Quote from: woods170 on 01/20/2023 01:25 pmTheir realistic assessment is a first uncrewed lunar landing attempt in 2026, with the crewed landing NET late 2027/early 2028.And yes, I'm willing to eat crow if my sources are wrong and the first uncrewed lunar landing attempt is earlier than 2026. Same for the first crewed landing it that happens before 2027.Where does that put Dear Moon?
Their realistic assessment is a first uncrewed lunar landing attempt in 2026, with the crewed landing NET late 2027/early 2028.And yes, I'm willing to eat crow if my sources are wrong and the first uncrewed lunar landing attempt is earlier than 2026. Same for the first crewed landing it that happens before 2027.
Quote from: woods170 on 01/20/2023 01:25 pm[None of the sources I have spoken at SpaceX deem an uncrewed Moon landing attempt possible this year. 2024 Is out of the question as well. The very earliest they see it happen is 2025, and then only if everything goes OK. Which, needless to say, will probably not be the case.Their realistic assessment is a first uncrewed lunar landing attempt in 2026, with the crewed landing NET late 2027/early 2028.And yes, I'm willing to eat crow if my sources are wrong and the first uncrewed lunar landing attempt is earlier than 2026. Same for the first crewed landing it that happens before 2027. I won't argue with you, but it seems likely to me that you will have to eat your crow.
[None of the sources I have spoken at SpaceX deem an uncrewed Moon landing attempt possible this year. 2024 Is out of the question as well. The very earliest they see it happen is 2025, and then only if everything goes OK. Which, needless to say, will probably not be the case.Their realistic assessment is a first uncrewed lunar landing attempt in 2026, with the crewed landing NET late 2027/early 2028.And yes, I'm willing to eat crow if my sources are wrong and the first uncrewed lunar landing attempt is earlier than 2026. Same for the first crewed landing it that happens before 2027.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 01/21/2023 06:29 pmQuote from: InterestedEngineer on 01/21/2023 06:24 pmQuote from: eriblo on 01/21/2023 04:11 pm]Expendable payload has been estimated as ~2x reusable which gives HLS + 2 tankers with quite a bit of margin for boiloff and residuals.There's no way it takes an extra 100t of propellant to reuse a Starship.1.2x I'd believe, but not 2xIt's not just the propellant. If SS is designed to be expendable it does not have TPS or Elonerons.Do the math, you still don't get 2x
Quote from: InterestedEngineer on 01/21/2023 06:24 pmQuote from: eriblo on 01/21/2023 04:11 pm]Expendable payload has been estimated as ~2x reusable which gives HLS + 2 tankers with quite a bit of margin for boiloff and residuals.There's no way it takes an extra 100t of propellant to reuse a Starship.1.2x I'd believe, but not 2xIt's not just the propellant. If SS is designed to be expendable it does not have TPS or Elonerons.
Quote from: eriblo on 01/21/2023 04:11 pm]Expendable payload has been estimated as ~2x reusable which gives HLS + 2 tankers with quite a bit of margin for boiloff and residuals.There's no way it takes an extra 100t of propellant to reuse a Starship.1.2x I'd believe, but not 2x
]Expendable payload has been estimated as ~2x reusable which gives HLS + 2 tankers with quite a bit of margin for boiloff and residuals.
I see a decent chance that SpaceX will start doing in orbit prop transfer tests in 2024.Pulling that forward to 2023 might be possible but is very unlikely - depending on SpaceX priorities.Prio 1 is obviously "Make orbit"Prio X is "launch Starlinks"Prio Y is "achieve full reusability"Prio Z is "in orbit prop transfer ( depot )SpaceX must Assign 2,3,4 to X,Y,ZAt first it looked like Y=2 X=3 Z=4Then SpaceX started removing recovery hw from newly built prototypes, suggestingX=2 Y=3 Z=4But now they have welded the dispenser slots shut. That might just be to not infer with Prio 1 - make orbit.Unless Prop Transfer suddenly is more important than both other goals, it likely won't start to happen this year. And there's good reason to get reusability - at least of booster - to work before starting simultaneous multi vehicle operations. You also want decent reliability and reliable engine restart in orbit already demonstrated.This is a long roadmap. Even at SpaceX speed. ( which wasn't all that fast in 2022 )
Another consideration: as long as there continues to be delay in building the high bays in Florida, the date of anything happening at that site gets pushed out.
Quote from: alugobi on 01/24/2023 06:38 pmAnother consideration: as long as there continues to be delay in building the high bays in Florida, the date of anything happening at that site gets pushed out. Not necessarily, according to Elon the first launches from Florida will be with vehicles produced in Boca Chica and barged over, I assume the engines will be installed in Florida, but SpaceX has shown that they are quite able to do that on a stand if required. So all that's really required for a launch from 39A is for the launch mount, tower, and GSE to be completed.
Quote from: Ben Baley on 01/24/2023 07:33 pmQuote from: alugobi on 01/24/2023 06:38 pmAnother consideration: as long as there continues to be delay in building the high bays in Florida, the date of anything happening at that site gets pushed out. Not necessarily, according to Elon the first launches from Florida will be with vehicles produced in Boca Chica and barged over, I assume the engines will be installed in Florida, but SpaceX has shown that they are quite able to do that on a stand if required. So all that's really required for a launch from 39A is for the launch mount, tower, and GSE to be completed.Is there a good reason to not mount the engines at BC? I guess this may depend on whether SS and SH will be shipped horizontally or vertically.
Pretty skeptical that they're going to build a lander in BC.
70 m x 9 m Booster barged vertically like a F9-Booster? Over such a big distance? Plus SS plus HSL?On which ships?
Quote from: Negan on 01/21/2023 04:52 amQuote from: woods170 on 01/20/2023 01:25 pmTheir realistic assessment is a first uncrewed lunar landing attempt in 2026, with the crewed landing NET late 2027/early 2028.And yes, I'm willing to eat crow if my sources are wrong and the first uncrewed lunar landing attempt is earlier than 2026. Same for the first crewed landing it that happens before 2027.Where does that put Dear Moon?2025 At the very earliest. But 2026/2027 is more realistic, according to my sources at SpaceX.The problem consists mainly of 2 things:1. getting Starship flying operationally.2. getting lots and lots and lots of flights to build confidence and reliability. Both things combined will take several years. So much in fact that one of the SpaceX sources suggested that DearMoon might actually fly only AFTER the Artemis III crewed landing. But we'll see what happens. One thing is for sure: if DearMoon flies successfully BEFORE Artemis III, then a lot of people will start questioning the use of the government owned systems for bringing people to the Moon.
Quote from: Marcia SmithOn panel abt Moon, Mars and Beyond, SpaceXs Nick Cummings says first Starship launches will be for Starlink but can think of them as Artemis flights bc theyll build reliability and reusability needed for HLS and more broadly sustainable exploration.https://twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1623737494054309888
On panel abt Moon, Mars and Beyond, SpaceXs Nick Cummings says first Starship launches will be for Starlink but can think of them as Artemis flights bc theyll build reliability and reusability needed for HLS and more broadly sustainable exploration.