Author Topic: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)  (Read 182883 times)

Online RocketLover0119

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2891
  • Space Geek
  • Tampa, Florida
  • Liked: 6777
  • Likes Given: 1609
Re: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)
« Reply #40 on: 03/14/2022 03:56 pm »
At KSC today. Third column added to first section. Hard to see but it’s there.  :)
"The Starship has landed"

Online Chris Bergin

This includes a lot of Roberts Road:

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 pyromatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 934
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 3422
  • Likes Given: 19

Offline pyromatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 934
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 3422
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)
« Reply #43 on: 03/18/2022 02:25 pm »
« Last Edit: 03/18/2022 02:26 pm by pyromatter »

Offline pyromatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 934
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 3422
  • Likes Given: 19

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7092
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 1947
  • Likes Given: 1911
Re: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)
« Reply #45 on: 04/01/2022 09:10 am »
Is it possible SpX might never produce a Booster in Florida? They'll be needing (many) more Starships than Boosters. Could the Florida production specialize in Starships, with all the needed boosters hopping in from Texas?
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Online edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5982
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9147
  • Likes Given: 38
Re: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)
« Reply #46 on: 04/01/2022 12:07 pm »
Not impossible. But a short overland (BC build site to port via SPMTs over the new port access road) then barge to the KSC turning basin (as every LC-39A/B launch vehicle other than Falcon 9 has travelled) then SPMTs over Saturn Causeway to LC-39A would be far less hassle and headache then trying to perform a suborbital hop up out over the Atlantic and the back to the Cape, and FAR less hassle and headache than trying to overly the CONUS in a straight-line ballistic flight. Basically the same hassle (or more for overflight) as an orbital launch, because it has all the same public safety hazards.
Mostly depends on whether the launch site at LC-39A is completed before the build site at Roberts Road can be spun up. And that depends on whether the launch table requires the extended concrete curing time that BC's did, because that was the major pacing item at BC.

Offline daavery

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 204
  • denver CO
  • Liked: 268
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)
« Reply #47 on: 04/01/2022 12:34 pm »
but building a booster at KSC is even easier, since starships and boosters are 90% the same parts and the same build processes

Online edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5982
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9147
  • Likes Given: 38
Re: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)
« Reply #48 on: 04/01/2022 12:50 pm »
but building a booster at KSC is even easier, since starships and boosters are 90% the same parts and the same build processes
Sure. But if they end up in a situation where they can twiddle their thumbs waiting for the Roberts Road site to complete their first booster with a KSC launch site sitting idle, or ship a completed booster from BC that can arrive before then, do you think SpaceX will choose the thumb-twiddling option?
They already contract with Roll-lift whose bread and butter is moving overland and over sea objects far larger and far heavier than Super Heavy, so I'd be very surprised if they did not already have a transport plan worked out with them in the event it was needed.

Offline Tangilinear Interjar

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 486
  • California
  • Liked: 879
  • Likes Given: 47
Re: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)
« Reply #49 on: 04/01/2022 03:45 pm »
And that depends on whether the launch table requires the extended concrete curing time that BC's did, because that was the major pacing item at BC.

Curing concrete has never been nor ever would be a significant cause of scheduling delay. Besides the fact that in general you can begin working of a freshly poured structure within a day or 7, and in all but the weirdest situations concrete is considered "fully" cured in 28 days, it's just not how construction schedules are done.

Now the welding and fitment of the launch table is a very long process that probably can't be improved by very much.

Online jstrotha0975

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 562
  • United States
  • Liked: 330
  • Likes Given: 2592
Re: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)
« Reply #50 on: 04/01/2022 03:47 pm »
If they plan to send 1,000 starships to Mars, they will need more booster build sights regardless.

Online edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5982
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9147
  • Likes Given: 38
Re: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)
« Reply #51 on: 04/01/2022 03:55 pm »
And that depends on whether the launch table requires the extended concrete curing time that BC's did, because that was the major pacing item at BC.

Curing concrete has never been nor ever would be a significant cause of scheduling delay. Besides the fact that in general you can begin working of a freshly poured structure within a day or 7, and in all but the weirdest situations concrete is considered "fully" cured in 28 days, it's just not how construction schedules are done.

Now the welding and fitment of the launch table is a very long process that probably can't be improved by very much.
Should have put 'curing and settling'. Regardless, 28 days would be an age at SpaceX's pace when it's an avoidable delay.

The launch table is likely to be much faster than the BC one: Not only do they have the experience of building and then modifying the BC table, it was even mentioned in the Everyday Astronaut video shortly after the lift that the next iteration was already being designed to be much simpler, lighter, and easier to assemble.

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5339
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4182
  • Likes Given: 1683
Re: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)
« Reply #52 on: 04/01/2022 03:58 pm »
If they plan to send 1,000 starships to Mars, they will need more booster build sights regardless.
Nope. Each booster can launch a great many Starships (100 or more).  You need one or at most two active boosters per launch tower.  At a very active launch cadence you will wear out maybe two boosters per launch tower per year. You do need to build all those 1000 Mars Starships, since they won't come back for several years, and you need to build even more support Starships, maybe one tanker for every 20 Mars Starships, that will be reused a lot.

All of this assumes the Starship system will actually work as designed.

Online rcoppola

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • USA
  • Liked: 1967
  • Likes Given: 964
Re: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)
« Reply #53 on: 04/01/2022 04:03 pm »
IIRC, during Tim Dodd's nighttime tour of Boca last year, it was mentioned that the OLM was a bit overbuilt and they would incorporate efficiencies of mass and welds on their next build. Which is now underway. So I'd expect a smoother flow with the OLM this time around. By how much? couldn't say.
Sail the oceans of space and set foot upon new lands!
http://www.stormsurgemedia.com

Offline alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1478
  • Liked: 1543
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)
« Reply #54 on: 04/01/2022 04:06 pm »
They're constructing the launch site and the Starship yard concurrently.  At this point, from the update videos, it doesn't appear that either has shown itself to be an avoidable delay.

Offline EL_DIABLO

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 180
  • Liked: 143
  • Likes Given: 157
Re: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)
« Reply #55 on: 04/01/2022 04:35 pm »
Talking of which, when's the next flyover video? Thought they were going to be weekly.

Offline pyromatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 934
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 3422
  • Likes Given: 19

Offline Hamish.Student

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 389
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 464
Re: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)
« Reply #57 on: 04/07/2022 04:26 am »
Do we know if the launch viewing tower from the original plan years back is still going to happen? Or is that basically cancelled now.

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6414
  • Liked: 9097
  • Likes Given: 885
Re: SpaceX Florida - Overall (Roberts Road to 39A and LC-49)
« Reply #58 on: 04/07/2022 04:46 am »
Do we know if the launch viewing tower from the original plan years back is still going to happen? Or is that basically cancelled now.

Seems that it can be readily replaced by viewing room on top of the new high bay? The viewing tower in the original plan is 300 feet tall, similar in height to the new wide bay at Boca Chica.

Offline pyromatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 934
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 3422
  • Likes Given: 19
« Last Edit: 04/07/2022 11:04 am by pyromatter »

 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0