Author Topic: The Starship "I risk sending a thread off topic" Homeless Posts Thread 2  (Read 183925 times)

Offline Chris Bergin

Relief Valve Thread 2

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.

This is not a free license to post nonsense, by the way, unlike the late posts in thread 1.
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 ETurner

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 302
  • Liked: 315
  • Likes Given: 327
This is not a free license to post nonsense, by the way, unlike the late posts in thread 1.
Iron fist moderation, please!

Offline Scintillant

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 242
  • Liked: 630
  • Likes Given: 197
Anyone know why the latest delivery included a giant Chick-Fil-A sign? New Starship development sponsor?  :P

Photo cred: Mary

EDIT: Disregard, question was addressed in the Facilities thread: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=49086.msg2220503#msg2220503
« Last Edit: 04/15/2021 02:47 am by Scintillant »

Offline rockets4life97

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 786
  • Liked: 507
  • Likes Given: 351
Seems like if SpaceX had to choose between the USAF development funding or the the Artemis lander funding, they would have chosen the Artemis lander funding. I know that the USAF and NASA don't work in coordination, but if you consider them together as U.S. government investors in rocket development SpaceX probably comes out fairly well vis-a-vis ULA and BO. NASA also gets a human-rated rocket (F9), human-rated spaceship ( Dragon), a Moon Lander, a heavy lift rocket (helpful to the USAF too), and a development towards a much larger human-rated space vehicle. So probably not an apples to apples comparison. But a good deal for the U.S. government!

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6415
  • Liked: 9057
  • Likes Given: 885
There's no question about it: NASA has been, and is, very very good to SpaceX.

In comparison USAF has been shortsighted, they could have funded Starship in EELV2 LSA, which would be a game changer for the military just as it is a game changer for NASA BLEO HSF. Instead they funded Omega, now that's $500M they'll never get back...

Offline Afterpwn

  • Member
  • Posts: 6
  • Liked: 39
  • Likes Given: 5
Good afternoon,
apologies if this has been asked or suggested before, and please shut me down if what I am suggesting below is complete nonsense.

While I was reading all the new posts in the Artemis topic an idea popped in my mind, I did some basic research but I am not great with crunching numbers.

Would it be possible for a dragon (XL) to be modified and replace the nosecone of a lunar starship. Currently we rely on Orion and possibly other spacecrafts to dock with Starship in lunar orbit, but doing this would potentially only require refueling the starship before it could land on the moon, crew onboard already, especially since the first few flights will most likely have limited crew members. It would also be able to remove some of the concerns of no launch abort system on starship, especially in its early days, and give the Astronauts a way to return home even when using the full SS stack to the moon.

Secondly I was wondering, if this system would be possible to use regular starships to bring dragon spacecrafts and Astronauts to the gateway, I understand they'd most likely have to find a new location for the header tank but I was not sure if starship would be able to safely do a belly flop re-entry without a nosecone on the vehicle.

I'd feel development for a system like this would still be a lot cheaper than a single SLS+Orion stack, but I also know we'd need at least a few of those flights to make congress happy.

Once again apologies if this makes no sense, and thank you in advance for anyone willing to answer some of my questions.
« Last Edit: 04/17/2021 02:06 pm by Afterpwn »

Offline James54

  • Member
  • Posts: 43
  • Denver, Colorado
  • Liked: 59
  • Likes Given: 51
Would it be possible for a dragon (XL) to be modified and replace the nosecone of a lunar starship. Currently we rely on Orion and possibly other spacecrafts to dock with Starship in lunar orbit, but doing this would potentially only require refueling the starship before it could land on the moon, crew onboard already, especially since the first few flights will most likely have limited crew members. It would also be able to remove some of the concerns of no launch abort system on starship, especially in its early days, and give the Astronauts a way to return home even when using the full SS stack to the moon.

Secondly I was wondering, if this system would be possible to use regular starships to bring dragon spacecrafts and Astronauts to the gateway, I understand they'd most likely have to find a new location for the header tank but I was not sure if starship would be able to safely do a belly flop re-entry without a nosecone on the vehicle.

I'd feel development for a system like this would still be a lot cheaper than a single SLS+Orion stack, but I also know we'd need at least a few of those flights to make congress happy.

Once again apologies if this makes no sense, and thank you in advance for anyone willing to answer some of my questions.

Afterpwn asked” Would it be possible for a dragon (XL) to be modified and replace the nosecone of a lunar starship.”
Starship is a structurally integrated system being developed and I don’t believe cutting off the “nosecone” above the fuel tanks is an option.  The diameters are not the same.  Also, Dragon XL is designed to take cargo to the Lunar Gateway.

Afterpwn asked “Secondly I was wondering, if this system would be possible to use regular starships to bring dragon spacecrafts and Astronauts to the gateway” Although this would be possible NASA has the “sunk cost” of all the money they have already put into SLS an Orion.  NASA’s plan is to use that system for the Lunar Gateway.  Of course, Congress could still decide to cancel the program and then Starship options might open up.

Offline KelvinZero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4286
  • Liked: 887
  • Likes Given: 201
Does the lunar starship still use that header tank in the nose? Could all that plumbing be removed? I quite like the idea of the lunar variant having a detachable hab section so it can lift specialised one-off cargoes to orbit that would not fit in a cargo starship, including the hab section that could become a module of a space station. It could also deliver massive objects to the lunar surface.

(edit) though that header tank could provide a bit of radiation shielding during long stays
« Last Edit: 04/18/2021 01:23 am by KelvinZero »

Offline Ben Baley

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 218
  • Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  • Liked: 243
  • Likes Given: 220
Does the lunar starship still use that header tank in the nose? Could all that plumbing be removed? I quite like the idea of the lunar variant having a detachable hab section so it can lift specialised one-off cargoes to orbit that would not fit in a cargo starship, including the hab section that could become a module of a space station. It could also deliver massive objects to the lunar surface.

(edit) though that header tank could provide a bit of radiation shielding during long stays

There is no nose header in LSS, the nose is taken up by an IDSS compliant docking port a la crew Dragon. This reuse of tested subsystems is one of the things NASA liked.

Because of the flight profile of LSS, which won't be returning to earth, header tanks aren't necessary, the only reason I can think of to include them would be for longer term fuel storage but I don't think it will be needed.

Online Cheapchips

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 998
  • UK
  • Liked: 801
  • Likes Given: 1770

Starships HLS win makes me wonder how rapidly SpaceX will start selling moon landings to commercial customers.  Inspiration 4 should fly a mere 16 months after DM2.

SpaceX are shameless rocket pimps, selling their services to all and sundry.   I'm expecting a commercial Moon mission to be  announced pretty much as soon as the Artemis III crew are back safely.

Online spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4855
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2417
  • Likes Given: 2568
At least SpaceX gets things done. 

Offline rsdavis9


Starships HLS win makes me wonder how rapidly SpaceX will start selling moon landings to commercial customers.  Inspiration 4 should fly a mere 16 months after DM2.

SpaceX are shameless rocket pimps, selling their services to all and sundry.   I'm expecting a commercial Moon mission to be  announced pretty much as soon as the Artemis III crew are back safely.

And they could always sell underpants. :)
With ELV best efficiency was the paradigm. The new paradigm is reusable, good enough, and commonality of design.
Same engines. Design once. Same vehicle. Design once. Reusable. Build once.

Offline AJW

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 803
  • Liked: 1310
  • Likes Given: 133
My post didn't really belong in the Artemis Contract thread, so moving here.

Before the Crewed flight, there will be a Demo flight.   I am assuming that is an all-out test of the ship, plus moon landing, before the human crew.

So, since they are going there anyway, what should they drop off?   Spare rover that can be tested autonomously?  Building supplies for a small base or a Bigelow? Wheel of cheese and a nice wine that travels well?
We are all interested in the future, for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives.

Offline tbellman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 572
  • Sweden
  • Liked: 822
  • Likes Given: 1
My post didn't really belong in the Artemis Contract thread, so moving here.

Before the Crewed flight, there will be a Demo flight.   I am assuming that is an all-out test of the ship, plus moon landing, before the human crew.

So, since they are going there anyway, what should they drop off?   Spare rover that can be tested autonomously?  Building supplies for a small base or a Bigelow? Wheel of cheese and a nice wine that travels well?

Option A requires two missions: one uncrewed landing, and one crewed landing with return to Orion.  Both are considered demo missions, not operational missions.  The uncrewed demo landing is not required to take off from the lunar surface again (but NASA will probably be happy if it does).

My expectation is that the uncrewed demo mission will not be able to carry anything interresting.  I think they will attempt that with what amounts to a prototype, before they have developed any way of delivering any cargo from the cargo hold to the surface.  So it might at most carry something whimsy, like a copy of A Grand Day Out.

But this is just my guess.

Offline Scintillant

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 242
  • Liked: 630
  • Likes Given: 197
My post didn't really belong in the Artemis Contract thread, so moving here.

Before the Crewed flight, there will be a Demo flight.   I am assuming that is an all-out test of the ship, plus moon landing, before the human crew.

So, since they are going there anyway, what should they drop off?   Spare rover that can be tested autonomously?  Building supplies for a small base or a Bigelow? Wheel of cheese and a nice wine that travels well?
Well, the render shows supplies on pallets, so why not bring a United Rentals forklift? :)

Offline Asteroza

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2371
  • Liked: 857
  • Likes Given: 30
Well, the render shows supplies on pallets, so why not bring a United Rentals forklift? :)

Because the rental fees would be out of this world...

Offline Ben Baley

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 218
  • Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  • Liked: 243
  • Likes Given: 220
My post didn't really belong in the Artemis Contract thread, so moving here.

Before the Crewed flight, there will be a Demo flight.   I am assuming that is an all-out test of the ship, plus moon landing, before the human crew.

So, since they are going there anyway, what should they drop off?   Spare rover that can be tested autonomously?  Building supplies for a small base or a Bigelow? Wheel of cheese and a nice wine that travels well?

Option A requires two missions: one uncrewed landing, and one crewed landing with return to Orion.  Both are considered demo missions, not operational missions.  The uncrewed demo landing is not required to take off from the lunar surface again (but NASA will probably be happy if it does).

My expectation is that the uncrewed demo mission will not be able to carry anything interresting.  I think they will attempt that with what amounts to a prototype, before they have developed any way of delivering any cargo from the cargo hold to the surface.  So it might at most carry something whimsy, like a copy of A Grand Day Out.

But this is just my guess.

I wouldn't be too surprised if they take some payloads because it would allow them to test some unloading procedures, but it would depend on how early in the development process they send the uncrewed demo mission. Either way 2 or three years isn't that long to develop a payload, however the large mass and volume does make it easier to use more off the shelf products which would shorten development timelines.

Offline mpthompson

  • Member
  • Posts: 10
  • Silicon Valley, CA
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Either way 2 or three years isn't that long to develop a payload, however the large mass and volume does make it easier to use more off the shelf products which would shorten development timelines.

Indeed.  With the payload capacity of Starship, the development burden could shift to how to harden terrestrial technology for the Lunar environment and how to secure it within the Starship for transport.  Normally, every ounce would be considered for equipment transported to the lunar surface, but that is hardly within the rounding errors now.

Offline sferrin

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 579
  • Utah
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 630
I'm surprised there doesn't appear to have been any discussion about the giant crane they're starting to assemble.  I think it was Mary who said once that a friend of hers was going to Boca Chica to build something and "wait until you see the size of the crane we're bringing with us".  It would appear to be even larger than the previous "BlueZilla".


"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline steveleach

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1588
  • Liked: 2107
  • Likes Given: 811
I'm surprised there doesn't appear to have been any discussion about the giant crane they're starting to assemble.  I think it was Mary who said once that a friend of hers was going to Boca Chica to build something and "wait until you see the size of the crane we're bringing with us".  It would appear to be even larger than the previous "BlueZilla".
It's been discussed, mainly across in the SpaceX Facilities and Fleets section.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?board=80.0

It is probably there to assemble the launch tower, but it might also be able to lift an empty Starship on top of a SuperHeavy on the launch mount. I'm not good at reading load charts though.

Tags: Tanker HLS 
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0