SpaceX Super Heavy and Starship updates

By DocM
in Science News & Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

DocM

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
On 05/08/2021 at 09:00, warwagon said:

How many of these do they have built?

>

 

They've completed over 100 Raptors and have at least a other 60 or so undergoing assembly.  This is just at Hawthorne CA, and they're building larger Raptor factory at the McGregor, TX test center. SpaceX is targeting a cost of about $250,000/Raptor.

 

A reusable RS-25 for the Shuttle cost about $40 million. A new but disposable RS-25 for SLS will cost $146 million. (link...)

 

S20 rollout. They'll likely stack it for integration checkouts and photo-ops, then bring it down to finish installing the tiles, etc.

 

272418784_Starship20rolloutScreenshot_2021-08-05-15-06-46-256.thumb.jpg.e47e39710dc58f45b546cacb0f005566.jpg

 

 

Edited by DocM
  • TrevorLahey
  • Like 1
Mentor

IsItPluggedIn

Posted
Posted
On 07/08/2021 at 04:57, bguy_1986 said:

I've been meaning to watch this.  Haven't had time yet:

 

Not a lot of detail in there. A few tidbits that are interesting, a lot of time talking about business philosophy. Interesting if you have some time to waste.

  • anthdci and TrevorLahey
  • Like 2
Mentor

anthdci

Posted
Posted
On 07/08/2021 at 03:33, DocM said:

Oh, my...

 

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1423830326665650179

 

IMG_20210806_221802.jpg

Do we have any idea of the plan? When they stacked I thought it would be a few weeks, but now they’ve rolled starship back and have stripped engines out of both it looks like it’ll be longer.

Mentor

IsItPluggedIn

Posted
Posted

Some of the engines bells were still white, so the assumption is that they were not even tested yet.

 

The rollout was technically just a stacking test. But I think it was also a political move to get the FAA to move quicker.

Grand Master

Jim K Global Moderator

Posted
  • Global Moderator
Posted
On 09/08/2021 at 10:42, anthdci said:

Do we have any idea of the plan? When they stacked I thought it would be a few weeks, but now they’ve rolled starship back and have stripped engines out of both it looks like it’ll be longer.

Looks like they are planning to light it ~2 weeks...if I'm reading the tweet correctly.

 

 

 

Grand Master

DocM

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
On 09/08/2021 at 18:36, IsItPluggedIn said:

Some of the engines bells were still white, so the assumption is that they were not even tested yet.

 

The rollout was technically just a stacking test. But I think it was also a political move to get the FAA to move quicker.

 

It was also a counterpunch against a bunch of FUD Bezos-connected media has been publishing; a "Context Card" hit piece in the fold of Washington Post (Bezos owns it), another hit-piece on Musk in Tech Insider (Bezos is a stakeholder in Insider Inc.) pushing a hit-piece book, and a Blue Origin (Bezos owned) "infographic" tossing shade at Starship vs. Blue's America's Team. All this after the GAO ruled, so they're drawing a lot of rolled- & side- eyes.

 

Sour grapes.

Edited by DocM
Grand Master

DocM

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Bezos says it'll take 14  Starsjip Tankers to fill Starship HLS. 16 launches counting the Starship HLS and depot ship.

 

Musk fires back that it'd be 8 to fill 'er up at 150 tonnes/launch, but lunar missions only need a half tank; 4 Starship Tankers. 6 launches counting HLS and the depot ship. 

 

Also, SpaceX's conops allows the depot to be loaded well before Starship HLS launches. 

 

 

 

Grand Master

TrevorLahey

Posted
Posted
On 11/08/2021 at 23:51, DocM said:

Bezos says it'll take 14  Starsjip Tankers to fill Starship HLS. 16 launches counting the Starship HLS and depot ship.

 

Musk fires back that it'd be 8 to fill 'er up at 150 tonnes/launch, but lunar missions only need a half tank; 4 Starship Tankers. 6 launches counting HLS and the depot ship. 

 

Also, SpaceX's conops allows the depot to be loaded well before Starship HLS launches. 

 

I'm surprised it will take that much.  We made it to the moon with Apollo.  I know it's a much larger ship, but it can hold a lot more fuel as well.  Is the mass to fuel ratio very different to Apollo?  (I'm sure there are a lot of other factors as well).

Grand Master

DocM

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 12/08/2021 at 08:37, bguy_1986 said:

I'm surprised it will take that much.  We made it to the moon with Apollo.  I know it's a much larger ship, but it can hold a lot more fuel as well.  Is the mass to fuel ratio very different to Apollo?  (I'm sure there are a lot of other factors as well).

Apollo had a very small mass budget, so far less propellant in the vehicle.

 

Moving mass requires deltaV, energy, and the more you're moving the more spacecraft & propellant mass you need. 

 

NASA only asked for the ability to transport 4 crew members and a few tonnes of cargo.

 

SpaceX seriously one-upped the competition on all counts at the cost of refuelling Starship HLS in LEO, where it's safer to do mission critical ops than in lunar orbit.

 

NASA liked the trade; by sending much more mass in each trip setting up and maintaining a base becomes safer, easier and cheaper.

 

OTOH; both Blue and Dynetics under-built their proposals, depending on even more funding later to upscale their designs to NASA's requirements. 

 

EX: their initial landers only carried 2 crew members and less than the asked for cargo.

 

In Dynetics case, to carry a lunar "car" would require a second lander with the habitat swapped out.

 

Starship can carry 4+ crew members, and its cargo hold is large enough to carry a light armored vehicle - or two. One cargo only Starship variant NASA shared has 4 decks for large equipment, brought down to the surface by elevator.

 

Starship HLS crews also use the elevator.

 

Blue's lander has them climb down a 40 foot ladder.

  • TrevorLahey
  • Thanks 1
Mentor

IsItPluggedIn

Posted
Posted

I believe there was 2 parts, an initial demonstration which would be 2 Astronauts(this competition) and then the actual contract for future missions would be 4 Astronauts.

 

The big piece that I have not seen talked about is that, in BO's proposal, to meet the 4 crew requirement of future missions, they effectively needed to design/build/test a new lander as it was so dissimilar to their demonstration lander. It would also need to use New Glen to launch as FH/Atlas5/Vulcan are not big enough to launch the new design.

 

So their proposal was.

1. Build a lander

2. Test it (2 flights)

3. Design a new lander

4. Launch on a rocket that has not launched yet or any real expected date.

5. Not sure if they would test it before landing people etc. (since it cant dock with Orion without SLS)

 

Then complain that the starship is untested technology. Also they didnt outline anywhere who would pay for the design and testing of the second lander.

 

There is a big push at NASA for Artemis to be sustainable, their plans had no details about other clients of the service just NASA, which was another piece of the contract.

 

The more you learn about the requirements that NASA set forth and how many pieces BO just ignored, the easier it is to see why Starship won. NASA really had no choice but to choose SpaceX.

Grand Master

Skiver Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

That's actually a really good point I'd not considered. Lets pretend BO had their ###### together and had their proposed lander ready etc. How many launches is it going to take for them to get the same amount of equipment to the moon that a single HLS is capable of? I would assume similar to Starship the lander has no plans to ever return back to earth so it's not even launchers, it's also how many landers would it take? 

Grand Master

DocM

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
On 13/08/2021 at 03:51, Skiver said:

That's actually a really good point I'd not considered. Lets pretend BO had their ###### together and had their proposed lander ready etc. How many launches is it going to take for them to get the same amount of equipment to the moon that a single HLS is capable of?

<inserted break>

I would assume similar to Starship the lander has no plans to ever return back to earth so it's not even launchers, it's also how many landers would it take? 

 

10-20, but size limited. 

 

The Cargo vehicle NASA shared had fins, indicating it could return to Earth. 

 

2041849222_LunarStarshipcargo-elevator1024_crop.thumb.jpg.16b422092b1c64f7f2baa0e68a5be4c2.jpg

 

Also interesting; the tower's Mechazilla arms catche Starship too. Legs are for Moon, Mars...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by DocM

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • Adobe Acrobat Reader DC 2026.001.21651

      By QuantumBigfoot · Posted

      It's amazing that anyone still uses this bloated trash.
    • An actual cosmic "Eye of Sauron" had been looking straight at us all along

      By +Edouard · Posted

      @Sayan...I have defended you at various points as I hope you know. This headline however is utter trash...shame on you sir!
    • An actual cosmic "Eye of Sauron" had been looking straight at us all along

      By hellowalkman · Posted

      An actual cosmic "Eye of Sauron" had been looking straight at us all along by Sayan Sen Image by Kovin P. Vasquez via Pexels | Not representative An international team of researchers has solved a long-standing mystery surrounding a distant blazar known as PKS 1424+240, helping explain why it produces some of the brightest high-energy gamma rays and cosmic neutrinos ever observed despite appearing to have a relatively slow-moving jet. The findings were published on June 6 in Astronomy & Astrophysics Letters. The study addresses a broader challenge in astrophysics: understanding how extreme cosmic objects accelerate particles to very high energies and produce very high-energy (VHE) photons and neutrinos. PKS 1424+240 is located billions of light-years from Earth. It has attracted attention for years because it is both a powerful source of VHE gamma rays and the brightest known neutrino-emitting blazar in the sky, according to observations by the IceCube Neutrino Observatory. It is also associated with one of the strongest peaks in IceCube's nine-year neutrino sky map A blazar is a type of active galactic nucleus powered by a supermassive black hole that pulls in surrounding matter and launches jets of plasma moving close to the speed of light. What makes blazars unique is their orientation. One of their jets points almost directly toward Earth, making them appear exceptionally bright across the electromagnetic spectrum and allowing scientists to study some of the most extreme physical processes in the Universe. The scientists exclaimed it's like the 'Eye of Sauron' in deep space. Usually, the brightest gamma-ray-emitting blazars are expected to have jets that appear to move very quickly. However, radio observations of PKS 1424+240 suggested that its jet was moving much more slowly, creating a contradiction that became part of a long-running problem known as the "Doppler factor crisis." To investigate, researchers analyzed 15 years of observations from the Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA), a network of 10 radio antennas spread across the continental United States, Hawaii and St. Croix. Using a technique called Very Long Baseline Interferometry (VLBI), astronomers combine signals from widely separated radio telescopes to create a virtual Earth-sized telescope capable of revealing extremely fine details. The team combined 42 polarization-sensitive radio images collected between 2009 and 2025, creating a much deeper and more detailed view of the jet than had previously been possible. The observations were carried out as part of MOJAVE (Monitoring Of Jets in Active galactic nuclei with VLBA Experiments), a long-running program that studies the brightness, polarization and magnetic field structures of jets produced by active galaxies. The project aims to better understand how activity near supermassive black holes is linked to high-energy radiation and neutrino emission. “When we reconstructed the image, it looked absolutely stunning,” said Yuri Kovalev, lead author of the study and Principal Investigator of the European Research Council-funded MuSES project at the Max Planck Institute for Radio Astronomy. “We have never seen anything quite like it — a near-perfect toroidal magnetic field with a jet, pointing straight at us.” The image revealed an unusual geometry. The researchers found that Earth lies almost directly in line with the jet, with a viewing angle of less than 0.6 degrees. In simple terms, astronomers are looking almost straight down the jet. This turned out to be the key to the mystery. Because the jet is aimed almost directly at Earth, a relativistic effect called Doppler boosting dramatically increases its apparent brightness. The study found that this effect boosts the emission by a factor of about 30 while also making the jet appear slower than it actually is. “This alignment causes a boost in brightness by a factor of 30 or more,” said Jack Livingston, a co-author at the Max Planck Institute for Radio Astronomy. “At the same time, the jet appears to move slowly due to projection effects — a classic optical illusion.” The nearly head-on view also gave scientists a rare look at the jet's magnetic field. Using polarized radio signals, they detected a clear toroidal, or doughnut-shaped, magnetic field component. The observations suggest the jet carries an electric current and that its magnetic field helps launch, shape and stabilize the flow of plasma. Researchers believe this magnetic structure may also play a key role in accelerating particles to energies high enough to produce both gamma rays and neutrinos. “Solving this puzzle confirms that active galactic nuclei with supermassive black holes are not only powerful accelerators of electrons, but also of protons — the origin of the observed high-energy neutrinos,” Kovalev said. The research was conducted under the MuSES (Multi-messenger Studies of Energetic Sources) project, which investigates how active galactic nuclei accelerate particles and generate different cosmic signals, including light and neutrinos. Scientists say understanding how protons are accelerated and linked to neutrino production remains one of the major unanswered questions in astrophysics. The findings help explain why some blazars can appear to have slow jets while still producing extremely bright high-energy emissions. More broadly, the study strengthens the link between relativistic jets, magnetic fields, gamma rays and high-energy neutrinos. Researchers say the results provide new clues about how some of the Universe's most powerful natural particle accelerators work and offer important insights for multimessenger astronomy, which combines different types of cosmic signals to study extreme events in space. Source: European Research Council, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • What browser do you prefer to use, and why?

      By AnotherITguy · Posted

      Edge
    • Classic Outlook vs New Outlook — Which one do you prefer and why?

      By AnotherITguy · Posted

      Gotenks98 is right... Outlook (new) is absolute trash. Doesn't Mozilla have an Enterprise Version of Firebird?

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      510
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      273
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      75
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      68
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!