Author Topic: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12  (Read 613186 times)

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4731
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 6862
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1220 on: 09/22/2022 09:46 pm »
So there are two water circuits and a cold/liquid nitrogen circuit.

It seems like one of the water circuits connects with the nitrogen circuit, possibly making a kind of snow maker.

I can understand using nitrogen to displace oxygen for fire suppression, adding some water will help a little but mostly it helps cool stuff. But if this is a fire suppression system what is on fire in there that needs to be put out?

Excluding methane, there's not a lot of stuff that should burn under the rocket, there's probably a lot more burny stuff bolted to the sides but we are not seeing any fire suppression there. If it's out of control methane burning you have a really big problem that I doubt that fire suppression system could handle.

So it doesn't make sense to me that this is just for putting out a fire. BUT it does seem like it could absorb a lot of heat energy, maybe it's a cooling system for static fires and launch?

They don't think they need a deluge system for sound suppression or flame diverter because they designed the rocket to be robust etc. But all that heat is going to be too much for the structure and equipment down below and nearby. So maybe this is just a big air-conditioner! 🤔

Here are pictures of the blast damage from the 7 engine static fire.  Before, and after. 

So with zero deluge 7 engines causes some amount of damage.
I see no 'blast damage', just intumescent paint doing its job and charring as intended.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31166
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 55594
  • Likes Given: 25116
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1221 on: 09/23/2022 12:05 am »

Offline alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 684
  • Liked: 723
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1222 on: 09/23/2022 12:16 am »
That's a lot of aerosol and not much liquid water.  Probably shouldn't call it a "deluge".  Look at the slotted curb line below the mount on the edge of the pad.  No visible runoff there.  This is nothing like a rainbird.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31166
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 55594
  • Likes Given: 25116
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1223 on: 09/27/2022 05:43 am »
twitter.com/csi_starbase/status/1574607761224175631

Quote
(1/2) If you have been wondering why there have been 30+ workers on the Orbital Launch Mount with Sparks flying everywhere 24/7 over the last few days. The reason is because they are installing additional blast shielding to protect the interior of the structure.

🎥: @LabPadre

https://twitter.com/csi_starbase/status/1574607763048697883

Quote
(2/2) Hey #StarshipAddicts, here is a preview of @RyanHansenSpace's animation showing one of the OLM upgrades currently in progress. These large plates prevent explosions from entering the table through the side of the hold down arms.

This upgrade is a top priority. #B8CanWait

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31166
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 55594
  • Likes Given: 25116
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1224 on: 09/28/2022 05:43 am »
See third photo in this tweet for number of cherry pickers around the OLM:

https://twitter.com/sergiochapa/status/1574941013759918080

Quote
Starbase Sunset: Rocket work and liquid oxygen deliveries... 🚀 #Starbase #SpaceX #BocaChica #RGV

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31166
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 55594
  • Likes Given: 25116
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1225 on: 09/28/2022 10:08 am »
NSF daily video with OLM work etc



Quote
Booster 9 and the Orbital Launch Mount Upgrades | SpaceX Boca Chica

28 Sept 2022

Booster 9 has been stacked on its engine section, with the notable lack of HPU covers, and the Orbital Launch Mount continues to be upgraded to support Starship's orbital test flight.

Video and Pictures from Nic (@NicAnsuini), Nomadd, and Starbase Live. Edited by Justin (@OGNovuh).

All content copyright to NSF. Not to be used elsewhere without explicit permission from NSF.

Click "Join" for access to early fast turnaround clips, exclusive discord access with the NSF team, etc - to support the channel.

Rolling Updates and Discussion: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...

Articles: https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/?s=St...

NSF Store: https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/shop/

L2 Boca Chica (more clips and photos) from BC's very early days to today.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...
(Join L2 and support NSF here: https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/l2/)

0:00 - Cryogenic Pump Removed
0:30 - Liquid Nitrogen Tanker at the Orbital Tank Farm
0:44 - Crews Work on the Orbital Launch Mount
3:10 - Booster Quick Disconnect
3:25 - The Ship Quick Disconnect Arm
4:01 - The Chopsticks
4:48 - The Sun and Moon Rise Over the Orbital Launch Site
4:55 - Upgrades Continue on the Orbital Launch Mount
6:28 - The Orbital Launch Site
6:43 - Ship 24 on Suborbital Pad B
7:29 - Ship 26’s Nosecone Moved to the High Bay
7:43 - New Nosecone Emerges From Tent 3
8:08 - Booster 9 in the Mega Bay

Offline alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 684
  • Liked: 723
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1226 on: 09/28/2022 07:12 pm »
Nomadd joins the film crew.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31166
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 55594
  • Likes Given: 25116
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1227 on: 09/30/2022 05:09 am »
https://twitter.com/cosmicalchief/status/1575708676786102273

Quote
#Starbase after the recent grass fires showing signs of regrowth. This was brown, dead brush just a couple weeks ago.
#Starship  #SpaceX
 📸 Me for WAI Media @FelixSchlang

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31166
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 55594
  • Likes Given: 25116

Online catdlr

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6927
  • Enthusiast since the Redstones
  • Marina del Rey, California, USA
  • Liked: 3562
  • Likes Given: 2854
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1229 on: 10/01/2022 10:58 pm »
Special Report: SpaceX Tests New DETONATION Suppression System for the Orbital Launch Mount!

CSI StarBase

Tony De La Rosa

Offline alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 684
  • Liked: 723
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1230 on: 10/02/2022 08:45 pm »
Special Report: SpaceX Tests New DETONATION Suppression System for the Orbital Launch Mount!

CSI StarBase
Pretty good.  Worth the watch.  His analysis of the changes they made to the water and nitrogen lines under and around the launch mount is quite informative. 

He's also made sense out of why they're doing it differently in Florida.  Where they have more water and a catch basin.

Edit for clarity.
« Last Edit: 10/02/2022 10:05 pm by alugobi »

Offline Vultur

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1802
  • Liked: 656
  • Likes Given: 151
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1231 on: 10/03/2022 06:20 pm »
How far are they along on the orbital launch mount upgrades?

Offline E_T

  • Member
  • Posts: 12
  • Central Florida
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1232 on: 10/06/2022 12:18 am »
Special Report: SpaceX Tests New DETONATION Suppression System for the Orbital Launch Mount!

CSI StarBase
Pretty good.  Worth the watch.  His analysis of the changes they made to the water and nitrogen lines under and around the launch mount is quite informative. 

He's also made sense out of why they're doing it differently in Florida.  Where they have more water and a catch basin.
That and the lack of land to convert into wetlands to keep the ACoE happy, so as to be able to properly build in the catch basins/holding ponds.
Watching Launches since Gemini

Online Hamish.Student

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 368
  • Liked: 410
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1233 on: 10/06/2022 04:50 am »
How far are they along on the orbital launch mount upgrades?
 
 
Only SpaceX can answer this, and I doubt they know for certain.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31166
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 55594
  • Likes Given: 25116
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1234 on: 10/06/2022 05:57 am »
https://twitter.com/csi_starbase/status/1577848343086104576

Quote
Thanks to this image by @Harry__Stranger  I can now retract my previous statement about the #WaterDeluge manifold going around the top of the #OrbitalLaunchMount at Pad39a.

It now appears that it will be buried underground! Thoughts?

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31166
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 55594
  • Likes Given: 25116
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1235 on: 10/07/2022 08:57 am »
twitter.com/13ericralph31/status/1578307104573894656

Quote
This has to be like the 5th or 6th time in just a week or two that SpaceX has removed one of the Starship OLS tank farm's methane pumps! Hard to say what, but something about the LCH4 farm and pump system is deeply flawed and has been for months 😟
Via: youtube.com/watch?v=nbBeoR…

https://twitter.com/13ericralph31/status/1578307112496959489

Quote
Even more strangely, shortly before SpaceX once again fully removed one of LCH4 pumps, a new pump was delivered to the OLS, unpackaged, removed from the truck, and then put on a different truck and moved from the OLS to the factory??

Also via @LabPadre

twitter.com/13ericralph31/status/1578307115936256000

Quote
This endless removal and replacement of OLS LCH4 pumps has been going on for as long as B7 testing, and probably longer. I struggle to see how SpaceX will be able to complete a proper full-stack Starship wet dress rehearsal, 33-engine static fire, or launch

https://twitter.com/13ericralph31/status/1578307117521698816

Quote
until one of the LCH4 farm's 3-4 pumps no longer need to be replaced after handling just ~100-200 tons of methane over several hours. To safely fill an entire Starship, it'll need to be able to quickly, reliably  fill/drain ~1000 tons of LCH4 in a few hours (and maybe faster)
« Last Edit: 10/07/2022 02:40 pm by FutureSpaceTourist »

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4731
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 6862
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1236 on: 10/07/2022 04:01 pm »
Quote
Hard to say what, but something about the LCH4 farm and pump system is deeply flawed and has been for months
IIRC, due to extended lead-times on the pumps SpaceX wanted (remember buildup started around the same time as the Great Global Supply Chain Disruption) they installed whatever pumps were in available stock at the time, and have been replacing them as and when they are delivered (and they have a gap in testing when the pumps aren't busy pumping).

Offline alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 684
  • Liked: 723
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1237 on: 10/10/2022 07:51 pm »
When they first installed the launch mount, at some point Musk said that it was way over-built.  Yet they've been adding thousands of pounds of shielding and plating to it over the last few weeks, and more piping and tubing and electrical. 

That stray methane explosion in July really got their attention, and appears to have really led to a redesign in place for a lot of it.  They really, really don't want rocket exhaust or other explosion coming up through the center.

Who knows what this has meant for the crew building the one in Florida.  It should outwardly look similar, because it has to fit the same rocket footprint.  I hope we'll get to see what the innards look like.  Maybe Tim Dodd will get a tour.

Even so, as armored as it is, I'm not overly confident that it's going to be able to be rapidly reused. 

Offline InterestedEngineer

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 820
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 685
  • Likes Given: 1012
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1238 on: 10/10/2022 10:22 pm »
When they first installed the launch mount, at some point Musk said that it was way over-built.  Yet they've been adding thousands of pounds of shielding and plating to it over the last few weeks, and more piping and tubing and electrical. 

That stray methane explosion in July really got their attention, and appears to have really led to a redesign in place for a lot of it.  They really, really don't want rocket exhaust or other explosion coming up through the center.

Who knows what this has meant for the crew building the one in Florida.  It should outwardly look similar, because it has to fit the same rocket footprint.  I hope we'll get to see what the innards look like.  Maybe Tim Dodd will get a tour.

Even so, as armored as it is, I'm not overly confident that it's going to be able to be rapidly reused.

There are abou 33GW coming off of the Booster for about 10 seconds or so (lighting engines to clearing the tower).  That's 330GJ of energy that has to be dispersed.

Enough to boil 127t of room temperature water.  Or melt 445t of steel.

I look at the steel covers for their plumbing and shake my head.


EDIT:  it's really 6.7GW per engine, or 6.7 worse.   total 95GW thermal 125GW kinetic.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=53555.660

so 3x worse thermal, so 381t of boiling water or 1,335t of melted 304 stainless steel
« Last Edit: 10/11/2022 05:40 am by InterestedEngineer »

Online matthewkantar

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1746
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 1864
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12
« Reply #1239 on: 10/10/2022 11:08 pm »
Enough to boil 127t of room temperature water.  Or melt 445t of steel.

You can melt three times the amount of steel with the energy it takes to boil a given amount of water?

Tags:
 

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