Cidco Rd. Manufacturing Site in Cocoa, Florida

[Chris Bergin]

And this thread should probably be in the BFR forum section.

I think we can keep this thread here and we'll start an update and discussion thread in the Starship section like we have for Boca Chica.

For now, the Phase 2 update thread will work as that doesn't have to be Boca Chica specific:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=47730.0

[Joffan]

It almost feels like in Contact when they zoom in from a satellite's point of view and then woohoo there's another one! Great to have two being built in parallel, it also speaks a lot about how much they can invest in this program.

The first rule of government spending: why have one when you can have two for twice the price?

Of course this isn't government spending. But your "rule" is not very reliable in any case.

If you remember the Mars Rovers Spirit and Opportunity, (admittedly this is my recollection) the assessment was that by having two rovers, the project actually went faster and cost not much more than having one rover. Problems identified in one could be avoided in the other which then took the lead while the issue was being fixed on the first one.

So two builds can be better than one, in many ways.

[Chris Bergin]

Let's keep this on topic and interesting like every other thread here. This one's been linked by Elon, so let's not let ourselves down here.

[x15_fan]

It almost feels like in Contact when they zoom in from a satellite's point of view and then woohoo there's another one! Great to have two being built in parallel, it also speaks a lot about how much they can invest in this program.

The first rule of government spending: why have one when you can have two for twice the price?

Of course this isn't government spending. But your "rule" is not very reliable in any case.

If you remember the Mars Rovers Spirit and Opportunity, (admittedly this is my recollection) the assessment was that by having two rovers, the project actually went faster and cost not much more than having one rover. Problems identified in one could be avoided in the other which then took the lead while the issue was being fixed on the first one.

So two builds can be better than one, in many ways.

Building two is not atypical. Two XB-70s, YF-22s/YF-23s (That was because of GE/PW competition but still). Two vehicles gives you schedule, RUD risk reduction and can cover more trade space quicker.

[Orbiter]

It almost feels like in Contact when they zoom in from a satellite's point of view and then woohoo there's another one! Great to have two being built in parallel, it also speaks a lot about how much they can invest in this program.

The first rule of government spending: why have one when you can have two for twice the price?

Of course this isn't government spending. But your "rule" is not very reliable in any case.

If you remember the Mars Rovers Spirit and Opportunity, (admittedly this is my recollection) the assessment was that by having two rovers, the project actually went faster and cost not much more than having one rover. Problems identified in one could be avoided in the other which then took the lead while the issue was being fixed on the first one.

So two builds can be better than one, in many ways.

That's a quote from the scene in the movie "Contact" that Alexphysics was referring too. 

It makes sense to me to build two Starships: If something goes wrong with the one in Texas, then you have one in Florida already built to continue.

[Robotbeat]

Freaking insane the way SpaceX does development. I'm not aware of anyone can iterate this fast.

I mean, the orbital Starship in Texas kind of looks like crap, but with this level of intense iteration, I think they'll have something flyable to above the Karman line within the year.

People often complain about SpaceX amazing peoples. But the amazing peoples didn't just appear out of nowhere. This kind of insanity (coupled with spectacular tangible successes and operational tempo) is why SpaceX has amazing peoples.

[SgtPoivre]

That's pretty nice eye candy!

But I still don't get the goal of all this. One would assume that SpaceX has pretty much mastered atmospheric flight and landing techniques with Falcon 9.
Deep-throttling of Raptor can be completely tested on engine test bench.
Maybe that's for testing interaction with pressure regulation of liquid methane tanks in a dynamic environment ? But this does not seem to require a flight test article.

The big novelty of Starship for SpaceX are very long duration autonomous orbital and deep space operations, as well as new reentry profiles, heat shielding, etc.
I would have expected them to focus on that. For sure that's much harder to test.

Anyway I will just shut off my brain and enjoy the show!

[CJ]

Incredible.

From debating whether-or-not it's a water tower in Boca Chica to one prototype and two full scale under construction, in separate sites no less,  in a couple of months.

I've often heard stories from the 60's, how fast things could get done. I never thought I'd see it in my lifetime, but here it is. And a Mars ship, no less. Or, a moon ship... at this rate of progress, I think it's very plausible they'll be ready to do a moon landing by the administration's goal of 2024. 

As for how to get it to the Cape, I concur with those here who say it'll be done in segments.

I also wonder, given this construction technique, whether we'll end up seeing the Super Heavy (BFR) 1st stage sooner than assumed.

[docmordrid]

Incredible.
>>

Totally agree!

I also wonder, given this construction technique, whether we'll end up seeing the Super Heavy (BFR) 1st stage sooner than assumed.

I'm betting that newly poured  weld-up jig is for SH builds.

[edzieba]

Transport out of there looks ugly.  It has rail access, and from there all the way to the NASA Causeway before hitting an underpass.  There is an unloading area around there, but it's on the wrong side of the rails and they'd have to bring Starship through the airport...

Or they could close about 5 miles of the highway and go that way.

If they can get it to the river via road, they have some more options:
- Barge it up to the crossing near the VAB and use the large roadways to overland to 39A
- Barge it all the way up to Mosquito Lagoon and then up to the inlet, and then all the way back down the cost directly to 39A
- Barge it down to Dragon Point then back up Banana river to a convenient KSC landing, then overland to 39a

One would assume that SpaceX has pretty much mastered atmospheric flight and landing techniques with Falcon 9.

Falcon 9 and Starship have significantly different aerodynamic design and control surfaces.

Falcon 9 is a relatively clean 'stick' when falling through the atmosphere. It is passively stable engines-down without active control, and indeed without the grid-fins at all. The grid-fins provide significant moment in two axes (pitch and yaw) due to providing a force at a significant distance form both the centre of mass and the centre of pressure of the stage, and a good amount of moment for roll control.

Starship may not even be passively stable while falling. Even ignoring the additional structural mass at the opposite end from the engines (the crew compartment), the large fixed fins at the base will serve to try and tip the stage nose-down. The actuated canards - as currently shown with a single movement axis aligned to the body of Starship - provide little to no control authority when Starship is flying along its long axis (falling nose-up or nose-down) and limited control in only one axis proportional to how far Starship has tipped over. When Starship is flying 'belly forwards' the two actuated legs and the actuated canards provide much more control authority, but this is a flight regime that SpaceX have no operation experience in, and as far as I am aware nobody else has either. The closest is the handful of lifting-body re-entry test vehicles, all of which flew 'forwards' instead and none of which had forward actuated 'flapping' canards (I'm not sure any even had canards!).

In short: Falcon is passively stable during non-powered flight and has good aerodynamic control for all three rotational axes. Starship is passively unstable during non-powered flight and flies in a completely perpendicular attitude, and with more limited aerodynamic control (and nearly none during the landing burn when sat on its tail) operating in a new and mostly unexplored flight regime.

[Rocket Science]

That's clearly a water tower.

"Water-tower" is the "code-name" for the Starship program...

[envy887]

As for how to get it to the Cape, I concur with those here who say it'll be done in segments.

Vertical on a SPMT like the Hopper, I think. That doesn't preclude segments but I think they could do it in one piece also, except the fins.

[Rocket Science]

As for how to get it to the Cape, I concur with those here who say it'll be done in segments.

Vertical on a SPMT like the Hopper, I think. That doesn't preclude segments but I think they could do it in one piece also, except the fins.

I'm going with vertical as well, but perhaps as an option "in sections". Final assembly could be at the Cape... Would help logistically and with safety, well see!

[Thorny]

And how are they going to move that to anyplace useful?

Cidco Road -> Industrial Avenue -> SR528 -> Port Canaveral

[Cheapchips]

By my rough measurement it's 20 miles to LZ1 via Port Canaveral. 30 miles to 39a.

There's a few overhead cables on the way but not many from what I could tell.  The worst bit seems to be getting down Cicdo road?

[Rocket Science]

By my rough measurement it's 20 miles to LZ1 via Port Canaveral. 30 miles to 39a.

There's a few overhead cables on the way but not many from what I could tell.  The worst bit seems to be getting down Cicdo road?

Piece of cake after seeing Endeavour move through LA....

[RotoSequence]

And how are they going to move that to anyplace useful?

Cidco Road -> Industrial Avenue -> SR528 -> Port Canaveral

I don't think Starship will fit under the overpass, but the route might still work if they move it against traffic on SR528. Still, there's an awful lot of obstacles on the road with that route. If they're going to be building a fleet of Starships at Coastal Steel, they might need to take a barge.

[TommyBoy32927]

I was reading this and decided to drive by as It's on my way home from work and saw this pulling in the gate!

[Keldor]

I also wonder, given this construction technique, whether we'll end up seeing the Super Heavy (BFR) 1st stage sooner than assumed.

Is there any particular reason to assume this isn't what we're already looking at right here, rather than a second Starship?

[docmordrid]

I also wonder, given this construction technique, whether we'll end up seeing the Super Heavy (BFR) 1st stage sooner than assumed.

Is there any particular reason to assume this isn't what we're already looking at right here, rather than a second Starship?

BC started with a Starship first, so why not FL?, and Musk said they're building a Starship.