Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10 Next
11
When Elon refers to the moonbase, is he talking about the outpost envisioned by NASA, or does he want a private SpaceX one?
Artemis (SLS/Orion) cannot support a real moonbase, so I think we can infer that the base would be supported by some sort of Starship-based transport scheme. That would effectively be a SpaceX moonbase, not a NASA moonbase. Elon's graphic showed multiple Starship HLSs on the surface.

As part of Artemis, SpaceX is responsible for discarding used Starship HLSs instead of letting them clutter up NRHO. I wonder how much extra propellant would be needed to land them back on the Moon to serve as the basis for a moonbase? The HLSs from the uncrewed demo, Artemis III, and Artemis IV would make a good start. Figuring out how to actually use them is the problem.

I am not sure what you mean by a SpaceX Moonbase but I am pretty sure that SpaceX would try to sell their Moonbase services to NASA and foreign governments. Like I said above, this private moonbase wouldn't be contrary to the Moon to Mars program since the Sustained Lunar Evolution segment of the Moon to Mars program provides for such a lunar economy where NASA is one of many customers.
12
Suborbital Missions / Re: The suborbital thread!
« Last post by catdlr on Today at 05:23 pm »
https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/1778835682112200933

Quote
Jonathan McDowell
@planet4589
LAUNCH of a suborbital missile test from GTsMP-4 (Kapustin Yar) near Volgograd in Russia to the GNIIP-10 range at Sary Shagan, Kazakhstan at about 1600 or 1630 UTC Apr 12. Apogee at least 1000 km, observed widely across the Middle East. The yellow straight line shows approx path
13
https://twitter.com/CSI_Starbase/status/1778831794629927051

Quote
Zack Golden
@CSI_Starbase
The piston is the same but the plumbing has been changed to allow it to perform as intended.  Seems like they eliminated a choke point in the system.
10:05 AM · Apr 12, 2024
 from Texas, USA
14
https://twitter.com/VickiCocks15/status/1778834329222697453

Quote
VixXi
@VickiCocks15
The actuator replacement lifted. Not hanging about. The first time this actuator was replaced, there was a....spillage...when the hydraulic pipe sprung a leak. Fingers crossed it goes better this time around.
15
Commercial Space Flight General / Re: Phantom Space
« Last post by catdlr on Today at 05:13 pm »

There has been a meeting of the California Coastal Commission to discuss the increased launch cadence at VSFB.  In it is this comment:

Quote
Phantom Space Corporation

At its December 15, 2023 meeting, the Commission concurred with a CD from
DAF for Phantom Space Corporation (Phantom) to construct a new commercial space
CD-0003-24 (DAF)
53
launch facility at the former site of SLC-5 and to carry out up to 48 rocket launches and
48 static fire engine tests per year. Additionally, the Commission is aware of several
other pending launch programs (see Table 1, below), a proposed increase in SpaceX
launches to 100 per year (anticipated to be submitted as a consistency determination
this year), and the potential construction of new launch facilities at VSFB to support
future launch activities. All of these have the potential to increase the total launch
activity on the base. The cumulative effects of engine noise from space launch
activities are influenced by the geographic distance between launch sites, the timing of
launches, the size and engine noise intensity created by different launch vehicles, and
the actual number of launches that take place (as noted above, the number of actual
launches has traditionally been ten percent or less of the authorized number).

The entire report is attached.  There are 11 references to the Phantom Space Corporation

I attached a map indicating the old launch location in question, it's the Red tag on the map
16


California Coastal Commission had a meeting on April 10th to discuss:

Quote
Consistency determination by the United States Space Force to increase Space Exploration Technologies’ (SpaceX) Falcon 9 launch and landing activities at Vandenberg Space Force Base (VSFB) from six to 36 per year as well as the addition of offshore landing locations in the Pacific Ocean Vandenberg Space Force Base, Santa Barbara County.

Article

Quote
After nearly two hours of discussion Wednesday afternoon, the commission agreed to the postponement amid questions about weather balloon debris, noise impacts, public launch alerts and more.

Attached is the report in Question: (CD-0003-24 (United States Space Force).

Here is an excerpt that mentions another commercial launch provider:

Quote
At its December 15, 2023 meeting, the Commission concurred with a CD from
DAF for Phantom Space Corporation (Phantom) to construct a new commercial space
CD-0003-24 (DAF)
53
launch facility at the former site of SLC-5 and to carry out up to 48 rocket launches and
48 static fire engine tests per year. Additionally, the Commission is aware of several
other pending launch programs (see Table 1, below), a proposed increase in SpaceX
launches to 100 per year (anticipated to be submitted as a consistency determination
this year), and the potential construction of new launch facilities at VSFB to support
future launch activities. All of these have the potential to increase the total launch
activity on the base. The cumulative effects of engine noise from space launch
activities are influenced by the geographic distance between launch sites, the timing of
launches, the size and engine noise intensity created by different launch vehicles, and
the actual number of launches that take place (as noted above, the number of actual
launches has traditionally been ten percent or less of the authorized number).
17
Falcon Heavy Side Booster B1072 was taken horizontal at McGregor yesterday, only B1086 testing remains
https://nsf.live/mcgregor

And B1086 is already vertical!

Quote
SpaceX never sleeps. Only 5 hrs after lowering FH side B1072, at 1am they raised its mission buddy B1086, another FH side for GOES-U launch NET June 25.  Both booster's will return to LZ1 & 2 while B1087 will be expended. https://nsf.live/mcgregor

https://twitter.com/jswartzphoto/status/1778831510784639037
18
Totally of topic, but since I work with airships. In German (and that is a very relevant language for airships ;) airships "sail" - while aircraft  (and birds and rockets) "fly" - which is an important distinction. Sadly English doesn't do that.

( more accurately the term used is "fahren" which literally translates as "to drive" - but that's also the term used for the motion of all watergoing vessels - and also balloons. "ein Schiff fährt" - "ein Luftschiff fährt" - "ein Ballon fährt"- vs "ein Flugzeug fliegt" & "Starship fliegt"  )

Too bad you don't use Segeln, since that would also go well with Luftschiffe.
19
Here are a couple NGA Space Debris notices that I don't know what they are. They are not necessarily related to each other, though they came out around 15 minutes apart. I don't know whether either or both are even SpaceX.

The first is Vandy.  The second is in the Eastern North Pacific running from well off the coast of California up to off the coast of British Columbia.

WorldView Legion 1 & 2, those match a SSO trajectory
20


California Coastal Commission had a meeting on April 10th to discuss:

Quote
Consistency determination by the United States Space Force to increase Space Exploration Technologies’ (SpaceX) Falcon 9 launch and landing activities at Vandenberg Space Force Base (VSFB) from six to 36 per year as well as the addition of offshore landing locations in the Pacific Ocean Vandenberg Space Force Base, Santa Barbara County.

Article

Quote
After nearly two hours of discussion Wednesday afternoon, the commission agreed to the postponement amid questions about weather balloon debris, noise impacts, public launch alerts and more.

Attached is the report in Question: (CD-0003-24 (United States Space Force).
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10 Next
Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0