on May 13, 2024, 01:40:26 am »

Panzergranate was referring to the Chinese lack of concern about customer satisfaction and their penchant for corruption, leading to "tofu dregs construction."  We still experience poorly manufactured crap in our stores.  We know they do some things right, like the 3 Gorges Dam.  If it were made like an ordinary infrastructure project, it would have killed millions of people, by now.  As it is product of hubris, to begin with, the dam is damned to collapse, before its time.

70

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on May 11, 2024, 07:57:38 pm »

IFT4 now showing as April 2024 (no day of the month).  Lets see if the FAA will issue another license that quick.

Now showing as May 2024.  Either they expect delays due to needed modifications to address the issues revealed or more time for the FAA to be satisfied (maybe both).

I'm prone to be extremely critical of Musk, but I suppose "eventually" is key to that claim.  Saturn's LEO payload for the Apollo lunar missions was 140 tons for CM, LEM and fuel fifty years ago, so 200 tons seems doable.... eventually.

Don't forget that you lose a significant amount of payload by going for reusable.  Also potentially lowering cost/kg significantly. 

Musk might be well advised to keep the current size for rockets that need to be fully refueled in orbit and the larger size for orbital cargo and fuel deliveries.  200+ tons of fuel delivered by a V3 to a V2 configuration could refuel it in 6 missions (1200 tons fuel if dry).

Seems that the date may be/may have slipped to June.  Looks like the IFT3 mishap report hasn't been filed with NASA yet.