Welcome to the SpeceX thread - 2022 edition. Please continue to post your news and discussions below.

Link to the locked 2021 edition:
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1455965

Today, SpaceX launched a batch of 47 solar-powered wifi routers into space - only 47 this time. The payload is lower because they used a high inclination south-easterly trajectory, flying over some Caribbean islands.

105 small satellites were launched into a near-polar, sun-synchronous orbit. Amazing footage of the F9 before touching down at CCAFS. It's the 10th landing of booster 1058.

Just amazing! Their cadence is something to behold. And having the same booster land ten times over - "who woulda thunk" just ten years ago.

Next launch scheduled for... ta dah: Monday.

Another batch of the Starlink space wifi routers launched. https://youtu.be/Yov854ZT1lg?t=1210 shows the 2nd stage's exhaust plume as seen from the launch site. I've never seen this before.

Also, better-than-usual video feed from the ASOG drone ship.

SpaceX is bombing the Moon:

https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/01 ... hin-weeks/

(my clickbait game is on point )

The Falcon 9 second stage was used to push the DSCOVR observatory onto a heliocentric orbit back in 2015. The spent stage did not have enough fuel to push itself into a harmless orbit around the Sun or back down into Earth's atmosphere, so it has been chaotically orbiting the Earth and Moon system for the last few years, and is now on course to crash into the far side of the Moon in March. It will be the first unintentional impact of man made debris on the Moon.

Some scientists are actually interested at the prospect of observing the ejecta. Hopefully we get some pictures or even footage of it. I'm not sure what's out there that could observe it however.

Francoflier wrote:

Some scientists are actually interested at the prospect of observing the ejecta. Hopefully we get some pictures or even footage of it. I'm not sure what's out there that could observe it however.

NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter is still active.

Raptor 2 engine runs stable at 300 bar. This engine is intended for the Starship spacecraft, which will eventually go to Mars.
The new version of the Raptor engine broke the previous record, which was set in 2019. Then the value of 268.9 bar was reached, and the record of the Russian two-component liquid-propellant rocket engine of the closed cycle RD-180 was also broken.

Hi all! I’m doing a cruise out of Cape Canaveral on March 18 and I’m hoping to see a rocket launch. I went on NASA website and they few have future showing but none past the one upcoming SpaceX. On SpaceX I can’t find any future launches, and from what I understand they have almost 30? scheduled for this year?? Was hoping to see a launch before I move out of the state. Thanks!!

SRQLOT wrote:

Hi all! I’m doing a cruise out of Cape Canaveral on March 18 and I’m hoping to see a rocket launch. I went on NASA website and they few have future showing but none past the one upcoming SpaceX. On SpaceX I can’t find any future launches, and from what I understand they have almost 30? scheduled for this year?? Was hoping to see a launch before I move out of the state. Thanks!!

They actually hope to launch close to 50 this year. But that busy schedule is a big part of the reason most missions aren't getting a specific date until close to launch. You just have to keep an eye on the schedule and hope for the best.

Nomadd wrote:

SRQLOT wrote:

Hi all! I’m doing a cruise out of Cape Canaveral on March 18 and I’m hoping to see a rocket launch. I went on NASA website and they few have future showing but none past the one upcoming SpaceX. On SpaceX I can’t find any future launches, and from what I understand they have almost 30? scheduled for this year?? Was hoping to see a launch before I move out of the state. Thanks!!

They actually hope to launch close to 50 this year. But that busy schedule is a big part of the reason most missions aren't getting a specific date until close to launch. You just have to keep an eye on the schedule and hope for the best.

Well thank you for the reply! I guess with 50! There should be a good chance to maybe see at least the rocket on the pad. And how good of a chance to see it from the Bahamas? If there is a launch?? Haha

Launch abort due to a...

...cruise ship. A cruise ship. A cruise ship.

SMH...

Funny enough, the NSF stream for the launch actually caught the cruise ship departing the port about 15 minutes before the launch, joking that the ship would have a good view of it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMaO47Xylx0
(27:25 in the video)

A certain cruise ship captain is going to get an earful.
Funny enough, MSC is an Italian company, and so is the payload they prevented from reaching orbit today.

flyingturtle wrote:

Launch abort due to a...

...cruise ship. A cruise ship. A cruise ship.

The chatter on Twitter is that it was another cruise ship, Royal Caribbean's Harmony of the Seas was the one that violated the range. The MSC cruise ship was apparently holding short at the mouth of the harbour, waiting for the launch to happen so it can pull out when it is clear.

Confirmation that it was Royal Caribbean that was the cause of the scrub, and Port authorities and the Coast Guard are investigating:

https://www.floridatoday.com/story/mone ... 287700002/

ThePointblank wrote:

Confirmation that it was Royal Caribbean that was the cause of the scrub, and Port authorities and the Coast Guard are investigating:

https://www.floridatoday.com/story/mone ... 287700002/

Thanks for the update. I wonder whether the cadence of launches from the Cape and the repeated scrubs makes communicating and enforcing the safety zones more challenging, or even confusing.

Anyhow, CSG-2 finally managed to launch. 5th time's the charm.

It put on a real show in a clear evening sky at dusk, ending with the booster sticking the landing on LZ-1 to the soundtrack of its own sonic boom... Nice.

Interestingly this booster used to be a Falcon Heavy side booster, which flew twice as a sidekick in 2019 before being refurbished as a standalone booster. All 3 of its landings were on dry land.

I don't recall seeing this before.
The booster flipped around and headed back to the landing zone (at around 18:00), and the landing was awesome too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBxHrNIzp9w

memphiX wrote:

I don't recall seeing this before.
The booster flipped around and headed back to the landing zone (at around 18:00), and the landing was awesome too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBxHrNIzp9w

There already have been quite a few RTLS (return to launch site) missions. For example, during the first flight of Falcon Heavy, both side boosters landed back in Cape Canaveral.

SpaceX is not done with Dragon capsule parachute problems:

https://spacenews.com/nasa-and-spacex-i ... e-opening/

The fourth chute does not always open as planned.
Nasa is looking into the issue as well, as it involves both the cargo and crewed versions of the capsule, and has happened on a few occasions on recent missions.

Francoflier wrote:

SpaceX is not done with Dragon capsule parachute problems:

https://spacenews.com/nasa-and-spacex-i ... e-opening/

The fourth chute does not always open as planned.
Nasa is looking into the issue as well, as it involves both the cargo and crewed versions of the capsule, and has happened on a few occasions on recent missions.

Interesting. I'm reading the comments section under the article, and multiple posters are saying that 4 chutes were not part of the SpaceX design. It was designed to use 3 chutes, but NASA insisted on 4.
In fact, the Crew Dragon was designed to land using the Super Draco thrusters, with the 3 chutes as backup.

The Super Draco thrusters are still there, armed for emergency in case the rocket explodes at the pad. But they're not programmed to be used for landings anymore.

JetBuddy wrote:

Francoflier wrote:

SpaceX is not done with Dragon capsule parachute problems:

https://spacenews.com/nasa-and-spacex-i ... e-opening/

The fourth chute does not always open as planned.
Nasa is looking into the issue as well, as it involves both the cargo and crewed versions of the capsule, and has happened on a few occasions on recent missions.

Interesting. I'm reading the comments section under the article, and multiple posters are saying that 4 chutes were not part of the SpaceX design. It was designed to use 3 chutes, but NASA insisted on 4.
In fact, the Crew Dragon was designed to land using the Super Draco thrusters, with the 3 chutes as backup.

The Super Draco thrusters are still there, armed for emergency in case the rocket explodes at the pad. But they're not programmed to be used for landings anymore.

SpaceX determined that a 4th chute would actually increase the odds of one failing, but were no match for the NASA way of thinking.
Modelling chute behavior is actually one of the hardest things to do in the space business because of the chaotic nature of the airflow while deploying.

Excellent tracking camera footage from the recent COSMO-Skymed launch.

https://youtu.be/FWUv7XXBb2Y

Of interest to me is the apparent size of the vacuum Merlin nozzle! Wow!

Musk tweeted recently that his next Starship presentation will be Thursday at 8PM CST.

GDB wrote:

Crystal clear weather at Vandenberg for the NRO launch, nothing routine in the stunning views of the RTLS, being sensitive in terms of payload, no 2nd stage coverage, aside from a spectacular view of the booster falling away, a rare brand new booster, slated for another NRO launch later this year.
And there is a Starlink mission scheduled for tomorrow.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVk8XyjhTKo

The Starlink mission has run into major problems. It was hit by a Geomagnetic storm and up to 40 satellites did not reach orbit and will re-enter the atmosphere and burn up this week.

https://www.spacex.com/updates/

AngMoh wrote:

The Starlink mission has run into major problems. It was hit by a Geomagnetic storm and up to 40 satellites did not reach orbit and will re-enter the atmosphere and burn up this week.

https://www.spacex.com/updates/

Did not reach intended orbit. “Did not reach orbit” implies a launch failure.

I fail to understand why Starlink sticked to its launch schedule, the solar storm was well publicized and its potential effects, documented.

zanl188 wrote:

AngMoh wrote:

The Starlink mission has run into major problems. It was hit by a Geomagnetic storm and up to 40 satellites did not reach orbit and will re-enter the atmosphere and burn up this week.

https://www.spacex.com/updates/

Did not reach intended orbit. “Did not reach orbit” implies a launch failure.

This explains the issue:

In an update on the company’s website Tuesday, it said the satellites were deployed after their Feb. 3 launch at a lower altitude for system checkouts to ensure everything was working as expected before being moved into eventual higher altitude orbit for operational use. The practice allows SpaceX to safely deorbit any Starlink satellites not working properly.

The company said a geomagnetic storm that causes the atmosphere to warm and atmospheric density to increase ended up causing drag on the batch of satellites up to 50% more than previous Starlink deployments. Despite efforts to basically duck and cover from the storm, the majority of the deployment was unable to raise orbits, and several of the satellites have already re-entered Earth’s atmosphere.

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/space/o ... story.html

Tugg

The NOAA provides a space weather forecast based on measurements from the ground and in space. Perhaps SpaceX missed the notification?

GDB wrote:

ITMercure wrote:

I fail to understand why Starlink sticked to its launch schedule, the solar storm was well publicized and its potential effects, documented.

In the 70's NASA seemed to ignore scientists who warned that their plans to do a Shuttle/Skylab mission early on, due to solar activity to increase atmospheric density, were likely doomed even with the then expected 1979 launch date, the Skylab mission being slated for STS-3.
That was based on long term observations, including ironically from the Skylab missions, was this event with Starlink a less expected one?

Well, on my side of the Channel (France) this solar weather forecast almost made the headlines. The storm was announced to reach earth on Wednesday and have effects for several days. Even the outcome for low-orbiting satellites was forecast. That's quite a faillure for Starlink, isn't it?

ITMercure wrote:

GDB wrote:

ITMercure wrote:

I fail to understand why Starlink sticked to its launch schedule, the solar storm was well publicized and its potential effects, documented.

In the 70's NASA seemed to ignore scientists who warned that their plans to do a Shuttle/Skylab mission early on, due to solar activity to increase atmospheric density, were likely doomed even with the then expected 1979 launch date, the Skylab mission being slated for STS-3.
That was based on long term observations, including ironically from the Skylab missions, was this event with Starlink a less expected one?

Well, on my side of the Channel (France) this solar weather forecast almost made the headlines. The storm was announced to reach earth on Wednesday and have effects for several days. Even the outcome for low-orbiting satellites was forecast. That's quite a faillure for Starlink, isn't it?

It may simply be the case that forecasting when such a storm would hit a body of newly deployed satellites was not accurately assessed. It’s not as though ‘all’ satellites facing the sun that day were impacted, just that this batch of newly deployed ones were. Further, it’s not even the case that it was the storm itself that caused their demise, but rather the expansion of the atmosphere/drag at a specific altitude. Given their busy launch manifests it’s tough to say they were negligent/didn’t mind the forecast, but rather were more probably just unlucky.

GDB wrote:

Here's Scott Manley's detailed take on it;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kIcEFyEPgA

Interesting stuff.

Space is hard.

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

GDB wrote:

Here's Scott Manley's detailed take on it;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kIcEFyEPgA

Interesting stuff.

Space is hard.

Tugg

Wow 50% denser atmosphere due to the atmospheric storm. That is incredible stuff to study and understand. I wonder if we get a few more launches this year due to this .

Good day for a walk on the beach.

That's allota rocket!


Tugg

It looks like it shouldn't work. I suspect a lot of people will be very happy to be proven wrong when this thing flies.

But as the saying goes, if it's not breaking the laws of physics, it's just engineering...

Great Pic.

I just wonder how soon we will get to see it fly. I think it was stacked only for Elon's publicity tour tonight.

I'm watching Elon's update on the Starship. He says that theoretically, a booster should be able to fly every hour, and a Starship three times a day.

Errrghh....

Some idiot was sitting out in the dunes, watching everything, allegedly not knowing they were suppose to be closed. Good thing most of the sheriff's guys are friendly.

Nomadd wrote:

Some idiot was sitting out in the dunes, watching everything, allegedly not knowing they were suppose to be closed. Good thing most of the sheriff's guys are friendly.

...I'm sure you told them you were an employee, and that Mr. Musk never really explained your role and your duties.


Well, at last for me the presentation didn't really contain anything new. It seems to me that Elon wanted to present an orbital launch test, but then the FAA's decision didn't arrive in time. So he told us what he wanted to tell us - that Starships will be used three times each day, how much transport capacity the Starships have, and how they're crucial for the first self-sufficient city and Mars...

Musk said booster would be used 3 times a day while his graphics plainly said 3 times a week. Lol… another variation of Elon Time.

I was hoping for a launch date. No joy there….

https://youtu.be/3N7L8Xhkzqo

That was just Elon being Elon. He was once again firing up the nerds and fans and pumping up the hype.

He went on about his Mars dream, the 'Plan B for civilization' routine and all the classics. This was a show for the enthusiasts and the dreamers with little on substance IMO.

I get what he is doing. He needs the PR to keep the project backed and funded (I can't begin to imagine how much Starship is costing him).
The real and much more pedestrian underlying hurry is that he is desperate for Starship if Starlink is ever to become a reality. SpaceX has already pretty much admitted that Starlink is dependent on Starship working as advertised to lift and maintain the thousands of sats they need up there.

He barely even mentioned the other major concrete plan they have for Starship, i.e. HLS, and mostly skimmed all the questions about man-rating it (launch escape solutions, long duration life support, refuelling refilling, etc.).
The engineering focus is also visibly on the cargo version, as seen from the cargo door-equipped mockup in Boca Chica.

The life-or-death project for SpaceX right now is Starlink, which F9 alone can't sustain, especially if it costs a second stage for every 40 or 50 sats (if they don't get shot down by the Sun) and when boosters take at least a month to refurbish and can only fly 10-ish times.

That said, if Starship becomes a reality and performs as intended, it opens the door to a whole new playing field for humans in space. I guess it doesn't matter why or how Starship succeeds as long as it does.

Tim Dodds interview with Jared Isaacman.

https://youtu.be/eCLDGNbgjfI

Isaacman planning more crewed launches with SpaceX, including the first crewed flight of Starship.

NASASpaceflight interview with Polaris Dawn astronaut Scott Poteet.

Sounds like SpaceX is going to everyone else involved in human space flight a run for their money.

https://youtu.be/vhhAe1LnMN8