Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
FGITD wrote:“Well damn...what do we do with it now?”
Francoflier wrote:
I wonder if they'll fly it again, or if they'll scrap it and go straight to SN16.
texl1649 wrote:
Naturally, the Chinese have plans for a copy cat as well, with plausible military implications.
ThePointblank wrote:They are streaming the high altitude test for SN 15 right now!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9eoubnO-pE
Edit: And looks like a good landing!
Edit 2: And there's a small fire on the pad that now appears to be out...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPNvB5ComFw
flyingturtle wrote:Regarding SpaceX' company culture - an interesting comment on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-jqHFKh70s
"I work at SpaceX and I'll tell you, they are SERIOUS when it comes to process improvements. When you make a mistake most companies will focus their attention on what disciplinary action they should take with you. Here at SpaceX it's the opposite, your punishment is coming up with a solution or system in which that issue can NEVER happen again, to anyone, ever. If you keep showing up late to work they'll literally switch you to a different shift before firing you. It's all about solving problems, not punishment. You have to be a real dirtbag to get fired from SpaceX. Before you apply make sure you are ready to commit to the company entirely. Pretend you're joining the military. It's pretty much like that in many ways..."
Wow.
CRJockey wrote:texl1649 wrote:
Naturally, the Chinese have plans for a copy cat as well, with plausible military implications.
I would really hope, that at least in one of the best & civil threads we would spare ourselves such politics. There aren't a dozen different ways of building rockets and other highly on basic physics dependable machines. So what must happen that you wouldn't consider the Chinese copying?
The concept is notable not only for its appearance to Starship—the vehicle's exterior is shiny, like the stainless steel structure of Starship, and the first and second stages are similarly seamless—but in its function as well. Although Starship has primarily been promoted as a vehicle to take humans to the Moon and Mars, SpaceX has also developed a point-to-point concept.
SpaceX first unveiled this "Earth to Earth" concept in September 2017. A video released at the time showed a suborbital flight time on Starship from New York City to Shanghai of just 39 minutes and advertised the capability of "anywhere on Earth in less than an hour."
The second point-to-point concept in the Chinese video showed a horizontal takeoff, horizontal landing vehicle that used some sort of electromagnetic catapult.
Both of these systems are part of China's previously announced plans to develop global point-to-point transportation by 2045. Under the country's long-term planning goals, Chinese industry would begin delivering cargo around the globe via suborbital flight by 2035 and passengers by 2045.
This would not be the first time that the Chinese space program has drawn inspiration from SpaceX. The country tracked SpaceX from the very beginning, particularly with an interest in SpaceX's plans to reuse rocket first stages. During the company's very first launch in 2006, as reported in the book Liftoff, a Chinese spy boat was in the small patch of ocean where the Falcon 1 rocket's first stage was due to reenter.
More recently, in 2019, the Chinese Long March 2C rocket tested "grid fins" like those used by the first stage of the Falcon 9 rocket to steer itself through the atmosphere during the reentry process. China intends to develop the Long March 8 rocket to land on a sea platform like the Falcon 9 booster did, and semi-private Chinese firms such as LinkSpace and Galactic Energy appear to be mimicking SpaceX launch technology.
texl1649 wrote:CRJockey wrote:texl1649 wrote:
Naturally, the Chinese have plans for a copy cat as well, with plausible military implications.
I would really hope, that at least in one of the best & civil threads we would spare ourselves such politics. There aren't a dozen different ways of building rockets and other highly on basic physics dependable machines. So what must happen that you wouldn't consider the Chinese copying?
I didn’t bring up anything political, thanks though. If this doesn’t imply some sort of espionage/copy cat design, I am not sure that there is one in aviation history (from the ars technica article I linked but you did not choose to quote);The concept is notable not only for its appearance to Starship—the vehicle's exterior is shiny, like the stainless steel structure of Starship, and the first and second stages are similarly seamless—but in its function as well. Although Starship has primarily been promoted as a vehicle to take humans to the Moon and Mars, SpaceX has also developed a point-to-point concept.
SpaceX first unveiled this "Earth to Earth" concept in September 2017. A video released at the time showed a suborbital flight time on Starship from New York City to Shanghai of just 39 minutes and advertised the capability of "anywhere on Earth in less than an hour."
The second point-to-point concept in the Chinese video showed a horizontal takeoff, horizontal landing vehicle that used some sort of electromagnetic catapult.
Both of these systems are part of China's previously announced plans to develop global point-to-point transportation by 2045. Under the country's long-term planning goals, Chinese industry would begin delivering cargo around the globe via suborbital flight by 2035 and passengers by 2045.
This would not be the first time that the Chinese space program has drawn inspiration from SpaceX. The country tracked SpaceX from the very beginning, particularly with an interest in SpaceX's plans to reuse rocket first stages. During the company's very first launch in 2006, as reported in the book Liftoff, a Chinese spy boat was in the small patch of ocean where the Falcon 1 rocket's first stage was due to reenter.
More recently, in 2019, the Chinese Long March 2C rocket tested "grid fins" like those used by the first stage of the Falcon 9 rocket to steer itself through the atmosphere during the reentry process. China intends to develop the Long March 8 rocket to land on a sea platform like the Falcon 9 booster did, and semi-private Chinese firms such as LinkSpace and Galactic Energy appear to be mimicking SpaceX launch technology.
Another source;
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2021/04/c ... point.html
https://youtu.be/mzNhrUQ_Qls
flyingturtle wrote:https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/space-junk-sleuths-track-down-the-rocket-chunks-that-lit-up-the-northwests-skies-last-month/
About a guy who hunted for the Falcon 9 upper stage debris when it landed in the northwestern United States... interesting stuff.
(Partially relephant song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEJ9HrZq7Ro - "Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down? - It's not my department, says Wernher von Braun")
WIederling wrote:flyingturtle wrote:https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/space-junk-sleuths-track-down-the-rocket-chunks-that-lit-up-the-northwests-skies-last-month/
About a guy who hunted for the Falcon 9 upper stage debris when it landed in the northwestern United States... interesting stuff.
(Partially relephant song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEJ9HrZq7Ro - "Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down? - It's not my department, says Wernher von Braun")
if it is China or Russia the printpresses and bitbuckets go overtime:
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1460625
FGITD wrote:Musk tweeted that they may try to re-fly sn15 again soon.
Given the eventual goal of using these on a regular basis, I can understand it. And it's definitely one way of determining how the vehicle held up. I guess we'll find out if it blows up on the pad
Francoflier wrote:Does anyone know what the plan is for stacking Starship on top of the booster is for the test flight since the integration tower won't be ready yet?
I don't think even those massive cranes are tall enough...
Tugger wrote:Am watching the 100 successful launch for SpeaceX. At T+3:33 you see things spinning to the left far below the booster as it reorients to its landing trajectory. I first thought it was the fairings but I don't think so now. Anyone with what they are?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRu-ekesDyY
Tugg
As part of last week's federal budget rollout, a process during which the White House proposes funding levels for fiscal year 2022, the US Air Force released its "justification book" to compare its current request to past budget data. The 462-page book contains a lot of information about how the Air Force spends its approximately $200 billion budget.
For those tracking the development of SpaceX's ambitious Starship vehicle, there is an interesting tidbit tucked away on page 305, under the heading of "Rocket Cargo" (see .pdf). The Air Force plans to invest $47.9 million into this project in the coming fiscal year, which begins October 1.
"The Department of the Air Force seeks to leverage the current multi-billion dollar commercial investment to develop the largest rockets ever, and with full reusability to develop and test the capability to leverage a commercial rocket to deliver AF cargo anywhere on the Earth in less than one hour, with a 100-ton capacity," the document states.
Although this does not refer to Starship by name, this is the only vehicle under development in the world with this kind of capability. The Air Force does not intend to invest directly into the vehicle's development, the document says. However, it proposes to fund science and technology needed to interface with the Starship vehicle so that the Air Force might leverage its capabilities.
Francoflier wrote:Definitely something the military would be interested in. How cool would it be to have a fleet of Starships in USAF (USSF?) markings...
But before getting carried away, among the many major technological and engineering hurdles that concept would have to clear, the obvious one to me is that after you've shipped a couple of missile launchers across the planet in your Starship... How do you send it back?
Provided you even have the ability to refuel a rocket with tons of methane and cryogenically cooled O2 wherever your theater of operations is, can a booster-less Starship make it back the other way with no payload?
ThePointblank wrote:I can see why the USAF is interested; being able to deliver 100 tons of cargo to anywhere in the world in mere hours is going to greatly appeal to the military in being able to rapidly respond to situations globally.
ssteve wrote:And if troops go along, why of course they'll be Starship Troopers.
mxaxai wrote:ThePointblank wrote:I can see why the USAF is interested; being able to deliver 100 tons of cargo to anywhere in the world in mere hours is going to greatly appeal to the military in being able to rapidly respond to situations globally.
Not hours, minutes. You could deliver a C-5 worth of cargo and troops to any point on Earth within less than 45 minutes. Need an MBT for fire support right now? No worries, it'll arrive on your location in 20 minutes (give or take).
You could also launch all US nuclear warheads with just a few Starships.
. Or you could create nuclear stockpiles on the moon..
Though a Starship would be a great target for any air defense system.
tommy1808 wrote:Hours, several of them. You need to fuel first.
...
Which would be useless and in violation of international law.
Thomas
mxaxai wrote:tommy1808 wrote:Hours, several of them. You need to fuel first.
...
Which would be useless and in violation of international law.
Thomas
You could keep some rockets fueled and ready to go. The US had B-52s flying circles in case they were needed immediately.
If you think you're stronger or can deal with the fallout, any laws are worth as much as the paper they're printed on.
From a purely technical POV, Starship creates many new options to transport cargo.
tommy1808 wrote:It creates exactly one new option for transporting cargo, and one that is particularly simple to shot down on top of that.
CRJockey wrote:ssteve wrote:And if troops go along, why of course they'll be Starship Troopers.
beauty of a movie...
bikerthai wrote:tommy1808 wrote:It creates exactly one new option for transporting cargo, and one that is particularly simple to shot down on top of that.
More simple than a charter 747?
SamYeager2016 wrote:CRJockey wrote:ssteve wrote:And if troops go along, why of course they'll be Starship Troopers.
beauty of a movie...
With all due respect, the book's marvellous, the movie rather less so IMO.