What's up with the gaps?
Quote from: EL_DIABLO on 11/18/2022 05:27 pmWhat's up with the gaps?Mechzilla carriage clearance henceangle metal. metal.
Quote from: russianhalo117 on 11/18/2022 07:26 pmQuote from: EL_DIABLO on 11/18/2022 05:27 pmWhat's up with the gaps?Mechzilla carriage clearance henceangle metal. metal.I'm obviously referring to these gaps.
Quote from: InterestedEngineer on 11/18/2022 06:17 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 11/18/2022 02:58 pmQuote from: kevinof on 11/18/2022 09:23 amWell NASA and the SLS team have a couple of years to fix it. Just shows you the power of these heavy boosters - Even with all the planning you can still get it wrong. As you say at least SpaceX is seeing the damge as they go, learning, fixing and going again.It's a bit difficult(!) to test SRBs incrementally on the launch pad. The SRBs provide about 75% of the liftoff thrust for SLS. We are seeing a secondary benefit of the decision to build a fully-reusable system.Iteration is so valuable that it should preclude non-reusable or hard to replicate expensive components from a design, such as SRBs.Which is a main concern about the tower/OLM. It's the one place in Starship development that violates this rule.Hopefully small iterations are enough to cover this.The tower isn’t that expensive, tho. Cheap enough they’re basically building a spare as far as we can tell. Probably costs less than a complete Starship/SuperHeavy stack.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 11/18/2022 02:58 pmQuote from: kevinof on 11/18/2022 09:23 amWell NASA and the SLS team have a couple of years to fix it. Just shows you the power of these heavy boosters - Even with all the planning you can still get it wrong. As you say at least SpaceX is seeing the damge as they go, learning, fixing and going again.It's a bit difficult(!) to test SRBs incrementally on the launch pad. The SRBs provide about 75% of the liftoff thrust for SLS. We are seeing a secondary benefit of the decision to build a fully-reusable system.Iteration is so valuable that it should preclude non-reusable or hard to replicate expensive components from a design, such as SRBs.Which is a main concern about the tower/OLM. It's the one place in Starship development that violates this rule.Hopefully small iterations are enough to cover this.
Quote from: kevinof on 11/18/2022 09:23 amWell NASA and the SLS team have a couple of years to fix it. Just shows you the power of these heavy boosters - Even with all the planning you can still get it wrong. As you say at least SpaceX is seeing the damge as they go, learning, fixing and going again.It's a bit difficult(!) to test SRBs incrementally on the launch pad. The SRBs provide about 75% of the liftoff thrust for SLS. We are seeing a secondary benefit of the decision to build a fully-reusable system.
Well NASA and the SLS team have a couple of years to fix it. Just shows you the power of these heavy boosters - Even with all the planning you can still get it wrong. As you say at least SpaceX is seeing the damge as they go, learning, fixing and going again.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 11/18/2022 06:19 pmQuote from: InterestedEngineer on 11/18/2022 06:17 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 11/18/2022 02:58 pmQuote from: kevinof on 11/18/2022 09:23 amWell NASA and the SLS team have a couple of years to fix it. Just shows you the power of these heavy boosters - Even with all the planning you can still get it wrong. As you say at least SpaceX is seeing the damge as they go, learning, fixing and going again.It's a bit difficult(!) to test SRBs incrementally on the launch pad. The SRBs provide about 75% of the liftoff thrust for SLS. We are seeing a secondary benefit of the decision to build a fully-reusable system.Iteration is so valuable that it should preclude non-reusable or hard to replicate expensive components from a design, such as SRBs.Which is a main concern about the tower/OLM. It's the one place in Starship development that violates this rule.Hopefully small iterations are enough to cover this.The tower isn’t that expensive, tho. Cheap enough they’re basically building a spare as far as we can tell. Probably costs less than a complete Starship/SuperHeavy stack.SpaceX can reliably make a booster every 2 months and a Starship every month.I'd say a new tower is on the order of 6-9 months, and Elon acknowledged in a tweet he was trying to avoid on-pad RUDs since it would delay the program.I'm glad they are building one in Florida. They need about 3 or 4 to iterate as fast as they can build boosters.
They have at least 2 additional launch pads/towers in planning right now in Florida.
Mystery objects at Sanchez possibly flame diverters @Thomaseo01 What do you all think they are for?Discussion happening now!Link: youtu.be/aMYweAPdAJo
Concrete under the OLM being torn out.Watch the discussion here live: youtu.be/aMYweAPdAJo
No beach today. The deputy says the road is 2 feet underwater.
Noted for flame trench AND proper water deluge concerner, spoiler: it wouldn't necessarily save the facilitieshttps://twitter.com/DutchSatellites/status/1593520419872641024?t=DThCON3HLtbMfLUiyT0Icg&s=19Unlike SLS ofc, SpaceX is most likely planning to conduct 33 engine static fire(s) before launch, meaning they will get most of the real-world data on how the launch site will be performing. And with higher cadence, they're needing it sooner rather than later
Quote from: Nomadd on 11/19/2022 07:31 pm No beach today. The deputy says the road is 2 feet underwater.How often does this happen? Which seasons?
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 11/19/2022 07:41 pmQuote from: Nomadd on 11/19/2022 07:31 pm No beach today. The deputy says the road is 2 feet underwater.How often does this happen? Which seasons?Whenever they are inundated with heavy or long lasting rain as the water is trying to find an escape route. High tide exacerbates the results.
They already had similar issues after the Ares 1 test. These beefed up SRBs are vicious. Not only do they have massive thrust, the exhaust itself is nasty and contains solid bits of burning propellant ( basically burning metal ) at high supersonic velocities, alongside corrosive gasses. You can see that great in the launchpad slowmos.
Quote from: CorvusCorax on 11/19/2022 08:13 pmThey already had similar issues after the Ares 1 test. These beefed up SRBs are vicious. Not only do they have massive thrust, the exhaust itself is nasty and contains solid bits of burning propellant ( basically burning metal ) at high supersonic velocities, alongside corrosive gasses. You can see that great in the launchpad slowmos.Interesting they had these issues with the Ares I-X test when that vehicle was carrying a standard STS SRB with a dummy upper fifth segment - i.e. they are not caused by the "vicious beefed-up SRBs", or at least have other dominant contributing causes. Most likely, the standards to which the tower was built (after many delays and reconstructions) should have been more conservative.
Quote from: alugobi on 11/16/2022 11:10 pmWe can't see the surface below. I still don't think that that was ice raining down post-fire.The winds 50 meters from the pad will exceed Mach 1, so the debris may be from within 50-200 meters of the OLM and not the OLM itself.A virtual cone forms at the base of the OLM so I doubt the bottom is damaged (look up the college junior physics problem "flow perpendicular to surface". Also, they just parked the OLM lift under the pad, so if there's damage it can't be very much.
We can't see the surface below. I still don't think that that was ice raining down post-fire.
1) Hey #StarshipAddicts, we now have an update on the aftermath from the 14 engine Static Fire Static Fire Test. We discussed this in yesterday's #StarbaseWeekly Livestream but here's a short thread in case you missed it. 🔗youtube.com/watch?v=aMYweA…
2) First and foremost, the camera that we have requested video from, has been destroyed. We believe the footage was most likely recoverable, but we won't know for sure unless @elonmusk or #SpaceX decides to share it.
3) Here is a closeup of the base of the Orbital Launch Integration Tower. On the left side of the yellow line is the new half finished extension, right side is the original concrete base. Left unprotected, the spalling damage will be worse after 33 Engine SF📸: @RGVaerialphotos
4) As shown here by @RGVaerialphotos, the concrete underneath the OLM suffered some pretty significant damage. It was severe enough to warrant replacing the entire pad. Exploding concrete was sent flying for several hundred meters during the 14 Engine Static Fire Test
5) This will most likely not happen again in the future. SpaceX is upgrading the hexagonal pad underneath the Orbital Launch Mount. They are now using a special concrete additive called Fondag RS. This will replace the original Martyte Blend 📸: @RGVaerialphotos
5) This is really good news for #StageZero. Here are some key benefits as advertised by Imerys, a Fondag manufacturer. Exact price of this material is unknown, but I'm sure one of the CSI Agents will provide more details in the comments. https://www.imerys.com/product-ranges/fondag
6) Last but not least, #SpaceX is now employing a new tool for fighting fires. This was originally discovered by @StarshipGazer. Identified as an ELIDE FIRE extinguishing ball, these are carried by drones and released over the fire. This one failed 😑youtube.com/watch?v=D709r6…
7) Awesome to see how quickly #SpaceX responds to every challenge they come up against. Keep up the great work!