1

Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle (HLV/SLS) / Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 8

« Last post by montyrmanley on Today at 09:52 pm »

SLS wasn't meant to go to the moon or anywhere, it's an incredibly expensive jobs program.

Just an observation. Moving Space Command won’t retain those jobs. They are two very different programs with different needs.

As Congresscritter deal-making goes, this is probably the best deal Huntsville is going to get. NASA has too many regional centers as it is, and it's going to get harder to justify them in the lean years ahead.

There'll be a lot of space-related manufacturing work in the coming years (both civilian and military), and if Huntsville plays their cards right, they'll have a workforce positioned to take a piece of that pie -- proximity to political power is always important, and private industry will want to have either manufacturing or administrative hubs close to the customers who sign the checks. I think Michoud and Stennis will have a harder time explaining why they continue to exist absent SLS.

Edit: Also, Richard Shelby is no longer around to run interference. That's an important point.

2

Missions To The Moon (HSF) / Re: NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 5

« Last post by yg1968 on Today at 09:42 pm »

From the same Eric Berger article:

So how would NASA astronauts get to the Moon without the SLS rocket? Nothing is final, and the trade space is open. One possible scenario being discussed for future Artemis missions is to launch the Orion spacecraft on a New Glenn rocket into low-Earth orbit. There, it could dock with a Centaur upper stage that would launch on a Vulcan rocket. This Centaur stage would then boost Orion toward lunar orbit.

https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/12/how-did-the-ceo-of-an-online-payments-firm-become-the-nominee-to-lead-nasa/

Another possible scenario for future Artemis missions is to launch the Orion spacecraft on a Falcon Heavy into low-Earth orbit. There, it could dock with a Falcon upper stage that would launch on another Falcon Heavy rocket. This Falcon stage would then boost Orion toward lunar orbit.

This provides the dual redundancy that NASA wants for launch services, while still retaining the Orion spacecraft with its ESA Service Module.

Yes, in such a scenario, I would imagine that Orion would be a GFE (Gorvernment Furnished Equipement) but the rest of the proposal would hopefully be commercial. Ideally, you should have two separate commercial BLEO LVs.

3

Space Policy Discussion / Re: Jared Isaacman nominated as NASA Administrator

« Last post by clongton on Today at 09:38 pm »

Hmmm.

Musk is great at building companies from scratch.

But it's a lot harder to turn companies around once they're on the wrong path.  And when you try, it involves by necessity getting rid of most of the people that define what is wrong with the company - which is all of the people that thrived in that wrong path.

Tough enough with a private company that it's really often easier to start a competing company from scratch.
With a government agency, neither of these things is possible, and I'm sure Musk knows that.
It'll get interesting to see what he has in mind.

He's successfully done it before. Look at Twitter, er "X".

4

Space Policy Discussion / Re: Jared Isaacman nominated as NASA Administrator

« Last post by yg1968 on Today at 09:36 pm »

Hmmm.

Musk is great at building companies from scratch.

But it's a lot harder to turn companies around once they're on the wrong path.  And when you try, it involves by necessity getting rid of most of the people that define what is wrong with the company - which is all of the people that thrived in that wrong path.

Tough enough with a private company that it's really often easier to start a competing company from scratch.

With a government agency, neither of these things is possible, and I'm sure Musk knows that.

It'll get interesting to see what he has in mind.

Isaacman and Musk share the same vision, so Musk probably recommended Isaacman to Trump but other than that, I wouldn't expect Musk to be giving any kind of orders to Isaacman. I don't think that Isaacman would have accepted the job without the responsability that comes with it.

5

SpaceX Starship Program / Re: Safe Instantaneous Impact Point Tracks for Starship Launch and Recovery

« Last post by TheRadicalModerate on Today at 09:35 pm »

Note:  Seems silly to create another thread to discuss launch IIP.  Let's just open this one up to the other topic as well.  I've changed the topic title.

There is always this track once starship gets reliable enough. Whats the altitude and velocity when it overflies the yucatan.

about 160deg azimuth

You have to adjust for Earth's rotation.  See here for how to compute the azimuth.  43º inclination is 129.5º azimuth, and 53º inclination is 142.9º azimuth.  Attached.

The altitude and velocity when Starship overflies the Yucatan is irrelevant.  The question is what downrange distance, altitude, and velocity cause debris to impact the Yucatan.  Based on my IIP for IFT-5 launch, the part of the trajectory track that leads to BC=1 debris¹ impacting land is highlighted in yellow.

____________
¹Note that I decided to get more conservative about the ballistic coefficient.  Terminal speed at that BC=1 is 4.0m/s (9mph), which seems like it's slow enough not to kill somebody, even if the debris weighs a kg or so.  Note also that it's the minimum BC we're interested in, since that lands the closest to the breakup point.

6

Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle (HLV/SLS) / Re: SLS General Discussion Thread 8

« Last post by Jimmy_C on Today at 09:34 pm »

SLS wasn't meant to go to the moon or anywhere, it's an incredibly expensive jobs program.

Just an observation. Moving Space Command won’t retain those jobs. They are two very different programs with different needs.

7

Rocket Lab / Re: Electron : StriX : Owl The Way Up : NET 17 December 2024

« Last post by GewoonLukas_ on Today at 09:33 pm »

Next Launch

Mission Name: Owl The Way Up
Rocket: Electron
Launch Date: 18 December 2024 NZT
Launch Site: Launch Complex 1
Launch Time: 03:00 - 04:15 am NZT
Payload: Strix-2

The owl is back 🦉

Next on the pad at LC-1? A dedicated Electron launch for @Synspective

🚀 Mission: Owl The Way Up
⏰ Launch window: No earlier than 18 Dec NZT.
💻 Mission info: http://rocketlabusa.com/next-mission

https://twitter.com/RocketLab/status/1864798781751070985

8

Rocket Lab / Electron : StriX-2 : Owl The Way Up : 17 December 2024 (14:00 UTC)

« Last post by GewoonLukas_ on Today at 09:29 pm »

Thread for the launch of Rocket Lab's "Owl The Way Up" mission with Synspective StriX-2 NET 17 December 2024 at 14:00 UTC.

Rocket Lab Sets Launch Window to Deploy Synspective Satellite
12/05/2024
The mission will be Rocket Lab’s sixth launch for Synspective, out of a total of 16 missions booked on Electron by the Japanese Earth observation company.

Rocket Lab USA, Inc. (Nasdaq: RKLB) (“Rocket Lab” or “the Company”), a global leader in launch services and space systems, today announced a launch window for an upcoming Electron mission to deploy the latest satellite in Synspective’s growing Earth observation constellation.

The “Owl The Way Up” mission is scheduled to launch from Rocket Lab Launch Complex 1 in Mahia, New Zealand during a launch window that opens on December 18 th NZDT (December 17 UTC). The mission will deploy a single StriX satellite to orbit for Synspective. The mission will be the sixth in a total of 16 launches booked on Electron for Synspective, a Japanese Earth observation company operating a constellation of synthetic aperture radar (SAR) satellites designed to deliver imagery that can detect millimetre-level changes to the Earth’s surface from space. Rocket Lab first launched for Synspective in December 2020 and has been the sole launch provider for Synspective’s constellation to date.

Rocket Lab founder and CEO, Sir Peter Beck, says: “As the sole launch provider for Synspective to date, we’ve developed an enduring relationship with their team built on trust and reliability across multiple Electron missions. By flying as the dedicated customer, rather than ridesharing, we’ve put Synspective in control of their launch schedule and mission parameters, affording them a level of control over their mission not traditionally afforded to small satellite operators. We’re looking forward to placing another StriX satellite in orbit and supporting Synspective’s vision to enable persistent monitoring of our planet to support disaster relief, agricultural development, maritime domain awareness and much more.”

Rocket Lab has launched 14 missions to date in 2024, besting the Company’s previous annual launch record of 10 missions achieved in 2023.

9

Commercial Space Flight General / Re: Stoke Space Technologies: General Company and Development Updates and Discussions

« Last post by Action on Today at 09:27 pm »

I have designed zero-length plugs off and on for forty years, but based on original P&W experimental results from the late 1960s, I always used a Prandtl angle of at least 10-12° to achieve the plug nozzle effect (also a function of base pressure).  I've been confused by Stoke's "straight down" combusted exhaust approach since I first saw it.  Presumably they have tested it a subscale or analyzed by CFD before they built the full scale version.

That's an interesting comment, and indeed that's what a lot of schematics I've seen show.

How well understood are the dynamics of the gas bubble?  What variables drive that?

Complex subject.  Mainly, what is required is "closed wake."

Mmm.  It's going to be interesting to see how those spaced out thrusters work out.

Maybe they're just thinking it will be better to figure this out in hardware as they iterate.  All the theorizing in the world doesn't seem to have convinced people.

10

Space Policy Discussion / Re: Jared Isaacman nominated as NASA Administrator

« Last post by meekGee on Today at 09:22 pm »

Hmmm.

Musk is great at building companies from scratch.

But it's a lot harder to turn companies around once they're on the wrong path.  And when you try, it involves by necessity getting rid of most of the people that define what is wrong with the company - which is all of the people that thrived in that wrong path.

Tough enough with a private company that it's really often easier to start a competing company from scratch.

With a government agency, neither of these things is possible, and I'm sure Musk knows that.

It'll get interesting to see what he has in mind.