Author Topic: The Starship "I risk sending a thread off topic" Homeless Posts Thread 1  (Read 357809 times)

Offline Chris Bergin

Relief Valve Thread.

Given this is a very busy section of the forum, I thought it might be a good idea to have this thread where we can move off topic chats and allow people to just fire away with posts that may not warrant a new thread of its own, etc. etc.

Not quite a party thread (like on SpaceX missions), but that kinda idea where it keeps the main threads clear of wandering and they can get moved here rather than trimmed.
« Last Edit: 04/14/2021 09:47 pm by Chris Bergin »
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline Star-Dust

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 125
  • Liked: 29
  • Likes Given: 318
Thanks for the opportunity offered by the new thread,

I just wanted to evoke my feelings and thoughts at this turning point (for me) of the developement of SS, we're a week or so from a 150 meters hop, a culminating attempt ahead after a series of setbacks and delays.

SX is ramping up her BC facilty with hangars and tools more and more elaborate, an indicator of the transition to the next level of the developement but most importantly (for me) a proof of the full engagement of the compagny in her enterprise which wont allow any plans reverse.

With sceptism at first, I got to understand what EM was doing in BC and with that  understanding a confidance build-up, I think he was trying the workability of steel (structure), if the coming test is succeful I think we will witness a rapid developement to the next stage, which is engines/aerodynamics.

I still have some concerns regarding the complexity of the 31 engined SH, and how the development process will be handled.


Offline geza

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 603
  • Budapest
    • Géza Meszéna's web page
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 59
I still have some concerns regarding the complexity of the 31 engined SH, and how the development process will be handled.

FH is launched with 29 engines in operation. I think, fin actuation under entry conditions will be the really challenging issue.

Offline Star-Dust

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 125
  • Liked: 29
  • Likes Given: 318
I still have some concerns regarding the complexity of the 31 engined SH, and how the development process will be handled.

FH is launched with 29 engines in operation. I think, fin actuation under entry conditions will be the really challenging issue.

FH is a kind of 3 Falcon-9 (3x9=27) attached together, you can't do a parallel with SH, May be just an apprehension but I feel always some uncertainty on things never done before.

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4794
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2363
  • Likes Given: 2471
I'm not concerned about the Super heavy booster.  They already know how to do a booster.  I too believe the hardest part to Starship will be the reentry and how the fins will work.  Once this is solved, it seems like everything else will be downhill. 

I also think for welding they may want to use robotic welding as much as possible to avoid mistakes like week spots, too much weld, not enough weld, etc. 

Offline intelati

I'm not concerned about the Super heavy booster.  They already know how to do a booster.  I too believe the hardest part to Starship will be the reentry and how the fins will work.  Once this is solved, it seems like everything else will be downhill.

And the current work backs your thoughts up. SpaceX didn't start with the big "dumb" booster, but the part that has to come back to earth from orbit.
Starships are meant to fly

Offline sucramdi

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 214
  • Canada
  • Liked: 432
  • Likes Given: 57
I still have some concerns regarding the complexity of the 31 engined SH, and how the development process will be handled.

FH is launched with 29 engines in operation. I think, fin actuation under entry conditions will be the really challenging issue.

FH is a kind of 3 Falcon-9 (3x9=27) attached together, you can't do a parallel with SH, May be just an apprehension but I feel always some uncertainty on things never done before.

Superheavy might be "only" 4 more engines than Falcon Heavy, but having all of those engines feeding off the same fuel tank and pushing against the same bulkhead is a significant new design challenge.

Offline Star-Dust

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 125
  • Liked: 29
  • Likes Given: 318
I'm not concerned about the Super heavy booster.  They already know how to do a booster.  I too believe the hardest part to Starship will be the reentry and how the fins will work.  Once this is solved, it seems like everything else will be downhill. 

I also think for welding they may want to use robotic welding as much as possible to avoid mistakes like week spots, too much weld, not enough weld, etc.

I think reentry will be all about materials resistance (to heat and stress) choice, this will not add any engeneering solving issues. On the contrary accomodating 31 engines with all necessery plumbing and connections, the weight pressure sustained (3.580 tons +1.300 tons = 4.880 tons),............. I imagine also the soviet abondoning the N1 rocket project for some valid complexity realted reason.
« Last Edit: 07/22/2020 02:43 pm by Star-Dust »

Offline Tulse

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 546
  • Liked: 395
  • Likes Given: 3
Having multiple engines pushing against the same bulkhead is likely simpler than having them push against three separate bulkheads and structural interconnects that also have to release at some point.

Offline steveleach

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1553
  • Liked: 2038
  • Likes Given: 797
I'm not concerned about the Super heavy booster.  They already know how to do a booster.  I too believe the hardest part to Starship will be the reentry and how the fins will work.  Once this is solved, it seems like everything else will be downhill.

And the current work backs your thoughts up. SpaceX didn't start with the big "dumb" booster, but the part that has to come back to earth from orbit.
Compared to some of the other challenges that SpaceX are tackling with Starship, SuperHeavy is maybe not so hard.

But building a 230ft high, fully reusable, stainless steel booster with 31 FFSC engines totalling 16 million lbf of thrust isn't exactly trivial.

Offline intelati

I'm not concerned about the Super heavy booster.  They already know how to do a booster.  I too believe the hardest part to Starship will be the reentry and how the fins will work.  Once this is solved, it seems like everything else will be downhill.

And the current work backs your thoughts up. SpaceX didn't start with the big "dumb" booster, but the part that has to come back to earth from orbit.
Compared to some of the other challenges that SpaceX are tackling with Starship, SuperHeavy is maybe not so hard.

But building a 230ft high, fully reusable, stainless steel booster with 31 FFSC engines totalling 16 million lbf of thrust isn't exactly trivial.

Sure, but compared to the technical nightmares of the belly flop, a booster can be modeled pretty effectively with the existing Falcon 9. And any physical limitations of the steel can be compensated with pure strength at least until a lighter alternative is made.

But that is to say, the Starship system is an incredibly risky and difficult undertaking. I'm amazed that they are taking this risk, and am glad I have this site to keep watch over their literal daily progress.
Starships are meant to fly

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4825
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 2559
  • Likes Given: 3259
LOL, I love this thread title.  (a good laugh to start the day).

We're all in it up to the elbows on SS and SH.  However, the attention once this thing starts flying will escalate.

Strap in!
Superheavy + Starship the final push to launch commit!

Offline anof

  • Member
  • Posts: 61
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 52
  • Likes Given: 104
The N1 did not have any ground tests prior to the launches. They did not have money or time to build the test facilities. Also the engines could only be fired once. They tested some of the of engines from each batch.
« Last Edit: 07/22/2020 03:00 pm by anof »

Online Okie_Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1734
  • Oklahoma, USA
  • Liked: 1060
  • Likes Given: 677
Having multiple engines pushing against the same bulkhead is likely simpler than having them push against three separate bulkheads and structural interconnects that also have to release at some point.

Hey! Who says they aren't really planning a super duper heavy with two strap-on super heavy side booster. What do you think all those extra nose cones are for?   ::)

Offline Star-Dust

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 125
  • Liked: 29
  • Likes Given: 318
Having multiple engines pushing against the same bulkhead is likely simpler than having them push against three separate bulkheads and structural interconnects that also have to release at some point.

Hey! Who says they aren't really planning a super duper heavy with two strap-on super heavy side booster. What do you think all those extra nose cones are for?   ::)

I do love the idea of a SH-SS with two or four boosters (reusable) how this could improve the overall yield of the rocket in terms of payload and financially.
« Last Edit: 07/22/2020 03:28 pm by Star-Dust »

Offline moreno7798

I still have some concerns regarding the complexity of the 31 engined SH, and how the development process will be handled.

FH is launched with 29 engines in operation. I think, fin actuation under entry conditions will be the really challenging issue.

As long as the motors can handle the entry loads they should be fine. They have the entry/landing algorithms pretty much figured out.
The only humans that make no mistakes are the ones that do nothing. The only mistakes that are failures are the ones where nothing is learned.

Offline sucramdi

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 214
  • Canada
  • Liked: 432
  • Likes Given: 57
RE: Boca Chica non-update photos thread

Excellent idea! Lots of beautiful photos floating around, but many aren't really updates.

Offline RotoSequence

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2208
  • Liked: 2068
  • Likes Given: 1536
How do you even pack in 31 engines in such a tight space? There's gonna be next to zero maneuvering room around the maze of pipes and pipe fittings for installing (or worse, removing) the various fixtures.

Offline mikegi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 477
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 16
I think there's a real chance this thing could become Musk's Spruce Goose. I'm not terribly concerned about SH except that it's so big ... because it has to lift the SS jack-of-all-trades monstrosity.

Offline butters

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2346
  • Liked: 1555
  • Likes Given: 532
I think there's a real chance this thing could become Musk's Spruce Goose. I'm not terribly concerned about SH except that it's so big ... because it has to lift the SS jack-of-all-trades monstrosity.

Elon Musk is often compared to Howard Hughes, but his track record thus far looks more like Kelly Johnson. Starship is his Blackbird. It's not a Spruce Goose, it's an Oxcart. It's not crazy, it's just near the edge of what's possible with the latest technology, and he's bringing tremendous engineering resources to bear on the project, applying lessons learned from multiple previous projects that have overcome setbacks to achieve remarkable success. Boca Chica is the Palmdale Skunkworks of our time, and we're watching it live!

Tags:
 

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