SpaceX Super Heavy and Starship updates

[DocM]

NASA comment propellant transfer test

NASA...

NASA Artemis Mission Progresses with SpaceX Starship Test Flight

>

One objective closely tied to future Artemis operations is the transfer of thousands of pounds of cryogenic propellant between internal tanks during the spacecraft’s coast phase as part of NASA’s Space Technology Missions Directorate 2020 Tipping Point awards. The propellant transfer demonstration operations were completed, and the NASA-SpaceX team is currently reviewing the flight data that was received. This Tipping Point technology demonstration is one of more than 20 development activities NASA is undertaking to solve the challenges of using cryogenic fluids during future missions.

As a key step toward understanding how super-cooled propellant sloshes within the tanks when the engines shut down, and how that movement affects Starship’s stability while in orbit, engineers will study flight test data to assess the performance of thrusters that control Starship’s orientation in space. They are also interested to learn more about how the fluid’s movement within the tanks can be settled to maximize propellant transfer efficiency and ensure Raptor engines receive needed propellant conditions to support restart in orbit.

>

[bguy_1986]

Seen this today on X. 
 

 

[DocM]

Just my opinion, but I think the roll started about the time the propellant transfer test started. Slosh from that could have induced a roll,  and a pitch change, while the vehicle was still high enough that the fins could not grab the atmosphere. May need a bit more power in the RCS  thrusters and some baffles in the tanks.

[DocM]

Shotwell quote

Quote

We'll get back to flight, hopefully in about 6 weeks, Flight 4 hopefully, beginning part of May. And I don't think were going to deploy satellites on the next flight, things are still in trade but I think were really going to focus on getting re-entry right and making sure we can land these things where we want to land them, successfully.

 

Edited March 19 by DocM

[DocM]

FAA wants to move to portfolio licenses for Starship, 

https://spacenews.com/spacex-planning-rapid-turnaround-for-next-starship-flight/

"The FAA has updated SpaceX’s Starship launch license after every flight to date to reflect changes in the mission, such as the different suborbital trajectory used on the most recent flight. However, Coleman said the agency wants to move to a process where the license is valid for “portfolio of launches” rather than individual ones. That is particularly important, he added, because SpaceX is planning six to nine more Starship launches this year."

[DocM]

Orbital Launch Mount getting ready to roll to KSC LC 39a. 

 

 

[DocM]

Flight 4 Starship static fire

 

[DocM]

Single engine static fire, and mission goal for Flight 4. Single engine to test the systems for a reentry burn.

If they get through reentry in functional condition, things will start to be fun. Starlink launches, recovery attempts, etc. 

 

[DocM]

Flight 4

Ship goes back to production for PreFlight work

Booster comes out to play for WDR/static fire

 

 

[DocM]

Ramping up to Flight 4, this looks to be a Booster 11  static fire attempt on Friday

Times in this test notice is Central, so 1100 to 2300 Eastern.

Note: in Texas the County Judge functions much like a Chief County Executive.

++++++++++

Sheriff Eric Garza@SheriffGarza
UPDATE: Cameron County Judge Eddie Treviño, Jr. has extended the temporary closure of Boca Chica Beach and State Highway 4 from FM 1419 to the beach entrance due to SpaceX testing. New closure hours: 04/05/2024 - 10 am to 10 pm.

 

[DocM]

 

[DocM]

Booster 11 static fire

 

[DocM]

STARSHIP TEST & UPGRADE PATH

https://spacenews.com/musk-outlines-plans-to-increase-starship-launch-rate-and-performance/

* Starbase Tower 2 and LC-39a Tower in service mid-2025. Most operational launches from the Cape.

* Flight 4 in a few weeks

-Starship reentry and virtual landing

-Booster virtual landing in the Gulf. If successful,

* Flight 5 will attempt

- BOOSTER RECOVERY. Musk estimates 80% to 90% chance of success this year.

- Starship recovery next year

* Starbase factory will quickly increase production.

* To support Starship 2, Raptor thrust will increase from 230 tonne-force to 280 t-f. Eventually, 330 t-f.

* Starship 3 will be ~25m taller, and be able  able to lift >200 tonnes to orbit in reusable mode.

* Estimate Starship 3 will have a launch cost (note: not price) of around $10m, falling to $2-3m with reuse.

[DocM]

Raptor Vacuum (RVac) shutdown video

 

 

 

[DocM]

Starship 2 and Starship 3 details. 

Starship 2 should start flying later this year, and it's a transitional vehicle. Starship 3 probably depends on how Starship 2 goes. Major stretches for both Booster and Ship in both steps. 

Ex;  Ship propellant load 

Ship 1: 1200 t

Ship 2; 1500 t

Ship 3; 2300 t

https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/04/elon-musk-just-gave-another-mars-speech-this-time-the-vision-seems-tangible/

 

 

 

 

 

[IsItPluggedIn]

SS3 seems aspirational with those rounded thrust numbers, an extra 20% thrust on the booster. Hopefully its not "needed" for the Artemis missions and is a long goal.

[DocM]

On 14/04/2024 at 18:46, IsItPluggedIn said:

SS3 seems aspirational with those rounded thrust numbers, an extra 20% thrust on the booster. Hopefully its not "needed" for the Artemis missions and is a long goal.

I think the full length stretch would be used for the depot and tankers, reducing the number of tanker flights. Constructing it from rings lets them create a vehicle to the purpose, shorter if that's all they need. This point of view gained some traction when Musk talked about a short expendable upper stage messing only 40 tons for deep space probes etc.

 

[DocM]

SpaceX "Raptor 4" engine 

 

Tweeted today

700,000 pound-force thrust 

Booster: about 23 million pound-force 

Starship: 6.3 million pound-force {9 engine V3)

In-sane....

 

 

 

[Xenon]

Exclusive: Injury rates for Musk's SpaceX exceed industry average for second year.

 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/exclusive-injury-rates-musks-spacex-211448196.html

 

No real surprise here. Musk's companies always treat safety for employees as secondary. They are components not people. 

[DocM]

On 23/04/2024 at 12:20, Xenon said:

No real surprise here. Musk's companies always treat safety for employees as secondary. They are components not people. 

Critical thinking required, very little in evidence.

The average rate of injury for US manufacturing companies is 6.6/100 full-time workers.

From your link, Spacex's injury rate for Boca Chia in  2023 was 5.9./100, lower than the national average. 

Then Reuters tries to compare SpaceX's rate to an aerospace average of 0.8/100. 

Problem 1: the vast majority of aerospace assembles rockets like Falcon 9, Atlas, Electron, etc horizontally, very few workers get more than three or four meters  off the ground. 

Super-heavy rockets need to be assembled vertically, stacking the rings and welding them together, so the workers end up at least 50 and sometimes 90 meters off the ground. This is inherently riskier, so the comparison is sketchy at best. 

Duh

Reuters also reported a rate of 7.9/100 for workers retrieving boosters at sea.

Problem 2: the barges, ships & crews are long-term leases from shipping company operators.  Go complain to them.

Yet another Reuters clickbait story.

[Xenon]

On 23/04/2024 at 14:33, DocM said:

Critical thinking required, very little in evidence.

The average rate of injury for US manufacturing companies is 6.6/100 full-time workers.

From your link, Spacex's injury rate for Boca Chia in  2023 was 5.9./100, lower than the national average. 

Then Reuters tries to compare SpaceX's rate to an aerospace average of 0.8/100. 

Problem 1: the vast majority of aerospace assembles rockets like Falcon 9, Atlas, Electron, etc horizontally, very few workers get more than three or four meters  off the ground. 

Super-heavy rockets need to be assembled vertically, stacking the rings and welding them together, so the workers end up at least 50 and sometimes 90 meters off the ground. This is inherently riskier, so the comparison is sketchy at best. 

Duh

Reuters also reported a rate of 7.9/100 for workers retrieving boosters at sea.

Problem 2: the barges, ships & crews are long-term leases from shipping company operators.  Go complain to them.

Yet another Reuters clickbait story.

You know I specifically posted this story and made those comments to see how I would set @docm off. I was not disappointed. 

[DocM]

On 23/04/2024 at 16:35, Xenon said:

You know I specifically posted this story and made those comments to see how I would set @docm off. I was not disappointed. 

 

Trust me Xenon, you have not seen my "set off" mode. Nor should you want to, and it takes more than grade-school taunts by adults who should know better to get me there.  

Edited Wednesday at 04:53 by DocM

[DocM]