That's a big mistake to make but maybe it's just google translator?
The first close-ups from the moon's back have reached the earth.
Technically true, other images were from a distance.
The moon's backside has never been explored by humans or spacecraft, but a very exclusive group of American astronauts have seen it while they have been orbiting the moon.
False, there are lots of photos and very detailed maps.
Apollo 8 was the first spacecraft to move around the moon.
False, there were previous unmanned orbiters.
The rendering posted by Elon earlier also had those "fairings" where the fins join the body but still somehow got surprised to see them on the first prototype.
It's also strange to see them add shiny steel all around the base: what could this be for other than aesthetics?
Same! Infact I feel like my car should be measured in m/s
Measuring speed per-hour makes sense for most transportation systems because it's easy to calculate time between different locations.
This doesn't apply to rocketry.
"Minimal viable product"
Get something you can test up and running ASAP then hit problems before they are baked into years of design work. Well that is the theory, we shall see how it works on something more akin to a Saturn V than a web page.
The only "viable product" SpaceX sells is orbital launches so this isn't anywhere close. Blue Origin plans to sell suborbital hops to space but not SpaceX.
This is just rapid prototyping.
That's what I thought; it'll be interesting to see whether they just later overhaul this Starship Mk1 and use it for their first Mars landing (or perhaps the Moon fly-by), or whether it'll remain purely a test vehicle (that's perhaps later cannibalised for vehicle system parts once it's no longer needed, or continually modified to test new engine configurations, etc).
Landing on Mars requires refueling and is pointless without some sort of cargo area. What they're building right now won't have that, it makes more sense to focus on reentry testing.
Elon also stated Starlink v2 will go up Starship, this implies a lot of cargo flights with LEO-only capability.
Landing on Mars requires refueling and is pointless without some sort of cargo area. What they're building right now won't have that
Source?
The quote above calls the ship a Mk 1 Starship, versus a prototype or demonstrator, implying that it'll be a fully functional system.
While there's been concepts of that clam-shell, large-satellite-deploying model, and a dedicated tanker variant, there's no real confirmation that the Starships that actually make the first couple unmanned trips to Mars will be configured differently to the manned versions (Mars colony concept art only shows man-capable variants of ITS & BFS). After all, it'd be wise to also be testing the structures, etc associated with manned version windows, living quarters, etc.
It could be wise for this Mk1 ship to eventually become a tanker model, but even then, why not knock out two birds with one stone by testing the most complicated / ambitious version of the design; if the tanker variant somehow doesn't work out, at least there's various other designs that could potentially refuel a Starship in orbit (eg: a shortened Super Heavy with a nosecone). If Starship can't handle high speed, Mars-style re-entry however, then it's basically back to the drawing board for the entire Starship family of systems (for the sake of common tooling and manufacturing at least).
The quote above calls the ship a Mk 1 Starship, versus a prototype or demonstrator, implying that it'll be a fully functional system.
No source for this but Mk 1 implies there will be later revisions just like on all other SpaceX vehicles. It will likely take a few iterations before launching for Mars and there is a lot of value in getting LEO capability out early for Starlink.
SpaceX vehicles are already better at LEO relative to other designs, BFR will allow them to out-deploy everybody else.
Load more comments
I’ve been reading that this is nearly an unthinkable feat.
Whoever writing this doesn't think much then... :)
What China did is novel and a landmark for Chinese efforts, but hardly a leap when overall space exploration is considered.
Landing on the far side of the Moon isn't terribly difficult: it requires an additional spacecraft to relay messages but that's already standard practice for Mars. A manned landing on the far side was seriously considered for Apollo and the capability was definitely there.
Landing on the near side is just more convenient.
No such "small lander" exists since Red Dragon was cancelled. Resuming that project would be very expensive.
The best imagery available from Mars comes with 0.3m/pixel resolution which is pretty damn good so areas with very few boulders could be found from orbit. Falcon 9 can land on flat concrete pads so a flat area of Mars would likely work for BFR.
Taking off is a bigger challenge because the tanks are full and much more thrust is required to take off. So maybe that area would be improved between landing and takeoff?
I he gone smoke weed and launch a rocket?
It can test landing, including scenarios where one engine is disabled. This would ensure that when the more capable prototype arrives it won't die.
Falcon 9 landing failed 7 times, this time they can't afford to throw away a new vehicle every few weeks.
In about 10 hours, the New Horizons mission will flyby Ultima Thule, making it the most distant object ever visited by a spacecraft. Though the icy world is more than 4 billion miles from Earth, New Horizons will pass within about 2,200 miles of the 18.5-mile-wide rock at more than 30,000 mph.
astronomy.com/news/n...Any ETAs for intermediate pictures?
Was it, though? I thought stuff sent into space tended to be a bit older tech because reliability is so critically important. Not to say it isn't still impressive though.
Telescope technology doesn't advance particularly fast. The electronics are old but the more interesting part is optics.
Who's paying for it? Because given enough money launch rates could be increased, it's just that at current prices demand is limited.
I doubt humanity could go much above 1000 tons without expanding rocket factories.
The turbopump and plumbing is higher up and not visible from this angle.
SpaceX already has an early version of the Raptor working, that's probably what we're looking at.
They could rent out a VAB bay (iirc one of them is totally unused rn), then use some kind of crawler (presumable one that's a little faster) to get the Starship to the pad, where it's hoisted on top of a booster. Constructing another vertical assembly building (which needs to be quite high, at least starship + 1x height of the payload bay) seems wasteful if there's one only a few km away already. Considering that this is only required for the "bay" version, not for the crew or fuel version, I don't expect the ground transport to bottleneck the cadence, even if it takes half a day to get to the pad.
The hangar at 39A was built directly on top of the crawlerway at the base of the ramp, it would have to be demolished.
Plans are still in flux but my bet is that all BFR work will happen at Boca Chica.
It would probably need to go either way, they need some way to get 9m components up the ramp, and the doors definitely don't fit that. And demolishing a sheet metal building isn't that expensive as well.
But that's where F9 processing happens!
Load more comments
You'll have to remember why it was chomped in the first place -- so the ablative heat shield can be applied to cover the entire bottom half and then some unbroken. With the new stainless steel design, it might not be necessary to do so, and Starship might be free to adopt a dual hinge design.
But now there are cooling channels inside the heat shield so the "hot" side still won't be able to flex.
Would also love to see a chart of "number of times a stage has landed in a populated area".
LZ-1 is technically in a populated area.
Also China nearly doubled on it's yearly launch record.
Seems legit, knowing the Russians have been known to never lie or produce false publications
There's no reason why russians would lie about this.
And since they do have to synchronize the visiting schedule it's very likely that they know unpublished information. Most likely NASA is still preparing press releases (or they got delayed by government shutdown) and it got leaked via Roscosmos.
Can confirm just upvoted with right hand, small hand scrubs
Small thumb == small penis, it's science!
Is that a condom?
What would the cleanup in this situation look like? How do you remove tons of solid steel from the floor of a factory?
Edit: From another thread
Cleaning up metal spills
Before any action is taken to clean up metal spills, the risks of the situation need to be fully assessed. If it is safe to do so, it may be possible to break the metal into sections before it fully solidifies, using a furnace tool. Primary PPE must be worn when doing this (see page 35).
If it is unsafe to intervene, the spill will have to be cleaned when the metal has solidified by lifting it from the ground with hand tools. For metal that is more difficult to remove, an oxygen lance may be required. An oxygen lance is an extremely dangerous piece of equipment and extra precautions (such as additional PPE and full training in its use) are required. It is also important to make sure the surrounding area is free of any standing water or flammable materials because molten metal can spray off the lance and onto these items, causing an eruption
Just throw the factory in some rice.
Yes: stars and everything else outside the solar system.