SpaceX flight testing in South Texas
Joined: Aug 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 1,221
Likes: 129
From: Near Stuttgart, Germany
It was the same with the Space Shuttle. The first five flights were covered live on TV (no internet yet...), the next five were mentioned in the news and from there on only the accidents got some media coverage.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,361
From: Peripatetic
Anyone able to explain the significance of that banana cartoon?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,361
From: Peripatetic
Starship Flight 6 test is scheduled to launch on Tuesday 19th Nov at 5 p.m. EST (2100 GMT), or 4 p.m. CST from SpaceX's Starbase facility near Boca Chica Beach in South Texas.
SpaceX has a 30-minute window in which to launch the Flight 5 mission. This means that Starship Flight 6 could lift off sometime between 5 p.m. and 5:30 p.m. EST (2130 GMT).
https://www.spacex.com/launches/miss...rship-flight-6
SpaceX has a 30-minute window in which to launch the Flight 5 mission. This means that Starship Flight 6 could lift off sometime between 5 p.m. and 5:30 p.m. EST (2130 GMT).
https://www.spacex.com/launches/miss...rship-flight-6
Starship Flight 6 is scheduled to flight on 19th of November, 2024. Curious about the changes? Here's some of them! (But I will most likely forget some):
S31:
- Thermal Protection System (TPS) tiles were removed from the sides of the vehicle, saving around 400-500kg of weight.
- New "Banana for scale" stickers.
- 6 TPS tiles on the frontal side of the right aft flap, reasons unknown.
B13:
- Chines have more rivets, suggesting more reinforcement.
- Both FTS boxes were moved slightly, the top FTS box receiving the same design as the bottom FTS box, along with a simplified connection design integrated into the leftmost front raceway.
- Leftmost front raceway was redesigned and slightly extended to reach into the booster top section.
- New, smaller design of the "Cowbell" vents on the sides of the booster.
- Raceway holding thingies (Sorry) now hold both of the rightmost front raceways.
S31:
- Thermal Protection System (TPS) tiles were removed from the sides of the vehicle, saving around 400-500kg of weight.
- New "Banana for scale" stickers.
- 6 TPS tiles on the frontal side of the right aft flap, reasons unknown.
B13:
- Chines have more rivets, suggesting more reinforcement.
- Both FTS boxes were moved slightly, the top FTS box receiving the same design as the bottom FTS box, along with a simplified connection design integrated into the leftmost front raceway.
- Leftmost front raceway was redesigned and slightly extended to reach into the booster top section.
- New, smaller design of the "Cowbell" vents on the sides of the booster.
- Raceway holding thingies (Sorry) now hold both of the rightmost front raceways.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,361
From: Peripatetic
Flight 6 full stack this morning after Booster FTS was installed last night. T-minus 3 days and counting!
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,361
From: Peripatetic
What is a raceway?
They could be routed internally, but in most cases the skin of the rocket is also the skin of the a fuel tank, or there is limited space between the two. It also makes access to items such as the FTS far easier in the days before launch.
You can see them working on the inside of one of the previous boosters before launch.
https://www.teslarati.com/wp-content...-2048x1167.jpg
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,361
From: Peripatetic
SpaceX's Gwynne Shotwell: “I would not be surprised if we fly 400 Starship launches in the next four years."
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,361
From: Peripatetic
Flight 6 full stack ready to go at T-minus 27 hrs and counting!
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,361
From: Peripatetic
NEWS: Trump is rumored to be in Texas tomorrow to watch SpaceX's Starship launch in person.
Temporary flight restrictions for were issued today for "VIP Movement"
Temporary flight restrictions for were issued today for "VIP Movement"
Joined: Aug 2023
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 77
Likes: 46
From: Texas
The explosion of Booster 13 upon landing looked like a small nuke. So with this data point how can SpaceX ever be allowed to try and land the booster anywhere near a populated area or a protected wildlife refuge? Back to landing on a rig offshore.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,361
From: Peripatetic
A massive exaggeration. The only explosion was the engine nozzles making contact with cold sea water, which won’t happen on land. Two hours later the vast majority of the booster is still; afloat.
Decisionnto go for a water landing seems based on the tower in top of the launch tower having been knocked askew and nothing to do with the booster - a simple fix which shouldn’t delay the next launch.
Starship - stripped of heat tiles and given an aggressive re-entry profile it wasn’t expected to survive….. performed perfectly.
Future launches will use the Starship Mk2 with increased fuel and redesigned flaps. Future Boosters increase thrust/payload by 50% with Raptor 3s.
Decisionnto go for a water landing seems based on the tower in top of the launch tower having been knocked askew and nothing to do with the booster - a simple fix which shouldn’t delay the next launch.
Starship - stripped of heat tiles and given an aggressive re-entry profile it wasn’t expected to survive….. performed perfectly.
Future launches will use the Starship Mk2 with increased fuel and redesigned flaps. Future Boosters increase thrust/payload by 50% with Raptor 3s.
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 262
From: Blighty
They have landed one already.
It looks like the comms tower on top of the launch tower got damaged which is why the booster landed out to sea.
The offshore rig idea is a dead duck. Can you imagine how much the top of the tower would move about in even a light swell. A catch would be impossible.
Joined: Aug 2023
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 77
Likes: 46
From: Texas
ORAC
At around 1:36:30 on this video you see a massive explosion well after the booster touched complete with mushroom cloud.
The point is that the booster has substantial stored explosive potential which can level a large area if they don”t catch the booster perfectly and there are no post landing fires.
The upper stage was always suppose to survive and land.
While they did accomplish significant technical achievements, they are still batting 0 on reusability.
At around 1:36:30 on this video you see a massive explosion well after the booster touched complete with mushroom cloud.
The point is that the booster has substantial stored explosive potential which can level a large area if they don”t catch the booster perfectly and there are no post landing fires.
The upper stage was always suppose to survive and land.
While they did accomplish significant technical achievements, they are still batting 0 on reusability.
Joined: Aug 2023
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 77
Likes: 46
From: Texas
Yes I have. Note I said reusability, not survivability. Did you note the heat deformed engine nozzles on the booster? The problem is that non-running engines have no fuel cooling of the nozzle or engine core so are damaged due to reentry heating. Also the fire after landing at the base of the booster is not suppose to be the norm. Exposing hardware to these temperatures pretty well scraps them so no reusability.
As to the orbiter, 5’s orbiter violently exploded right after landing and 6 was last seen on fire so not ringing endorsements for reusability.
As to the orbiter, 5’s orbiter violently exploded right after landing and 6 was last seen on fire so not ringing endorsements for reusability.
Joined: Oct 2004
Aviation Qualifications: Military (Retired)
Posts: 454
Likes: 134
From: Norfolk, UK
They have demonstrated repeatedly the ability to put the booster where they want it and have the FTS to fall back on if that's not working out for them.
Plus, considering they're catching it where they launched it a few minutes prior when it had 3400 tonnes in the tanks, I think the probability of damage if it did have a RUD on landing with a few 10s of tonnes left is probably already covered in their risk analysis.
Rockets do go boom from time to time, that's why the launch sites are where they are.
Plus, considering they're catching it where they launched it a few minutes prior when it had 3400 tonnes in the tanks, I think the probability of damage if it did have a RUD on landing with a few 10s of tonnes left is probably already covered in their risk analysis.
Rockets do go boom from time to time, that's why the launch sites are where they are.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,361
From: Peripatetic
Musk - one more sea landing for Starship and then they will go for a catch.
Don’t know if that means off Australia again or if they’ll do an orbit and try and land it off the launch site. Since they’ll have to bring it back for a catch I think it probable as a dry run (sic)….
Don’t know if that means off Australia again or if they’ll do an orbit and try and land it off the launch site. Since they’ll have to bring it back for a catch I think it probable as a dry run (sic)….
Joined: Sep 2022
Posts: 140
Likes: 79
From: EGBO
Yes I have. Note I said reusability, not survivability. Did you note the heat deformed engine nozzles on the booster? The problem is that non-running engines have no fuel cooling of the nozzle or engine core so are damaged due to reentry heating. Also the fire after landing at the base of the booster is not suppose to be the norm. Exposing hardware to these temperatures pretty well scraps them so no reusability.
As to the orbiter, 5’s orbiter violently exploded right after landing and 6 was last seen on fire so not ringing endorsements for reusability.
As to the orbiter, 5’s orbiter violently exploded right after landing and 6 was last seen on fire so not ringing endorsements for reusability.
5's orbiter was destroyed by the FTS...
6's orbiter landed in water and fell over - you do realise in future it will be caught in the same way as the booster...?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,361
From: Peripatetic
An interesting part of the SpaceX commentary you may have missed was the job advert - they want engineers in various trades and welders to contact them for interviews as they want to recruit thousands of more workers for their Starship mega-factory just being finished.
The reason is so they can up production to be able to roll-out a completed Starship every 8 hours.
Yes - that’s right every 8 hours.
Using the same model as Falcon 9 booster and upper stage, there will only be a need for a smaller number of boosters - they are expected to be back on the ground after 10 minutes and turned round in a few hours to launch again.
Starships, however, will have a multiple number of versions with many with long trips, some never to return.
Throw always will be tankers - which might, possibly, be reused in orbit.. Others will be lunar landers which may be left on the surface for bases or used as earth-moon shuttles. Later many will head to Mars never to return carrying machinery, supplies and personnel to land and provide the core parts of the buildings for a colony.
Those that do land to be reused will replace Falcon 9 for uses such as launching Starlink satellites - but much larger ones and in their hundreds per trip rather than 60-66, working towards the planned constellations of over 40,000.
The reason is so they can up production to be able to roll-out a completed Starship every 8 hours.
Yes - that’s right every 8 hours.
Using the same model as Falcon 9 booster and upper stage, there will only be a need for a smaller number of boosters - they are expected to be back on the ground after 10 minutes and turned round in a few hours to launch again.
Starships, however, will have a multiple number of versions with many with long trips, some never to return.
Throw always will be tankers - which might, possibly, be reused in orbit.. Others will be lunar landers which may be left on the surface for bases or used as earth-moon shuttles. Later many will head to Mars never to return carrying machinery, supplies and personnel to land and provide the core parts of the buildings for a colony.
Those that do land to be reused will replace Falcon 9 for uses such as launching Starlink satellites - but much larger ones and in their hundreds per trip rather than 60-66, working towards the planned constellations of over 40,000.