Author Topic: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities  (Read 270987 times)

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27513
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 51218
  • Likes Given: 21751
Couldn’t find a thread specific to Cape facilities for Starship.

This seems like a good starting point:

https://twitter.com/tgmetsfan98/status/1146887854334926863

Quote
SpaceX has a new job posting for “Launch Engineer, Starship Operations” in Cape Canaveral:

“The Cape Starship Operations Engineer...for Starship and Super Heavy vehicle development and initial launch capability from Launch Pad 39A.”

https://boards.greenhouse.io/spacex/jobs/4342965002?gh_jid=4342965002

Quote
LAUNCH ENGINEER, STARSHIP OPERATIONS
Cape Canaveral, FL, United States

SpaceX was founded under the belief that a future where humanity is out exploring the stars is fundamentally more exciting than one where we are not. Today SpaceX is actively developing the technologies to make this possible, with the ultimate goal of enabling human life on Mars.

LAUNCH ENGINEER (STARSHIP OPERATIONS)

The Cape Starship Operations Engineer plays a critical role, and is responsible for design, build, and operations for Starship and Super Heavy vehicle development and initial launch capability from Launch Pad 39A. Engineers will be working in multiple disciplines: fluids, structures, instrumentation, civil, and manufacturing.

RESPONSIBILITIES:

Assist in the design and development of mechanical and fluid launch systems for the Starship and Super Heavy vehicle at our Cape Canaveral launch site
Develop novel ways site wide to streamline processes and increase the reliability of Starship operations
Projects will range from site development for fabrication, automated welding systems, launch pad fluid systems, to small custom valves for fluid systems, test fixtures, and automated mechanisms
Use your well-rounded technical knowledge to display proficiency in basic structural sizing, mechanisms, and design while making development decisions based on cost and schedule considerations
Directly support the fabrication of tooling and ground support equipment at the launch site facilities
Collaborate with both design and fabrication engineering
Ensure that all parts are received and inspected at the correct time to facilitate the build schedule
Participate in tool design and development
Develop production, activation, and operations procedures/processes
Resolve manufacturing discrepancies and interface with the cross functional teams

BASIC QUALIFICATIONS:

Bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering or aerospace engineering
2+ years of experience working with mechanical processes in a manufacturing environment
2+ year of hands-on fabrication, assembly, and/or testing experience

PREFERRED SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE:

Master's degree in an engineering discipline
Experience designing large mechanical systems within a fast paced environment requiring high-levels of autonomy and design creativity
Strong experience using a high-end CAD software design package (e.g. Unigraphics, CATIA, or ProE)
Previous experience managing large assembly models and drawings
Able to work well in an integrated collaborative team environment including daily interactions with technicians, engineers, and managers
Able to prioritize and execute tasks in a high-pressure environment
Self-motivated and directed with keen attention to detail
Demonstrated expertise in the design of welded structures
Strong understanding and application of Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing (GD&T)
Experience designing mass efficient structures
Ongoing drive for continuous improvement in all aspects of work
Able to prioritize and execute tasks in a high-pressure environment
Detail oriented, organized, and demonstrate a high sense of urgency
Experience with metallic manufacturing techniques, processes, equipment, and other processes such as machining, welding, tube bending, structural assembly, etc.

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS:

Ability to pass Air Force background check for Cape Canaveral
Ability to lift 20-30 lbs., standing, climbing, bending, grasping, sitting, pulling, pushing, stooping, stretching, and carrying may be required to perform the functions of this position
Willing to travel for undetermined periods of time with limited notice
Ability to work extended hours as needed to support project milestones

ITAR REQUIREMENTS:

To conform to U.S. Government space technology export regulations, including the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) you must be a U.S. citizen, lawful permanent resident of the U.S., protected individual as defined by 8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3), or eligible to obtain the required authorizations from the U.S. Department of State. Learn more about the ITAR here. 
SpaceX is an Equal Opportunity Employer; employment with SpaceX is governed on the basis of merit, competence and qualifications and will not be influenced in any manner by race, color, religion, gender, national origin/ethnicity, veteran status, disability status, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, mental or physical disability or any other legally protected status.

Applicants wishing to view a copy of SpaceX’s Affirmative Action Plan for veterans and individuals with disabilities, or applicants requiring reasonable accommodation to the application/interview process should notify the Human Resources Department at (310) 363-6000.
« Last Edit: 07/05/2019 12:43 pm by FutureSpaceTourist »

Offline Cheapchips

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 972
  • UK
  • Liked: 777
  • Likes Given: 1699
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #1 on: 07/05/2019 12:09 pm »
Although we knew they were exploring the possibility, I think that's the first official confirmation that they plan on launching development vehicles out of 39a?

Offline jstrotha0975

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 416
  • United States
  • Liked: 256
  • Likes Given: 1957
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #2 on: 07/05/2019 01:44 pm »
I think it's just for the Starship prototypes, no idea where they will launch the full stack from.

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27513
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 51218
  • Likes Given: 21751
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #3 on: 07/05/2019 02:02 pm »
Although we knew they were exploring the possibility, I think that's the first official confirmation that they plan on launching development vehicles out of 39a?

Yes, I think that's true in terms of something said by SpaceX itself.

For completeness of this thread, here's the June 2 NSF article that made public that SpaceX was actively considering 39A:

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2019/06/spacex-starhopper-hops-texas-pad-39a-plans-materialize-florida/

I think it's just for the Starship prototypes, no idea where they will launch the full stack from.

I agree that so far all SpaceX/Elon have explicitly talked about with Boca Chica and Cape launch sites is for testing prototypes. However, that obviously doesn't preclude doing operational/commercial launches from there as well. For example, I think dearmoon is most likely to launch from 39A.
« Last Edit: 07/05/2019 04:13 pm by FutureSpaceTourist »

Online wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4793
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 2520
  • Likes Given: 3224
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #4 on: 07/05/2019 06:43 pm »
I think if they are going to build up the facility and capability for LOx, Methane and other ground support for a new type of vehicle there will be financial and workforce benefits to starting in the same place you are likely to end up. 

NASA won't hate having the Super Heavy and Starship under development on KSC. 
Superheavy + Starship the final push to launch commit!

Offline TheRadicalModerate

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2897
  • Tampa, FL
  • Liked: 2147
  • Likes Given: 421
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #5 on: 07/05/2019 07:02 pm »
Quote
The Cape Starship Operations Engineer plays a critical role, and is responsible for design, build, and operations for Starship and Super Heavy vehicle development and initial launch capability from Launch Pad 39A.

The SH part is new and significant.  Anybody have any thoughts on how SH could use the existing flame trench?  It'd be hard from where the Starship test pad is proposed to be located.

Offline OxCartMark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1836
  • Former barge watcher now into water towers
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 2072
  • Likes Given: 1552
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #6 on: 07/05/2019 07:51 pm »
Have you ever felt like someone wrote a job description pointed at you?
Actulus Ferociter!

Offline Kansan52

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1456
  • Hutchinson, KS
  • Liked: 551
  • Likes Given: 537
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #7 on: 07/05/2019 08:05 pm »
...  Anybody have any thoughts on how SH could use the existing flame trench?  It'd be hard from where the Starship test pad is proposed to be located.

Maybe no F9 or FH and switch completely to SH/SS? If memory serves, the flame trench can do it.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13419
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11782
  • Likes Given: 10991
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #8 on: 07/05/2019 09:05 pm »
Have you ever felt like someone wrote a job description pointed at you?
Go get that job! I read it and wished I had the interdisciplinary experience needed... it sounds like a dream job that will give you an ulcer in a year but man what a ride...
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9084
  • US
  • Liked: 11321
  • Likes Given: 5049
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #9 on: 07/05/2019 09:14 pm »
...  Anybody have any thoughts on how SH could use the existing flame trench?  It'd be hard from where the Starship test pad is proposed to be located.

Maybe no F9 or FH and switch completely to SH/SS? If memory serves, the flame trench can do it.

That is not feasible anytime soon.  They have large contracts for F9/FH flying from that pad.  You can't just throw away your existing vehicles before the replacement has even flown.

Offline TheRadicalModerate

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2897
  • Tampa, FL
  • Liked: 2147
  • Likes Given: 421
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #10 on: 07/05/2019 09:48 pm »
That is not feasible anytime soon.  They have large contracts for F9/FH flying from that pad.  You can't just throw away your existing vehicles before the replacement has even flown.

That's my understanding, too.

A couple of half-baked ideas: 

1) Build an SH pad off to the side of the current F9/FH pad, so SH can share the same flame trench.  You'd have to do something weird with the flame deflector (maybe put it on rails?), and you'd need to have a very different way of putting the SS/SH/TEL onto the new pad.  You might need to build a new ramp.

2) Dig a new flame trench, and put the pad between the HIF and the current F9/FH pad.  You could presumably do this by building out the purported Starship test pad, but it sounds pretty expensive, and the HIF would be in for a bad day if the SH blew up.

One thing SpaceX has going for it:  All the truly scary SH testing can be done at Boca Chica, so the risk to the F9/FH infrastructure can be reduced.  But I still don't see how they're going to do this.

Offline billh

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 710
  • Houston
  • Liked: 904
  • Likes Given: 604
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #11 on: 07/05/2019 11:25 pm »
I love how this qualification is listed twice:
Quote
Able to prioritize and execute tasks in a high-pressure environment
I think that's telling.

Offline GrandByte

  • Member
  • Posts: 15
  • United States
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #12 on: 07/05/2019 11:45 pm »
I feel that their best bet might be to move Falcon Heavy and Crew Dragon launches to other launchpads, so they can convert LC-39A to only launch Super Heavy/Starship. However, since there aren't that many spare launchpads floating around in Florida, that might become an issue. I know SLC-40 can be adapted for Crew Dragon with the addition of a crew arm, but it's too small to launch Falcon Heavy from. However they decide to tackle this problem will certainly be interesting indeed.

Online rockets4life97

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
  • Liked: 507
  • Likes Given: 345
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #13 on: 07/06/2019 01:31 am »
I think SpaceX will find a way to use the flame trench. That seems like the most difficult part to build while the pad remains active and could be the longest lead time.

Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #14 on: 07/06/2019 03:56 am »
What I haven't seen in any of the conversations of retrofitting 39A to handle starship is the potential of RUDs. 39A is too important to crew Dragon and Falcon heavy and starlink cadence when those launches start for, in my opinion, them risking 39A to a test rocket that frankly will probably at least once RUD.

It would be far safer if they are going to use 39a as the launch site, to build a side launch as has been pictured. The shorter distance between the two would lower tremendously the chance of a RUD doing any significant damage to the main pad that couldn't be repaired in short order.

I also question if the prep building could handle F9, Falcon Heave AND Starship. It looks full and busy most of the time now from pictures released. Frankly I'm of the mind that ultimately they'll move Starship to another pad entirely to test. I would not be surprised seeing as what there is in Boca that initial flights of the FL startship take place from the landing site.

Offline TheRadicalModerate

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2897
  • Tampa, FL
  • Liked: 2147
  • Likes Given: 421
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #15 on: 07/06/2019 04:30 am »
I feel that their best bet might be to move Falcon Heavy and Crew Dragon launches to other launchpads, so they can convert LC-39A to only launch Super Heavy/Starship. However, since there aren't that many spare launchpads floating around in Florida, that might become an issue. I know SLC-40 can be adapted for Crew Dragon with the addition of a crew arm, but it's too small to launch Falcon Heavy from. However they decide to tackle this problem will certainly be interesting indeed.

LC-40 doesn't have a service tower.  You'll need a lot more than a crew access arm.

Offline TheRadicalModerate

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2897
  • Tampa, FL
  • Liked: 2147
  • Likes Given: 421
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #16 on: 07/06/2019 04:32 am »
What I haven't seen in any of the conversations of retrofitting 39A to handle starship is the potential of RUDs. 39A is too important to crew Dragon and Falcon heavy and starlink cadence when those launches start for, in my opinion, them risking 39A to a test rocket that frankly will probably at least once RUD.

It would be far safer if they are going to use 39a as the launch site, to build a side launch as has been pictured. The shorter distance between the two would lower tremendously the chance of a RUD doing any significant damage to the main pad that couldn't be repaired in short order.

I also question if the prep building could handle F9, Falcon Heave AND Starship. It looks full and busy most of the time now from pictures released. Frankly I'm of the mind that ultimately they'll move Starship to another pad entirely to test. I would not be surprised seeing as what there is in Boca that initial flights of the FL startship take place from the landing site.

Where the Starship pad is proposed has no access to the big flame trench.  That's probably not a problem for Starship, but it is for SuperHeavy.

Offline gtae07

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 109
  • Georgia, USA
  • Liked: 223
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #17 on: 07/06/2019 09:33 am »
Have you ever felt like someone wrote a job description pointed at you?

I know what you mean.  However I think my wife would be... less than pleased... and I really do like my time off...

Now, if I were a little younger, and single...

Offline jpo234

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1924
  • Liked: 2095
  • Likes Given: 1749
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #18 on: 07/06/2019 09:45 am »
Although we knew they were exploring the possibility, I think that's the first official confirmation that they plan on launching development vehicles out of 39a?

Yes, I think that's true in terms of something said by SpaceX itself.

It's right there in the very first ITS video released in 2016...
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline Cheapchips

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 972
  • UK
  • Liked: 777
  • Likes Given: 1699
Re: SpaceX Cape 39A Starship launch/landing facilities
« Reply #19 on: 07/06/2019 12:16 pm »
It's right there in the very first ITS video released in 2016...

That's why I said Development vehicles.  :)

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1