Author Topic: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion  (Read 1040332 times)

Offline lykos

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 264
  • Greece
  • Liked: 169
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2300 on: 08/09/2022 04:10 pm »
I think a "linear process" will show up when the Starfactory is ready and working.
For now it's all still "testing"

Offline rsdavis9


Why did it seem to me that last night's test was only one engine?  I expected a cloud to extend downward around the entire circumference instead of just one specific area. 

Because apparently it was. For B7, there were what looked like two single-engine tests, though it wasnít clear to me that it was the same engine each time.

After the incident last time doesnít it make sense to run through the spin test steps initially for the booster for just one engine, confirm that things donít blow up and then go on to multiple engines ?

A lot things ďmake senseĒ to lay people when we donít have any insights into the thought processes, rationales, or testing objectives. I personally prefer not to speculate about stuff like last night with so little data. Remember, SpaceX hasnít done a whole lot of real engine testing with a Booster at all yet. We donít know what exactly they were testing last night, nor what the limitations were/are. Proving out GSE? Testing a single engine and measuring for residual methane or LOX concentrations in the local wind conditions? Etc.

Absent that info, I will suspend personal judgment on what seems to make sense. FWIW, there are possible closures listed for today and Wednesday as well, from 10:00am - 10:00pm. So hopefully we will see more Booster testing and ge some more insight into how SpaceX is running this test program.

Remember that the outer engines have a different startup. Startup stuff is supplied from the mount. Spin start gas, electric, etc. So testing is very different than the center engines.
With ELV best efficiency was the paradigm. The new paradigm is reusable, good enough, and commonality of design.
Same engines. Design once. Same vehicle. Design once. Reusable. Build once.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12783
  • N. California
  • Liked: 11986
  • Likes Given: 1332
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2302 on: 08/09/2022 05:42 pm »
Are these for real or are they renders ?!

https://twitter.com/nicansuini/status/1556863658357149696

Quote
Booster 7 descending from the heavens

[email protected]

Edit to add:

https://twitter.com/nicansuini/status/1556852640658722816

Quote
B7 completes two successful spin prime tests this evening!

[email protected]
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline jackvancouver

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 153
  • Video Tech expert
  • Vancouver, Canada
  • Liked: 93
  • Likes Given: 38
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2303 on: 08/09/2022 05:55 pm »
Are these for real or are they renders ?!

If they were renders, they'd likely be made in Unreal Engine 5.

BTW, why has nobody made Starbase and Boca Chica in Unreal Engine 5? All we currently have is an outdated Unity project:

http://spaceport-x.com/

Offline daveglo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 459
  • "a big enough engine, even a water tower can fly"
  • St. Louis, MO, USA
  • Liked: 483
  • Likes Given: 427
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2304 on: 08/10/2022 12:50 am »
Are these for real or are they renders ?!


Yes, they're real.

Regarding the static fire earlier tonight, is anyone else suitably impressed that the time delta between the projected time on the OP warning that Mary got, and the actual test time was less than 5 minutes?  To me, that implies that the booster engine startup sequence must be getting pretty coherent.
« Last Edit: 08/10/2022 12:50 am by daveglo »

Offline OTV Booster

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4402
  • Terra is my nation; currently Kansas
  • Liked: 3015
  • Likes Given: 4933
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2305 on: 08/10/2022 02:30 am »
I think a "linear process" will show up when the Starfactory is ready and working.
For now it's all still "testing"
I'd expect nothing less than 'final' design dictating 'final' manufacturing process. But not all design or manufacturing matures at the same time. IMO, ring fabrication is reasonably mature, followed by ring stacking and dome insertion. The number of rings in a barrel can change as can dome design - elipidome and thrust structure for example. Changes in dome design calls for validation efforts but shouldn't change that part of manufacturing flow much.


This and the uneven progress on the different builds is the source of my curiosity on dome flipping. Streamline the flip looks like low hanging fruit in the search for manufacturing efficiency that they will have to look at eventually. They are kinda busy so if they're not doing it now it would be an easy thing to watch to get a sense of the emphasis they're placing on manufacturability.
We are on the cusp of revolutionary access to space. One hallmark of a revolution is that there is a disjuncture through which projections do not work. The thread must be picked up anew and the tapestry of history woven with a fresh pattern.

Online ThatOldJanxSpirit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 786
  • Liked: 1123
  • Likes Given: 2504
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2306 on: 08/10/2022 06:43 am »
I think a "linear process" will show up when the Starfactory is ready and working.
For now it's all still "testing"
I'd expect nothing less than 'final' design dictating 'final' manufacturing process. But not all design or manufacturing matures at the same time. IMO, ring fabrication is reasonably mature, followed by ring stacking and dome insertion. The number of rings in a barrel can change as can dome design - elipidome and thrust structure for example. Changes in dome design calls for validation efforts but shouldn't change that part of manufacturing flow much.


This and the uneven progress on the different builds is the source of my curiosity on dome flipping. Streamline the flip looks like low hanging fruit in the search for manufacturing efficiency that they will have to look at eventually. They are kinda busy so if they're not doing it now it would be an easy thing to watch to get a sense of the emphasis they're placing on manufacturability.

Iíll share this quote from u/Astronstellar (aka Avalaerion) on the Reddit SpaceX lounge site.

ďDome parts and shape are still experimental, so until the final design shape is locked in, it is not practical to set up this type of production machinery.

Currently the improved nosecone still uses a type of English wheel to form the compound curves of the panels. A process that is over 100 years old and requires human skill and judgement.

What is under consideration is press forming the stringers into the actual barrel sheet before welding to form the barrel ring, which is a huge weight and time saver from welding individual stringers, and also doing away with a double thickness of metal within the stringer area.Ē

I donít trust this alleged insider on operational matters but they make interesting engineering observations. The takeaway is not to assume that any part of the manufacturing process is mature yet.

Online edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4717
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 6835
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2307 on: 08/10/2022 11:17 am »
Currently the improved nosecone still uses a type of English wheel to form the compound curves of the panels. A process that is over 100 years old and requires human skill and judgement.
We already know this is incorrect: per Elon on one of the Everyday Astronaut site walkthroughs, the new nosecone uses stretch-formed gores, and we also saw the stretch-former on screen during the walkthrough.
We've also seen stretch-formed gores on the new flatter 'E domes'.

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4824
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 2558
  • Likes Given: 3259
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2308 on: 08/10/2022 02:29 pm »
Alright folks, yesterday was a pretty big step.

A Raptor static fire on the OLM with a booster.  Even though it was only 1 engine its a start that can quickly be built upon, like daily.

7 weeks till the end of September, having a fully prepared stack ready to go by the end of September looks possible.
Superheavy + Starship the final push to launch commit!

Offline DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2807
  • California
  • Liked: 2205
  • Likes Given: 847
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2309 on: 08/10/2022 02:43 pm »
Alright folks, yesterday was a pretty big step.

A Raptor static fire on the OLM with a booster.  Even though it was only 1 engine its a start that can quickly be built upon, like daily.

7 weeks till the end of September, having a fully prepared stack ready to go by the end of September looks possible.
My guess: they tested only one outer-ring raptor because they wanted to test the way the OLM starts up an outer-ring Raptor. This is a new untested system that is replicated 20 times on the OLM, so start by testing one, not 20. By contrast, the inner 13 Raptors are started by the booster itself and the start system is basically the same as engine start on the Starship, so there is less to learn and they will get to it eventually.

Offline AllenB

  • Member
  • Posts: 52
  • Evanston, IL, USA
  • Liked: 88
  • Likes Given: 220
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2310 on: 08/10/2022 02:59 pm »
Alright folks, yesterday was a pretty big step.

A Raptor static fire on the OLM with a booster.  Even though it was only 1 engine its a start that can quickly be built upon, like daily.

7 weeks till the end of September, having a fully prepared stack ready to go by the end of September looks possible.

What really impressed me is how smooth it all seemed. Clean startup, clean shutdown, minimal surrounding damage. AND both ignitions seemed to take place pretty close to when the NSF commentators expected. Gives the impression that the internal countdowns are going more smoothly than I've seen in the past. Which in turn feels like slowly increasing operational confidence.

Yeah, I'm beginning to get excited.

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4824
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 2558
  • Likes Given: 3259
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2311 on: 08/10/2022 03:40 pm »
Alright folks, yesterday was a pretty big step.

A Raptor static fire on the OLM with a booster.  Even though it was only 1 engine its a start that can quickly be built upon, like daily.

7 weeks till the end of September, having a fully prepared stack ready to go by the end of September looks possible.
My guess: they tested only one outer-ring raptor because they wanted to test the way the OLM starts up an outer-ring Raptor. This is a new untested system that is replicated 20 times on the OLM, so start by testing one, not 20. By contrast, the inner 13 Raptors are started by the booster itself and the start system is basically the same as engine start on the Starship, so there is less to learn and they will get to it eventually.

Agreed, use the OLM itself on 1 engine and see how it performs.  Then start stepping up and check all 20.

Then switch to the inner 13.

I agree with AllenB too, it all looked very smooth.  Raptor 2 seems easier to fire than the finicky Raptor 1's that seemed to need multiple attempts with the early Starships.

It's a good start to Booster static fire testing.
Superheavy + Starship the final push to launch commit!

Offline ppb

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 160
  • San Francisco Bay Area
  • Liked: 182
  • Likes Given: 146
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2312 on: 08/10/2022 04:10 pm »
(snip).. Raptor 2 seems easier to fire than the finicky Raptor 1's that seemed to need multiple attempts with the early Starships.

Not to mention multiple Raptors.

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4824
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 2558
  • Likes Given: 3259
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2313 on: 08/10/2022 04:31 pm »
(snip).. Raptor 2 seems easier to fire than the finicky Raptor 1's that seemed to need multiple attempts with the early Starships.

Not to mention multiple Raptors.

When you say multiple, do you mean 33.

Thanks going to be wild.
Superheavy + Starship the final push to launch commit!

Offline LaunchedIn68

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 171
  • Deer Park, NY
  • Liked: 139
  • Likes Given: 366
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2314 on: 08/10/2022 05:10 pm »
Alright folks, yesterday was a pretty big step.

A Raptor static fire on the OLM with a booster.  Even though it was only 1 engine its a start that can quickly be built upon, like daily.

7 weeks till the end of September, having a fully prepared stack ready to go by the end of September looks possible.

Agreed.  You test rocket engines on a new booster/vehicle "Gradatim Ferrociter", you don't build rockets that way.  ;D
"I want to build a spaceship, go to the moon, salvage all the junk that's up there, bring it back, sell it." - Harry Broderick

Offline CorvusCorax

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1575
  • Germany
  • Liked: 3134
  • Likes Given: 2305
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2315 on: 08/10/2022 05:45 pm »
(snip).. Raptor 2 seems easier to fire than the finicky Raptor 1's that seemed to need multiple attempts with the early Starships.

Not to mention multiple Raptors.

When you say multiple, do you mean 33.

Thanks going to be wild.

I think they meant having to replace raptors multiple times in the process flow to get one successful static fire going. Starship rarely launched with the same set of Raptor 1's that they had installed on the first attempt of static fire.   If ever ...    And we had multiple instances of molten stuff coming out of the bottom after an aborted static fire.

Raptor 2 seems to be less finicky and more reliable. At least that was one of the design goals.
« Last Edit: 08/10/2022 05:46 pm by CorvusCorax »

Offline alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 678
  • Liked: 716
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2316 on: 08/10/2022 07:27 pm »
7 weeks till the end of September, having a fully prepared stack ready to go by the end of September looks possible.
If they do, watch for it to be the next booster in line.  I see B7 as a test mount for proofing engine start.

Online AU1.52

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 620
  • Life is like riding a bicycle - Einstein
  • Ohio, USA, AU1
  • Liked: 636
  • Likes Given: 689
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2317 on: 08/10/2022 11:46 pm »
Another box ticked: Launch license!

Offline kdhilliard

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 994
  • Kirk
  • Tanstaa, FL
  • Liked: 1398
  • Likes Given: 3480
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2318 on: 08/11/2022 12:13 am »
Another box ticked: Launch license!
If only!
FAA Launch License ≠ FCC STA (Special Temporary Authority) Radio License

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4824
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 2558
  • Likes Given: 3259
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion
« Reply #2319 on: 08/11/2022 04:19 am »
7 weeks till the end of September, having a fully prepared stack ready to go by the end of September looks possible.
If they do, watch for it to be the next booster in line.  I see B7 as a test mount for proofing engine start.
I started thinking that is a possibility when they rolled out with the outer engines only.

But Iíd say itís still only a possibility, it could be the flight article and that it doesnít go back to the Megabay.  B7 maybe there until it flies.
Superheavy + Starship the final push to launch commit!

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1