Author Topic: SpaceX F9 : Starlink v0.9 : May 23, 2019 - DISCUSSION  (Read 235816 times)

Offline intelati

5 dozen.

I was thinking a couple dozens.

Geez SpaceX.
Starships are meant to fly

Offline king1999

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
  • F-Niner Fan
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 282
  • Likes Given: 1266
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1127388838362378241

Now we know.  60!

Don't know why this picture made me laugh out loud literately! Guess it is that this number exceeds all the expectation/predictions here. Such a surprise, and the insane arrangement!

Offline rockets4life97

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 783
  • Liked: 507
  • Likes Given: 345
I'm starting to think we are going to see a static fire with the payload attached.

SpaceX continues to impress.

Offline Jcc

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1193
  • Liked: 403
  • Likes Given: 203
https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/starlink-1.htm

If each Starlink sat is 387 kilograms, and there's 60 all together, that's an estimated total payload mass of 23,220 kilograms (not including the dispenser).
Looks to be no dispenser.

They are stacked on top of each other.

Also looks to be 2 stacks of 30 rectangular flat ~ .3 m thick.

At 250 kg will be a total of ~16mt.

LEGOs?

Offline Joseph Peterson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 752
  • Pittsburgh, PA
  • Liked: 577
  • Likes Given: 14347
I'm counting 30 in a stack, so two stacks.  What I can't tell is the shape.  Perhaps triangular?

Offline oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5224
  • Florida
  • Liked: 4841
  • Likes Given: 1097
And they call these tests?

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6716
  • California
  • Liked: 8142
  • Likes Given: 5191
I'm counting 30 in a stack, so two stacks.  What I can't tell is the shape.  Perhaps triangular?

Looks like 4 stacks of 15 to me. But I could certainly be wrong. Impressive either way!

Offline king1999

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
  • F-Niner Fan
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 282
  • Likes Given: 1266
I'm counting 30 in a stack, so two stacks.  What I can't tell is the shape.  Perhaps triangular?

Looks like 4 stacks of 15 to me. But I could certainly be wrong. Impressive either way!
That's what I see too. 4 stacks of 15, each having two layers, probably solar panels.

Offline russianhalo117

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8237
  • Liked: 4074
  • Likes Given: 756
And they call these tests?
Block-0.9 production sats per Shotwell and Elon statements.

Offline Mandella

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 509
  • Liked: 781
  • Likes Given: 2160
Holy crap, that is a lot of eggs in one basket!

But that has got to be the way to do it if it's going to be done.

I really hope we get to see what the deployment looks like. And I wonder how long it is going to take?

Some additional tweets:
 flat-packed. No dispenser

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13438
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11808
  • Likes Given: 11015
Kudos to those who predicted that (no dispenser). Some clever mechanical engineering!
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline groundbound

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 382
  • Liked: 404
  • Likes Given: 14
I'm starting to think we are going to see a static fire with the payload attached.

SpaceX continues to impress.

No. Their customer would never allow that.

Oh, wait...
 :)

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4860
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 2601
  • Likes Given: 3297
I'm starting to think we are going to see a static fire with the payload attached.

SpaceX continues to impress.

No. Their customer would never allow that.

Oh, wait...
 :)

Why not a static fire with payload attach and at the time of the launch window.  And if it goes well let it fly. 

Saves a few days and a cycle. They’ll need to a hundred or so launches like this so why not save a few days on each.

Seeing that stack just the payload configuration, payload faring separation and deployment is as much value as the satellites.
« Last Edit: 05/12/2019 05:45 am by wannamoonbase »
Superheavy + Starship the final push to launch commit!

Offline lonestriker

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 417
  • Houston We've Had A Problem
  • Liked: 820
  • Likes Given: 5155
Why not a static fire with payload attach and at the time of the launch window.  And if it goes well let it fly. 

Saves a few days and a cycle. They’ll need to a hundred or so launches like this so why not save a few days on each.

Seeing that stack just the payload configuration, payload faring separation and deployment is as much value as the satellites.

They review the static fire data via a quick-look review before giving the green light for the launch.  So, I presume there's a lot of data available that you can't make a split-second decision whether to launch or scrub.  Elon's already tweeted that if the static fire on Monday is good, they'll launch on Tuesday.  So the static fire only costs them ~24 hours to ensure the GSE, rocket and payload pass their test before doing it for real.

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6283
  • Liked: 8884
  • Likes Given: 871
There're some variations for the satellite edges on the left side of the image, some have extra strip of metal, some doesn't.

Offline oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5224
  • Florida
  • Liked: 4841
  • Likes Given: 1097
There're some variations for the satellite edges on the left side of the image, some have extra strip of metal, some doesn't.
Yes it looks like across the manufacture of 60+ sats there has been some modifications or variations to test out to determine which works best.

Offline geza

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 606
  • Budapest
    • Géza Meszéna's web page
  • Liked: 374
  • Likes Given: 59
So these spacecraft are just flat. Probably, one side of it is a solar panel, the other on is the phased-array antenna. Electronics and tankage are in between. RCS thrusters at the edges.

Offline oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5224
  • Florida
  • Liked: 4841
  • Likes Given: 1097
In the case of two stacks of 30:
The dimensions would be ~ 3m x 1.5m x .3m (9.8ft x 4.9ft x .98ft)
1.35 cubic meters

In the case of four stacks of 15:
The dimensions would be ~ 1.5m x 1.5m x .6m (4.9ft x 4.9ft x 1.96ft)
1.35 cubic meters

But because of the noted variations of edges shown it is unlikely  because the edges are too random to support the conclusion of double thick but square sized sats for four stacks of 15.

Offline speedevil

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4406
  • Fife
  • Liked: 2761
  • Likes Given: 3369
So these spacecraft are just flat. Probably, one side of it is a solar panel, the other on is the phased-array antenna. Electronics and tankage are in between. RCS thrusters at the edges.

If this is so, the power consumption went _way_ down from initial estimates based on size of solar panels in the approvals docs.
Non-steerable panels would mean they can't have the satellite pointed down all the time, or get significant additional losses of power.


Tags:
 

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