NASASpaceFlight.com Forum

SpaceX Vehicles and Missions => SpaceX Super Heavy/Starship (BFR/BFS) - Earth to Deep Space => Topic started by: gongora on 08/26/2019 05:09 pm

Title: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 08/26/2019 05:09 pm
Thread for discussion of the Starship prototype being built in Cocoa, FL (and probably finished at KSC).  Previous posts on this prototype can be found in these threads:

SpaceX BFS : Phase 2 Starship Orbital Prototype(s) - Discussion (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=47184.0)
SpaceX BFS : Phase 2 - Starship Orbital Prototype(s) - Photos and Updates (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=47730.0)
Starship Manufacturing in Cocoa, Florida (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48158.0)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 08/26/2019 05:32 pm
Ok - so how will the half core transition in and out of the structure?  Lift-roll? Permanent rail? Roof mounted rail hoist?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 08/26/2019 06:50 pm
Ok - so how will the half core transition in and out of the structure?  Lift-roll? Permanent rail? Roof mounted rail hoist?

A really big dolly?  ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: AU1.52 on 08/27/2019 02:45 am
I just noticed something. One of the 13 rings on the ground has what looks like a port access template on it already!
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Mark S on 08/27/2019 03:35 am
I just noticed something. One of the 13 rings on the ground has what looks like a port access template on it already!

I wonder about the rings lying right on the ground, instead of on some kind of a simple rig designed to keep them true and straight. I'm sure their parking lot is wonderfully flat for vehicular traffic, but maybe not so much for precision aerospace components.

I seem to recall the rings are stainless steel of 5/16ths inch thickness, or something near that. Is that thick enough to not be worried about distortion or warping?

Thanks.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: su27k on 08/27/2019 04:05 am
https://twitter.com/flying_briann/status/1166085547468709888

Quote
#starship update for the day.

They're erecting something inside the doorway of the big hangar.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 08/27/2019 05:21 am
https://twitter.com/flying_briann/status/1166085547468709888

Quote
#starship update for the day.

They're erecting something inside the doorway of the big hangar.
Roll up door?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Cheapchips on 08/27/2019 05:34 am
I thought roll up door at first but looks more like light bleeding through the back wall.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Yggdrasill on 08/27/2019 06:10 am
I wonder about the rings lying right on the ground, instead of on some kind of a simple rig designed to keep them true and straight. I'm sure their parking lot is wonderfully flat for vehicular traffic, but maybe not so much for precision aerospace components.

I seem to recall the rings are stainless steel of 5/16ths inch thickness, or something near that. Is that thick enough to not be worried about distortion or warping?

Thanks.
They will warp. But probably not to any significant degree beyond the yield point. Most likely the points in contact with the ground see the most deformation, and that can likely be compensated for in the welding. (And it's not like the prototypes are perfectly unwrinkled. This kind of design doesn't require perfection.)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: speedevil on 08/27/2019 01:22 pm
I wonder about the rings lying right on the ground, instead of on some kind of a simple rig designed to keep them true and straight. I'm sure their parking lot is wonderfully flat for vehicular traffic, but maybe not so much for precision aerospace components.

I seem to recall the rings are stainless steel of 5/16ths inch thickness, or something near that. Is that thick enough to not be worried about distortion or warping?

Thanks.
They will warp. But probably not to any significant degree beyond the yield point. Most likely the points in contact with the ground see the most deformation, and that can likely be compensated for in the welding. (And it's not like the prototypes are perfectly unwrinkled. This kind of design doesn't require perfection.)

It's a pretty flexible hoop, and the loading on it is only ~1.5kg/cm or so on average.
This is enough that if you put it on a 'flat' surface with no sticky-out sharp rocks, it will flex into rough contact with the ground at enough points to self-support by warping out of circular slightly, and not be deformed at all long-term.

The most you'd expect would be light scratches on the base with no deformation unless it's actually dragged over the ground.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BZHSpace on 08/27/2019 02:11 pm
For SH :

. According to the heigh of a single ring which I've estimated it's arround 2.5 meters high and to the whole heigh of the SH which is 63, I find that 25 rings are needed to build one SH booster. So 12 rings more are needed to build the whole SH booster. After they finish the SS prototype they will have more spaces to put all the rings.

. The construction of SH will be vertical or horizontal as they do will the SS ? According to me it simple to build horizontally than vertically, SH is higher than an 20 stories building so it will be windy at the top. (I remember that Elon said tha SH will be built horizontally)

. Holes have already be done on some rings so I guess that they will gain some construction time. For me SH construction will be very fast (1 month).



Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: marsbase on 08/27/2019 02:21 pm
. The construction of SH will be vertical or horizontal as they do will the SS ? According to me it simple to build horizontally than vertically, SH is higher than an 20 stories building so it will be windy at the top. (I remember that Elon said tha SH will be built horizontally)
SH will be built vertically.  Elon didn't say it would be built horizontally.  He said it would be transported horizontally, but that was a joke. He meant that it would not be launched from the build site in Florida to Pad 39A.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 08/27/2019 03:19 pm
Vertical makes more sense. Won't have to deal with sides sagging under their own weight while horizontal, plus the orientation and pressure on the weld lines will be consistent.

Plus, installing bulkheads and such will be easier vertically.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 08/27/2019 03:19 pm
For SH :

. According to the heigh of a single ring which I've estimated it's arround 2.5 meters high and to the whole heigh of the SH which is 63, I find that 25 rings are needed to build one SH booster. So 12 rings more are needed to build the whole SH booster. After they finish the SS prototype they will have more spaces to put all the rings.

. The construction of SH will be vertical or horizontal as they do will the SS ? According to me it simple to build horizontally than vertically, SH is higher than an 20 stories building so it will be windy at the top. (I remember that Elon said tha SH will be built horizontally)

. Holes have already be done on some rings so I guess that they will gain some construction time. For me SH construction will be very fast (1 month).

The double stacked rings used at Boca Chica are around 2.4m high. The single rings at Cocoa are only 1.8m high.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Joffan on 08/27/2019 05:21 pm
https://twitter.com/flying_briann/status/1166085547468709888

Quote
#starship update for the day.
The two similar pictures there make a gorgeous stereo pair; cross-eye setup attached.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Spindog on 08/27/2019 05:28 pm
They might want to start some preps with Dorian approaching if it keeps to it's currently forecasted track. There is potential for strong tropical storm force winds in Cocoa by Sunday morning.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: tyrred on 08/27/2019 06:16 pm
They still have to cut the prototype in half vertically to get it around the beam. Give 'em a few days, Dorian, please?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: DaveH62 on 08/27/2019 06:38 pm
Is the beam a hinge that will swing open to get the ship inside? Will the upper half go inside as well, or just the lower half?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: AC in NC on 08/27/2019 06:44 pm
Is the beam a hinge that will swing open to get the ship inside? Will the upper half go inside as well, or just the lower half?

Looks like the structural steel "in" the doorway is no longer there.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6G0z1QS9qHI

Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 08/27/2019 07:14 pm
I think I see 19 rings in today's video:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1984781#msg1984781
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RobLynn on 08/27/2019 08:39 pm
. The construction of SH will be vertical or horizontal as they do will the SS ? According to me it simple to build horizontally than vertically, SH is higher than an 20 stories building so it will be windy at the top. (I remember that Elon said tha SH will be built horizontally)
SH will be built vertically.  Elon didn't say it would be built horizontally.  He said it would be transported horizontally, but that was a joke. He meant that it would not be launched from the build site in Florida to Pad 39A.

My pick is built in two halves inside the tall bay hanger.  Possibly tested for fit, but likely not integrated until after transported to Canaveral as a 100+ tonne 70m (including truck cab) long ō9m SH seems like it would be very challenging to safely assemble and tip over onto trailers for transport through intersections - instead rent space in the VAB for final assembly and hurricane shelter?  Possibly same is true for SS
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Nehkara on 08/28/2019 06:38 am
Are we thinking that Starship may be hurriedly moved into the large hangar to attempt to protect it from Huricane Dorian?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: kkattula on 08/28/2019 07:21 am
I don't know about hurriedly. They've got until early Saturday morning. If Dorian does become a hurricane, and the path follows the current long range prediction.

I expect they have a plan for securing the parts under construction, and the whole site.  But wouldn't want to execute it until necessary.

I do wonder how they'll move the two halves.  Self-propelled modular transporters like the Hopper at BC?  Or maybe they just use a crane to drop them on custom, low, flat trolleys, and tow them in?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: cuddihy on 08/28/2019 07:57 am
Maybe it was just temporary support for construction.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BZHSpace on 08/28/2019 08:31 am
. The construction of SH will be vertical or horizontal as they do will the SS ? According to me it simple to build horizontally than vertically, SH is higher than an 20 stories building so it will be windy at the top. (I remember that Elon said tha SH will be built horizontally)
SH will be built vertically.  Elon didn't say it would be built horizontally.  He said it would be transported horizontally, but that was a joke. He meant that it would not be launched from the build site in Florida to Pad 39A.

My pick is built in two halves inside the tall bay hanger.  Possibly tested for fit, but likely not integrated until after transported to Canaveral as a 100+ tonne 70m (including truck cab) long ō9m SH seems like it would be very challenging to safely assemble and tip over onto trailers for transport through intersections - instead rent space in the VAB for final assembly and hurricane shelter?  Possibly same is true for SS

Two halves in theory, yes, but if we take the size of the LOX and CH4 tank showed on the SH concept model the two halves will have different height, but I can't say how high they will be. If someone it will be great if he can write it in this topic.

SH is 9m diameter is lower than Saturn V's diameter which is 10.1 according to wikipedia's figures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_V, Saturn V was built horizontally so I can't say why built SH vertically is more simply than horizontally (maybe because they don't have facilites to do that horizontally and maybe lift SH is very hard.

An other point I want to talk about is during the transportation of the SH to the launch pad, vertical position will be a challenge to SpaceX's teams (it's like carring a 21 stories building) on the contrary horizontal position will be better for the transportation. Altrought, transportation issues make me think of the relevance of the location of the construction's site.

Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Michael Paul on 08/28/2019 08:41 am
. The construction of SH will be vertical or horizontal as they do will the SS ? According to me it simple to build horizontally than vertically, SH is higher than an 20 stories building so it will be windy at the top. (I remember that Elon said tha SH will be built horizontally)
SH will be built vertically.  Elon didn't say it would be built horizontally.  He said it would be transported horizontally, but that was a joke. He meant that it would not be launched from the build site in Florida to Pad 39A.

My pick is built in two halves inside the tall bay hanger.  Possibly tested for fit, but likely not integrated until after transported to Canaveral as a 100+ tonne 70m (including truck cab) long ō9m SH seems like it would be very challenging to safely assemble and tip over onto trailers for transport through intersections - instead rent space in the VAB for final assembly and hurricane shelter?  Possibly same is true for SS

Two halves in theory, yes, but if we take the size of the LOX and CH4 tank showed on the SH concept model the two halves will have different height, but I can't say how high they will be. If someone it will be great if he can write it in this topic.

SH is 9m diameter is lower than Saturn V's diameter which is 10.1 according to wikipedia's figures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_V, Saturn V was built horizontally so I can't say why built SH vertically is more simply than horizontally (maybe because they don't have facilites to do that horizontally and maybe lift SH is very hard.

An other point I want to talk about is during the transportation of the SH to the launch pad, vertical position will be a challenge to SpaceX's teams (it's like carring a 21 stories building) on the contrary horizontal position will be better for the transportation. Altrought, transportation issues make me think of the relevance of the location of the construction's site.
SS and SH will each be transported horizontally and each will be transported in two pieces on Mammoet type self propelled transporters to barges waiting at sea wall on Rt.528.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: tyrred on 08/28/2019 09:23 am
Maybe it was just temporary support for construction.

Makes sense.

It always looked wrong to me with the vertical supports there.  Modern construction methods, eh?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: speedevil on 08/28/2019 11:21 am
<snip "how will they get SH in hanger">
Two halves in theory, yes, but if we take the size of the LOX and CH4 tank showed on the SH concept model the two halves will have different height, but I can't say how high they will be. If someone it will be great if he can write it in this topic.

Halves - with the ends being at an uncomplicated area of the tank where there is nothing but a single tank wall to deal with - would not greatly complicate things.

Rather than breaking it at the 'natural' division of a bulkhead.
Have temporary ring attached to the outsides as a stiffener, bolt two rings together, weld along line through gaps between rings, remove ring. (for example).
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 08/28/2019 03:59 pm
. The construction of SH will be vertical or horizontal as they do will the SS ? According to me it simple to build horizontally than vertically, SH is higher than an 20 stories building so it will be windy at the top. (I remember that Elon said tha SH will be built horizontally)
SH will be built vertically.  Elon didn't say it would be built horizontally.  He said it would be transported horizontally, but that was a joke. He meant that it would not be launched from the build site in Florida to Pad 39A.

My pick is built in two halves inside the tall bay hanger.  Possibly tested for fit, but likely not integrated until after transported to Canaveral as a 100+ tonne 70m (including truck cab) long ō9m SH seems like it would be very challenging to safely assemble and tip over onto trailers for transport through intersections - instead rent space in the VAB for final assembly and hurricane shelter?  Possibly same is true for SS

Two halves in theory, yes, but if we take the size of the LOX and CH4 tank showed on the SH concept model the two halves will have different height, but I can't say how high they will be. If someone it will be great if he can write it in this topic.

the two tanks differ in size, but they don't need to build the halves each one fitting one tank exactly. for example, texas starship: most likely the top bulkhead will go into the nose cone (somehow), since we see an access port being cut onto the nose cone, and the common bulkhead was welded very close to the top of the bottom section. so the two halves are split in the middle of the lox tank.

I'll repost a render I made a few days ago, with some annotations, that helps visualizing this. notice that I added another ring to MK1, which currently is laying on the ground. red lines represent the precise position of current access ports and halves division. green lines are rough position of the lower and common bulkheads based on weld marks from pictures, and estimated top bulkhead position. I don't have close enough images of mk2 to estimate bulkheads position, but probably safe to assume they'll be about the same place as mk1

edit: this is starship, but I'm reposting this image to help speculate where they are going to split superheavy
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RobLynn on 08/29/2019 06:02 am
Looks like Hurricane Dorian might hit canaveral head on on Sunday night.  100+mph winds, worst to hit area in 30 years.  What can SpaceX best do to prepare?
https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/storm_graphics/AT05/refresh/AL052019_wind_probs_34_F120+png/024109.png
https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at5+shtml/024109.shtml?cone#contents
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Wargrim on 08/29/2019 08:11 am
Get the people out.

I mean the shelter looks finished, with some luck they can move the Starship halves in before the storm arrives. But if not, they can only tie it down and hope for the best. All those steel rings outside? Not enough space to bring them all inside any shelter / building.

But in the worst case, where both halves get blown over and land right on buildings... is its just stainless steel. Throws them back a few months, but we have seen how fast they can bring these things up by now.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: kevinof on 08/29/2019 08:35 am
Monday is looking like 70 mph (65 knots) with the european model.  The GFS model has it missing the Cape and passing to the north.


Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 08/29/2019 12:25 pm
Get the people out.

I mean the shelter looks finished, with some luck they can move the Starship halves in before the storm arrives. But if not, they can only tie it down and hope for the best. All those steel rings outside? Not enough space to bring them all inside any shelter / building.

But in the worst case, where both halves get blown over and land right on buildings... is its just stainless steel. Throws them back a few months, but we have seen how fast they can bring these things up by now.

I'm thinking the starship halves may have enough structure to withstand the wind if they are able to tie them down well enough.. but I think the rings are another matter. They have no ribs to keep them in shape in the wind, even if tied down. They could potentially blow everywhere.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: spacenut on 08/29/2019 02:02 pm
I've been through two hurricanes and I am about 250 miles from the Gulf.  Both were around 70 mph winds by the time it reached my location.  Power was out for 3 days both times for me anyway.  Wind at 70 mph did a lot of damage if you didn't have things tied down or put away.  Musk hasn't lived through one, he needs to take warning.  Anchor everything down.  Put the engines inside buildings that can stand up to this Cat 3 possibility.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 08/29/2019 02:46 pm
Musk hasn't lived through one, he needs to take warning.

SpaceX went through the last hurricane to hit the cape, so I'm pretty sure they have people with a clue about what needs to be done. 

General discussion about Dorian should be in the Dorian thread:
Hurricane Dorian (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48900.0)

Hurricane preps for the Cidco Rd site can be discussed in:
Starship Manufacturing in Cocoa, Florida (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48158.0)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Neopork on 08/29/2019 02:54 pm
I've been through two hurricanes and I am about 250 miles from the Gulf.  Both were around 70 mph winds by the time it reached my location.  Power was out for 3 days both times for me anyway.  Wind at 70 mph did a lot of damage if you didn't have things tied down or put away.  Musk hasn't lived through one, he needs to take warning.  Anchor everything down.  Put the engines inside buildings that can stand up to this Cat 3 possibility.

I know you are using hyperbole, but I doubt Elon himself has that much involvement with hurricane preparation. I  expect they are taking this very seriously since there are millions of dollars and countless work hours put into the current state of the prototype. I hope they have hired consultants to help with hurricane prep and go overboard with precautions. A setback could impact several timelines and generate bad PR right when they are looking for hype.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: livingjw on 08/29/2019 03:50 pm
I believe that Star Ship will be much easier to handle and transport when tanks and forward section are joined and pressurized. This was how Atlas was transported. It makes everything nice and rigid.

John
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 08/29/2019 03:55 pm
I've been through two hurricanes and I am about 250 miles from the Gulf.  Both were around 70 mph winds by the time it reached my location.  Power was out for 3 days both times for me anyway.  Wind at 70 mph did a lot of damage if you didn't have things tied down or put away.  Musk hasn't lived through one, he needs to take warning.  Anchor everything down.  Put the engines inside buildings that can stand up to this Cat 3 possibility.

Latest views show they are removing the fabric from the front tunnel tent. Suspect that this is evidence of preparation.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RoboGoofers on 08/29/2019 04:01 pm
Looks like the tip of the nose cone has a much smaller hole in it now. a flat wall/floor with an access port in it?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 08/29/2019 04:34 pm
Discussion about Dorian's path and timing should be in the Dorian thread.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: SpaceJunkE on 08/30/2019 12:39 am
First post to be gentle....

I was thinking about the catastrophic damage that could be caused by all of the Starship/SuperHeavy rings if Dorian comes anywhere near the Cocoa SpaceX facility; each one could become a flying cylinder or ďannular airfoilĒ.  If they would make each of these rings a temporary ďabove ground poolĒ, they could inexpensively secure each ring with little chance of damage to the ring or anything else.

Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: sdub on 08/30/2019 01:41 am
Get the people out.

I mean the shelter looks finished, with some luck they can move the Starship halves in before the storm arrives. But if not, they can only tie it down and hope for the best. All those steel rings outside? Not enough space to bring them all inside any shelter / building.

But in the worst case, where both halves get blown over and land right on buildings... is its just stainless steel. Throws them back a few months, but we have seen how fast they can bring these things up by now.

I'm thinking the starship halves may have enough structure to withstand the wind if they are able to tie them down well enough.. but I think the rings are another matter. They have no ribs to keep them in shape in the wind, even if tied down. They could potentially blow everywhere.

They've got to get all those rings indoors or they are goners for sure.  Would be a real shame to lose all that work to the weather.  We already lost the fairing for the Hopper, but I guess these are the risks ( and potentially expected losses) with this kind of open air fabrication process.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: marsbase on 08/30/2019 01:58 am
Copied from the Florida Update thread.
Models right now are showing Dorian well to the south of the cape. But the winds north of Dorian will all be onshore, so the biggest risk now may be storm surge, rather than winds.  Timing with high tide will be critical.  They need to pack up and move inland everything they can.
 
The City of Cocoa, where the SpaceX facility is, lies 36 feet above sea level and is 10 miles from open ocean, with two barrier islands and two rivers in between.  Storm surge should not have a direct effect there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Lars-J on 08/30/2019 06:34 am
"goners for sure" if outdoor? Doubt it. People are getting a bit overboard in their concerns. They can be secured, and they are fairly substantial, not tinfoil.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: tyrred on 08/30/2019 07:53 am
First post to be gentle....

I was thinking about the catastrophic damage that could be caused by all of the Starship/SuperHeavy rings if Dorian comes anywhere near the Cocoa SpaceX facility; each one could become a flying cylinder or ďannular airfoilĒ.  If they would make each of these rings a temporary ďabove ground poolĒ, they could inexpensively secure each ring with little chance of damage to the ring or anything else.

Welcome to the forums!

Sounds like you are suggesting securing the bases of rings water-tight and filling with water.  Might work, if they have enough time and resources.  Could end up filled with gators, though.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Michael Paul on 08/30/2019 08:42 am
First post to be gentle....

I was thinking about the catastrophic damage that could be caused by all of the Starship/SuperHeavy rings if Dorian comes anywhere near the Cocoa SpaceX facility; each one could become a flying cylinder or ďannular airfoilĒ.  If they would make each of these rings a temporary ďabove ground poolĒ, they could inexpensively secure each ring with little chance of damage to the ring or anything else.

Welcome to the forums!

Sounds like you are suggesting securing the bases of rings water-tight and filling with water.  Might work, if they have enough time and resources.  Could end up filled with gators, though.
Hurricane force winds will blow the water right out of swimming pools and the saturated ground via hydrostatic pressure then heaves the shallow end up out of the ground, concrete deck and all. Ballast the rings with Milspec fuel and water bladders draped half inside, half outside. Adjacent rings can share a single bladder.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Rei on 08/30/2019 01:07 pm
Contrarily, there's an old trick popular in hurricane areas... though it probably wouldn't work for huge structures like these rings. It's simply: carefully set all of your outdoor stuff that might blow away in the pool.  Hurricanes don't generally "empty" pools (and can outright flood them). Things at the bottom are perfectly safe (so long as they're compatible with submersion and pool chemicals) - even relatively delicate things.

(https://www.nspf.org/sites/default/files/blog/Swimming-Pool-Filled-with-Chairs-and-Tables.jpg)

Good luck finding a "pool" big enough for all these rings, however, esp. since they don't fit inside each other. Hangars would be easier.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RoboGoofers on 08/30/2019 02:03 pm
Good luck finding a "pool" big enough for all these rings, however, esp. since they don't fit inside each other. Hangars would be easier.
Not serious, but...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 08/30/2019 03:56 pm
Moved some posts to the Party Thread
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: tater on 08/30/2019 05:32 pm
Looking at the flyby videos of the facility, it seems to me that the black base of the main tank component doesn't quite touch the ground.

Could it be movable?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: sdub on 08/30/2019 06:16 pm
"goners for sure" if outdoor? Doubt it. People are getting a bit overboard in their concerns. They can be secured, and they are fairly substantial, not tinfoil.

Hopefully they can be secured more substantially than the Hopper fairing was.  I think that recent example of a fairly substantial component being blown over and considered a complete loss in relatively mild wind conditions (compared to a hurricane) validates some of these concerns.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: rsdavis9 on 08/30/2019 06:18 pm
"goners for sure" if outdoor? Doubt it. People are getting a bit overboard in their concerns. They can be secured, and they are fairly substantial, not tinfoil.

Hopefully they can be secured more substantially than the Hopper fairing was.  I think that recent example of a fairly substantial component being blown over and considered a complete loss in relatively mild wind conditions (compared to a hurricane) validates some of these concerns.

It was a photo op "hat".
Very non essential.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Neopork on 08/30/2019 06:22 pm
Good luck finding a "pool" big enough for all these rings, however, esp. since they don't fit inside each other. Hangars would be easier.
Not serious, but...

I had the same thought. Putting them in the water would probably be one way to prevent them from being blown around or getting impact damage. Have fun retrieving them without damaging them though.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: sdub on 08/30/2019 06:23 pm
"goners for sure" if outdoor? Doubt it. People are getting a bit overboard in their concerns. They can be secured, and they are fairly substantial, not tinfoil.

Hopefully they can be secured more substantially than the Hopper fairing was.  I think that recent example of a fairly substantial component being blown over and considered a complete loss in relatively mild wind conditions (compared to a hurricane) validates some of these concerns.

It was a photo op "hat".
Very non essential.

Sure, but that's not really relevant.  The point is that SpaceX had a substantial (in size) steel component that was secured (albeit inadequately) and it was destroyed by the weather.  We'll find out soon enough (assuming they don't relocate the rings) whether there was cause for concern or not...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Neopork on 08/30/2019 06:34 pm
"goners for sure" if outdoor? Doubt it. People are getting a bit overboard in their concerns. They can be secured, and they are fairly substantial, not tinfoil.

Hopefully they can be secured more substantially than the Hopper fairing was.  I think that recent example of a fairly substantial component being blown over and considered a complete loss in relatively mild wind conditions (compared to a hurricane) validates some of these concerns.

It was a photo op "hat".
Very non essential.

Sure, but that's not really relevant.  The point is that SpaceX had a substantial (in size) steel component that was secured (albeit inadequately) and it was destroyed by the weather.  We'll find out soon enough (assuming they don't relocate the rings) whether there was cause for concern or not...

I think his point is that the "hat" was a crudely built (i.e. cheap) piece of non-essential hardware. These prototypes are multi-million dollar investments that are essential for testing flight hardware, which is in turn essential for the successful development of the 1.0 SS/SH rockets (and securing major rounds of funding necessary to further the program).

In other words, these are a LOT more important than the hopper and I believe that they will do whatever is within their capability and the remaining time frame to protect them from destruction.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: groknull on 08/30/2019 06:46 pm
Looking at the flyby videos of the facility, it seems to me that the black base of the main tank component doesn't quite touch the ground.

Could it be movable?

Probably.

The first concrete jig built at Boca Chica was built on the ground and a pad poured around it, so that one won't move (easily).

The second concrete jig at Boca Chica, the jig you referenced at Cocoa, and the new jig1 at Boca Chica all have concrete block standoffs, so they are not physically attached to the concrete pads they are sitting on.

The question is what you would move it with.  An SPMT is possible, but it might be difficult to distribute the load properly to prevent the concrete from cracking.  Air bearing casters under the steel base ring at the bottom of the concrete jig is a better option.  Lateral movement could be done by winches or even a piece of heavy construction equipment.

(1) The steel base ring of the new concrete jig at Boca Chica can be seen in the 4th photo in this post from bocachicagal:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48895.msg1986317#msg1986317
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Lar on 08/30/2019 07:26 pm
There is not a lot of time remaining, and workers need some time to secure their own property too.

Putting the rings in the pond might be the best that can be done
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: speedevil on 08/30/2019 07:32 pm
There is not a lot of time remaining, and workers need some time to secure their own property too.

Putting the rings in the pond might be the best that can be done
Go and buy 20 big tarps, place in rings, fill to halfway with water, and they're not going anywhere.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Neopork on 08/30/2019 07:41 pm
There is not a lot of time remaining, and workers need some time to secure their own property too.

Putting the rings in the pond might be the best that can be done
Go and buy 20 big tarps, place in rings, fill to halfway with water, and they're not going anywhere.

Great idea.
Isn't there a huge gravel/sand yard next door or something? They could have a bunch of trucks fill up the rings with sand and then water them down. They wouldn't move if they were filled. It wouldn't prevent impact damage, but maybe they could also put a berm of gravel/sand on the sides that are likely to get whipped.

Secondly, what if they have more of that tall structure material and the could stretch it across the top of the rings. They could prevent the wind from getting underneath and lifting it by putting sand or gravel around the periphery.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: aero on 08/30/2019 08:16 pm
First post to be gentle....

I was thinking about the catastrophic damage that could be caused by all of the Starship/SuperHeavy rings if Dorian comes anywhere near the Cocoa SpaceX facility; each one could become a flying cylinder or ďannular airfoilĒ.  If they would make each of these rings a temporary ďabove ground poolĒ, they could inexpensively secure each ring with little chance of damage to the ring or anything else.

Welcome to the forums!

Sounds like you are suggesting securing the bases of rings water-tight and filling with water.  Might work, if they have enough time and resources.  Could end up filled with gators, though.

Gators? Well if you can't beat em, join em. Dump the rings in the lake. If the water is 2 meters deep then the wind won't much bother the rings, and they are stainless, so the mud and muck should wash off afterward.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 08/30/2019 08:24 pm
Looking at the flyby videos of the facility, it seems to me that the black base of the main tank component doesn't quite touch the ground.

Could it be movable?

Probably.

The first concrete jig built at Boca Chica was built on the ground and a pad poured around it, so that one won't move (easily).

The second concrete jig at Boca Chica, the jig you referenced at Cocoa, and the new jig1 at Boca Chica all have concrete block standoffs, so they are not physically attached to the concrete pads they are sitting on.

The question is what you would move it with.  An SPMT is possible, but it might be difficult to distribute the load properly to prevent the concrete from cracking.  Air bearing casters under the steel base ring at the bottom of the concrete jig is a better option.  Lateral movement could be done by winches or even a piece of heavy construction equipment.

(1) The steel base ring of the new concrete jig at Boca Chica can be seen in the 4th photo in this post from bocachicagal:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48895.msg1986317#msg1986317

so you're saying that this thing will be a new concrete jig? texas superheavy confirmed?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Neopork on 08/30/2019 08:32 pm
so you're saying that this thing will be a new concrete jig? texas superheavy confirmed?

I think what he means is that this is the base of a concrete form. If the flat portions are in fact for doorways on either side, I would imagine that they are building another round concrete base upon which to build a rocket structure (probably SH). I'm not sure why people are questioning whether or not a SH will be built in Texas. If both teams are racing to orbit, they will both need a SH booster. I just figured that Texas was a bit behind Florida in that regard.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: CJ on 08/30/2019 09:43 pm
There is not a lot of time remaining, and workers need some time to secure their own property too.

Putting the rings in the pond might be the best that can be done

Placing the rings underwater in a sheltered/isolated pond is IMHO an excellent idea. The rings would be protected from wind, impact damage, etc. The tricky bit is probably how; can the crane do the job, and do so fast enough?

There would also be the issue of getting them out after the storm. How? If the pond has gators (and given the area, it probably does), easy becomes hard - you can't just send in a crew to hook up the slings. 

Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: rsdavis9 on 08/30/2019 09:44 pm
filling with sand isn't bad. Probably easier to recover too.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 08/30/2019 10:14 pm
so you're saying that this thing will be a new concrete jig? texas superheavy confirmed?

I think what he means is that this is the base of a concrete form. If the flat portions are in fact for doorways on either side, I would imagine that they are building another round concrete base upon which to build a rocket structure (probably SH). I'm not sure why people are questioning whether or not a SH will be built in Texas. If both teams are racing to orbit, they will both need a SH booster. I just figured that Texas was a bit behind Florida in that regard.

no reason, just because we've been seing superheavy rings for weeks now in cocoa but no sign of any in texas, and this could be the first sign of it.

well technically that tent they are assembling could be the first sign of it, that tent looks like the one they use to make rings in cocoa. or those stainless steel panels that look sort of brushed, similar to the SH rings in cocoa could be the first sign of it. ok, quite a few possible signs of SH in texas

although boca chica is going to need quite some changes on the launch pad if (or when) they are to launch a whole starship+superheavy from there, while florida already has 39a
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: aero on 08/31/2019 01:43 am
filling with sand isn't bad. Probably easier to recover too.

I would go for the sand solution if there is time. We have 2 more days of relatively peaceful weather and there is a lot to do in addition to securing the rings. Secure a float to each ring then to recover the ring use a boat to attach the float to a crane. Anyway, why worry? - that's a job for "Recovery."

You know, it might be possible to just stake the rings in place where they lie. Time is the enemy of that solution, too.

Added - On second thought, the sand solution would take to much time and sand. Those rings are big, (20 of them, 9 meters in diameter and how tall, or how full do you fill them, then who levels the fill?) They can't just back a dump truck up to them and dump the load. They'd need a ramp to back up in order to get high enough to dump the load inside and the likelihood of damaging the ring in this process is pretty high.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Keldor on 08/31/2019 02:11 am
First post to be gentle....

I was thinking about the catastrophic damage that could be caused by all of the Starship/SuperHeavy rings if Dorian comes anywhere near the Cocoa SpaceX facility; each one could become a flying cylinder or ďannular airfoilĒ.  If they would make each of these rings a temporary ďabove ground poolĒ, they could inexpensively secure each ring with little chance of damage to the ring or anything else.

Welcome to the forums!

Sounds like you are suggesting securing the bases of rings water-tight and filling with water.  Might work, if they have enough time and resources.  Could end up filled with gators, though.

Gators? Well if you can't beat em, join em. Dump the rings in the lake. If the water is 2 meters deep then the wind won't much bother the rings, and they are stainless, so the mud and muck should wash off afterward.

The bottom of that lake is probably deep mud.  If you put those rings in there, they might well sink deep into the mud and you'll never get them out again.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gaballard on 08/31/2019 02:30 am
First post to be gentle....

I was thinking about the catastrophic damage that could be caused by all of the Starship/SuperHeavy rings if Dorian comes anywhere near the Cocoa SpaceX facility; each one could become a flying cylinder or ďannular airfoilĒ.  If they would make each of these rings a temporary ďabove ground poolĒ, they could inexpensively secure each ring with little chance of damage to the ring or anything else.

Welcome to the forums!

Sounds like you are suggesting securing the bases of rings water-tight and filling with water.  Might work, if they have enough time and resources.  Could end up filled with gators, though.

Gators? Well if you can't beat em, join em. Dump the rings in the lake. If the water is 2 meters deep then the wind won't much bother the rings, and they are stainless, so the mud and muck should wash off afterward.

The bottom of that lake is probably deep mud.  If you put those rings in there, they might well sink deep into the mud and you'll never get them out again.

Nah, I've swam in a lot of Central Floridian lakes, they're not really "muddy" the way real dirt is when it gets wet. Bottom of the lakes is a few inches of gross squishy silt and sand, but nothing close to deep enough to swallow those rings.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Coastal Ron on 08/31/2019 02:34 am
I'm also concerned about the Super Heavy rings on the ground in Florida, but I'm starting to think that they won't be a big concern.

#1 they are very heavy.

#2 in order to move, air needs to get under them, and if SpaceX dumps a couple of feet of dirt inside the rings there is no way the rings can "catch an edge" to move.

So my solution to the problem is to dump a couple of feet of dirt inside each completed ring. And after the storm, and they want to start stacking, they just crane them straight up, wash them off, and start welding.

Why wouldn't this work?  :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gaballard on 08/31/2019 02:39 am
I'm also concerned about the Super Heavy rings on the ground in Florida, but I'm starting to think that they won't be a big concern.

#1 they are very heavy.

#2 in order to move, air needs to get under them, and if SpaceX dumps a couple of feet of dirt inside the rings there is no way the rings can "catch an edge" to move.

So my solution to the problem is to dump a couple of feet of dirt inside each completed ring. And after the storm, and they want to start stacking, they just crane them straight up, wash them off, and start welding.

Why wouldn't this work?  :D

They're heavy, but they're paper compared to what those winds can do. I think the real problem with any solution that leaves them outside isn't that they'd blow away, but that they'd get smashed and dented up from flying debris. Part of me thinks they'll just cram them in the windbreak building around the SS prototype once they have it in there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: envy887 on 08/31/2019 02:41 am
I'm also concerned about the Super Heavy rings on the ground in Florida, but I'm starting to think that they won't be a big concern.

#1 they are very heavy.

#2 in order to move, air needs to get under them, and if SpaceX dumps a couple of feet of dirt inside the rings there is no way the rings can "catch an edge" to move.

So my solution to the problem is to dump a couple of feet of dirt inside each completed ring. And after the storm, and they want to start stacking, they just crane them straight up, wash them off, and start welding.

Why wouldn't this work?  :D

They are about 5000 lbs each, but I don't actually think the wind getting under the rings is an issue since the have no "underside" area to generate lift. The wind can only push on the sides.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: envy887 on 08/31/2019 02:46 am
I'm also concerned about the Super Heavy rings on the ground in Florida, but I'm starting to think that they won't be a big concern.

#1 they are very heavy.

#2 in order to move, air needs to get under them, and if SpaceX dumps a couple of feet of dirt inside the rings there is no way the rings can "catch an edge" to move.

So my solution to the problem is to dump a couple of feet of dirt inside each completed ring. And after the storm, and they want to start stacking, they just crane them straight up, wash them off, and start welding.

Why wouldn't this work?  :D

They're heavy, but they're paper compared to what those winds can do. I think the real problem with any solution that leaves them outside isn't that they'd blow away, but that they'd get smashed and dented up from flying debris. Part of me thinks they'll just cram them in the windbreak building around the SS prototype once they have it in there.

That isn't tin siding. 1/4" hardened stainless can take quite an impact without denting.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 08/31/2019 03:36 am
So they moved half starship into the building.

...but how?

Feels like we're missing a lot of stuff going on down there, weird feeling specially for those watching paint dry on the live streaming videos, and constant high resolution close up shots.

Perhaps we should crowdfund vacation trips for bcg and lab to cocoa?

Jokes aside, I'm really curious about how they did that.

I'd guess lifting it and placing it on roll lifts but we never saw any roll lifts there, nor signs of them detaching bottom section from the jig, or even signs of a crane capable of lifting it. But again, we don't see much of what's going on there at all, so

Another guess would be they moved it with the jig, since it looks as tall as before, and removing the jig would make it at least a good 5 meters shorter. But how would they do it anyway? 🤔
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Lars-J on 08/31/2019 04:34 am
It’s not a great mystery. It was built to be moved, it’s not a permanent water tower after all. ;-) I’m not sure why the mechanical detail of it matters so much.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Chris_Pi on 08/31/2019 04:42 am
If the concrete base has a steel-ring bottom like the one that just showed up in Boca Chica There's probably nothing keeping it from moving but gravity and (some) friction.

Weld on some loops to attach to and an anchor point on the other end of the building for a block & tackle. Then pull. Fast setup, simple equipment. It's probably not even very heavy if you can find someone who can unstick grounded barges or similar.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Lars-J on 08/31/2019 05:15 am
It has the same height now (barely fitting under the door top), which means that it did not come off its high mounting base. Therefore it (the base) was designed to be able to move. Or be easily jacked up some inches and be moved.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: geza on 08/31/2019 08:39 am
Is it a possibility that the tent structure was moved, instead of the half-spaceship? I speculate that the steel structure of the tent has weels inside and a way to secure/unsecure it at a given position.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: martiantime on 08/31/2019 08:54 am
Is it a possibility that the tent structure was moved, instead of the half-spaceship? I speculate that the steel structure of the tent has weels inside and a way to secure/unsecure it at a given position.

No. Here is a John Winkopp's image on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10215543111512624&set=gm.10157824957716318&type=3&theater&ifg=1).
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: tyrred on 08/31/2019 08:55 am
A photo uploaded to the Facebook SpaceX group and shot by Seamore Holdings.

You can clearly see the entire StarShip inside and a track on which the concrete cylinder moves!

(https://scontent-mxp1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-9/69494094_890761791300179_6711314711318626304_n.png?_nc_cat=100&_nc_oc=AQl1WEZHFzbsUp94bMCnQA43d8gYES8DfBHQdyoNuQyBpW1PrSVqJf8udnpRyqQSOxA&_nc_ht=scontent-mxp1-1.xx&oh=ca2b0ac180538a2974e581fc7bdef293&oe=5E0A0D9A)

Yes the entire stack, including the base, was moved into the big tent. Dang... Loving this agility.

edit: ninja'd by martiantime
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: geza on 08/31/2019 09:02 am
Yes the entire stack, including the base, was moved into the big tent. Dang... Loving this agility.

Then the jig shuold have an inside mechanism to support relocation.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: martiantime on 08/31/2019 09:04 am
Can't say for sure, but looks like the same (header?) tanks as we saw in BC.

Cropped from John Winkopp's image on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10215533533593182&set=gm.10157821116536318&type=3&theater&ifg=1).
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: tyrred on 08/31/2019 09:18 am
Can't say for sure, but looks like the same (header?) tanks as we saw in BC.

Cropped from John Winkopp's image on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10215533533593182&set=gm.10157821116536318&type=3&theater&ifg=1).

No, too small.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: speedevil on 08/31/2019 10:43 am
It would be interesting if tomorrow we saw it pushed back further in the building, with the nosecone in front of it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 08/31/2019 01:10 pm
So they moved half starship into the building.

...but how?

Feels like we're missing a lot of stuff going on down there, weird feeling specially for those watching paint dry on the live streaming videos, and constant high resolution close up shots.

Perhaps we should crowdfund vacation trips for bcg and lab to cocoa?

Jokes aside, I'm really curious about how they did that.


Here's a video showing a 70,000 pound steel mill component being moved on air skids. Note that on a reasonably smooth concrete floor, the whole thing can be pushed around by just a few men.

If SpaceX built the concrete pad(s) and the tent building with this move in mind, all they had to do was make the concrete reasonably flat and smooth, and smooth over any transition points as shown in the video.

Someone said above they can see a track on the ground in the photo. If so, the track could be as simple as a lateral guide to keep the whole stack centered, with the air skids on either side providing the lifting force.

So even with the weight of the concrete Starship base, it's conceivable that the entire stack could have been pushed by a crew of workers manually into the tent, on the air skids.

In Boca Chica, we can see the steel beams that will form the base of the concrete for the Super Heavy (?) build resting on concrete blocks. The blocks are just tall enough to allow for the height of air skids, plus a row of steel beams running laterally atop the skids, similar to the cradle shown here.

Too bad we don't have a shot of a bunch of guys pushing Starship into the tent. There would have been many mouths hanging open, including mine!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6m01VGiNPI
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: sucramdi on 08/31/2019 01:21 pm
I donít know enough about how to move a giant piece of concrete with half a space ship on top of it to hypothesize how it happened, but this close up photo from June might help give an idea. Looks the concrete jig is either sitting on top of something or at least has a visually different base to to all the others.

https://twitter.com/SpaceCoast_Life/status/1142503126076928000
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: AC in NC on 08/31/2019 01:21 pm
Although Lars-J is right and the mechanical details don't ultimately matter a lot, I still find myself curious about them.  Blowing up the image, I'm not sure what they suggest.

The original location seems residually marked by a hexagonal impression from perhaps a dolly mechanism.
Center "slide" mark is surprising, I would have expected more marks from wheels.  No wheels and pushed?

NSF:  Idle Speculation ... It's What We Doô
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 08/31/2019 01:29 pm

 I would have expected more marks from wheels.  No wheels and pushed?


No wheels. Air skids. See upthread.

Another thing we can notice from the photo is the telehandler backed almost out of frame, with the boom facing directly towards the tent door. So despite the physical possibility that a crew of guys *could* have pushed something that heavy on air skids, they may have used the telehandler to push it into the tent (on air skids) with the center track (?) acting as a centering guide.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: DistantTemple on 08/31/2019 01:44 pm

 I would have expected more marks from wheels.  No wheels and pushed?


No wheels. Air skids. See upthread.
At least its a chance to demonstrate Elon's air bearings, on which the Hyperloop was supposed to ride, before magnetic levitation seemed to take over! Only the movement was somewhat sower than Hyperloop (travel, not progress)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 08/31/2019 02:14 pm
So they moved half starship into the building.

...but how?

Feels like we're missing a lot of stuff going on down there, weird feeling specially for those watching paint dry on the live streaming videos, and constant high resolution close up shots.

Perhaps we should crowdfund vacation trips for bcg and lab to cocoa?

Jokes aside, I'm really curious about how they did that.

I'd guess lifting it and placing it on roll lifts but we never saw any roll lifts there, nor signs of them detaching bottom section from the jig, or even signs of a crane capable of lifting it. But again, we don't see much of what's going on there at all, so

Another guess would be they moved it with the jig, since it looks as tall as before, and removing the jig would make it at least a good 5 meters shorter. But how would they do it anyway? 🤔

If you have an L2 membership, look there. If you donít ... *shrug* :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gtae07 on 08/31/2019 02:28 pm
Here's a video showing a 70,000 pound steel mill component being moved on air skids. Note that on a reasonably smooth concrete floor, the whole thing can be pushed around by just a few men.

If SpaceX built the concrete pad(s) and the tent building with this move in mind, all they had to do was make the concrete reasonably flat and smooth, and smooth over any transition points as shown in the video

My last assignment as an intern was figuring out how to float a 50,000lb aircraft sideways into a hangar whose door was too small to tow it in normally.  We built an air bearing platform and made a path out of wallboard sealed with speed tape to get it over the rough concrete outside.  Two tugs gave us good control.  Using an air bearing like this is certainly believable for something like this.

Heck, it's the same basic operating principle behind these guys and they weigh about 390,000lb:
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/596513c9d9fccdfe0b8b5a90-750-472.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Neopork on 08/31/2019 02:38 pm
Which thread? I just looked in L2 and didn't find anything definitive. Link?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: AC in NC on 08/31/2019 02:45 pm
If you have an L2 membership, look there. If you donít ... *shrug* :)
Which thread? I just looked in L2 and didn't find anything definitive. Link?

Seconded.  I saw nothing like what was suggested.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 09/01/2019 11:33 pm

 I would have expected more marks from wheels.  No wheels and pushed?


No wheels. Air skids. See upthread.
At least its a chance to demonstrate Elon's air bearings, on which the Hyperloop was supposed to ride, before magnetic levitation seemed to take over! Only the movement was somewhat sower than Hyperloop (travel, not progress)

Iíve helped move equipment in the 15 ton range using nothing more complex than a railroad jack, 6í pry bars and 2Ē pipe. I donít think we were anywhere max. Sub in hydraulic jacks working off a common pump, bigger pipe and a pickup with a tow hitch and its not that big a job. Iím guessing, working back from 85 ton dry, around 25-30 tons plus concrete. They used to do this 3500 years ago.

Phil
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Lar on 09/02/2019 04:48 am
If you have an L2 membership, look there. If you donít ... *shrug* :)
Which thread? I just looked in L2 and didn't find anything definitive. Link?

Seconded.  I saw nothing like what was suggested.
Thirded. Some of the likely thread candidates hadn't been updated in a week...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 09/02/2019 12:49 pm
If you have an L2 membership, look there. If you donít ... *shrug* :)
Which thread? I just looked in L2 and didn't find anything definitive. Link?

Seconded.  I saw nothing like what was suggested.
Thirded. Some of the likely thread candidates hadn't been updated in a week...
Well my bad, then. Too many discrete threads in multiple fora to keep up with.  I must have conflated bits on pieces seen on L2, the public side and info obtained from people off-site who know, into a singular post in L2.

Apologies. (But people, still join L2! Chris has to keep the gerbils running or the servers will go down! :) )
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: kdhilliard on 09/02/2019 04:21 pm
...  I must have conflated bits on pieces seen on L2, the public side and info obtained from people off-site who know, into a singular post in L2. ...
How about posting what you were told to L2, or was that too far off the record even to quote anonymous sources?

Despite Lars-J's pondering (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48892.msg1986947#msg1986947), "Iím not sure why the mechanical detail of it matters so much", it is the minor mechanical details of things like this which attracts many of us here.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 09/02/2019 04:29 pm
...  I must have conflated bits on pieces seen on L2, the public side and info obtained from people off-site who know, into a singular post in L2. ...
How about posting what you were told to L2, or was that too far off the record even to quote anonymous sources?

Despite Lars-J's pondering (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48892.msg1986947#msg1986947), "Iím not sure why the mechanical detail of it matters so much", it is the minor mechanical details of things like this which attracts many of us here.

oh yeah.

moving a 5 meter tall concrete jig with a freaking stainless steel tower on top of it is no small task, even if there are elegant solutions for doing so.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: LouScheffer on 09/02/2019 05:41 pm

Despite Lars-J's pondering (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48892.msg1986947#msg1986947), "Iím not sure why the mechanical detail of it matters so much", it is the minor mechanical details of things like this which attracts many of us here.
When an obilisk was moved 250 meters in 1586, during the construction of St. Peter's, the effort had a  whole book about how it was done (http://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.php?entryid=2249).  There is a  more recent book about the moving of obelisks in general. (https://www.amazon.com/Moving-Obelisks-Chapter-Engineering-History-ebook/dp/B073FQT8G8).  It's a great frustration among engineering historians that the Romans moved these things many km across the desert, loaded them onto boats, sailed them across the Mediterranean, hauled them up to Rome, then set them up, and no-one was even impressed enough to write down how they did it.

There is a long history of folks being interested on how large stuff gets moved....
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 09/02/2019 07:32 pm

Despite Lars-J's pondering (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48892.msg1986947#msg1986947), "Iím not sure why the mechanical detail of it matters so much", it is the minor mechanical details of things like this which attracts many of us here.
When an obilisk was moved 250 meters in 1586, during the construction of St. Peter's, the effort had a  whole book about how it was done (http://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.php?entryid=2249).  There is a  more recent book about the moving of obelisks in general. (https://www.amazon.com/Moving-Obelisks-Chapter-Engineering-History-ebook/dp/B073FQT8G8).  It's a great frustration among engineering historians that the Romans moved these things many km across the desert, loaded them onto boats, sailed them across the Mediterranean, hauled them up to Rome, then set them up, and no-one was even impressed enough to write down how they did it.

There is a long history of folks being interested on how large stuff gets moved....

They wrote it on the bases of the obelisks, and then tragically died laughing about it on the way to the bar.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 09/02/2019 08:24 pm
...  I must have conflated bits on pieces seen on L2, the public side and info obtained from people off-site who know, into a singular post in L2. ...
How about posting what you were told to L2, or was that too far off the record even to quote anonymous sources?

Despite Lars-J's pondering (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48892.msg1986947#msg1986947), "Iím not sure why the mechanical detail of it matters so much", it is the minor mechanical details of things like this which attracts many of us here.

oh yeah.

moving a 5 meter tall concrete jig with a freaking stainless steel tower on top of it is no small task, even if there are elegant solutions for doing so.

Anything you donít know how to do is hard. Any thing you know how to do is easy.

The old gent that took charge of moving the heavy loads I spoke of earlier knew what he was doing. He was up in his 80ís and knew more about rigging and moving big heavy things than I can even quite comprehend. He was this mellow good olí boy who I got to know a bit. Turns out he had a degree in mech E. Wisdom comes where you find it.


Phil
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 09/02/2019 08:32 pm

Despite Lars-J's pondering (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48892.msg1986947#msg1986947), "Iím not sure why the mechanical detail of it matters so much", it is the minor mechanical details of things like this which attracts many of us here.
When an obilisk was moved 250 meters in 1586, during the construction of St. Peter's, the effort had a  whole book about how it was done (http://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.php?entryid=2249).  There is a  more recent book about the moving of obelisks in general. (https://www.amazon.com/Moving-Obelisks-Chapter-Engineering-History-ebook/dp/B073FQT8G8).  It's a great frustration among engineering historians that the Romans moved these things many km across the desert, loaded them onto boats, sailed them across the Mediterranean, hauled them up to Rome, then set them up, and no-one was even impressed enough to write down how they did it.

There is a long history of folks being interested on how large stuff gets moved....


Yeah, moving tall stone is several orders of magnatude harder. If SS had zip for tinsel strength they'd still be moving it. Stone is really hard -cause I donít know how to do it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 09/02/2019 09:24 pm
Enough about moving things that aren't Starship. Let's get this back on topic.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 09/04/2019 12:31 pm
I've been reading local news feeds from Brevard County trying to get a sense of local conditions at Cocoa. In general, looks like they came through relatively unscathed. Dorian's eye stayed 100+ miles offshore, so local winds were tropical storm force (over 39 mph) but not hurricane force. Some rain, but not major flooding. Winds at Port Canaveral Tuesday night were reported at 44 mph with gusts up to 60 mph. Wednesday morning, sea conditions at Cocoa Beach pier webcam were relatively calm.

Florida Power reports that as of Wednesday morning about 2400 customers in Brevard County (out of 300,000+) were without power, which is better than 99% of customers still online.

So the Starship build should be back on track soon without too much difficulty.

Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 09/04/2019 06:42 pm
I see nineteen rings, no common bulkhead and no obvious damage in the post Dorian drone footage.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 09/04/2019 06:48 pm
I see nineteen rings, no common bulkhead and no obvious damage in the post Dorian drone footage.

I think you missed a ring.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 09/04/2019 07:43 pm
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1988872#msg1988872

I like the concrete weights on the rings  :)  They're a good scale to show how big those things are.

edit: also looks like a set of bulkhead panels over by the rolls of steel?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: AC in NC on 09/04/2019 09:01 pm
I like the concrete weights on the rings  :)  They're a good scale to show how big those things are.
Also a fascinating counterpoint to idle speculation vs. K.I.S.S..  LOL.  What were the ideas (and they were good ones too)?  Tarps with water.  Tarps with sand.  Rings in the Pool. .... Elon:  "Hold My Jersey Barriers."
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Coastal Ron on 09/04/2019 09:30 pm
I like the concrete weights on the rings  :)  They're a good scale to show how big those things are.
Also a fascinating counterpoint to idle speculation vs. K.I.S.S..  LOL.  What were the ideas (and they were good ones too)?  Tarps with water.  Tarps with sand.  Rings in the Pool. .... Elon:  "Hold My Jersey Barriers."

My idea was to just fill the inside of the rings with dirt. Wouldn't need to completely fill them (1-2'?), just make sure no wind could get underneath them. Then when they are ready to work on them, just lift the rings out of the dirt and wash them off. Pretty simple.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Pete on 09/05/2019 06:36 am

My idea was to just fill the inside of the rings with dirt. Wouldn't need to completely fill them (1-2'?), just make sure no wind could get underneath them. Then when they are ready to work on them, just lift the rings out of the dirt and wash them off. Pretty simple.
Putting 2 feet of dirt in those rings, would have required moving some 22000 cubic feet of dirt.

Not a very trivial undertaking.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Nevyn72 on 09/05/2019 06:47 am
Looking at the below image there appears to be an awful lot of large diameter pipe toward the front of the complex.
If you look closely to the area just in front of the building (far right of image) there appears to similar diameter pipe bends on pallets.

Any ideas what all this big bore pipe could be for?

Image from this post.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1988872#msg1988872

(https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=48893.0;attach=1581070;image)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: geza on 09/05/2019 08:15 am

 I would have expected more marks from wheels.  No wheels and pushed?


No wheels. Air skids. See upthread.


On the new photo we can see more clearly the two strips of something on which the tower was moved. The simplest hypothesis is that the something is stainless steel. They have enogh of it at the site. The picture votes for wheels, instead of air skids. In the latter case they would use a single, wider strip of stainless. Wheel marks are missing because the strips are strong enough.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Lampyridae on 09/05/2019 08:52 am
Looking at the below image there appears to be an awful lot of large diameter pipe toward the front of the complex.
If you look closely to the area just in front of the building (far right of image) there appears to similar diameter pipe bends on pallets.

Any ideas what all this big bore pipe could be for?

Image from this post.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1988872#msg1988872



Plain old pipe for their other customers would be my guest. Otherwise, launchpad infrastructure.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 09/05/2019 09:26 am
Looking at the below image there appears to be an awful lot of large diameter pipe toward the front of the complex.
If you look closely to the area just in front of the building (far right of image) there appears to similar diameter pipe bends on pallets.

Any ideas what all this big bore pipe could be for?

Image from this post.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1988872#msg1988872



Plain old pipe for their other customers would be my guest. Otherwise, launchpad infrastructure.

I thought we had established that this is a SpaceX facility so there are no other Coastal Steel customers being supplied. Your second suggestion seems more likely, though Iím surprised they are staging it here rather than shipping direct to 39A. They have shifted at least some ring production out to a tunnel tent, and there are pipes in the main building doorway, so Iíd suggest they are also fabricating flame diverter sub assemblies here.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: TheUltimateConan on 09/05/2019 01:46 pm
Looking at the below image there appears to be an awful lot of large diameter pipe toward the front of the complex.
If you look closely to the area just in front of the building (far right of image) there appears to similar diameter pipe bends on pallets.

Any ideas what all this big bore pipe could be for?

Image from this post.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1988872#msg1988872



Plain old pipe for their other customers would be my guest. Otherwise, launchpad infrastructure.

I thought we had established that this is a SpaceX facility so there are no other Coastal Steel customers being supplied. Your second suggestion seems more likely, though Iím surprised they are staging it here rather than shipping direct to 39A. They have shifted at least some ring production out to a tunnel tent, and there are pipes in the main building doorway, so Iíd suggest they are also fabricating flame diverter sub assemblies here.

I noticed that the rings look like that they were manufactured out of one single peace of steel. I can only see one weldingline per ring.

Image from this post.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1988872#msg1988872
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 09/05/2019 01:48 pm
Looking at the below image there appears to be an awful lot of large diameter pipe toward the front of the complex.
If you look closely to the area just in front of the building (far right of image) there appears to similar diameter pipe bends on pallets.

Any ideas what all this big bore pipe could be for?

Image from this post.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1988872#msg1988872 (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1988872#msg1988872)



Plain old pipe for their other customers would be my guest. Otherwise, launchpad infrastructure.

I thought we had established that this is a SpaceX facility so there are no other Coastal Steel customers being supplied. Your second suggestion seems more likely, though Iím surprised they are staging it here rather than shipping direct to 39A. They have shifted at least some ring production out to a tunnel tent, and there are pipes in the main building doorway, so Iíd suggest they are also fabricating flame diverter sub assemblies here.

I noticed that the rings look like that they were manufactured out of one single peace of steel. I can only see one weldingline per ring.

Image from this post.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1988872#msg1988872 (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1988872#msg1988872)
It's been my assumption that's what the SS rolls are for...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Zpoxy on 09/05/2019 02:08 pm

 I would have expected more marks from wheels.  No wheels and pushed?


No wheels. Air skids. See upthread.


On the new photo we can see more clearly the two strips of something on which the tower was moved. The simplest hypothesis is that the something is stainless steel. They have enogh of it at the site. The picture votes for wheels, instead of air skids. In the latter case they would use a single, wider strip of stainless. Wheel marks are missing because the strips are strong enough.
I think they used wheels. See the attached picture. This is OPF3, the RH forward jack on Discovery. The casters on the jack legs could be raised or lowered with the crank handle,  allowing us to easily raise or lower the jacks which weighed several thousand pounds. Something like this could easily be mounted as a component of the concrete base, out of the way until needed. A small tug, forklift or otherwise could be used to move the stack. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Neopork on 09/05/2019 02:16 pm
Looking at the below image there appears to be an awful lot of large diameter pipe toward the front of the complex.
If you look closely to the area just in front of the building (far right of image) there appears to similar diameter pipe bends on pallets.

Any ideas what all this big bore pipe could be for?

I can't tell if it is stainless steel or not from the photo (assuming so...). Could they be fabricating the landing legs/fins on-site? That tubing looks similar in diameter to the tubing used on Starhopper. Could be tubular structure wrapped in stainless sheet metal and heat tiles attached on top of that?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 09/05/2019 03:10 pm
Looking at the below image there appears to be an awful lot of large diameter pipe toward the front of the complex.
If you look closely to the area just in front of the building (far right of image) there appears to similar diameter pipe bends on pallets.

Any ideas what all this big bore pipe could be for?

I can't tell if it is stainless steel or not from the photo (assuming so...). Could they be fabricating the landing legs/fins on-site? That tubing looks similar in diameter to the tubing used on Starhopper. Could be tubular structure wrapped in stainless sheet metal and heat tiles attached on top of that?

There's a good amount of small diameter pipe on site as well, particularly on the left against the fence. They could build quite a rat's nest of fuel, oxidizer, and autogenously-pressurized gas line with all that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: kraisee on 09/05/2019 07:06 pm
Possibly parts for a new LCH4 propellant storage tank would be my guess. Inner tank, outer vacuum jacket, associated plumbing. Maybe.

Might even be needing another water tower? Exhaust ducting for new pad? How large diameter pipe will be needed for all the boil-off (oxy and methane) from a full two stage Super? Pre staging parts for vehicle 2 is also a remote possibility.

-Ross.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: PresidentBartlet on 09/05/2019 07:19 pm
Possibly parts for a new LCH4 propellant storage tank would be my guess. Inner tank, outer vacuum jacket, associated plumbing. Maybe.

Might even be needing another water tower? Exhaust ducting for new pad? How large diameter pipe will be needed for all the boil-off (oxy and methane) from a full two stage Super? Pre staging parts for vehicle 2 is also a remote possibility.

-Ross.

They're not launching it from Cocoa so they wouldn't need propellant storage at the build site. They'll be transporting Starship to 39A and testing/launching from there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: aero on 09/05/2019 09:45 pm
Possibly parts for a new LCH4 propellant storage tank would be my guess. Inner tank, outer vacuum jacket, associated plumbing. Maybe.

Might even be needing another water tower? Exhaust ducting for new pad? How large diameter pipe will be needed for all the boil-off (oxy and methane) from a full two stage Super? Pre staging parts for vehicle 2 is also a remote possibility.

-Ross.

They're not launching it from Cocoa so they wouldn't need propellant storage at the build site. They'll be transporting Starship to 39A and testing/launching from there.

I'm thinking something more mundane, like leak checks. I doubt they will ship the spacecraft to 39A without having an idea that its leak proof. I also wonder if they can get by using nitrogen or liquid air to do the leak checks with? (Safe fluids) As I recall, the hopper was filled and emptied several times before they got around to testing the Raptor. They used the real prop with the hopper. I wonder if they will need to use real prop at Cocoa, or maybe that can be deferred to 39 A. I doubt it because when they start pumping out these spacecraft they will need a dedicated test facility for the tanks, hulls, and all the plumbing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RobLynn on 09/05/2019 11:47 pm
up to 20 rings now ready for SH construction
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Lars-J on 09/06/2019 12:19 am
up to 20 rings now ready for SH construction

Or the next SS prototype.

But these new rings look a lot smoother than the old ones, they must be making them a different way. No discernible weld lines.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 09/06/2019 12:20 am
up to 20 rings now ready for SH construction

Or the next SS prototype.

But these new rings look a lot smoother than the old ones, they must be making them a different way. No discernible weld lines.

The consensus has been that they're making them from large, continuous rolls of sheet stock, with just one weld per ring.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 09/06/2019 01:06 am
Possibly parts for a new LCH4 propellant storage tank would be my guess. Inner tank, outer vacuum jacket, associated plumbing. Maybe.

Might even be needing another water tower? Exhaust ducting for new pad? How large diameter pipe will be needed for all the boil-off (oxy and methane) from a full two stage Super? Pre staging parts for vehicle 2 is also a remote possibility.

-Ross.

They're not launching it from Cocoa so they wouldn't need propellant storage at the build site. They'll be transporting Starship to 39A and testing/launching from there.

I'm thinking something more mundane, like leak checks. I doubt they will ship the spacecraft to 39A without having an idea that its leak proof. I also wonder if they can get by using nitrogen or liquid air to do the leak checks with? (Safe fluids) As I recall, the hopper was filled and emptied several times before they got around to testing the Raptor. They used the real prop with the hopper. I wonder if they will need to use real prop at Cocoa, or maybe that can be deferred to 39 A. I doubt it because when they start pumping out these spacecraft they will need a dedicated test facility for the tanks, hulls, and all the plumbing.

Even with "safe liquids", it would need to be pressurized to effectively check for leaks, and I don't think that's happening at this facility in the middle of an inhabited area

I don't recall when but it has been mentioned that they could finish starship construction down at the cape, which seems more plausible to me
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: livingjw on 09/06/2019 01:09 am
Possibly parts for a new LCH4 propellant storage tank would be my guess. Inner tank, outer vacuum jacket, associated plumbing. Maybe.

Might even be needing another water tower? Exhaust ducting for new pad? How large diameter pipe will be needed for all the boil-off (oxy and methane) from a full two stage Super? Pre staging parts for vehicle 2 is also a remote possibility.

-Ross.

They're not launching it from Cocoa so they wouldn't need propellant storage at the build site. They'll be transporting Starship to 39A and testing/launching from there.

I'm thinking something more mundane, like leak checks. I doubt they will ship the spacecraft to 39A without having an idea that its leak proof. I also wonder if they can get by using nitrogen or liquid air to do the leak checks with? (Safe fluids) As I recall, the hopper was filled and emptied several times before they got around to testing the Raptor. They used the real prop with the hopper. I wonder if they will need to use real prop at Cocoa, or maybe that can be deferred to 39 A. I doubt it because when they start pumping out these spacecraft they will need a dedicated test facility for the tanks, hulls, and all the plumbing.

Even with "safe liquids", it would need to be pressurized to effectively check for leaks, and I don't think that's happening at this facility in the middle of an inhabited area

I don't recall when but it has been mentioned that they could finish starship construction down at the cape, which seems more plausible to me

I suspect they will pressurize them on site. It should make them easier to transport, if nothing else.

John
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 09/06/2019 02:33 am
>
Even with "safe liquids", it would need to be pressurized to effectively check for leaks, and I don't think that's happening at this facility in the middle of an inhabited area
>

Why not? They pressurized StarHopper at the pad using live props, for both hops and numerous WDR's.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: PresidentBartlet on 09/06/2019 02:40 am
Why build up the infrastructure at the shipyard to test for leaks when they can use the infrastructure they are building at 39A and have any needed workers come over from Cocoa to 39A to do any work? 
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RobLynn on 09/06/2019 02:50 am
I suspect they will pressurize them on site. It should make them easier to transport, if nothing else.
Can they even transport a fully assembled SH or SS? - 60m long ō9m is pretty enormous.  Easier in 2 parts.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 09/06/2019 02:57 am
>
Even with "safe liquids", it would need to be pressurized to effectively check for leaks, and I don't think that's happening at this facility in the middle of an inhabited area
>

Why not? They pressurized StarHopper at the pad using live props, for both hops and numerous WDR's.

I thought they needed a 1.5 mile radius of clearance for pressurizing hopper, no?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: su27k on 09/06/2019 03:08 am
The pipes could be for something much more mundane: drainage. They filed paperwork for some expansion of this site, it may involve laying down new pipes, you can find the plan at the St. John's River Water Management District web site, I think there's some pipe work in it but I'm not an architect so can't be certain.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ZChris13 on 09/06/2019 06:12 am
Even with "safe liquids", it would need to be pressurized to effectively check for leaks, and I don't think that's happening at this facility in the middle of an inhabited area

I don't recall when but it has been mentioned that they could finish starship construction down at the cape, which seems more plausible to me
Hydro pressure testing has a much less dramatic and dangerous failure mode when compared to pneumatic pressure testing, due to the incompressability of water. Much less energy in the system.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 09/06/2019 07:04 am
By the way, it looks like Mk.2 has emerged.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/d07k2r/9519_starship_cocoa_is_out_of_the_barn/
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Keldor on 09/06/2019 07:36 am
The pipes could be for something much more mundane: drainage. They filed paperwork for some expansion of this site, it may involve laying down new pipes, you can find the plan at the St. John's River Water Management District web site, I think there's some pipe work in it but I'm not an architect so can't be certain.

Another possibility is plumbing/sewage.  I rather suspect that building Starship has greatly increased the number of workers there.  Overwhelming existing infrastructure?  In this case, they may well have to upgrade the pipes all the way out to the main water and/or sewage lines, which could be a fair distance.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 09/06/2019 07:48 am
The pipes could be for something much more mundane: drainage. They filed paperwork for some expansion of this site, it may involve laying down new pipes, you can find the plan at the St. John's River Water Management District web site, I think there's some pipe work in it but I'm not an architect so can't be certain.

Another possibility is plumbing/sewage.  I rather suspect that building Starship has greatly increased the number of workers there.  Overwhelming existing infrastructure?  In this case, they may well have to upgrade the pipes all the way out to the main water and/or sewage lines, which could be a fair distance.

I don't think the Coastal Steel facility is permanent, or even long lived.

One of the advantages Sprung and other tension fabric structures have is they're mobile - you can take them down and relocate as quickly as they went up.  ISTM that relocation will be to the SpaceX Operations Area now being cleared south of the Vehicle Assembly Building.

Being a short road tow to 39A fully within the range, there would be no need to close highways & barge vehicles from Cocoa.

Use the pipes there and for the 39A upgrades.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Slothman on 09/06/2019 08:11 am
Even with "safe liquids", it would need to be pressurized to effectively check for leaks, and I don't think that's happening at this facility in the middle of an inhabited area

I don't recall when but it has been mentioned that they could finish starship construction down at the cape, which seems more plausible to me
Hydro pressure testing has a much less dramatic and dangerous failure mode when compared to pneumatic pressure testing, due to the incompressability of water. Much less energy in the system.

It's also much easier to deform the tank unintentionally, essentially hydroforming. And the water molecules are much bigger than for example helium, so, what doesn't leak water, may still leak a lighter gas. Also water is pretty corrosive, might want to keep that away from the inside of the tanks and plumbing as much as possible after it has all been assembled and cleaned.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Sir_Bedevere on 09/06/2019 08:28 am
Pipes look like plastic water supply pipes. Possibly drainage although unlikely looking at the topography. Suspect its storage, later shipped to KSC-39A.
What's more interesting are the two Wye (node) types items at the front of the main building. They look like cast items. Any ideas??
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 09/06/2019 09:39 am
By the way, it looks like Mk.2 has emerged.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/d07k2r/9519_starship_cocoa_is_out_of_the_barn/

Are those metal strips, like the ones we've seen on the Mark 1's payload area, running all the way up the length of the hull?  :o
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Cheapchips on 09/06/2019 10:04 am
By the way, it looks like Mk.2 has emerged.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/d07k2r/9519_starship_cocoa_is_out_of_the_barn/

Are those metal strips, like the ones we've seen on the Mark 1's payload area, running all the way up the length of the hull?  :o
Yes, they've been there for a little while.  Oddly, the don't have them on their payload area yet.  Sometimes it feels like the two sites are doing things in different orders just be contrary.  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RoboGoofers on 09/06/2019 11:59 am
The pipes could be for something much more mundane: drainage. They filed paperwork for some expansion of this site, it may involve laying down new pipes, you can find the plan at the St. John's River Water Management District web site, I think there's some pipe work in it but I'm not an architect so can't be certain.
or HVAC ducting for the tall building.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 09/06/2019 01:22 pm
The pipes could be for something much more mundane: drainage. They filed paperwork for some expansion of this site, it may involve laying down new pipes, you can find the plan at the St. John's River Water Management District web site, I think there's some pipe work in it but I'm not an architect so can't be certain.
or HVAC ducting for the tall building.

I donít think the Ďstar barní needs any more ventilation.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: testguy on 09/06/2019 01:32 pm
Even with "safe liquids", it would need to be pressurized to effectively check for leaks, and I don't think that's happening at this facility in the middle of an inhabited area

I don't recall when but it has been mentioned that they could finish starship construction down at the cape, which seems more plausible to me
Hydro pressure testing has a much less dramatic and dangerous failure mode when compared to pneumatic pressure testing, due to the incompressability of water. Much less energy in the system.
You are absolutely correct about much less energy than an incompressible system.  However, there is stored energy due to the expansion of the metal due to pressure loading.  At the point of failure the metal releases that energy much like a spring.  Workers would not want to be in the area when that occurs.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 09/06/2019 02:12 pm
Even with "safe liquids", it would need to be pressurized to effectively check for leaks, and I don't think that's happening at this facility in the middle of an inhabited area

I don't recall when but it has been mentioned that they could finish starship construction down at the cape, which seems more plausible to me
Hydro pressure testing has a much less dramatic and dangerous failure mode when compared to pneumatic pressure testing, due to the incompressability of water. Much less energy in the system.
You are absolutely correct about much less energy than an incompressible system.  However, there is stored energy due to the expansion of the metal due to pressure loading.  At the point of failure the metal releases that energy much like a spring.  Workers would not want to be in the area when that occurs.

Yes, and even for hydroburst testing, SpaceX put the composite BFR tank on a ship and did the hydroburst out at sea. IIRC, Elon said when the tank burst, it launched 300 feet in the air.

There's a video of the burst somewhere, and although you can't see the tank going ballistic, you can see the violence of the burst and imagine not wanting to be anywhere near it.

Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: rsdavis9 on 09/06/2019 02:17 pm
Even with "safe liquids", it would need to be pressurized to effectively check for leaks, and I don't think that's happening at this facility in the middle of an inhabited area

I don't recall when but it has been mentioned that they could finish starship construction down at the cape, which seems more plausible to me
Hydro pressure testing has a much less dramatic and dangerous failure mode when compared to pneumatic pressure testing, due to the incompressability of water. Much less energy in the system.
You are absolutely correct about much less energy than an incompressible system.  However, there is stored energy due to the expansion of the metal due to pressure loading.  At the point of failure the metal releases that energy much like a spring.  Workers would not want to be in the area when that occurs.

Yes, and even for hydroburst testing, SpaceX put the composite BFR tank on a ship and did the hydroburst out at sea. IIRC, Elon said when the tank burst, it launched 300 feet in the air.

There's a video of the burst somewhere, and although you can't see the tank going ballistic, you can see the violence of the burst and imagine not wanting to be anywhere near it.

From what I remember I think it was gas pressurization.
Didn't see a definitive answer either way.

On the face of it thats a lot of water.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ModeHopper on 09/06/2019 02:22 pm
This might already have been noticed (I haven't seen any mention of it but discussion moves quick), but it looks like they're using a jig to form the single piece rings. Image is from this video (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1989343#msg1989343).
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Tole on 09/06/2019 02:36 pm
Even with "safe liquids", it would need to be pressurized to effectively check for leaks, and I don't think that's happening at this facility in the middle of an inhabited area

I don't recall when but it has been mentioned that they could finish starship construction down at the cape, which seems more plausible to me
Hydro pressure testing has a much less dramatic and dangerous failure mode when compared to pneumatic pressure testing, due to the incompressability of water. Much less energy in the system.
You are absolutely correct about much less energy than an incompressible system.  However, there is stored energy due to the expansion of the metal due to pressure loading.  At the point of failure the metal releases that energy much like a spring.  Workers would not want to be in the area when that occurs.

Yes, and even for hydroburst testing, SpaceX put the composite BFR tank on a ship and did the hydroburst out at sea. IIRC, Elon said when the tank burst, it launched 300 feet in the air.

There's a video of the burst somewhere, and although you can't see the tank going ballistic, you can see the violence of the burst and imagine not wanting to be anywhere near it.

Important question is at what pressure it will be tested? That composite BFR tank if I remember correctly was some insane pressure, but if SS will be pressurized at 3 bars then I don't see the need to test it at some crazy pressures thus there will not be so much energy stored. Also, I think that the force needed to do some crazy stuff with SS (like bursting it 150m in the air) can not be released.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: testguy on 09/06/2019 03:48 pm
Even with "safe liquids", it would need to be pressurized to effectively check for leaks, and I don't think that's happening at this facility in the middle of an inhabited area

I don't recall when but it has been mentioned that they could finish starship construction down at the cape, which seems more plausible to me
Hydro pressure testing has a much less dramatic and dangerous failure mode when compared to pneumatic pressure testing, due to the incompressability of water. Much less energy in the system.
You are absolutely correct about much less energy than an incompressible system.  However, there is stored energy due to the expansion of the metal due to pressure loading.  At the point of failure the metal releases that energy much like a spring.  Workers would not want to be in the area when that occurs.

Yes, and even for hydroburst testing, SpaceX put the composite BFR tank on a ship and did the hydroburst out at sea. IIRC, Elon said when the tank burst, it launched 300 feet in the air.

There's a video of the burst somewhere, and although you can't see the tank going ballistic, you can see the violence of the burst and imagine not wanting to be anywhere near it.

Important question is at what pressure it will be tested? That composite BFR tank if I remember correctly was some insane pressure, but if SS will be pressurized at 3 bars then I don't see the need to test it at some crazy pressures thus there will not be so much energy stored. Also, I think that the force needed to do some crazy stuff with SS (like bursting it 150m in the air) can not be released.

Naturally stored energy will be proportional to pressure.  Proof pressure testing should be around 1.25 x MEOP.  If the CF oxygen burst at more than 2x MEOP it would be way over designed and therefore would be way over the needed design weight.  Also, isnít steel more elastic than CF?  Itís apples and oranges but still significant energy and a significant hazard.
Probably too much discussion on this subject and we should get back to the thread topic.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: janky on 09/07/2019 12:05 am
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ED0DBSiX4AAGepG?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)

what are those things on top? could they be the top ends of the support for the forward canard-things?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Cheapchips on 09/07/2019 07:19 am
Finding hard to believe Mk2 will move to 39a this month.  Even if it looked complete I'd expect them to be doing plenty of finishing activity and it still looks far from complete.  Alternatively the next couple of weeks are really exciting for build spectating.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BZHSpace on 09/07/2019 10:03 am
Finding hard to believe Mk2 will move to 39a this month.  Even if it looked complete I'd expect them to be doing plenty of finishing activity and it still looks far from complete.  Alternatively the next couple of weeks are really exciting for build spectating.

I think that Texas's starship will be finish earlier than Florida's one but I can be wrong. It's an very hard chalenge to transport SS from assembly location to launch pad. 9m diameter - 55m heigh (if you add landing leg it's a very complicated task).

My first question about this issue : how wide are regular roads in US ?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Cheapchips on 09/07/2019 10:57 am
It's an very hard chalenge to transport SS from assembly location to launch pad. 9m diameter - 55m heigh (if you add landing leg it's a very complicated task).
They have route picked out. Details are either in this thread or the Cocoa facilities one. They're cutting through to Grissom Parkway.  Then wrong way along the highway to the river. Barge to Turning Basin and then up the crawler way.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 09/07/2019 01:14 pm
Finding hard to believe Mk2 will move to 39a this month.  Even if it looked complete I'd expect them to be doing plenty of finishing activity and it still looks far from complete.  Alternatively the next couple of weeks are really exciting for build spectating.

I think that Texas's starship will be finish earlier than Florida's one but I can be wrong. It's an very hard chalenge to transport SS from assembly location to launch pad. 9m diameter - 55m heigh (if you add landing leg it's a very complicated task).

My first question about this issue : how wide are regular roads in US ?

Most or all of what they have to travel will be 12ft/~3.66m lanes with two lanes available except on that exit ramp that they will use as an entrance ramp. Shoulder width varies quite a bit and can range from .3m-4m. Without actually being there Iíd expect ~3.66 shoulders for most of it except for the ramp which could be wider. Sometimes the median (normally to the drivers left) can have a full lane of width, specially in urban areas like Cocoa.

Hope this helps.

Phil
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Cheapchips on 09/08/2019 06:33 am
From the Farrielle Mohan photos in the update thread you can see one of the dull metal tanks lurking in the windbreak.  Didn't spot the 2nd one.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 09/08/2019 06:46 am
From the Farrielle Mohan photos in the update thread you can see one of the dull metal tanks lurking in the windbreak.  Didn't spot the 2nd one.
Was just posting same thing! Hereís the image that shows the referenced pressure vessel...

Photo credit Twitter user Farrielle Mohan
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 09/08/2019 07:30 am
Also from the Farrielle Mohan images, I count a line of  32+ "unistruts" on the tank module. If this is for mounting a leg/fin it's a long SOB. More likely a utility  raceway, but perhaps too wide?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 09/08/2019 02:36 pm
Also from the Farrielle Mohan images, I count a line of  32+ "unistruts" on the tank module. If this is for mounting a leg/fin it's a long SOB. More likely a utility  raceway, but perhaps too wide?

I donít remember this being pointed out before. If you look close to the bottom of the stack there is a yellow something taped around the circumference. Wazzat?

PPhil
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Cheapchips on 09/08/2019 03:02 pm
Also from the Farrielle Mohan images, I count a line of  32+ "unistruts" on the tank module. If this is for mounting a leg/fin it's a long SOB. More likely a utility  raceway, but perhaps too wide?

I donít remember this being pointed out before. If you look close to the bottom of the stack there is a yellow something taped around the circumference. Wazzat?

PPhil

There's tape on both Texas stacks.  For the Hopper, they cut off the bottom section where it's anchored to the ring wall.  It's presumably marking the cut point here as well.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 09/08/2019 04:01 pm
Also from the Farrielle Mohan images, I count a line of  32+ "unistruts" on the tank module. If this is for mounting a leg/fin it's a long SOB. More likely a utility  raceway, but perhaps too wide?

I've been expecting full body chines ever since I saw those struts on both the tank section of Mark 2 and the fairing section of Mark 1.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Coastal Ron on 09/08/2019 04:23 pm
Also from the Farrielle Mohan images, I count a line of  32+ "unistruts" on the tank module. If this is for mounting a leg/fin it's a long SOB. More likely a utility  raceway, but perhaps too wide?

I've been expecting full body chines ever since I saw those struts on both the tank section of Mark 2 and the fairing section of Mark 1.

I'm not an engineer, but I would imagine the pluses and minuses for that could be:

Plus:

- Adds rigidity to the structure
- Provides more drag, and more lift

Minus:

- Chines would suffer greater heating, so might need to be cooled or made of some other material (i.e. more complexity to the design)
- SpaceX tries to have a solution provide two benefits, such as fins also acting as legs, and chines may not provide that
- Are they necessary?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 09/08/2019 04:49 pm
ISTM if chines increase surface area they should reduce overall heating, and could double as a housing for retractable landing gear with large feet, as seen in the 2016 ITS concept.

Did a quick crop and edge detection to highlight the unistruts.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Stimbergi on 09/08/2019 04:58 pm
If you look close to the bottom of the stack there is a yellow something taped around the circumference. Wazzat?
measuring tape
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 09/08/2019 05:11 pm
Also from the Farrielle Mohan images, I count a line of  32+ "unistruts" on the tank module. If this is for mounting a leg/fin it's a long SOB. More likely a utility  raceway, but perhaps too wide?

I've been expecting full body chines ever since I saw those struts on both the tank section of Mark 2 and the fairing section of Mark 1.

I'm not an engineer, but I would imagine the pluses and minuses for that could be:

Plus:

- Adds rigidity to the structure
- Provides more drag, and more lift

Minus:

- Chines would suffer greater heating, so might need to be cooled or made of some other material (i.e. more complexity to the design)
- SpaceX tries to have a solution provide two benefits, such as fins also acting as legs, and chines may not provide that
- Are they necessary?

One more plus for chines, they would work as external raceways, limiting SpaceX's need to open the tanks to maintain any plumbing or electrical systems in the vehicle, while creating less need to put holes in the tanks for flush mounted and moving/retractable surfaces.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 09/08/2019 07:51 pm
23 rings on the latest flyby video
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1990393#msg1990393
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: frederickm17 on 09/08/2019 08:04 pm
Quote
Latest work @SpaceX Cocoa, Florida on MK2 #STARSHIP today

https://twitter.com/farryfaz/status/1170535442342666240


Zoom in on the rings. Some rings have yellow writing on them that says "scrap" so the total of usable rings may be lower.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Spock1108 on 09/08/2019 08:19 pm
Is it my impression or have they also installed the second bulkhead?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 09/08/2019 08:35 pm
Zoom in on the rings. Some rings have yellow writing on them that says "scrap" so the total of usable rings may be lower.

I see at least 3 of those.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Michael Paul on 09/08/2019 11:25 pm
Also from the Farrielle Mohan images, I count a line of  32+ "unistruts" on the tank module. If this is for mounting a leg/fin it's a long SOB. More likely a utility  raceway, but perhaps too wide?

I've been expecting full body chines ever since I saw those struts on both the tank section of Mark 2 and the fairing section of Mark 1.

I'm not an engineer, but I would imagine the pluses and minuses for that could be:

Plus:

- Adds rigidity to the structure
- Provides more drag, and more lift

Minus:

- Chines would suffer greater heating, so might need to be cooled or made of some other material (i.e. more complexity to the design)
- SpaceX tries to have a solution provide two benefits, such as fins also acting as legs, and chines may not provide that
- Are they necessary?

One more plus for chines, they would work as external raceways, limiting SpaceX's need to open the tanks to maintain any plumbing or electrical systems in the vehicle, while creating less need to put holes in the tanks for flush mounted and moving/retractable surfaces.
Chine is incorrect terminology, a chine is a sharp change in the angle of a hull, cross- sectionally.
The correct term is sponson, which is a purposeful bump out either in a single location or the length of a hull.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: matthewkantar on 09/09/2019 12:05 am
Chine is incorrect terminology, a chine is a sharp change in the angle of a hull, cross- sectionally.
The correct term is sponson, which is a purposeful bump out either in a single location or the length of a hull.

"Chine" is accurate, see SR-71. This is aerospace terminology, not ship building.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: SkyRate on 09/09/2019 12:27 am
Chine is incorrect terminology, a chine is a sharp change in the angle of a hull, cross- sectionally.
The correct term is sponson, which is a purposeful bump out either in a single location or the length of a hull.

"Chine" is accurate, see SR-71. This is aerospace terminology, not ship building.

If they are big enough to start turning it into a double-delta wing they are better referred to as strakes.
But I doubt we will see substantial strakes - they are most effective at extending the unstalled AOA range of a delta wing (due to the vortex) and the "belly flop" EDL profile is way past the stall.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 09/09/2019 12:34 am
Speculation on wing/fin/whatever structure and nomenclature would be better placed in the Starship Engineering thread or the Elon's Next Presentation Speculation thread.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: AU1.52 on 09/09/2019 01:00 am
23 rings on the latest flyby video
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1990393#msg1990393

25 rings - one being lifted and one all the way at the front.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 09/09/2019 01:58 am
23 rings on the latest flyby video
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1990393#msg1990393

25 rings - one being lifted and one all the way at the front.

definitely 25, that's mind blowing. 10 rings more than bottom section currently has. if those rings are the same height as the other kind already stacked on mk2, it could stack up to 45 meters already
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 09/09/2019 02:04 am
something curious can be seen on this pic, most rings have a "brushed" like, more matte finish, but at least two are polished. different suppliers maybe? perhaps different thickness?

also, all of them appear to have a smoother surface and less wrinkles than the stacked rings, however maybe that's just because they haven't been welded onto each other yet.

credits Farriele Mohan @FarryFaz on twitter
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Neopork on 09/09/2019 02:22 am
something curious can be seen on this pic, most rings have a "brushed" like, more matte finish, but at least two are polished. different suppliers maybe? perhaps different thickness?

also, all of them appear to have a smoother surface and less wrinkles than the stacked rings, however maybe that's just because they haven't been welded onto each other yet.

credits Farriele Mohan @FarryFaz on twitter

The SS rings were welded together from many smaller plates to form the 9m diameter ring. The staged rings on the ground are presumably for Super Heavy and they have been created from one long strip of stainless steel and formed into the ring. If you look closely, you will see that on those rings there is a single weld joint where they connected the two ends of the sheet. The metal sheet used for these new rings comes in a tightly wound roll covered in white plastic wrap. You can see some of these sitting around onsite.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: aero on 09/09/2019 04:07 am
Quote
The metal sheet used for these new rings comes in a tightly wound roll covered in white plastic wrap. You can see some of these sitting around onsite.

Is that them in the top left-center of the above image?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 09/09/2019 04:08 am
Also from the Farrielle Mohan images, I count a line of  32+ "unistruts" on the tank module. If this is for mounting a leg/fin it's a long SOB. More likely a utility  raceway, but perhaps too wide?

I've been expecting full body chines ever since I saw those struts on both the tank section of Mark 2 and the fairing section of Mark 1.

I'm not an engineer, but I would imagine the pluses and minuses for that could be:

Plus:

- Adds rigidity to the structure
- Provides more drag, and more lift

Minus:

- Chines would suffer greater heating, so might need to be cooled or made of some other material (i.e. more complexity to the design)
- SpaceX tries to have a solution provide two benefits, such as fins also acting as legs, and chines may not provide that
- Are they necessary?

One more plus for chines, they would work as external raceways, limiting SpaceX's need to open the tanks to maintain any plumbing or electrical systems in the vehicle, while creating less need to put holes in the tanks for flush mounted and moving/retractable surfaces.

Over in the Texas SS prototype thread Uhuznaa posted his idea of how it might fit together. This would do everything above with, to my mind, excellent aerodynamics. ISTM the loading would be directly inboard at the top about where the unistrut is.

Phil

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48894.msg1990406#msg1990406 (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48894.msg1990406#msg1990406)


Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 09/09/2019 12:37 pm
Chine is incorrect terminology, a chine is a sharp change in the angle of a hull, cross- sectionally.
The correct term is sponson, which is a purposeful bump out either in a single location or the length of a hull.

"Chine" is accurate, see SR-71. This is aerospace terminology, not ship building.

Aerospace has so far been looked upon as a cutting edge extension of aviation but SX is pushing in a direction that really has overlap with ship building. What is a finny thingie by any other name? Itís still a finny thingie.

Iíll shut up now.

Phil
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Neopork on 09/09/2019 01:32 pm
Chine is incorrect terminology, a chine is a sharp change in the angle of a hull, cross- sectionally.
The correct term is sponson, which is a purposeful bump out either in a single location or the length of a hull.

"Chine" is accurate, see SR-71. This is aerospace terminology, not ship building.

Aerospace has so far been looked upon as a cutting edge extension of aviation but SX is pushing in a direction that really has overlap with ship building. What is a finny thingie by any other name? Itís still a finny thingie.

Iíll shut up now.

Phil

There is no point in arguing about terminology if nobody has the correct answer, right? Starship is not a boat and it is not a plane. Based on the discussions about the fins, my understanding is that there has never been a vehicle that uses control surfaces for re-entry orientation and stability in this manner (correct me if I am wrong). Therefore, the control surfaces are their own thing and I guess we will just have to wait to see what SpaceX calls them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Thunderscreech on 09/09/2019 01:36 pm
The shuttle Columbia had visually distinct chines (and that was the name used by NASA) along the top of the interface between the delta wing and the fuselage so there's some aerospace precedent for the term being used this way, right?

(https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/A10.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 09/09/2019 01:42 pm
something curious can be seen on this pic, most rings have a "brushed" like, more matte finish, but at least two are polished. different suppliers maybe? perhaps different thickness?

also, all of them appear to have a smoother surface and less wrinkles than the stacked rings, however maybe that's just because they haven't been welded onto each other yet.

credits Farriele Mohan @FarryFaz on twitter

The SS rings were welded together from many smaller plates to form the 9m diameter ring. The staged rings on the ground are presumably for Super Heavy and they have been created from one long strip of stainless steel and formed into the ring. If you look closely, you will see that on those rings there is a single weld joint where they connected the two ends of the sheet. The metal sheet used for these new rings comes in a tightly wound roll covered in white plastic wrap. You can see some of these sitting around onsite.

hey,
ok, I sppose I didn't make myself very clear, let me try again

currently there are 25 single sheet superheavy rings staged on the ground, supposedly all made the same way.

however from these high res aerial pictures now you can notice at least two of them have a different finish, those 2 are polished shiny stainless steel, in contrast to the other ones that have this brushed finish.

that's why I'm wondering if those are just from a different supplier, or if they are of a different thickness. surely they didn't polish those rings while they were making them.

make sure you zoom the picture and see it in full res, so you can see what I'm talking about.

this doesn't mean anything, I just find it curious and wonder how weird this is going to look when stacked, before they polish the whole thing
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Neopork on 09/09/2019 01:50 pm
hey,
ok, I sppose I didn't make myself very clear, let me try again

currently there are 25 single sheet superheavy rings staged on the ground, supposedly all made the same way.

however from these high res aerial pictures now you can notice at least two of them have a different finish, those 2 are polished shiny stainless steel, in contrast to the other ones that have this brushed finish.

that's why I'm wondering if those are just from a different supplier, or if they are of a different thickness. surely they didn't polish those rings while they were making them.

make sure you zoom the picture and see it in full res, so you can see what I'm talking about.

this doesn't mean anything, I just find it curious and wonder how weird this is going to look when stacked, before they polish the whole thing

Ah - I see what you mean now. Could be different supplier or different thickness, as you mentioned. There is presumably one at the top of SH that are not a pressure vessel (is above the top bulkhead) and are just used to mate to the fairing. Maybe that is what we are seeing here?

I am not interested in the ring in the upper right of that photo. I looks like it has a number of devices in it. My brain went to huge electric solenoids, but does anyone know what those are?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: niwax on 09/09/2019 01:53 pm
Aerospace has so far been looked upon as a cutting edge extension of aviation but SX is pushing in a direction that really has overlap with ship building. What is a finny thingie by any other name?

In shipbuilding? A sail
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 09/09/2019 02:00 pm
something curious can be seen on this pic, most rings have a "brushed" like, more matte finish, but at least two are polished. different suppliers maybe? perhaps different thickness?

also, all of them appear to have a smoother surface and less wrinkles than the stacked rings, however maybe that's just because they haven't been welded onto each other yet.

credits Farriele Mohan @FarryFaz on twitter

The SS rings were welded together from many smaller plates to form the 9m diameter ring. The staged rings on the ground are presumably for Super Heavy and they have been created from one long strip of stainless steel and formed into the ring. If you look closely, you will see that on those rings there is a single weld joint where they connected the two ends of the sheet. The metal sheet used for these new rings comes in a tightly wound roll covered in white plastic wrap. You can see some of these sitting around onsite.

hey,
ok, I sppose I didn't make myself very clear, let me try again

currently there are 25 single sheet superheavy rings staged on the ground, supposedly all made the same way.

however from these high res aerial pictures now you can notice at least two of them have a different finish, those 2 are polished shiny stainless steel, in contrast to the other ones that have this brushed finish.

that's why I'm wondering if those are just from a different supplier, or if they are of a different thickness. surely they didn't polish those rings while they were making them.

make sure you zoom the picture and see it in full res, so you can see what I'm talking about.

this doesn't mean anything, I just find it curious and wonder how weird this is going to look when stacked, before they polish the whole thing
The shiny ones are potentially the ones marked "SCRAP" (don't have time right now to do a image compare to verify).
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: uhuznaa on 09/09/2019 02:13 pm
Also from the Farrielle Mohan images, I count a line of  32+ "unistruts" on the tank module. If this is for mounting a leg/fin it's a long SOB. More likely a utility  raceway, but perhaps too wide?

I've been expecting full body chines ever since I saw those struts on both the tank section of Mark 2 and the fairing section of Mark 1.

I'm not an engineer, but I would imagine the pluses and minuses for that could be:

Plus:

- Adds rigidity to the structure
- Provides more drag, and more lift

Minus:

- Chines would suffer greater heating, so might need to be cooled or made of some other material (i.e. more complexity to the design)
- SpaceX tries to have a solution provide two benefits, such as fins also acting as legs, and chines may not provide that
- Are they necessary?

One more plus for chines, they would work as external raceways, limiting SpaceX's need to open the tanks to maintain any plumbing or electrical systems in the vehicle, while creating less need to put holes in the tanks for flush mounted and moving/retractable surfaces.

Over in the Texas SS prototype thread Uhuznaa posted his idea of how it might fit together. This would do everything above with, to my mind, excellent aerodynamics. ISTM the loading would be directly inboard at the top about where the unistrut is.

Phil

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48894.msg1990406#msg1990406 (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48894.msg1990406#msg1990406)

I arrived at that because the very short legs around the circumference of the stage we have seen on some drawings just seem implausible to me, they would be too close together and can't keep the ship a healthy distance from the ground either. And the fins we have seen do not really look as if they would also work as legs, especially since the fins then would need beefy hinges.

If you want to have movable fins and legs with a wide base there's no real option except separating both and use long legs that fold out like on the F9. The leg on the top would be easy (there's no need for any fin there anyway) and the two others could nicely snuggle into the nook between the wing root and the body.

But probably all of this will still look totally different... For the first flights half a dozen fixed stumpy legs at the bottom may be enough anyway. If you can rely on an even landing pad and do a slow and careful strictly vertical landing approach it may work just fine this way. For fast landings (due to thin propellant margins) on unprepared ground (like on the Moon or on Mars) things will look very different though. With a higher center of mass (due to the payload high up) and unknown/unreliable ground they will need a wide leg base and shock absorbers with some decent travel or tipping over will be a real risk.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 09/09/2019 02:28 pm
The shuttle Columbia had visually distinct chines (and that was the name used by NASA) along the top of the interface between the delta wing and the fuselage so there's some aerospace precedent for the term being used this way, right?

(https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/A10.jpg)

I always thought of it as a leading edge extension, like the f-18
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 09/09/2019 02:32 pm
hey,
ok, I sppose I didn't make myself very clear, let me try again

currently there are 25 single sheet superheavy rings staged on the ground, supposedly all made the same way.

however from these high res aerial pictures now you can notice at least two of them have a different finish, those 2 are polished shiny stainless steel, in contrast to the other ones that have this brushed finish.

that's why I'm wondering if those are just from a different supplier, or if they are of a different thickness. surely they didn't polish those rings while they were making them.

make sure you zoom the picture and see it in full res, so you can see what I'm talking about.

this doesn't mean anything, I just find it curious and wonder how weird this is going to look when stacked, before they polish the whole thing

Ah - I see what you mean now. Could be different supplier or different thickness, as you mentioned. There is presumably one at the top of SH that are not a pressure vessel (is above the top bulkhead) and are just used to mate to the fairing. Maybe that is what we are seeing here?

I am not interested in the ring in the upper right of that photo. I looks like it has a number of devices in it. My brain went to huge electric solenoids, but does anyone know what those are?

ah yes, like an integrated interstage, which SH is supposed to have, right? sounds plausible.

about the right upper ring, I saw that, it kinda looks like some sort of device with thick copper wires, but it could also be just round concrete blocks with rebars sticking out, which I'm leaning towards, even though some are white and not cement color. but I guess they wouldn't leave any kind of electric device out there in the open, so who knows?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Thunderscreech on 09/09/2019 03:09 pm
The shuttle Columbia had visually distinct chines (and that was the name used by NASA) along the top of the interface between the delta wing and the fuselage so there's some aerospace precedent for the term being used this way, right?

(https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/A10.jpg)

I always thought of it as a leading edge extension, like the f-18
And it would be understandable, just noting that NASA themselves referred to them as chines.  Example,  page 159 of the accident report. (https://spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/archives/sts-107/investigation/CAIB_lowres_full.pdf)  I don't know if it was considered an official term or just used colloquially, just something that I remembered coming up from a few decades of conversation about that shuttle so I wanted to mention it here.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 09/09/2019 03:43 pm
This whole "chine" conversation will get moved to another thread, I may not have time to do it until tomorrow.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 09/09/2019 03:45 pm
Is it my impression or have they also installed the second bulkhead?

It has been removed from the turnover jig (which is now temporarily hosting a scrap ring), and I certainly canít find it on the ground. Either they shifted it to the back of the starbarn, or it has been installed. Unfortunately you canít quite see far enough into the tank section on the latest drone footage to be sure.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gtae07 on 09/09/2019 03:45 pm
The shuttle Columbia had visually distinct chines (and that was the name used by NASA) along the top of the interface between the delta wing and the fuselage so there's some aerospace precedent for the term being used this way, right?

SR-71 as well...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Mandella on 09/09/2019 05:25 pm
Posting here as I think more likely to reach people who need to know:

twitter.com/realchefjared/status/1171094207945216001

Quote
IMPORTANT!!

Was approached by likely SpaceX employes while in the clearing at #STARSHIP and long story short we can't be going through that clearing anymore as its private property. They were nice about it but I wouldn't recommend testing your luck. #starshipeast #Warning

https://twitter.com/realchefjared/status/1171095077894180866

Quote
They said you can still drive by on the main road (minimal to no stopping) and get what you need but that's it.

https://twitter.com/realchefjared/status/1171095629906493440

Quote
For clarification on which clearing, it's the one that they are clearing for transporting starship.

Edit to add:

https://twitter.com/realchefjared/status/1171098044823166976

Quote
Last video update from #starshipeast for a while. They were lifting a circular disc out of #STARSHIP, they have cleared more land, and have an excavator on site now (land clearing likely to accelerate). #spacex


Although I am going through all these updates and photos with rabid interest (as I'm sure most of us are), I do want to urge no one to commit trespass to get them. I don't want them that much, and especially not to risk souring relations between SpaceX and the community of stalkers, er, we fascinated watchers..
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 09/09/2019 11:13 pm
I want to say that the flat disk pulled out of the Mark 2 was a protective plug put in to prevent the entry of hurricane debris. I can't yet fathom what else it might have been for.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: XenIneX on 09/09/2019 11:34 pm
I want to say that the flat disk pulled out of the Mark 2 was a protective plug put in to prevent the entry of hurricane debris. I can't yet fathom what else it might have been for.
I'd say less for debris, and more as reinforcement to help prevent the bulkhead (and everything attached) from being bent out of true.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: NewSpaceIsFun on 09/10/2019 05:20 am
Guess: work platform, sits within the internal concave dome so they can weld the seam where dome/sides of SS merge. I'm assuming in the past they used ladders/tacked work platforms?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 09/10/2019 08:03 am
Guess: work platform, sits within the internal concave dome so they can weld the seam where dome/sides of SS merge. I'm assuming in the past they used ladders/tacked work platforms?

Most likely explanation for me. Suggests they got the common bulkhead in just before Dorian hit, and have now finished welding it in.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: t3kboi on 09/10/2019 11:24 pm
The "devices" in the upper ring look to me like 24" diameter concrete pilings with anchor bolts.

Like what you would bury to anchor a lightpost.

Or tie down a bunch of floppy rings with in a hurricane.....
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: aero on 09/11/2019 12:45 am
The "devices" in the upper ring look to me like 24" diameter concrete pilings with anchor bolts.

Like what you would bury to anchor a lightpost.

Or tie down a bunch of floppy rings with in a hurricane.....

No - look carefully at the expanded image as I just now did. Should have before I posted because in the expanded image you can see that they are clearly rolls of raw sheet metal wrapped in protective plastic. All except one, for which the plastic has been removed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: PresidentBartlet on 09/11/2019 01:02 am
I think you're looking at different objects. The "devices" are inside one of the rings on the right. You're looking at the rolls of sheet metal up near the top that are not inside the rings.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 09/11/2019 01:12 am
The "devices" in the upper ring look to me like 24" diameter concrete pilings with anchor bolts.

Like what you would bury to anchor a lightpost.

Or tie down a bunch of floppy rings with in a hurricane.....

We already saw how they were tied down, and it had nothing to do with those circular things...
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg1988872#msg1988872
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: xyv on 09/11/2019 03:03 am
something curious can be seen on this pic, most rings have a "brushed" like, more matte finish, but at least two are polished. different suppliers maybe? perhaps different thickness?

also, all of them appear to have a smoother surface and less wrinkles than the stacked rings, however maybe that's just because they haven't been welded onto each other yet.

credits Farriele Mohan @FarryFaz on twitter

The SS rings were welded together from many smaller plates to form the 9m diameter ring. The staged rings on the ground are presumably for Super Heavy and they have been created from one long strip of stainless steel and formed into the ring. If you look closely, you will see that on those rings there is a single weld joint where they connected the two ends of the sheet. The metal sheet used for these new rings comes in a tightly wound roll covered in white plastic wrap. You can see some of these sitting around onsite.

hey,
ok, I sppose I didn't make myself very clear, let me try again

currently there are 25 single sheet superheavy rings staged on the ground, supposedly all made the same way.

however from these high res aerial pictures now you can notice at least two of them have a different finish, those 2 are polished shiny stainless steel, in contrast to the other ones that have this brushed finish.

that's why I'm wondering if those are just from a different supplier, or if they are of a different thickness. surely they didn't polish those rings while they were making them.

make sure you zoom the picture and see it in full res, so you can see what I'm talking about.

this doesn't mean anything, I just find it curious and wonder how weird this is going to look when stacked, before they polish the whole thing

I think it is just the angle of the surface relative to the lighting and the camera.  Look two rings behind the right hand arrow and there is another one.   Other rings look polished on the inside.  With circular cylinders and a semi-polished surface you have a near complete distribution of light-surface-camera angles.  A poor mans BRDF (bi-reflectance distribution function) if you will.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 09/11/2019 12:38 pm
something curious can be seen on this pic, most rings have a "brushed" like, more matte finish, but at least two are polished. different suppliers maybe? perhaps different thickness?

also, all of them appear to have a smoother surface and less wrinkles than the stacked rings, however maybe that's just because they haven't been welded onto each other yet.

credits Farriele Mohan @FarryFaz on twitter

The SS rings were welded together from many smaller plates to form the 9m diameter ring. The staged rings on the ground are presumably for Super Heavy and they have been created from one long strip of stainless steel and formed into the ring. If you look closely, you will see that on those rings there is a single weld joint where they connected the two ends of the sheet. The metal sheet used for these new rings comes in a tightly wound roll covered in white plastic wrap. You can see some of these sitting around onsite.

hey,
ok, I sppose I didn't make myself very clear, let me try again

currently there are 25 single sheet superheavy rings staged on the ground, supposedly all made the same way.

however from these high res aerial pictures now you can notice at least two of them have a different finish, those 2 are polished shiny stainless steel, in contrast to the other ones that have this brushed finish.

that's why I'm wondering if those are just from a different supplier, or if they are of a different thickness. surely they didn't polish those rings while they were making them.

make sure you zoom the picture and see it in full res, so you can see what I'm talking about.

this doesn't mean anything, I just find it curious and wonder how weird this is going to look when stacked, before they polish the whole thing

I think it is just the angle of the surface relative to the lighting and the camera.  Look two rings behind the right hand arrow and there is another one.   Other rings look polished on the inside.  With circular cylinders and a semi-polished surface you have a near complete distribution of light-surface-camera angles.  A poor mans BRDF (bi-reflectance distribution function) if you will.

hey, funny you should mention BRDF, that's the first thing I considered when I noticed the difference, but it doesn't seem to be the case. a matte object needs to be viewed from angles almost parallel to the surface to appear polished, so you would expect the rings to look polished only on their sides relative to the camera, but those marked look polished the whole surface so effectively from all angles. also this picture was taken from a good distance, so there's not much difference between the viewing angles from one ring to the other, and the shiny ones have matte ones on the same plane, so effectively the same viewing angle. metals in particular have a fresnel curve that begins way closer to 90ļ than dielectric materials.

there's a great paper from Cornell on this if you or anyone is interested: https://www.graphics.cornell.edu/pubs/2004/WLT04b.pdf
it's kinda basic, so maybe not for you, but particularly interesting for the layman.
figure 3 is a great example of how viewing a matte metal from a sharp angle makes it look polished.
sorry for nerding out on this, but I work with 3d visualization  ::)

but back on topic, those rings I marked look definitely polished, but their inside has the same brushed finish as all (or almost all) the others, so I'm thinking spacex guys polished those rings themselves to see how close to a "liquid silver" look they could get, before going ahead and making a bunch of rings with this other kind of stainless steel, which has a more brushed looking finish than the ones they used on mk2.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: shuntley on 09/11/2019 08:22 pm
Sorry if this has been addressed, but any idea what these 1/8th rings are? Built between Sept 8 and Sept 10 as shown in drone flights from John Winkopp as provided by FutureSpaceTourist in photos and Updates thread. First try at attaching image, so hope it works...

Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: rsdavis9 on 09/11/2019 08:35 pm
Sorry if this has been addressed, but any idea what these 1/8th rings are? Built between Sept 8 and Sept 10 as shown in drone flights from John Winkopp as provided by FutureSpaceTourist in photos and Updates thread. First try at attaching image, so hope it works...

a round stand to set things on. Like rockets.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Cheapchips on 09/11/2019 09:02 pm
Sorry if this has been addressed, but any idea what these 1/8th rings are? Built between Sept 8 and Sept 10 as shown in drone flights from John Winkopp as provided by FutureSpaceTourist in photos and Updates thread. First try at attaching image, so hope it works...

a round stand to set things on. Like rockets.

They are planning to transport Mk2 in mid-Sept.  That's ages away though.  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: shuntley on 09/11/2019 09:06 pm
Sorry if this has been addressed, but any idea what these 1/8th rings are? Built between Sept 8 and Sept 10 as shown in drone flights from John Winkopp as provided by FutureSpaceTourist in photos and Updates thread. First try at attaching image, so hope it works...

a round stand to set things on. Like rockets.

Should have been more specific as I assumed that as likely, but why make it modular with all the lifts and cranes there?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: FutureSpaceTourist on 09/12/2019 03:43 pm
Fun video looking through Starship Ďkey holeí (clearer from about 40s in):

https://twitter.com/spacecoast_stve/status/1172164262057381888

Quote
Take a peek inside Cocoa #Starship. Iíve been sitting on this for a couple weeks because, frankly, Iím not sure how interesting it is. I took this on 8/28 (before Dorian). Maybe someone out there will see something I donít see.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Julia B on 09/13/2019 03:29 am
Y'all can invite Mary or SpPadre here as I would love to meet them but I hate to say we are not afforded the same open points of view that they are down in Boca. Can't stop on the road and the large building blocks all of the good things to see anyways. Most of my decent photos were taken while coasting in the car, on investment private property or when nobody was there because a hurricane was coming. That Starship is not worth the parking ticket nor the tresspassing citation I would get if I went any farther with my exploring.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 09/13/2019 02:05 pm
Y'all can invite Mary or SpPadre here as I would love to meet them but I hate to say we are not afforded the same open points of view that they are down in Boca. Can't stop on the road and the large building blocks all of the good things to see anyways. Most of my decent photos were taken while coasting in the car, on investment private property or when nobody was there because a hurricane was coming. That Starship is not worth the parking ticket nor the tresspassing citation I would get if I went any farther with my exploring.

Yaíll stay safe & legal. You do great work and we all appreciate it.

Phil

PS: Were looking to get you a jet pack and helmet cam <g>
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: FutureSpaceTourist on 09/13/2019 02:30 pm
My thanks to Julia for all the great photos & info you post, such as:

https://twitter.com/julia_bergeron/status/1172510946440466432

Quote
Hyperlapse view to give a basic idea of the road portion of the #Starship move to the Banana River. Reminder: they will go contra traffic to avoid the overpass and be on the correct side for the bridge footing. Start at FedEx clearing. End at construction sign by footing. #SpaceX
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Michael Paul on 09/13/2019 05:21 pm
Sorry if this has been addressed, but any idea what these 1/8th rings are? Built between Sept 8 and Sept 10 as shown in drone flights from John Winkopp as provided by FutureSpaceTourist in photos and Updates thread. First try at attaching image, so hope it works...
Ingredients for another assembly base, unassembled.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: SLC on 09/14/2019 01:23 am
This whole "chine" conversation will get moved to another thread, I may not have time to do it until tomorrow.
We could actually do with a whole thread specifically for terminology.  There we can argue about:

chines vs strakes vs sponsons

flipperons vs finny-thingies

launch tempo vs launch cadence

... and many more!
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Nevyn72 on 09/14/2019 02:46 am
In the most recent flyby video from FutureSpaceTourist there now appear to be some, for wnat of a better description, 'Thin rings' lying on the ground.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsOSn09hkTw

If you go to the bookmarked point, (at ~50 seconds in) below, you can see them on the ground between the normal rings and the 'middle section' of Mk2.

There also appear to some more unfinished 'thin rings' in quadrants on the ground between the lower section and the cathedral tent shelter.

https://youtu.be/QsOSn09hkTw?t=50

I wonder what purpose these will perform?
Stiffening structures for the existing rings on the ground perhaps?

It's hard to be sure but they appear to be significantly smaller in diameter to the existing rings.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: PresidentBartlet on 09/14/2019 03:44 am
Are they really smaller though? Could it be the lighting on some of them making them look different sizes?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Twark_Main on 09/14/2019 06:03 am
Y'all can invite Mary or SpPadre here as I would love to meet them but I hate to say we are not afforded the same open points of view that they are down in Boca. Can't stop on the road and the large building blocks all of the good things to see anyways. Most of my decent photos were taken while coasting in the car, on investment private property or when nobody was there because a hurricane was coming. That Starship is not worth the parking ticket nor the tresspassing citation I would get if I went any farther with my exploring.

Dumb question: why not just park your car behind the sign and walk up? According to the sign that's perfectly legal.

It says "no standing" and "no stopping" (which are both vehicular violations), not "no pedestrians." That signage only applies to cars, nothing about people on foot (even if those pedestrians stop to take pictures).

As long as you remain within (iirc) 14 feet of the road centerline you're within the public right-of-way, so you're not trespassing on SpaceX land either.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: AC in NC on 09/14/2019 01:37 pm
Dumb question: why not just park your car behind the sign and walk up? According to the sign that's perfectly legal.

It says "no standing" and "no stopping" (which are both vehicular violations), not "no pedestrians." That signage only applies to cars, nothing about people on foot (even if those pedestrians stop to take pictures).

As long as you remain within (iirc) 14 feet of the road centerline you're within the public right-of-way, so you're not trespassing on SpaceX land either.

Though not trained, I'm pretty good at interpreting legalese.  That sign is mostly toothless from a legal perspective unless you actually park on the side of the road.

Broadly:  anything on foot, or in a vehicle without stopping for a period of time longer than just briefly as part of another vehicular manuever is legal.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: spacenut on 09/14/2019 02:16 pm
Are the Starship prototypes supposed to have the internal smaller tanks for landing fuel?  Doesn't seem like they built them into these prototypes. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: 2megs on 09/14/2019 02:51 pm
Though not trained, I'm pretty good at interpreting legalese.  That sign is mostly toothless from a legal perspective unless you actually park on the side of the road.

There's a very, very big gap between being a good neighbor and "this isn't technically illegal". Our first priority as fans/supporters/enthusiasts should be to never annoy or harass or inconvenience the thing we're fans of. That argues for giving great respect and latitude to the spirit of the request as well as the letter of the law.

(I work in the videogame industry, and I'm very aware of what it feels like to be on the other side of an intense community. Even when the attention is 100% well-intentioned it can be a distraction from just getting your job done.)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 09/14/2019 03:37 pm
Iím a lawyer AND an engineer. While itís fun to play either one on the internet, lets just not, okay?

Thanks ...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Julia B on 09/15/2019 01:27 am
I would LOVE a jet pack! For now I rely on careful slow driving and moments of guard distraction to stop for two seconds. A ghillie suit would be nice for offroad travels but way to hot for that nonsense.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Julia B on 09/15/2019 01:29 am
My pleasure! I'm trying to be better about putting the photos into the update thread so they are easier to see.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Twark_Main on 09/15/2019 12:51 pm
Though not trained, I'm pretty good at interpreting legalese.  That sign is mostly toothless from a legal perspective unless you actually park on the side of the road.

There's a very, very big gap between being a good neighbor and "this isn't technically illegal". Our first priority as fans/supporters/enthusiasts should be to never annoy or harass or inconvenience the thing we're fans of. That argues for giving great respect and latitude to the spirit of the request as well as the letter of the law.

(I work in the videogame industry, and I'm very aware of what it feels like to be on the other side of an intense community. Even when the attention is 100% well-intentioned it can be a distraction from just getting your job done.)

It sounds like you're saying "the spirit" of putting up that sign is to forbid people from walking along a public road (via people misunderstanding the meaning of the words "standing" and "stopping"), but encourage people to slowly (and by the letter of the law, distractedly) drive by taking pictures. I have seen nothing to suggest that this rather bizarre interpretation correctly reflects SpaceX's intent.

If our highest concern were following "the spirit" of the request, there would be no photography, period. That would certainly be the most broad possible interpretation of SpaceX's intent!

I’m a lawyer AND an engineer. While it’s fun to play either one on the internet, lets just not, okay?

Thanks ...

This isn't Obama's constitutional law class. We're reading a traffic sign. If mere mortals were forbidden from even that, why have signs at all?

I would LOVE a jet pack! For now I rely on careful slow driving and moments of guard distraction to stop for two seconds. A ghillie suit would be nice for offroad travels but way to hot for that nonsense.

How do we figure this is better than just walking up? Technically that violates the sign by stopping a vehicle "for two seconds," whereas walking along the road is not prohibited in the slightest.

And again there's no trespassing here, so the verbal request from SpaceX to keep off their property is being respected.

To be clear, anyone visiting and taking photographs should show the utmost respect and courtesy to SpaceX employees. But that doesn't mean we should misinterpret traffic signs on purpose. That's not doing anyone any favors.

Anyway, this is getting way off-topic.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 09/15/2019 02:13 pm
Possible that some Starship transportation hardware has been delivered.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/d4kopd/starship_transportation_friday_morning_saw_a/
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: AC in NC on 09/15/2019 02:45 pm
Iím a lawyer AND an engineer. While itís fun to play either one on the internet, lets just not, okay?
Thanks ...

This isn't Obama's constitutional law class. We're reading a traffic sign. If mere mortals were forbidden from even that, why have signs at all?

And this isn't a typical public forum either, it's NSF.  The rule is "be good to each other" and the first followup to my post was a totally proper reminder that "by extension" that rule applies between the community and SpaceX as well.

It's really not appropriate for us to debate the nuances of the rule.  NSF sets the rule and that's that.

Herb is reminding us that we not debate the nuances of the sign.  He's right.

And this should close this digression. 

EDIT:  Of course it never does which is why we're supposed to stop at Herb's reminder.

Sorry for my part in starting it and continuing it.  I keep hoping we can collectively better ourselves and the mods are saved some grief.  But we never do and they never are.   :-[
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Twark_Main on 09/15/2019 05:53 pm
I’m a lawyer AND an engineer. While it’s fun to play either one on the internet, lets just not, okay?
Thanks ...

This isn't Obama's constitutional law class. We're reading a traffic sign. If mere mortals were forbidden from even that, why have signs at all?

And this isn't a typical public forum either, it's NSF.  The rule is "be good to each other" and the first followup to my post was a totally proper reminder that "by extension" that rule applies between the community and SpaceX as well.

It's really not appropriate for us to debate the nuances of the rule.  NSF sets the rule and that's that.

In light of this unexpected reaction I must clarify: "be good to SpaceX" was never in doubt. This is about respecting SpaceX's actual rules, not a misinterpreted version of them.

As for the sign's meaning, there's no debate. Unless you're driving a motor vehicle it doesn't apply to you, period. If tomorrow our resident on-site photographers mention that they are standing on their hands so they can "follow the No Standing sign," this misinterpretation should be fair game for a friendly and brief correction. ;) The back-and-forth is unnecessary though.

All being on the same page now, let's happily and mercifully put "sign-gate" to bed. And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest! I won't post again on the topic, but that means I can't help if someone else muddies the water. Cheers.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: 50_Caliber on 09/15/2019 06:59 pm
There seems to be no indication of header tanks installed in the MK1 prototype in Boca Chica, has anyone noticed anything resembling header tanks for the MK2 laying around?

There also seems to be indication of the LOX tank being on top and the Methane tank on the bottom. These are substantial design changes if that's the case.

Really looking forward to EM's update on the 28th.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: FlattestEarth on 09/15/2019 10:52 pm
There seems to be no indication of header tanks installed in the MK1 prototype in Boca Chica, has anyone noticed anything resembling header tanks for the MK2 laying around?

There also seems to be indication of the LOX tank being on top and the Methane tank on the bottom. These are substantial design changes if that's the case.

Really looking forward to EM's update on the 28th.

There is a set of small grey tanks present at both locations.  Speculation abounds.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 09/15/2019 10:53 pm
There seems to be no indication of header tanks installed in the MK1 prototype in Boca Chica, has anyone noticed anything resembling header tanks for the MK2 laying around?

There also seems to be indication of the LOX tank being on top and the he topMethane tank on the bottom. These are substantial design changes if that's the case.

Really looking forward to EM's update on the 28th.


AIUI the lox was always thought to be on the top. There is discussion of this point on the Texas thread.


Phil
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 09/16/2019 12:18 am
Hey new question.

Initial rings were made from multiple sheets, whereas subsequent rings transition to single-strip.
Did we ever figure out why?
It's not like nobody knew that making them from a single strip is faster / more precise.

There is only one reason I can think of and that is initially the required thickness was not available in roll form, only in sheet form - but one of the mills agreed to produce and roll thicker rolls for SpaceX.

And if that's the case, then the decision to go to steel may have been taken more recently than at least I had assumed - since otherwise they'd have had the time to secure the proper material.

Any other ideas?



Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BrianPeterson on 09/16/2019 12:38 am
Initial rings were made from multiple sheets, whereas subsequent rings transition to single-strip.
Did we ever figure out why?
It's not like nobody knew that making them from a single strip is faster / more precise.

Old question honestly. Starship due to re-entry heating dynamics can save weight by varying the thickness depending on what side of the ship it is only.

What is being made out of single roll stainless most of us believe is the first stage booster. Which will not have the same high speed re-entry heating dynamics of starship.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: livingjw on 09/16/2019 12:42 am
Initial rings were made from multiple sheets, whereas subsequent rings transition to single-strip.
Did we ever figure out why?
It's not like nobody knew that making them from a single strip is faster / more precise.

Old question honestly. Starship due to re-entry heating dynamics can save weight by varying the thickness depending on what side of the ship it is only.

What is being made out of single roll stainless most of us believe is the first stage booster. Which will not have the same high speed re-entry heating dynamics of starship.

That just doesn't seem to smell right to me. Could be part of the answer.

John
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Keldor on 09/16/2019 12:52 am
Initial rings were made from multiple sheets, whereas subsequent rings transition to single-strip.
Did we ever figure out why?
It's not like nobody knew that making them from a single strip is faster / more precise.

Old question honestly. Starship due to re-entry heating dynamics can save weight by varying the thickness depending on what side of the ship it is only.

What is being made out of single roll stainless most of us believe is the first stage booster. Which will not have the same high speed re-entry heating dynamics of starship.

That just doesn't seem to smell right to me. Could be part of the answer.

John

Might be a simple matter of tooling and infrastructure availibility.  Boca Chica is a good deal more remote than Cocoa beach, and had no preexisting infrastructure, whereas Cocoa Beach started as a preexisting steel working facility.  An unrolled single segment ring is nearly 100 feet long!  Too cumbersome to handle with the machinery initially present at Boca Chica?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: xanzi4096 on 09/16/2019 01:31 am
Is the switch to single pieces of steel possibly due to differences in steel type between Starship and the booster? It could be that whatever cryo-formed sheets they were using before aren't available in larger sizes, but Super Heavy can use larger commercially available sheets of steel because the heating/strength requirements aren't as severe.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 09/16/2019 01:40 am
Initial rings were made from multiple sheets, whereas subsequent rings transition to single-strip.
Did we ever figure out why?
It's not like nobody knew that making them from a single strip is faster / more precise.

Old question honestly. Starship due to re-entry heating dynamics can save weight by varying the thickness depending on what side of the ship it is only.

What is being made out of single roll stainless most of us believe is the first stage booster. Which will not have the same high speed re-entry heating dynamics of starship.

That just doesn't seem to smell right to me. Could be part of the answer.

John

Might be a simple matter of tooling and infrastructure availibility.  Boca Chica is a good deal more remote than Cocoa beach, and had no preexisting infrastructure, whereas Cocoa Beach started as a preexisting steel working facility.  An unrolled single segment ring is nearly 100 feet long!  Too cumbersome to handle with the machinery initially present at Boca Chica?

It's Cocoa FL, not Cocoa Beach. There's also Cocoa West.

I tend to agree with the tooling, with the first appearance being at Cocoa. The whole competing innovation thing Musk talked about.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 09/16/2019 02:07 am
Initial rings were made from multiple sheets, whereas subsequent rings transition to single-strip.
Did we ever figure out why?
It's not like nobody knew that making them from a single strip is faster / more precise.

Old question honestly. Starship due to re-entry heating dynamics can save weight by varying the thickness depending on what side of the ship it is only.

What is being made out of single roll stainless most of us believe is the first stage booster. Which will not have the same high speed re-entry heating dynamics of starship.

That just doesn't seem to smell right to me. Could be part of the answer.

John

Might be a simple matter of tooling and infrastructure availibility.  Boca Chica is a good deal more remote than Cocoa beach, and had no preexisting infrastructure, whereas Cocoa Beach started as a preexisting steel working facility.  An unrolled single segment ring is nearly 100 feet long!  Too cumbersome to handle with the machinery initially present at Boca Chica?

Anything along these lines argues to the same conclusion.

Ever since water tower became a thing in Texas,  we saw basically an explosion of execution-to-plan, and a rate that makes grown men tremble in fear.

So if after all this planning they still had fundamental "missing pieces", whether tooling or raw material, it just might be that this plan was really fresh, and they chose to start executing with what's available rather than sit on it for another 3 months, get all the pieces in place, and then go.

Amazing really, the sense of urgency.  Musk is racing either the daemon of a stealthy and competent competitor, or the spectre of the collapse of modern civilization.  Or, he is just driven because he is.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: tyrred on 09/16/2019 08:51 am
Is the switch to single pieces of steel possibly due to differences in steel type between Starship and the booster? It could be that whatever cryo-formed sheets they were using before aren't available in larger sizes, but Super Heavy can use larger commercially available sheets of steel because the heating/strength requirements aren't as severe.

Welcome to the fora!

The heating requirements of the booster will indeed be different (lower) than the spaceship.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Cheapchips on 09/16/2019 10:53 am

So if after all this planning they still had fundamental "missing pieces", whether tooling or raw material, it just might be that this plan was really fresh, and they chose to start executing with what's available rather than sit on it for another 3 months, get all the pieces in place, and then go.

It's easy to forget we're less than a year in their public switch to steel.  I'd be fascinated to know how much planning actually happened prior to LA port build being scrapped. 

It certainly feelslike they went:

1. Caldwell's plate stacking technique will do. Lets go!
2. Lets stack full rings since doing thin plates in wind is a total pain
3. Now we're going full rings we can use one of these welding machine thingies
4. If we're doing full rings it works better to make them 1.8m high
5. If we're doing full rings it works better to roll one piece of steel and use a single weld

Based on past SpaceXer comments, between 1 & 5 there was plenty of Googling, emails and phone calls to experts exploring what's possible.

Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 09/16/2019 12:26 pm

So if after all this planning they still had fundamental "missing pieces", whether tooling or raw material, it just might be that this plan was really fresh, and they chose to start executing with what's available rather than sit on it for another 3 months, get all the pieces in place, and then go.

It's easy to forget we're less than a year in their public switch to steel.  I'd be fascinated to know how much planning actually happened prior to LA port build being scrapped. 

It certainly feelslike they went:

1. Caldwell's plate stacking technique will do. Lets go!
2. Lets stack full rings since doing thin plates in wind is a total pain
3. Now we're going full rings we can use one of these welding machine thingies
4. If we're doing full rings it works better to make them 1.8m high
5. If we're doing full rings it works better to roll one piece of steel and use a single weld

Based on past SpaceXer comments, between 1 & 5 there was plenty of Googling, emails and phone calls to experts exploring what's possible.
I don't think that's how it went down.  What you're describing doesn't require experts, and while SpaceX questions everything, I think some answers are too obvious.

I think the changes reveal that the change to stainless was extremely recent.  They could find an AGW available in less than 3-6 months and so started with plate because that was just too long  to sit and wait.  They also couldn't find the right gauge in roll form for 6-9 months.

When Musk said "delightfully counter intuitive", it must have been about 3 maybe 6 month into it, no more.  Or else material and equipment would have been available.

All of the above is conjecture based on common sense. Which is the same technique that failed us so often when evaluating SpaceX's plans. So, maybe.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: vulture4 on 09/16/2019 06:10 pm
As much as I admire the panache of building a spaceship in the open, in a industrial area in the middle of Cocoa it won't be practical to ship it back and forth for maintenance. Space Florida has made extraordinary efforts to lure space providers to build facilities on Space Commerce Blvd where Blue Origin is building and at one time SpaceX was talking about leasing property north of Static Test Road as well. and I wonder what went into SpaceX's decision to go offsite with such a large project.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Zpoxy on 09/16/2019 06:33 pm
As much as I admire the panache of building a spaceship in the open, in a industrial area in the middle of Cocoa it won't be practical to ship it back and forth for maintenance. Space Florida has made extraordinary efforts to lure space providers to build facilities on Space Commerce Blvd where Blue Origin is building and at one time SpaceX was talking about leasing property north of Static Test Road as well. and I wonder what went into SpaceX's decision to go offsite with such a large project.
I don't think there was ever any intention to ship SS and SH back and forth to Cocoa from KSC. All processing will occur at KSC. Construction on the new SpaceX facility on KSC property near the intersection of State Road 3 and Roberts Road south of LC39 has commenced.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: marsbase on 09/16/2019 06:34 pm
moved from the Florida Prototype(s) Photos and Updates thread
As much as I admire the panache of building a spaceship in the open, in a industrial area in the middle of Cocoa it won't be practical to ship it back and forth for maintenance. Space Florida has made extraordinary efforts to lure space providers to build facilities on Space Commerce Blvd where Blue Origin is building and at one time SpaceX was talking about leasing property north of Static Test Road as well. and I wonder what went into SpaceX's decision to go offsite with such a large project.
There are probably many issues that they considered, many of which we probably know nothing about.  But one likely reason for the choice is the likelihood of hurricane damage on low-lying areas of the Cape.  Most of the Cape is at 10 feet above sea level.  Cocoa is at 36 feet.  That is the difference between being underwater in a storm surge and being relatively high and dry.  I suspect that much of the launch facilities at KSC and the Air Force Base are flood hardened but vehicles under construction are very vulnerable.  Once they are finished and tested, they can be flown out of the path of a hurricane.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: aero on 09/17/2019 12:06 am
The Shuttle rode around on the back of a 747. Will the SS ever have the need for such a ride? Would the SS fit on the back of any accessible airplane?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Ace on 09/17/2019 01:21 am
The Shuttle rode around on the back of a 747. Will the SS ever have the need for such a ride? Would the SS fit on the back of any accessible airplane?

The fuselage of the A380 (the world's largest passenger plane) is about 72.7 x 7.1m, with a maximum payload of 84t. Ignoring structural and aerodynamic issues, SS is wider and shorter, and probably beyond the payload weight limit.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Thrustpuzzle on 09/17/2019 01:39 am
The Shuttle rode around on the back of a 747. Will the SS ever have the need for such a ride? Would the SS fit on the back of any accessible airplane?
Just one, the one-off Stratolaunch (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scaled_Composites_Stratolaunch) aircraft which can carry an external payload of 220 tons.  While designed for airborne launching, it could likely be converted to a ferry role.
Stratolaunch does not have the height clearance needed for Starship's 9 meter + fins  diameter to carry it underslung, though, so the aircraft would need significant modification.

It happens to be for sale.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Stan-1967 on 09/17/2019 01:51 am
Iím a betting type of guy, & I think the odds are better that a 12,000 ft runway with a 15 meter wide trench excavated down the runway centerline to accommodate SS will be built before they modify Stratolauncher with higher ground clearance landing gear.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Asteroza on 09/17/2019 02:51 am
Current big mouth cargo planes would be a NASA Superguppy or one of the newer large cargo craft used by Boeing and Airbus. But I doubt Airbus will loan out a Beluga XL out from their fleet, and Boeing has very few 747 LCF Dreamlifters to begin with so isn't likely to loan them out either. Either way, you'd have to take the fins off starship.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 09/17/2019 03:13 am
Current big mouth cargo planes would be a NASA Superguppy or one of the newer large cargo craft used by Boeing and Airbus. But I doubt Airbus will loan out a Beluga XL out from their fleet, and Boeing has very few 747 LCF Dreamlifters to begin with so isn't likely to loan them out either. Either way, you'd have to take the fins off starship.

This is really getting offtopic, but none of those planes could carry a Starship internally even without the fins.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Pete on 09/17/2019 09:06 am
Current big mouth cargo planes would be a NASA Superguppy or one of the newer large cargo craft used by Boeing and Airbus. But I doubt Airbus will loan out a Beluga XL out from their fleet, and Boeing has very few 747 LCF Dreamlifters to begin with so isn't likely to loan them out either. Either way, you'd have to take the fins off starship.

This is really getting offtopic, but none of those planes could carry a Starship internally even without the fins.

Umm, yeah.. No.
Might be a tight fit.
Image to scale:
(https://i.imgur.com/FAfpvAA.png)





(mods: feel free to shove this posting to the party thread, or even to file13. Some people just don't appreciate the scale of the SpaceX StarShip )
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: jstrotha0975 on 09/17/2019 01:15 pm
Iím a betting type of guy, & I think the odds are better that a 12,000 ft runway with a 15 meter wide trench excavated down the runway centerline to accommodate SS will be built before they modify Stratolauncher with higher ground clearance landing gear.

Why can't SS ride on top like the Shuttle?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BZHSpace on 09/17/2019 01:27 pm
Current big mouth cargo planes would be a NASA Superguppy or one of the newer large cargo craft used by Boeing and Airbus. But I doubt Airbus will loan out a Beluga XL out from their fleet, and Boeing has very few 747 LCF Dreamlifters to begin with so isn't likely to loan them out either. Either way, you'd have to take the fins off starship.

This is really getting offtopic, but none of those planes could carry a Starship internally even without the fins.

Umm, yeah.. No.
Might be a tight fit.
Image to scale:
(https://i.imgur.com/FAfpvAA.png)





(mods: feel free to shove this posting to the party thread, or even to file13. Some people just don't appreciate the scale of the SpaceX StarShip )

The comparaison broke my breath  :o
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThePonjaX on 09/17/2019 04:38 pm
Iím a betting type of guy, & I think the odds are better that a 12,000 ft runway with a 15 meter wide trench excavated down the runway centerline to accommodate SS will be built before they modify Stratolauncher with higher ground clearance landing gear.

Why can't SS ride on top like the Shuttle?

did you see the size difference? The plane can't handle the size and weight of SS.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: jstrotha0975 on 09/17/2019 05:28 pm
Iím a betting type of guy, & I think the odds are better that a 12,000 ft runway with a 15 meter wide trench excavated down the runway centerline to accommodate SS will be built before they modify Stratolauncher with higher ground clearance landing gear.

Why can't SS ride on top like the Shuttle?

did you see the size difference? The plane can't handle the size and weight of SS.

I want to see a size comparison of SS and Stratolaunch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: dwheeler on 09/17/2019 05:58 pm
The Shuttle rode around on the back of a 747. Will the SS ever have the need for such a ride? Would the SS fit on the back of any accessible airplane?

The Antonov An-225 I think theoretically could carry it. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-225_Mriya (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-225_Mriya):

Quote
It can carry ultra-heavy and oversize freight, <snip>... or 200,000 kg (440,000 lb) on the upper fuselage. Cargo on the upper fuselage can be 70 m (230 ft) long.

I wouldn't be surprised if support for carrying cargo on the upper fuselage has since been deleted.

And there's only one such aircraft in the whole world. But it is for hire...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 09/17/2019 06:12 pm
>
I want to see a size comparison of SS and Stratolaunch.

Should be close enough
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RicertyRocket on 09/17/2019 06:32 pm
Iím a betting type of guy, & I think the odds are better that a 12,000 ft runway with a 15 meter wide trench excavated down the runway centerline to accommodate SS will be built before they modify Stratolauncher with higher ground clearance landing gear.

Why can't SS ride on top like the Shuttle?

Sorta like on the AN225 that was designed to carry huge heavy oilfield and other heavy parts.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 09/17/2019 08:30 pm
As much as I admire the panache of building a spaceship in the open, in a industrial area in the middle of Cocoa it won't be practical to ship it back and forth for maintenance. Space Florida has made extraordinary efforts to lure space providers to build facilities on Space Commerce Blvd where Blue Origin is building and at one time SpaceX was talking about leasing property north of Static Test Road as well. and I wonder what went into SpaceX's decision to go offsite with such a large project.

A guess on the offsite reasoning: A facility with workforce was already up and running. IIRC SX now owns the Cocoa location. Iíd guess SX went looking on the off chance something with a shipping path to the cape was available and some combination of Ďmaybe availableí and Ďa deal almost too good to be trueí happened.

They need some sort of facility on the cape for integration and fit out at a minimum. If this evolves into full blown construction and assembly Iíd expect Cocoa to either go on the block or shift to subassemblies.

Has anybody been keeping tabs on the cape? Is there any chance construction is planned or started with no public announcement?

Phil
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: amgin3 on 09/17/2019 09:27 pm
Quote
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOI__ag5eQQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOI__ag5eQQ)

Looks like there is a new port hole near the top of the nosecone which can be seen at the start of the above video..
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Lar on 09/17/2019 09:49 pm

Has anybody been keeping tabs on the cape? Is there any chance construction is planned or started with no public announcement?
They have a site in early development on Roberts Road I think? and there has been stuff filed for EIS and permits and suchlike, IIRC.  The Facilities thread has more IIRC.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: MKremer on 09/18/2019 03:26 am
Have these been ID'd yet? They seem to be the right shape and size for internal bracing or supports of some sort.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Asteroza on 09/18/2019 04:20 am
The Shuttle rode around on the back of a 747. Will the SS ever have the need for such a ride? Would the SS fit on the back of any accessible airplane?

The Antonov An-225 I think theoretically could carry it. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-225_Mriya (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-225_Mriya):

Quote
It can carry ultra-heavy and oversize freight, <snip>... or 200,000 kg (440,000 lb) on the upper fuselage. Cargo on the upper fuselage can be 70 m (230 ft) long.

I wouldn't be surprised if support for carrying cargo on the upper fuselage has since been deleted.

And there's only one such aircraft in the whole world. But it is for hire...

Very off topic, buy the An-225 does still have the shoulder bumps for dorsal cargo carry. It will be hating life carrying something so large though.

Regardless, the Superguppy is clearly undersized in both length and width by the above picture. Looks like the dreamlifter is about 6m or so so that's out. Beluga XL seems to have a 9m diameter fuselage, so that's just a little too narrow, and probably too short regardless.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ShSch on 09/18/2019 04:59 am
It will be hating life carrying something so large though.
Not necessarily. This guy (http://englishrussia.com/2007/09/01/more-about-soviet-space-program-vm-t-atlant/) has successfully carried parts of the central stage of the Energia rocket (diameter 7.75m), despite being significantly smaller than An-225. So An-225 should be quite capable of carrying SS stripped of its engines. The only question is why bother. It also needs quite a long runway at MTOW, I believe. Various sources say 3--3.5km (10,000--12,000ft). But the view of it in flight would be astounding ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 09/18/2019 06:04 am
Have these been ID'd yet? They seem to be the right shape and size for internal bracing or supports of some sort.

Tooling, not Starship I reckon. Look to be similar to the Boca Chica nose support frame, but possibly 9m diameter.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Pete on 09/18/2019 06:29 am
Regardless, the Superguppy is clearly undersized in both length and width by the above picture. Looks like the dreamlifter is about 6m or so so that's out. Beluga XL seems to have a 9m diameter fuselage, so that's just a little too narrow, and probably too short regardless.
There is no current plane that has a big enough interior cargo space. Beluga Xl at ~ 8.65m comes the closest.

So, top-carry it is.
Assuming the StarShip is happy being supported on its side like that, or they provide a suitable cradle for it, this should be quite doable.
The Stratolaunch is more than up to the task, but may require a bit of rework for the balance. It was designed to carry much smaller but fully-fuelled thus heavier rocket(s) under its wing. Putting a lighter but very very large thing on top changes the control situation a  lot.

But if *this thing* can fly, then anything is possible!!
(https://englishrussia.com/images/soviet_space_program_vm-t_atlant/7.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: pilotError on 09/18/2019 12:09 pm
Has the big hole in the nosecone gone unnoticed?

From the video Amgin3 posted

Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Tommyboy on 09/18/2019 12:33 pm
But if *this thing* can fly, then anything is possible!!
If you're amazed by that flying contraption, I once heard of a guy who strapped a rocket engine to a freakin' water tower and actually got it to fly without crashing!
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: shuntley on 09/18/2019 12:56 pm
Have these been ID'd yet? They seem to be the right shape and size for internal bracing or supports of some sort.

Tooling, not Starship I reckon. Look to be similar to the Boca Chica nose support frame, but possibly 9m diameter.

Been thinking about these since when I asked last week... I bet they are a modular pedestal for the barge part of transport as yard pedestal wouldn't have to be modular
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: webdan on 09/18/2019 01:29 pm
Regardless, the Superguppy is clearly undersized in both length and width by the above picture. Looks like the dreamlifter is about 6m or so so that's out. Beluga XL seems to have a 9m diameter fuselage, so that's just a little too narrow, and probably too short regardless.
There is no current plane that has a big enough interior cargo space. Beluga Xl at ~ 8.65m comes the closest.

So, top-carry it is.
Assuming the StarShip is happy being supported on its side like that, or they provide a suitable cradle for it, this should be quite doable.
The Stratolaunch is more than up to the task, but may require a bit of rework for the balance. It was designed to carry much smaller but fully-fuelled thus heavier rocket(s) under its wing. Putting a lighter but very very large thing on top changes the control situation a  lot.

But if *this thing* can fly, then anything is possible!!
(https://englishrussia.com/images/soviet_space_program_vm-t_atlant/7.jpg)

Certainly has that Thunderbirds look to it...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 09/18/2019 03:08 pm
Have these been ID'd yet? They seem to be the right shape and size for internal bracing or supports of some sort.

Tooling, not Starship I reckon. Look to be similar to the Boca Chica nose support frame, but possibly 9m diameter.

Been thinking about these since when I asked last week... I bet they are a modular pedestal for the barge part of transport as yard pedestal wouldn't have to be modular

Iím expecting the barge to take Starship horizontally. Iím wondering if they are going to shift the tank section on to this stand for flap and leg attachment. This would free up the ringwall for assembling all those rings scattered around the site.

Edit: should have said leg and flap roots, as Iíd expect the big flappy bits to be left off for transport.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: CyclicVoltmanatee on 09/18/2019 05:43 pm
Has the big hole in the nosecone gone unnoticed?

From the video Amgin3 posted

Thoughts about what that is for? It looks similar to the access ports in the main body but I don't know why they'd need one in the nose cone.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Kansan52 on 09/18/2019 06:15 pm
My reply (guess only based on our experience here) to the USLaunch narrator, most of the cost (if not all) will be paid by SpaceX.

The number of StarShips built at the Cocoa facility and then moved to the Cape has not been announced. My guess would be 20+. But that number is a guess.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Asadinator on 09/18/2019 10:54 pm
Has the big hole in the nosecone gone unnoticed?

From the video Amgin3 posted

Thoughts about what that is for? It looks similar to the access ports in the main body but I don't know why they'd need one in the nose cone.

I think itís reflections. Seen similar black spots before.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: SteveU on 09/18/2019 11:02 pm
Has the big hole in the nosecone gone unnoticed?

From the video Amgin3 posted

Thoughts about what that is for? It looks similar to the access ports in the main body but I don't know why they'd need one in the nose cone.

I think itís reflections. Seen similar black spots before.

Not a reflection. I watched the flyby again. Hole does not move at all as drone flys around site. Unfortunately too low resolution to make out actual shape.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Mark S on 09/19/2019 01:42 am
Has the big hole in the nosecone gone unnoticed?

From the video Amgin3 posted

Thoughts about what that is for? It looks similar to the access ports in the main body but I don't know why they'd need one in the nose cone.

I think itís reflections. Seen similar black spots before.

I don't think it's a reflection. First, you can see all around the area, and there is nothing nearby of that shape and color to reflect. Second, there are other reflections present that do reflect surrounding objects. Third, the shape changes with perspective as the drone flies around the area, as you would expect from an actual hole. Fourth, if you watch in full screen mode, the resolution gets much better a few seconds into the video, if you have enough bandwidth. Finally, the spot is black with a white (or lighter) rim, which doesn't change with the changing viewpoint. See attached cropped pics.

So it definitely seems to be a porthole.  Maybe for access to the upper nose cone to install instrumentation?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Mark S on 09/19/2019 01:59 am
Has anyone counted pixels to figure out how tall that nose cone is? I'm wondering because I just realized that the entire Orion CM would fit in, what, the top half of that cone? Top third? The Orion CM is about 3.3m tall, from heat shield to docking ring, and 5m wide at the base.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: moreno7798 on 09/19/2019 02:20 am
Have these been ID'd yet? They seem to be the right shape and size for internal bracing or supports of some sort.

These seem to me to be the window panes of the main large window...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: moreno7798 on 09/19/2019 02:26 am
Have these been ID'd yet? They seem to be the right shape and size for internal bracing or supports of some sort.

These seem to me to be the window panes of the main large window...
...or not.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: MKremer on 09/19/2019 03:03 am
The window area may likely have been and still is going through design development at Hawthorn. Much easier to do controlled environment tests for different materials and prototypes.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Brigo on 09/19/2019 08:23 am
i would guess windows are for humans, no for cargo and this is the cargo version (at most).
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: CyclicVoltmanatee on 09/19/2019 10:53 am

So it definitely seems to be a porthole.  Maybe for access to the upper nose cone to install instrumentation?

I agree! There is also a horizontal line/bump/break visible just below this new porthole wrapping around the cone itself. Perhaps there is an internal bulkhead/bracing of some sort that blocks easy access to this portion of the nosecone ... hence the need for a port. Why they would have such internal structure I don't know. Maybe to support something with canard actuation?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Ionmars on 09/19/2019 11:18 am

So it definitely seems to be a porthole.  Maybe for access to the upper nose cone to install instrumentation?

I agree! There is also a horizontal line/bump/break visible just below this new porthole wrapping around the cone itself. Perhaps there is an internal bulkhead/bracing of some sort that blocks easy access to this portion of the nosecone ... hence the need for a port. Why they would have such internal structure I don't know. Maybe to support something with canard actuation?

Possibly they need an access port for canard motors and actuators?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RoboGoofers on 09/19/2019 11:51 am
I could see the main large window ending up being a series of discreet oval windows a la Burt Rutan.
But I also think it's likely for instrumentation.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: matthewkantar on 09/19/2019 01:09 pm
Maybe not a port  at all. maybe its a cutout to install a hard point for mounting the forward (when launching) aero surfaces.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: FutureSpaceTourist on 09/20/2019 07:51 pm
https://twitter.com/therealjonvh/status/1175124653205000192

Quote
I believe they have a port-a-potty on the lift for men/women working inside the vessel.

Hey! When you gotta go, you gotta go. Saves time for production too. #Starship #SpaceCoastStarship #StarshipEast
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: born01930 on 09/21/2019 02:17 pm
SpaceX sourcing their own supply of methane
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BretShooter on 09/25/2019 03:19 am
I know spiral welding was disregarded for SS due to thickness variability needs.  Would it be appropriate for SH?  Basic tube assembly would go very quickly.  I imagine it would be a 'top of the cylinder down' construction method.  That would require a way to elevate it as it was built. Or would horizontal be reasonable?  Then the whole tube would need to rotate in a roller cradle of sorts.  But welding would be easy to automate.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: sucramdi on 09/29/2019 01:24 pm
Based on what Elon said at yesterdayís update, those rings laying about must be for Starship Mk. 4. It will be interesting to see how quickly production ramps up with the new technique.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: MaladjustedPlatypus on 09/29/2019 01:53 pm
One clear difference is the work on the rings that is happening on the ground, before stacking, like some of us predicted they would eventually switch to doing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: livingjw on 09/29/2019 02:07 pm
I know spiral welding was disregarded for SS due to thickness variability needs.  Would it be appropriate for SH?  Basic tube assembly would go very quickly.  I imagine it would be a 'top of the cylinder down' construction method.  That would require a way to elevate it as it was built. Or would horizontal be reasonable?  Then the whole tube would need to rotate in a roller cradle of sorts.  But welding would be easy to automate.

No. Rings at the bottom need to be thicker than rings at the top to resist head pressure. Cannot do that with spiral construction. Please check past posts. This has been discussed quite a lot.

John
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: MaladjustedPlatypus on 09/29/2019 02:28 pm
The nosecone strut/support piece photographed on the 28th by Julia has been installed now, going off of the latest aerial footage from John Winkopp. Nosecone header tank is also visible near it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Nevyn72 on 10/01/2019 12:59 am
Interesting developments in the latest video below.

They appear to have commenced stacking the 'single weld' rings beside the lower section of Mk2.
This also appears to be happening without a concrete ring base! Although there does appear to be the beginnings of a new one on the other side of the MK2 base section.

It looks like it is a 2 step process, firstly the ring section is lowered onto a circular base jig with a flat 'stiffening ring' and joined. Then this is lifted and stacked on top of another already stiffened ring. This could be required due to the use of a thinner ring material perhaps?

In the video they are in the process of lowering a ring onto the base jig + 'stiffening ring'. This is located next to what appears to be two already stacked 'single weld' rings with what appears to be a 'stiffening ring' just visible inside.

What do you folks think? Am I just seeing things?

SpaceX Starship Cocoa Facility 29 Sep 2019 courtesy of John Winkopp.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3SdxeMurF0
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: moreno7798 on 10/01/2019 01:48 am
So do we know what the "M" shaped structures are used for?

(https://images2.imgbox.com/32/71/3R9sBIsW_o.png) (http://imgbox.com/3R9sBIsW)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BrianPeterson on 10/01/2019 01:53 am
I don't think they are preping another stack without a concrete jig, I think what we are looking at is probably the next rings to be stacked on MK2. What was the last estimate on MK2, did it need 4 or 2 more rings?

The jig behind with a ring around it looks like one they recently welded and are now putting out with the rest. I've long though they move them with the jig in them.

One interesting thing is that there are several rings missing from the storage area. I wonder if they finally weeded out the ones marked "do not use".

The circle of parts that look like a new concrete jig has actually been there for the last several videos. I think it might be where they stage rings before stacking.

Musk indicated that MK4 would not start for at least a month so anything near the present stack is probably related to that Starship.


They appear to have commenced stacking the 'single weld' rings beside the lower section of Mk2.
This also appears to be happening without a concrete ring base! Although there does appear to be the beginnings of a new one on the other side of the MK2 base section.

It looks like it is a 2 step process, firstly the ring section is lowered onto a circular base jig with a flat 'stiffening ring' and joined. Then this is lifted and stacked on top of another already stiffened ring. This could be required due to the use of a thinner ring material perhaps?

In the video they are in the process of lowering a ring onto the base jig + 'stiffening ring'. This is located next to what appears to be two already stacked 'single weld' rings with what appears to be a 'stiffening ring' just visible inside.

What do you folks think? Am I just seeing things?

Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 10/01/2019 01:57 am
The Mark 1/2 are massively overbuilt, but the later vehicles are supposed to shave off a great deal of mass. Perhaps the rings are for a structural test article, before jumping straight into Mark 3/4 construction?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BrianPeterson on 10/01/2019 01:59 am
So do we know what the "M" shaped structures are used for?

I'm thinking they are the phase 2 launch pad intended for 39A. We know they were building parts off site and these are identical to what showed up in Boca at the launch pad.

(https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=48895.0;attach=1585305;image)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: moreno7798 on 10/01/2019 02:20 am
So do we know what the "M" shaped structures are used for?

I'm thinking they are the phase 2 launch pad intended for 39A. We know they were building parts off site and these are identical to what showed up in Boca at the launch pad.

(https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=48895.0;attach=1585305;image)

Yep. Looks like it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: frederickm17 on 10/02/2019 10:16 pm
Anyone have any ideas why they seem to be stacking rings that we assume are for the next prototype? Maybe keeping busy while waiting on pre-fabricated parts for Mk2?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: MaladjustedPlatypus on 10/02/2019 11:01 pm
Anyone have any ideas why they seem to be stacking rings that we assume are for the next prototype? Maybe keeping busy while waiting on pre-fabricated parts for Mk2?

That and double stacking them is likely much simpler in terms of overall manufacturing ease. You end up with half the number of segments to stack on the main cylinder once you actually begin full stacking. Plus some pieces might need two ring segments to attach to if they're assembling some internals before stacking the rings. And yet another plus is that double stacking all the rings means the space on the lot that they occupy is halved.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BZHSpace on 10/03/2019 09:05 am
Anyone have any ideas why they seem to be stacking rings that we assume are for the next prototype? Maybe keeping busy while waiting on pre-fabricated parts for Mk2?

That and double stacking them is likely much simpler in terms of overall manufacturing ease. You end up with half the number of segments to stack on the main cylinder once you actually begin full stacking. Plus some pieces might need two ring segments to attach to if they're assembling some internals before stacking the rings. And yet another plus is that double stacking all the rings means the space on the lot that they occupy is halved.

Logistical option for stocking more rings on the construction site and it can help to built quicker SS/SH ? What's the heigh of the Florida's ring ?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: tyrred on 10/03/2019 09:16 am
Interesting developments in the latest video below.

They appear to have commenced stacking the 'single weld' rings beside the lower section of Mk2.
This also appears to be happening without a concrete ring base! Although there does appear to be the beginnings of a new one on the other side of the MK2 base section.

It looks like it is a 2 step process, firstly the ring section is lowered onto a circular base jig with a flat 'stiffening ring' and joined. Then this is lifted and stacked on top of another already stiffened ring. This could be required due to the use of a thinner ring material perhaps?

In the video they are in the process of lowering a ring onto the base jig + 'stiffening ring'. This is located next to what appears to be two already stacked 'single weld' rings with what appears to be a 'stiffening ring' just visible inside.

What do you folks think? Am I just seeing things?

SpaceX Starship Cocoa Facility 29 Sep 2019 courtesy of John Winkopp.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3SdxeMurF0

Please timestamp what you are referring to.  There are a lot of things.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: su27k on 10/03/2019 09:53 am
So do we know what the "M" shaped structures are used for?

I'm thinking they are the phase 2 launch pad intended for 39A. We know they were building parts off site and these are identical to what showed up in Boca at the launch pad.

(https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=48895.0;attach=1585305;image)

Yep. Looks like it.

From the latest Texas photos, it looks like they assembled these "M" shaped structures into a circular stand at the launch site, then moved the stand to the build site, and is bolting it on top of the support legs that was used for securing mk1 during the presentation.

So I think this stand is just a work stand for mk1/2 at the build site, not the launch mount. I mean it makes no sense to have launch mount parts at the Cocoa site anyway, since once they built it they'll have to transport the 9m structure to 39A, which is a lot of hassle. Makes much more sense to have the launch mount built at 39A itself.

I suspect Cocoa will assemble their work stand and mount it on top of the supposed new concrete ring base near the foot of mk2, and this is what mk2 will sit on once it's mated with its fairing section.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 10/03/2019 05:08 pm
So do we know what the "M" shaped structures are used for?

I'm thinking they are the phase 2 launch pad intended for 39A. We know they were building parts off site and these are identical to what showed up in Boca at the launch pad.

(https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=48895.0;attach=1585305;image)

Yep. Looks like it.

From the latest Texas photos, it looks like they assembled these "M" shaped structures into a circular stand at the launch site, then moved the stand to the build site, and is bolting it on top of the support legs that was used for securing mk1 during the presentation.

So I think this stand is just a work stand for mk1/2 at the build site, not the launch mount. I mean it makes no sense to have launch mount parts at the Cocoa site anyway, since once they built it they'll have to transport the 9m structure to 39A, which is a lot of hassle. Makes much more sense to have the launch mount built at 39A itself.

I suspect Cocoa will assemble their work stand and mount it on top of the supposed new concrete ring base near the foot of mk2, and this is what mk2 will sit on once it's mated with its fairing section.

I think this stand will facilitate installation of the legs. I think the concrete jigs may get in the way of installing the legs as they are.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 10/03/2019 05:42 pm
So do we know what the "M" shaped structures are used for?

I'm thinking they are the phase 2 launch pad intended for 39A. We know they were building parts off site and these are identical to what showed up in Boca at the launch pad.

(https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=48895.0;attach=1585305;image)

Yep. Looks like it.

From the latest Texas photos, it looks like they assembled these "M" shaped structures into a circular stand at the launch site, then moved the stand to the build site, and is bolting it on top of the support legs that was used for securing mk1 during the presentation.

So I think this stand is just a work stand for mk1/2 at the build site, not the launch mount. I mean it makes no sense to have launch mount parts at the Cocoa site anyway, since once they built it they'll have to transport the 9m structure to 39A, which is a lot of hassle. Makes much more sense to have the launch mount built at 39A itself.

I suspect Cocoa will assemble their work stand and mount it on top of the supposed new concrete ring base near the foot of mk2, and this is what mk2 will sit on once it's mated with its fairing section.

I think this stand will facilitate installation of the legs. I think the concrete jigs may get in the way of installing the legs as they are.
This stand is indeed being erected on the new footings in the Coco facility next to the tank section.

Image credit: John Winkopp's YouTube video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tHdoS92dZU&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Supafly on 10/03/2019 05:52 pm
These stands also have an open to the ground gap on both sides.  Looks wide enough to drive a crawler under to lift and transport a Starship to a barge or launch pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: DistantTemple on 10/03/2019 06:06 pm
Also these parts look great for a couple of hundred tonnes.... but not  1200, let alone 4500!!! - I'have not measured them!
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: MaladjustedPlatypus on 10/03/2019 07:09 pm
New metal stand is being assembled next to the existing bottom half, according to John Winkopp's Oct 3 flyby.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Anjin_ on 10/03/2019 08:20 pm
Hmmm, I see a few of the new single seam steel rings stacked to double height, and also a bulkhead. Almost makes me wonder if they are going to fully complete Mk2, or just move right on to Mk3.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BrianPeterson on 10/03/2019 11:09 pm
Also these parts look great for a couple of hundred tonnes.... but not  1200, let alone 4500!!! - I'have not measured them!

Well if starship mK1 weighs 2000 tons then they just plopped the heaviest half of that on the structure in Boca according to the LabPadre stream.

So we have 3 concrete jigs in construction in Boca and now a steel girder jig in use in Boca. Along with that another steel girder jig in construction in Coca... What is for what?

edit correct spelling
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: marsbase on 10/03/2019 11:15 pm
Also these parts look great for a couple of hundred tonnes.... but not  1200, let alone 4500!!! - I'have not measured them!

Well if starship mK1 weighs 2000 tons then they just plopped the heaviest half of that on the structure in Boca according to the LabPadre stream.
Mk1 weighs 200 tons dry, 1400 tons wet.  Goal  is for Starship to weigh 120 tons, 110 at best.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: MdBee on 10/04/2019 03:01 am


So we have 3 concrete jigs in construction in Boca and now a steel girder jig in use in Boca. Along with that another steel girder jig in construction in Coca... What is for what?

edit correct spelling

The suggestions for the frame I've seen are largely for managing the leg attachments (since they appear to go on the outside of the skirt, and the steel jig seems to be 9m to match the skirt), and also for making it easier for adding/removing Raptors - there's a couple of tall rectangular gaps in the circle.

The other thing I suspect is airflow, given a number of welders, plumbers and electricians all working at length under there, in a tightly-enclosed steel cylinder in the sun when on the concrete jig, would not be comfortable.

The concrete jigs could be used for overall stacking and major installations like bulkheads (if not done at ground level), where access and airflow are less crucial, and fewer people are involved. Each jig could be a tank/fairing stand before moving on to mating and full assembly, which parallelises construction.

Time, and many watching eyes, will tell...  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Nomadd on 10/04/2019 03:40 am
Also these parts look great for a couple of hundred tonnes.... but not  1200, let alone 4500!!! - I'have not measured them!

Well if starship mK1 weighs 2000 tons then they just plopped the heaviest half of that on the structure in Boca according to the LabPadre stream.

So we have 3 concrete jigs in construction in Boca and now a steel girder jig in use in Boca. Along with that another steel girder jig in construction in Coca... What is for what?

edit correct spelling

Two concrete jigs built and three more under construction. And two or three spots on the ground they can set the ship directly on.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 10/04/2019 06:50 am
Hmmm, I see a few of the new single seam steel rings stacked to double height, and also a bulkhead. Almost makes me wonder if they are going to fully complete Mk2, or just move right on to Mk3.

Beat me to it. My thoughts too. Elon made little (if any) reference to Mk.2, and I donít see what it will give them. The only part I can see being worked on is the nose cone which could easily be used for Mk.4(?), as could the fore dome. They may not have decided themselves yet.

Edit: Whoa, changed my mind already. Latest drone shots show the leg attachment stand is being built, and there is now a work platform half way up the tank section. I think weíll get Mk.2 after all.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: su27k on 10/04/2019 09:48 am
Hmmm, I see a few of the new single seam steel rings stacked to double height, and also a bulkhead. Almost makes me wonder if they are going to fully complete Mk2, or just move right on to Mk3.

Beat me to it. My thoughts too. Elon made little (if any) reference to Mk.2, and I donít see what it will give them. The only part I can see being worked on is the nose cone which could easily be used for Mk.4(?), as could the fore dome. They may not have decided themselves yet.

He did mention mk2, he said it would be built in a couple of months or less.

Note mk2's nose has a manhole which is not present on mk1, I wonder if mk2 will be the first to have integrated header tank at the nose. Maybe the slowdown in assembling mk2 is because they need to wait for parts for the new header tank.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 10/04/2019 11:53 am
Hmmm, I see a few of the new single seam steel rings stacked to double height, and also a bulkhead. Almost makes me wonder if they are going to fully complete Mk2, or just move right on to Mk3.

Beat me to it. My thoughts too. Elon made little (if any) reference to Mk.2, and I donít see what it will give them. The only part I can see being worked on is the nose cone which could easily be used for Mk.4(?), as could the fore dome. They may not have decided themselves yet.

He did mention mk2, he said it would be built in a couple of months or less.

Note mk2's nose has a manhole which is not present on mk1, I wonder if mk2 will be the first to have integrated header tank at the nose. Maybe the slowdown in assembling mk2 is because they need to wait for parts for the new header tank.

Musk seemed to think not.  In his post-update interview with Tim Dodd after discussing him interest in NOT carrying "propellant tanks as cargo" like in the Mk1, he said they might possibly make the change by Mk3.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 10/04/2019 01:15 pm
Hmmm, I see a few of the new single seam steel rings stacked to double height, and also a bulkhead. Almost makes me wonder if they are going to fully complete Mk2, or just move right on to Mk3.

Beat me to it. My thoughts too. Elon made little (if any) reference to Mk.2, and I donít see what it will give them. The only part I can see being worked on is the nose cone which could easily be used for Mk.4(?), as could the fore dome. They may not have decided themselves yet.

He did mention mk2, he said it would be built in a couple of months or less.

Note mk2's nose has a manhole which is not present on mk1, I wonder if mk2 will be the first to have integrated header tank at the nose. Maybe the slowdown in assembling mk2 is because they need to wait for parts for the new header tank.

Musk seemed to think not.  In his post-update interview with Tim Dodd after discussing him interest in NOT carrying "propellant tanks as cargo" like in the Mk1, he said they might possibly make the change by Mk3.
Additionally weíve seen the standalone header tanks at the Coco site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Nevyn72 on 10/05/2019 02:07 am
Additionally weíve seen the standalone header tanks at the Coco site.

Things change quickly in SpaceX-land.

Just because they are there, it doesn't necessarily mean they will use them......
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: su27k on 10/05/2019 04:17 am
Thanks to @julia_bergeron we now know mk2's dry mass: 135 metric tons.

https://mobile.twitter.com/julia_bergeron/status/1180198139145445376

The diagram also showed the center of mass in this configuration, in case someone is interested.

Not sure if this included the Raptors and fins, they did say it's reduced to minimal weight possible, so probably not.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: FutureSpaceTourist on 10/05/2019 06:06 am
https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1180264002515095552

Quote
Someone else pointed out, the guy under the umbrella is there for the safety of others working the confined area in the structure. They are completing a new base perhaps in prep for the big move.

twitter.com/realchefjared/status/1180273301354160130

Quote
You know what that reminds me of. It could be an attachment for taking it horizontal with cranes, like the ones left on the Saturn V in the SVC. I don't know how the bases are made though so it could just be a base.

https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1180281607330115584

Quote
Yes that heavy one at the base and maybe this part at the top. It has been sitting outside for over a month and your picture gives it some meaning.

https://twitter.com/13ericralph31/status/1180324840298799104

Quote
Starship Mk1 was just spotted being attached to an almost identical steel structure! Seems like some combination of a launch and/or fabrication mount
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: marsbase on 10/05/2019 12:52 pm
Thanks to @julia_bergeron we now know mk2's dry mass: 135 metric tons.

The diagram also showed the center of mass in this configuration, in case someone is interested.

Not sure if this included the Raptors and fins, they did say it's reduced to minimal weight possible, so probably not.
Here is a post from 5 weeks ago by Michael Paul who has had a very high reliability on details of SpaceX operations.  He says the Mk2 will be transported horizontally in two pieces.  Also, I wonder if that mass includes fins and legs.  Seems to be a big reduction from Mk1 mass of 200 tons.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48892.msg1985234#msg1985234
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: philw1776 on 10/05/2019 02:28 pm
Thanks to @julia_bergeron we now know mk2's dry mass: 135 metric tons.

The diagram also showed the center of mass in this configuration, in case someone is interested.

Not sure if this included the Raptors and fins, they did say it's reduced to minimal weight possible, so probably not.
Here is a post from 5 weeks ago by Michael Paul who has had a very high reliability on details of SpaceX operations.  He says the Mk2 will be transported horizontally in two pieces.  Also, I wonder if that mass includes fins and legs.  Seems to be a big reduction from Mk1 mass of 200 tons.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48892.msg1985234#msg1985234

I also wonder if fins & legs are included in the 135.  My guess is that the ~10 tonnes for 6 raptors is not included.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 10/05/2019 02:54 pm
Mk2 should only have 3 Raptors, there would be no reason to have them installed when transporting the ship, and the transport documents Julia posted on Twitter show the dimensions being 32'-33' so basically nothing attached outside the cylinder.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: cppetrie on 10/06/2019 03:39 pm
https://twitter.com/marekcyzio/status/1180855435911405571

Quote
@julia_bergeron You are missing some serious action! SpaceX just got new delivery!
That cross-section looks like it might be the covers at the wing/flap roots.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: MdBee on 10/07/2019 06:18 am
Mk2 should only have 3 Raptors, there would be no reason to have them installed when transporting the ship, and the transport documents Julia posted on Twitter show the dimensions being 32'-33' so basically nothing attached outside the cylinder.

The diagram from Julia's tweet shows the total payload length at 50m, with quite some overhang at the rear - which (if Mk2 is the same height as Mk1) suggests it will be carried in a single piece, rather than two?

The per-axle weights are the same along the whole trailer, so that does suggest the Raptors won't be attached, or it would show up as extra weight at one end.

Would the 9.7m diameter in the diagram include the hinge pins for the fins? I've only seen mention of the tube diameter being '9m' but no actual references or pixel counts. Possible I've missed something in the many threads. But that allows for a foot each side (note the elegant hop between imperial and metric :-) ). I wondered about the fins being folded against the body for transport, and how thick they are at the base. Fairly sure that's more than one foot(!). But there's all the raceways and chines and flaring around the lower fins, plus leg-cowling (all also >>1'), which might get in the way of removing/attaching the fins. Does that mean that that work will happen over at KSC? Or the fins are more easily removable than I'd expect. We did seem to see a delivery of some shaped panels at Cocoa yesterday, which suggests they go on there before transport.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OneSpeed on 10/07/2019 08:46 am
The per-axle weights are the same along the whole trailer, so that does suggest the Raptors won't be attached, or it would show up as extra weight at one end.

The load's centre of gravity is directly over the trailer's centre axle, and that is why the weight is evenly distributed over all eleven axles. So, how can you tell if the Raptors are attached or not?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 10/07/2019 03:12 pm
https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1181211268767797250

Quote
l#Starship #MK2 Cocoa, this area of the facility is where parts waiting to be installed are placed.  A lot of plumbing yet to go into MK2. Expect a while before the big move to Space Center.

Is it a trick of the light, or has the bulkhead been plastic wrapped? Not looking like they are in a hurry to install it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: sferrin on 10/07/2019 05:59 pm
Is this location going to build Starships long term?  Was reading the article on the front page, discussing the need to transport the rocket(s) to the Cape, and it sounded like it was a temporary problem.   ???
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: jfarnen on 10/07/2019 08:00 pm
Don't know if this has been pointed out yet but in John Winkopp's most recent photo the wing mounts have been moved closer to the main work area (see upper left of the photo). They used to be in the 'on deck area'.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: burger on 10/07/2019 10:27 pm
Is this location going to build Starships long term?  Was reading the article on the front page, discussing the need to transport the rocket(s) to the Cape, and it sounded like it was a temporary problem.   ???


In the long-term construction will move to KSC. But they currently don't have any facilities set up there yet thus the use of Cocoa
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: MdBee on 10/07/2019 10:37 pm
The per-axle weights are the same along the whole trailer, so that does suggest the Raptors won't be attached, or it would show up as extra weight at one end.

The load's centre of gravity is directly over the trailer's centre axle, and that is why the weight is evenly distributed over all eleven axles. So, how can you tell if the Raptors are attached or not?

The centre of gravity is just where the moments of the mass distribution balance out - and you want that within the wheelbase of the trailer to stop it tipping of course. But that is not the mass felt by each axle, they feel what is directly above them, and some fraction of the adjacent material, decreasing as distance increases. So it's quite dependent on the mass distribution. A barbell shape would have a COG in the middle of the bar without any load on the axle under it, while the ends would feel a lot. Try standing on a pair of bathroom scales. If your COG is in the middle between them, each will read half your total weight. If you lift one leg off then, your COG either better be above your remaining axle/leg (and that scale reads your full weight) or you'll tip over :-)

So I would expect that if there was a huge additional load at one end it would show up at that end. Given the rear overhang drawn in that diagram I wonder if that's the nose or the tail...

Having said that, you're right it is odd that the axle loads are perfectly evenly distributed, given there's probably a lot of mass at both ends and in theory not so much in the middle. I wonder if those figures are peaks or limits rather than actuals.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 10/07/2019 10:57 pm
Is this location going to build Starships long term?  Was reading the article on the front page, discussing the need to transport the rocket(s) to the Cape, and it sounded like it was a temporary problem.   ???


In the long-term construction will move to KSC. But they currently don't have any facilities set up there yet thus the use of Cocoa

The currently planned KSC facilities don't seem large enough for more than final outfitting, and certainly not for the scale of operations SpaceX has envisioned. The amount of groundwork going on doesn't suggest that their operations are only going to be short term. Is the end of operations at Cocoa popular speculation, or is there definitive information that I haven't seen?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BrianPeterson on 10/08/2019 12:27 am
The amount of groundwork going on doesn't suggest that their operations are only going to be short term. Is the end of operations at Cocoa popular speculation, or is there definitive information that I haven't seen?

Anyone saying that the Coca site will be entirely moved to the Cape is just speculating. There has been absolutely nothing said to indicate that new construction facilities will be built at the Cape.

What has been said is that the new building(s) going up at the Cape for SpaceX are intended to be storage and maintenance area for Falcon9 and Falcon Heavy along with administrative office are and a future control tower. So it's the assumption that the Starship will finish assembly there in the future.

But there is no indication that I have found that the Coca site won't be the primary building center in FL like it is now. Frankly I would think that the property in Coca is cheaper than if they moved that aspect onto the Cape.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Keldor on 10/08/2019 02:14 am
https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1181211268767797250

Quote
l#Starship #MK2 Cocoa, this area of the facility is where parts waiting to be installed are placed.  A lot of plumbing yet to go into MK2. Expect a while before the big move to Space Center.

Is it a trick of the light, or has the bulkhead been plastic wrapped? Not looking like they are in a hurry to install it.

I think it's just a trick of the light.  In order for it to look like it does with plastic wrap, they would have had to vacuum pack it with transparent plastic, which makes no sense whatsoever.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think all the major bulkheads for MK2 are already installed?  In this case, I assume this bulkhead is for MK4, so no, it's not going to be installed for some time.

~~~

I can't get over how the trays of parts in the upper right of the photo remind me of those little packets of screws and nuts you get at the hardware store...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 10/08/2019 02:53 am
https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1181211268767797250

Quote
l#Starship #MK2 Cocoa, this area of the facility is where parts waiting to be installed are placed.  A lot of plumbing yet to go into MK2. Expect a while before the big move to Space Center.

Is it a trick of the light, or has the bulkhead been plastic wrapped? Not looking like they are in a hurry to install it.

I think it's just a trick of the light.  In order for it to look like it does with plastic wrap, they would have had to vacuum pack it with transparent plastic, which makes no sense whatsoever.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think all the major bulkheads for MK2 are already installed?  In this case, I assume this bulkhead is for MK4, so no, it's not going to be installed for some time.

~~~

I can't get over how the trays of parts in the upper right of the photo remind me of those little packets of screws and nuts you get at the hardware store...
Upper dome has yet to be installed...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OneSpeed on 10/08/2019 03:25 am
The per-axle weights are the same along the whole trailer, so that does suggest the Raptors won't be attached, or it would show up as extra weight at one end.

The load's centre of gravity is directly over the trailer's centre axle, and that is why the weight is evenly distributed over all eleven axles. So, how can you tell if the Raptors are attached or not?

The centre of gravity is just where the moments of the mass distribution balance out - and you want that within the wheelbase of the trailer to stop it tipping of course. But that is not the mass felt by each axle, they feel what is directly above them, and some fraction of the adjacent material, decreasing as distance increases. So it's quite dependent on the mass distribution. A barbell shape would have a COG in the middle of the bar without any load on the axle under it, while the ends would feel a lot. Try standing on a pair of bathroom scales. If your COG is in the middle between them, each will read half your total weight. If you lift one leg off then, your COG either better be above your remaining axle/leg (and that scale reads your full weight) or you'll tip over :-)

So I would expect that if there was a huge additional load at one end it would show up at that end. Given the rear overhang drawn in that diagram I wonder if that's the nose or the tail...

Having said that, you're right it is odd that the axle loads are perfectly evenly distributed, given there's probably a lot of mass at both ends and in theory not so much in the middle. I wonder if those figures are peaks or limits rather than actuals.

Ok, let's continue with your bathroom scale analogy. You appear to be suggesting the Roll-Lift trailer is actually like 11 separate bathroom scales, and that in order to re-distribute its mass the starship has 11 legs that are somehow individually adjustable.

This is clearly not the case. From an engineering point of view, both the starship and the trailer are rigid beams, and the trailer has 11 equally spaced supports. Concentrations of mass like any Raptor engines will have been taken into account when the centre of mass of the Starship was calculated. If the centre of mass is at the centre of the trailer, then the load will be evenly distributed along its length, regardless of any mass concentrations inside the Starship. Because the load is rigid, there is no way for it to concentrate load at a particular point on the trailer. And because the trailer is also rigid, there is no way for it to concentrate load on a particular axle.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: groundbound on 10/08/2019 04:36 am
Did I miss something? When did the mass of three sea level Raptors become a significant fraction of the vehicle mass?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 10/08/2019 05:32 am
https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1181211268767797250

Quote
l#Starship #MK2 Cocoa, this area of the facility is where parts waiting to be installed are placed.  A lot of plumbing yet to go into MK2. Expect a while before the big move to Space Center.

Is it a trick of the light, or has the bulkhead been plastic wrapped? Not looking like they are in a hurry to install it.

I think it's just a trick of the light.  In order for it to look like it does with plastic wrap, they would have had to vacuum pack it with transparent plastic, which makes no sense whatsoever.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think all the major bulkheads for MK2 are already installed?  In this case, I assume this bulkhead is for MK4, so no, it's not going to be installed for some time.

~~~

I can't get over how the trays of parts in the upper right of the photo remind me of those little packets of screws and nuts you get at the hardware store...
Upper dome has yet to be installed...

Yup, itís the upper dome. Looks loose wrapped rather than vacuum packed. Doesnít make sence to me either way.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Lemurion on 10/08/2019 06:36 pm
Did I miss something? When did the mass of three sea level Raptors become a significant fraction of the vehicle mass?

I think itís less the mass of the Raptors than the mass of the thrust structure.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 10/09/2019 12:14 am
The per-axle weights are the same along the whole trailer, so that does suggest the Raptors won't be attached, or it would show up as extra weight at one end.

The load's centre of gravity is directly over the trailer's centre axle, and that is why the weight is evenly distributed over all eleven axles. So, how can you tell if the Raptors are attached or not?

Thatís a great find. And it leaves me confused.

Axle 1 is listed as 15Ē. 2-4 are listed as 11Ē. Without exception highway tractor tires are either 22.5Ē or 24.5Ē inner diameter and then something showing the profile and load rating. There are a variety of sizes for specialized trailers.

For example my last truck had 22.5 R11 tires. This means they were rated for (I think) 6,500 lb. each and weíre full profile as opposed to low profile.

It looks like they will not be using a highway tractor. Iíve seen pics of those carriers using some sort of attached power unit for short moves. I wonder if they have a different power unit for this type of move. Iíve always assumed (maybe incorrectly) that those carriers were diesel-electric with all wheels driven. The permit image showed a traditional heavy haul tractor. The image may be notional.

Also, it shows a pintle hook and tow bar instead of a 5th wheel hookup. Ive never done heavy haul so I canít say if this is unusual. I have seen heavy ore trucks in Wyoming with a fixed dump type body and pintle hook/tow bars in sequence to two short trailers. It does allow the hookup to stay low.

With that long overhang they will not have the raptors in the rear. So either nose pointing back or no raptors on board. This leads to a question.

ISTM the engine section and tanks/bulkheads are the stiffest part of the structure, but also the heaviest. It is not reasonable to have the heavy part as a dangling overhang. OTOH, it is not reasonable to have the heavy part in front if the top dome is out in the overhang area. It would be a natural hinging point unless reinforced more than we know.

The overhang was showing 50-55 ft. (Dangit I cant we the post while Iím posting) Assuming the tanks are leading and do not extend forward of the carriers, where would the top header line up? If its on the carriers with enough of the upper structure on the carriers to be secured, all is good.

Phil
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 10/09/2019 12:45 am
Did I miss something? When did the mass of three sea level Raptors become a significant fraction of the vehicle mass?

More like the engines are a point of high density. Itís 3+(?) tons all in one cross sectional area. Of course the full engine bay/thrust structure/tank header are there too but the engines are not insignificant.

I can see another problem with having the engines installed during the move. The gimbal mount and mounting bolts will be in shear when itís designed for mostly tension and compression. The engines can be blocked into place but thatís a bandaid for an issue that doesnít have to be. Itís not like R&R is a major operation.

Phil
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Keldor on 10/09/2019 03:00 pm
Did I miss something? When did the mass of three sea level Raptors become a significant fraction of the vehicle mass?

More like the engines are a point of high density. Itís 3+(?) tons all in one cross sectional area. Of course the full engine bay/thrust structure/tank header are there too but the engines are not insignificant.

I can see another problem with having the engines installed during the move. The gimbal mount and mounting bolts will be in shear when itís designed for mostly tension and compression. The engines can be blocked into place but thatís a bandaid for an issue that doesnít have to be. Itís not like R&R is a major operation.

Phil

At least for Starship, the engine mounts will have to survive this sort of sheer in normal operation.  During reentry it will be coming in belly first, with maybe 2G worth of accelleration, in addition to whatever peaks happen from roughness in the flight.

It's a bit less clear for Superheavy, since it just reenters tail first.  However, under these circumstances, it seems like there will be plenty of roughness as the result of a not tremendously aerodynamic rear end of a rocket leading the way starting at hypersonic speeds.

These mounts are designed to support up to 250 tons of thrust (plus safety margin), up to several degrees off axis during gimbal, and with all the bumpyness associated with the violence of a firing rocket engine.  Even if it's orientated with the forces acting at an unusual angle, it's hard to imagine the weight alone of a 1 ton engine bothering it.

Falcon 9 is shipped with the engines mounted.

One other thing is that mounting engines takes a fair chunk of time.  This might not be a big deal for Starship, but closing down your launch pad for a month so workers can mount all 35+ engines on a Super Heavy is a no-no.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 10/11/2019 02:38 am
Did I miss something? When did the mass of three sea level Raptors become a significant fraction of the vehicle mass?

More like the engines are a point of high density. Itís 3+(?) tons all in one cross sectional area. Of course the full engine bay/thrust structure/tank header are there too but the engines are not insignificant.

I can see another problem with having the engines installed during the move. The gimbal mount and mounting bolts will be in shear when itís designed for mostly tension and compression. The engines can be blocked into place but thatís a bandaid for an issue that doesnít have to be. Itís not like R&R is a major operation.

Phil

At least for Starship, the engine mounts will have to survive this sort of sheer in normal operation.  During reentry it will be coming in belly first, with maybe 2G worth of accelleration, in addition to whatever peaks happen from roughness in the flight.

It's a bit less clear for Superheavy, since it just reenters tail first.  However, under these circumstances, it seems like there will be plenty of roughness as the result of a not tremendously aerodynamic rear end of a rocket leading the way starting at hypersonic speeds.

These mounts are designed to support up to 250 tons of thrust (plus safety margin), up to several degrees off axis during gimbal, and with all the bumpyness associated with the violence of a firing rocket engine.  Even if it's orientated with the forces acting at an unusual angle, it's hard to imagine the weight alone of a 1 ton engine bothering it.

Falcon 9 is shipped with the engines mounted.

One other thing is that mounting engines takes a fair chunk of time.  This might not be a big deal for Starship, but closing down your launch pad for a month so workers can mount all 35+ engines on a Super Heavy is a no-no.


Good points on the type of loadings. I was wearing blinders when I write that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 10/11/2019 02:47 pm
The crew is busy this morning. What are possibly fuel lines have been run which, I believe, have not been seen yet at MK1. They were installed along the plates that I photographed later night
Very cool Julia - those are what's assumed to be the runs to/from the header tanks. Man, they went up fast! They are on MK1, but these look to be an upgraded version with what appears to be insulation.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BZHSpace on 10/11/2019 03:25 pm
The crew is busy this morning. What are possibly fuel lines have been run which, I believe, have not been seen yet at MK1. They were installed along the plates that I photographed later night
Very cool Julia - those are what's assumed to be the runs to/from the header tanks. Man, they went up fast! They are on MK1, but these look to be an upgraded version with what appears to be insulation.

They are building the sheath on both side to the cylinder and they simplified the cable and join them. They will built the joint system between cylinder and fins. Fins will arrive after and also the case. More simple system will come on the "final" production series Starship because its safer to have cleaner systems and it's will be more simple for building Starship on site. MK2 appears to be cleaner than MK1.

Its very close to Iron Man different version; MK1 is very rusty, the MK2 is a little bit cleaner and version after version the Starship will have more advance hardware and less rusty part. Isn't very suprising to see that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: SteveU on 10/11/2019 03:25 pm
The crew is busy this morning. What are possibly fuel lines have been run which, I believe, have not been seen yet at MK1. They were installed along the plates that I photographed later night
Very cool Julia - those are what's assumed to be the runs to/from the header tanks. Man, they went up fast! They are on MK1, but these look to be an upgraded version with what appears to be insulation.

Agree - they appear to be insulated.  Does that mean MK2 will be testing true EDL effects?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 10/11/2019 06:16 pm
https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1182712980087234562

Quote
6 rings doubled up, work on the external sides of lower section and lots of new parts arriving at #SpaceX #Starship #MK2 Cocoa Facility, video soon.

I like the new office building next to the Cathedral  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BZHSpace on 10/12/2019 09:55 am
- MK2 appears to be completed in one month or more but not in two or more.
- MK4 is next and ready to be build quickly after the Mk2 has flight

About the MK2:

I think the lateral system for fins, lox and ch4 pipe will be build on next week, then I will come the fins/canard and the engines, (maybe they will bring the fins/canards after they transport the prototype to the launch facilities and then they will build it). A good way to reduct width of the Starship during transport consists in retracting the fins and maybe the canards. I note they put the casing of the Starship next to the ring. picture below and they put the support structure for lower section next to the lower section so It's means that lifting operations will happen very soon.

About MK4 :

I saw 6 double rings and 4 new one possible next to the others and three single rings behing the central building, construction will be very fast I think because of the pre-assembly of the rings, less elevation operations than for the MK2. The exterior surface will be cleaner than the MK2 for sure. I think their are enought "standard" rings for building the MK4.


For the third/fourth picture what do you think it is ? On the fourth picture it's seemed to be pipe "structure" (what Julia took 10/11/2019) fifith picture. I saw the pipe is composed in many sections which are assembly togother for building the whole pipes. Very interesting to see the evolution of construction process by the Florida teams. They prefer to build one layer by one layer rather than put one part and go back to an other part behind the part they put on the Starship.




Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Michael Paul on 10/13/2019 02:12 am
The crew is busy this morning. What are possibly fuel lines have been run which, I believe, have not been seen yet at MK1. They were installed along the plates that I photographed later night

The plates are an off the shelf product known as Unistrut, used in commercial applications in electrical and plumbing raceways as a mounting surface.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Cheapchips on 10/13/2019 06:41 am
I wonder what's going on with the Roberts Road bulkhead. Possibly the start of a Super Heavy?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: MySDCUserID on 10/13/2019 12:48 pm
Saw a flat bed parked in front of Hangar M on Friday with what looked like two rolls of stainless steel on it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: kuldan on 10/13/2019 04:01 pm
I wonder what's going on with the Roberts Road bulkhead. Possibly the start of a Super Heavy?

Just an idea...since they will soon be facing a lot of trouble with transporting full vessels to KSC via the road (due to the new bridge construction), can they use Cidco to just pre-fabricate double-stacked rings and maybe bulkheads, and move those on flatbeds (oversize load obviously, but road transportable I think)? Anyone know how much vertical clearing the new bridge will have?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: DistantTemple on 10/13/2019 04:06 pm
I wonder what's going on with the Roberts Road bulkhead. Possibly the start of a Super Heavy?

Just an idea...since they will soon be facing a lot of trouble with transporting full vessels to KSC via the road (due to the new bridge construction), can they use Cidco to just pre-fabricate double-stacked rings and maybe bulkheads, and move those on flatbeds (oversize load obviously, but road transportable I think)? Anyone know how much vertical clearing the new bridge will have?
Where is the new bridge going to be? Is that related to Virgin Trains? when is it expected? 
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 10/13/2019 05:58 pm
I am thinking there will not be a blocking bridge by Richard Branson. It looks more and more like it will only be a railroad crossing at Industrial Blvd. The steel beams are being used to make a small bridge in median of Industrial Blvd to cross a small ditch, not over the road.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 10/14/2019 03:29 pm
I wonder what's going on with the Roberts Road bulkhead. Possibly the start of a Super Heavy?

Just an idea...since they will soon be facing a lot of trouble with transporting full vessels to KSC via the road (due to the new bridge construction), can they use Cidco to just pre-fabricate double-stacked rings and maybe bulkheads, and move those on flatbeds (oversize load obviously, but road transportable I think)? Anyone know how much vertical clearing the new bridge will have?

Standard minimum overpass height is 13í6Ē or ~4.1m. Can be higher. Standard lane width is 12í or ~3.7m.

Moving one single or a double 9m ring on a flatbed would be ~40% of the PITA of moving the whole ship. Each truck in the convoy bumps the number up a bit.

The only advantages are lower height so no need to dodge overpasses, less specialized carriers, and easier (still not easy) cornering.

There is still a permitting process, closed roads, a lead and trail car for each truck public inconvenience, moved signage, power lines, lotsa cops. Even though the load is light it will move slow.

The permitting process might be blanket for an ongoing effort but I doubt it. Power lines moved only once. Signs will probably be taken down by a crew moving ahead of the load(s) and put back by a crew following. The cops work out fine until the time for a move coincides with a multi vehicle fustercluck with a burning gas tanker in a fog, or, well take your pick of human tragedy that is all to common and calls for lotsa cops. 

All in all, the Cocoa facility doesnít seem like a long term solution for SS or SH. Itíll do for now but a facility is really needed at KSC.

As an added point, Cocoa is getting towards maxing out for space.

Phil
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 10/14/2019 03:49 pm
>
All in all, the Cocoa facility doesnít seem like a long term solution for SS or SH. Itíll do for now but a facility is really needed at KSC.

As an added point, Cocoa is getting towards maxing out for space.

Phil

While vehicle assembly, maintenance etc. will likely be at the Roberts Rd. Operations Center, I think they'll keep the Cocoa facility for parts fabrication & assembly; legs, fins, etc. Once a steelyard....
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 10/14/2019 08:11 pm
>
All in all, the Cocoa facility doesnít seem like a long term solution for SS or SH. Itíll do for now but a facility is really needed at KSC.

As an added point, Cocoa is getting towards maxing out for space.

Phil

While vehicle assembly, maintenance etc. will likely be at the Roberts Rd. Operations Center, I think they'll keep the Cocoa facility for parts fabrication & assembly; legs, fins, etc. Once a steelyard....

but aren't the fins manufactured someplace else? at least both top and bottom fins were delivered to boca chica, and not built in site. unclear if they can build them at the cocoa site, but I'd guess it's the same as BC
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: allins on 10/14/2019 09:09 pm
I wonder what's going on with the Roberts Road bulkhead. Possibly the start of a Super Heavy?

Just an idea...since they will soon be facing a lot of trouble with transporting full vessels to KSC via the road (due to the new bridge construction), can they use Cidco to just pre-fabricate double-stacked rings and maybe bulkheads, and move those on flatbeds (oversize load obviously, but road transportable I think)? Anyone know how much vertical clearing the new bridge will have?

Standard minimum overpass height is 13í6Ē or ~4.1m. Can be higher. Standard lane width is 12í or ~3.7m.

Moving one single or a double 9m ring on a flatbed would be ~40% of the PITA of moving the whole ship. Each truck in the convoy bumps the number up a bit.

The only advantages are lower height so no need to dodge overpasses, less specialized carriers, and easier (still not easy) cornering.

There is still a permitting process, closed roads, a lead and trail car for each truck public inconvenience, moved signage, power lines, lotsa cops. Even though the load is light it will move slow.

The permitting process might be blanket for an ongoing effort but I doubt it. Power lines moved only once. Signs will probably be taken down by a crew moving ahead of the load(s) and put back by a crew following. The cops work out fine until the time for a move coincides with a multi vehicle fustercluck with a burning gas tanker in a fog, or, well take your pick of human tragedy that is all to common and calls for lotsa cops. 

All in all, the Cocoa facility doesnít seem like a long term solution for SS or SH. Itíll do for now but a facility is really needed at KSC.

As an added point, Cocoa is getting towards maxing out for space.

Phil

Some time ago during the water tower debate in Texas, it was mentioned that maybe they could flatten the ring into a more oval shape to get it into a tighter space.  Could you do something like that here, put a ring on its side, allow it to "sag" (with appropriate supports) and transport them that way?  The width would now be the height of the ring and the height would be dependent on how much you smush (technical term) the ring.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 10/14/2019 10:06 pm
>
All in all, the Cocoa facility doesnít seem like a long term solution for SS or SH. Itíll do for now but a facility is really needed at KSC.

As an added point, Cocoa is getting towards maxing out for space.

Phil

While vehicle assembly, maintenance etc. will likely be at the Roberts Rd. Operations Center, I think they'll keep the Cocoa facility for parts fabrication & assembly; legs, fins, etc. Once a steelyard....

but aren't the fins manufactured someplace else? at least both top and bottom fins were delivered to boca chica, and not built in site. unclear if they can build them at the cocoa site, but I'd guess it's the same as BC

True that. But nothing they canít bring in house. My guess is they outsourced them for the first go round just to make sure it got done and not become a bottleneck.

Technique and fixtures are a bit different than the norm for a steel yard. For the next time they have a better feel for the production process at both locations and more time to find someone with airframe experience. It looks like that type work.

Phil
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 10/14/2019 10:31 pm
I wonder what's going on with the Roberts Road bulkhead. Possibly the start of a Super Heavy?

Just an idea...since they will soon be facing a lot of trouble with transporting full vessels to KSC via the road (due to the new bridge construction), can they use Cidco to just pre-fabricate double-stacked rings and maybe bulkheads, and move those on flatbeds (oversize load obviously, but road transportable I think)? Anyone know how much vertical clearing the new bridge will have?

Standard minimum overpass height is 13í6Ē or ~4.1m. Can be higher. Standard lane width is 12í or ~3.7m.

Moving one single or a double 9m ring on a flatbed would be ~40% of the PITA of moving the whole ship. Each truck in the convoy bumps the number up a bit.

The only advantages are lower height so no need to dodge overpasses, less specialized carriers, and easier (still not easy) cornering.

There is still a permitting process, closed roads, a lead and trail car for each truck public inconvenience, moved signage, power lines, lotsa cops. Even though the load is light it will move slow.

The permitting process might be blanket for an ongoing effort but I doubt it. Power lines moved only once. Signs will probably be taken down by a crew moving ahead of the load(s) and put back by a crew following. The cops work out fine until the time for a move coincides with a multi vehicle fustercluck with a burning gas tanker in a fog, or, well take your pick of human tragedy that is all to common and calls for lotsa cops. 

All in all, the Cocoa facility doesnít seem like a long term solution for SS or SH. Itíll do for now but a facility is really needed at KSC.

As an added point, Cocoa is getting towards maxing out for space.

Phil

Some time ago during the water tower debate in Texas, it was mentioned that maybe they could flatten the ring into a more oval shape to get it into a tighter space.  Could you do something like that here, put a ring on its side, allow it to "sag" (with appropriate supports) and transport them that way?  The width would now be the height of the ring and the height would be dependent on how much you smush (technical term) the ring.


If you look at the rings that have been doubled youíll see a rib installed in each sub ring. They probably do that before joining. Probably could move only one ring at a time and with no rib. Ribs are anti-smush devices.

All Cocoa would be doing is cutting the rings and welding them closed for shipping. It would be a weird load to secure and sensitive to wind. The weight would be nothing.

The other end would would have to do ribs & joining. Best to move that whole process to the assembly location and be done with it.

Phil
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 10/15/2019 01:38 pm
I wonder what's going on with the Roberts Road bulkhead. Possibly the start of a Super Heavy?

Just an idea...since they will soon be facing a lot of trouble with transporting full vessels to KSC via the road (due to the new bridge construction), can they use Cidco to just pre-fabricate double-stacked rings and maybe bulkheads, and move those on flatbeds (oversize load obviously, but road transportable I think)? Anyone know how much vertical clearing the new bridge will have?

Standard minimum overpass height is 13í6Ē or ~4.1m. Can be higher. Standard lane width is 12í or ~3.7m.

Moving one single or a double 9m ring on a flatbed would be ~40% of the PITA of moving the whole ship. Each truck in the convoy bumps the number up a bit.

The only advantages are lower height so no need to dodge overpasses, less specialized carriers, and easier (still not easy) cornering.

There is still a permitting process, closed roads, a lead and trail car for each truck public inconvenience, moved signage, power lines, lotsa cops. Even though the load is light it will move slow.

The permitting process might be blanket for an ongoing effort but I doubt it. Power lines moved only once. Signs will probably be taken down by a crew moving ahead of the load(s) and put back by a crew following. The cops work out fine until the time for a move coincides with a multi vehicle fustercluck with a burning gas tanker in a fog, or, well take your pick of human tragedy that is all to common and calls for lotsa cops. 

All in all, the Cocoa facility doesnít seem like a long term solution for SS or SH. Itíll do for now but a facility is really needed at KSC.

As an added point, Cocoa is getting towards maxing out for space.

Phil

Some time ago during the water tower debate in Texas, it was mentioned that maybe they could flatten the ring into a more oval shape to get it into a tighter space.  Could you do something like that here, put a ring on its side, allow it to "sag" (with appropriate supports) and transport them that way?  The width would now be the height of the ring and the height would be dependent on how much you smush (technical term) the ring.


If you look at the rings that have been doubled youíll see a rib installed in each sub ring. They probably do that before joining. Probably could move only one ring at a time and with no rib. Ribs are anti-smush devices.

All Cocoa would be doing is cutting the rings and welding them closed for shipping. It would be a weird load to secure and sensitive to wind. The weight would be nothing.

The other end would would have to do ribs & joining. Best to move that whole process to the assembly location and be done with it.

Phil

Agreed. The single weld process for rings is simple in comparison to building other attachments like legs, fairings and fins, so moving that process onto the assembly location makes more sense, avoiding the transport issue. Building the complex attachments and interior parts in Cocoa, that don't have the transportation issues may have been in SpaceX's plans all along.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 10/17/2019 06:36 pm
https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1184849912250470400

Quote
@SpaceX #Starship #MK4 stacking has begun 17 October 2019.

it looks like they are stacking rings with the seams 180ļ opposite from each other. assuming those seams will stay under the raceway covers, and also that these flat new rings will stay smooth without wrinkles after stacking and welding, hopefully we'll have smooth shiny mk3 and mk4 ships, with only horizontal ring seams.

I love the steampunk aesthetics of mk1 and 2, but 3 and 4 are gonna look awesome!
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eer on 10/17/2019 07:01 pm
Photos from this afternoon at Cidco Road.

First the fairing with nosecone?

Next, body with ring on jig to right.

Third, zoom on ring on Jig.

Autorotation not working. Sigh. Taken with iPhone in vertical orientation. If someone could rotate them I’d appreciate it. Else, I’ll do it when I get a laptop connection.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: cppetrie on 10/17/2019 07:04 pm
Photos from this afternoon at Cidco Road.

First the fairing with nosecone?

Next, body with ring on jig to right.

Third, zoom on ring on Jig.
First pic is of the top tank dome I think.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: woods170 on 10/17/2019 07:11 pm
Photos from this afternoon at Cidco Road.

First the fairing with nosecone?

Next, body with ring on jig to right.

Third, zoom on ring on Jig.

Autorotation not working. Sigh. Taken with iPhone in vertical orientation. If someone could rotate them Iíd appreciate it. Else, Iíll do it when I get a laptop connection.

Rotated versions
#iPhoneS*cks
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: JamesH65 on 10/17/2019 07:15 pm
https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1184849912250470400

Quote
@SpaceX #Starship #MK4 stacking has begun 17 October 2019.

it looks like they are stacking rings with the seams 180ļ opposite from each other. assuming those seams will stay under the raceway covers, and also that these flat new rings will stay smooth without wrinkles after stacking and welding, hopefully we'll have smooth shiny mk3 and mk4 ships, with only horizontal ring seams.

I love the steampunk aesthetics of mk1 and 2, but 3 and 4 are gonna look awesome!

Why not stack 45degs (or less) apart, with the vertical welds always on the leeward side of the craft. Windward side then only have horizontal welds in the main airflow.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Crispy on 10/17/2019 07:35 pm
https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1184849912250470400

Quote
@SpaceX #Starship #MK4 stacking has begun 17 October 2019.

it looks like they are stacking rings with the seams 180ļ opposite from each other. assuming those seams will stay under the raceway covers, and also that these flat new rings will stay smooth without wrinkles after stacking and welding, hopefully we'll have smooth shiny mk3 and mk4 ships, with only horizontal ring seams.

I love the steampunk aesthetics of mk1 and 2, but 3 and 4 are gonna look awesome!

Why not stack 45degs (or less) apart, with the vertical welds always on the leeward side of the craft. Windward side then only have horizontal welds in the main airflow.
Why not stack with the welds under the wing roots so no welds are visible at all?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 10/17/2019 07:36 pm
https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1184849912250470400

Quote
@SpaceX #Starship #MK4 stacking has begun 17 October 2019.

it looks like they are stacking rings with the seams 180ļ opposite from each other. assuming those seams will stay under the raceway covers, and also that these flat new rings will stay smooth without wrinkles after stacking and welding, hopefully we'll have smooth shiny mk3 and mk4 ships, with only horizontal ring seams.

I love the steampunk aesthetics of mk1 and 2, but 3 and 4 are gonna look awesome!

Why not stack 45degs (or less) apart, with the vertical welds always on the leeward side of the craft. Windward side then only have horizontal welds in the main airflow.

Two reasons: If the welds are under the raceway, the horizontal brackets and overall structure may add strength to the vertical welds. Kind of like stitching over a wound. Secondly, Elon also wants an aesthetic "liquid silver" look, and hiding the weld lines will add to that aesthetic.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: IvanDogovich on 10/17/2019 07:44 pm
https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1184849912250470400

Quote
@SpaceX #Starship #MK4 stacking has begun 17 October 2019.

I think this statement is too strong "MK4 stacking has begun 17 October 2019"

In John's photo we see one solid ring on the stand, and the other with the access port on the ground next to it.

When they built the bulkhead in Boca Chica it was a double ring with an access port in the top ring.

This could be further indications that the work that we are seeing here is for Bulkhead assemble for the top of the Mk2 stack.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 10/17/2019 07:49 pm
https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1184849912250470400

Quote
@SpaceX #Starship #MK4 stacking has begun 17 October 2019.

it looks like they are stacking rings with the seams 180ļ opposite from each other. assuming those seams will stay under the raceway covers, and also that these flat new rings will stay smooth without wrinkles after stacking and welding, hopefully we'll have smooth shiny mk3 and mk4 ships, with only horizontal ring seams.

I love the steampunk aesthetics of mk1 and 2, but 3 and 4 are gonna look awesome!

Why not stack 45degs (or less) apart, with the vertical welds always on the leeward side of the craft. Windward side then only have horizontal welds in the main airflow.
Why not stack with the welds under the wing roots so no welds are visible at all?

I know, right? still too early to tell, and the evidence is just two rings stacked 180ļ from each other, but that's probably what's gonna happen anyway.

and if for some reason they wanted to stack them 45 degrees apart but on only one side, make it the windward side, so the heat shield will hide the seams anyway.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ejb749 on 10/17/2019 09:45 pm
It looks like three more sets of stacked rings in the background.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: vaporcobra on 10/18/2019 12:44 am
https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1184971070916444163

Altogether, there are still 23 rings on site - now seven doubles and nine singles :) That number has remained oddly constant for at least a month, at this point.

Given that work has started on a fourth bulkhead at Roberts Road while what is probably Mk4's base has been mounted in Cocoa, I also get the feeling that SpaceX isn't particularly worried about the challenge of transporting Mk2-sized stacks from Cocoa to KSC. Or bulkhead #4 is for Mk5+. Or it will be shipped from KSC to Cocoa for installation on Mk4.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 10/18/2019 02:37 am
https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1184971070916444163

Altogether, there are still 23 rings on site - now seven doubles and nine singles :) That number has remained oddly constant for at least a month, at this point.

Given that work has started on a fourth bulkhead at Roberts Road while what is probably Mk4's base has been mounted in Cocoa, I also get the feeling that SpaceX isn't particularly worried about the challenge of transporting Mk2-sized stacks from Cocoa to KSC. Or bulkhead #4 is for Mk5+. Or it will be shipped from KSC to Cocoa for installation on Mk4.

kinda odd really, specially considering mk2 has only 20 rings. there were some marked as scrap before, but I thought those were moved

also, did I spot fin root covers under the tent where they previously were making the rings? it's really a question because twitter video resolution is crap
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: vaporcobra on 10/18/2019 03:17 am
Altogether, there are still 23 rings on site - now seven doubles and nine singles :) That number has remained oddly constant for at least a month, at this point.

kinda odd really, specially considering mk2 has only 20 rings. there were some marked as scrap before, but I thought those were moved

One easy way to reconcile those differences is by assuming that the two rings still on the east side of the lot are also scrap (or for Super Heavy). If you also assume that Cocoa will cut Mk4 off its steel mount like they did with Mk1, that can also explain away one more ring, bringing the total to 20 for Mk4 itself. Or Mk2's tank section is still missing 1-2 rings, also possible :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 10/18/2019 07:23 am
https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1184849912250470400

Quote
@SpaceX #Starship #MK4 stacking has begun 17 October 2019.

I think this statement is too strong "MK4 stacking has begun 17 October 2019"

In John's photo we see one solid ring on the stand, and the other with the access port on the ground next to it.

When they built the bulkhead in Boca Chica it was a double ring with an access port in the top ring.

This could be further indications that the work that we are seeing here is for Bulkhead assemble for the top of the Mk2 stack.

Possible, but it could also mean that they are starting work on the Mk.4 fairing which also has a low access port.

 I am wondering about that Mk.2 dome. It has been lying there a long time and the dome cap weld line looks a mess in the close-ups. I donít think they have decided to scrap it (yet) but wouldnít be surprised if they do.

By the way, I think you can see the automatic girth welder on the double ring centre left (yellow framework on the left hand side).
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 10/18/2019 11:00 am
Nobody caught the work being done on the upper section. It now has the same fittings on the side, like the lower section.



Photos from this afternoon at Cidco Road.

First the fairing with nosecone?

Next, body with ring on jig to right.

Third, zoom on ring on Jig.

Autorotation not working. Sigh. Taken with iPhone in vertical orientation. If someone could rotate them Iíd appreciate it. Else, Iíll do it when I get a laptop connection.

Rotated versions
#iPhoneS*cks
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 10/18/2019 11:32 am
Here are some of my observations. There are actually two extra base mounts, one on the outside with the ring on it, and one on the inside of the hangar. If you go back and look at some of the old videos, you can see that when the hangar first opened, after the hurricane, there was material for two bases. The first went into the hangar and then they constructed the second base after the concrete pad was finished. I suspect the top section will initially be built inside the hangar on the first base.
There are two multi ring bases on site. They like to keep them inside. Sometimes you can see one in the front of the main facility call it "A". These bases are used to fabricate the domes. I suspect one of these is also currently in the hangar call it base "B". The other is currently in the main facility. I expect to see base "A" make its way outside to clear a path and we will see one or two multi-weld rings make their appearance. The new multi-weld ring will be used to mount the top dome. They moved the dome to its current location to gather the steel sheets that were stored in the "On Deck" location behind the dome.
They are very limited for space to make all the rings, parts and domes. That is why big parts and bases are always moving around the facility. Those Bases "A" and "B" are very large. They most likely really want to make three domes at a time in sheltered conditions. That is why there is a third ringed base out at the KSC site making the third dome. Those domes require the most detailed, time consuming, and skilled work.
If you have stuck around reading these observations, here is a small thanks: Did anyone notice the header tank below the nosecone?





https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1184849912250470400

Quote
@SpaceX #Starship #MK4 stacking has begun 17 October 2019.

it looks like they are stacking rings with the seams 180ļ opposite from each other. assuming those seams will stay under the raceway covers, and also that these flat new rings will stay smooth without wrinkles after stacking and welding, hopefully we'll have smooth shiny mk3 and mk4 ships, with only horizontal ring seams.

I love the steampunk aesthetics of mk1 and 2, but 3 and 4 are gonna look awesome!

Why not stack 45degs (or less) apart, with the vertical welds always on the leeward side of the craft. Windward side then only have horizontal welds in the main airflow.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ioncloud9 on 10/18/2019 11:45 am
Wouldn't it be better to build these sections horizontally? You could put the rings around a mandrel and weld them in one continuous rotation with a machine. You'll get more consistent higher quality welds that way.

The only reasons I can think of why they aren't doing this, is it needs to be done indoors and they have no facility built to do this, and they are wanting to avoid transitions from horizontal to vertical and instead want to keep it always vertical.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 10/18/2019 12:36 pm
Here are some of my observations. There are actually two extra base mounts, one on the outside with the ring on it, and one on the inside of the hangar. If you go back and look at some of the old videos, you can see that when the hangar first opened, after the hurricane, there was material for two bases. The first went into the hangar and then they constructed the second base after the concrete pad was finished. I suspect the top section will initially be built inside the hangar on the first base.
There are two multi ring bases on site. They like to keep them inside. Sometimes you can see one in the front of the main facility call it "A". These bases are used to fabricate the domes. I suspect one of these is also currently in the hangar call it base "B". The other is currently in the main facility. I expect to see base "A" make its way outside to clear a path and we will see one or two multi-weld rings make their appearance. The new multi-weld ring will be used to mount the top dome. They moved the dome to its current location to gather the steel sheets that were stored in the "On Deck" location behind the dome.
They are very limited for space to make all the rings, parts and domes. That is why big parts and bases are always moving around the facility. Those Bases "A" and "B" are very large. They most likely really want to make three domes at a time in sheltered conditions. That is why there is a third ringed base out at the KSC site making the third dome. Those domes require the most detailed, time consuming, and skilled work.
If you have stuck around reading these observations, here is a small thanks: Did anyone notice the header tank below the nosecone?





https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1184849912250470400

Quote
@SpaceX #Starship #MK4 stacking has begun 17 October 2019.

it looks like they are stacking rings with the seams 180ļ opposite from each other. assuming those seams will stay under the raceway covers, and also that these flat new rings will stay smooth without wrinkles after stacking and welding, hopefully we'll have smooth shiny mk3 and mk4 ships, with only horizontal ring seams.

I love the steampunk aesthetics of mk1 and 2, but 3 and 4 are gonna look awesome!

Why not stack 45degs (or less) apart, with the vertical welds always on the leeward side of the craft. Windward side then only have horizontal welds in the main airflow.

some great observations, thanks John
I don't see any header tanks, do you mean like inside the cone?
I noticed mk2 already has fuel lines going up on both sides of the nose cone though, which mk1 still doesn't.
I also noticed they are already installing things into the top bulkhead, while for mk1 they first installed the bulkhead into a ring, then stacked the ring, and then started adding stuff such as ladder steps, cable mounts, etc. maybe that's why it's taking so long to install this dome into the stack. but at this point I'd be surprise if they scrap this, there's a lot done on top of it already.
and last I already mentioned before but I spotted fin root covers under the tent where they previously were making the rings, although I still don't see any signs of fins here
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: nuukee on 10/18/2019 12:42 pm
I don't see any header tanks, do you mean like inside the cone?

I believe he is referring to the pointy part of the nosecone, a silver, roundish shape can be seen below it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 10/18/2019 12:45 pm
Yes
And
Good catch. Yes, the tent where they were making the one-weld rings seems to be where they refine all the stainless steel pieces. The multi-weld rings were/are made inside the main building.


Here are some of my observations. There are actually two extra base mounts, one on the outside with the ring on it, and one on the inside of the hangar. If you go back and look at some of the old videos, you can see that when the hangar first opened, after the hurricane, there was material for two bases. The first went into the hangar and then they constructed the second base after the concrete pad was finished. I suspect the top section will initially be built inside the hangar on the first base.
There are two multi ring bases on site. They like to keep them inside. Sometimes you can see one in the front of the main facility call it "A". These bases are used to fabricate the domes. I suspect one of these is also currently in the hangar call it base "B". The other is currently in the main facility. I expect to see base "A" make its way outside to clear a path and we will see one or two multi-weld rings make their appearance. The new multi-weld ring will be used to mount the top dome. They moved the dome to its current location to gather the steel sheets that were stored in the "On Deck" location behind the dome.
They are very limited for space to make all the rings, parts and domes. That is why big parts and bases are always moving around the facility. Those Bases "A" and "B" are very large. They most likely really want to make three domes at a time in sheltered conditions. That is why there is a third ringed base out at the KSC site making the third dome. Those domes require the most detailed, time consuming, and skilled work.
If you have stuck around reading these observations, here is a small thanks: Did anyone notice the header tank below the nosecone?





some great observations, thanks John
I don't see any header tanks, do you mean like inside the cone?
I noticed mk2 already has fuel lines going up on both sides of the nose cone though, which mk1 still doesn't.
I also noticed they are already installing things into the top bulkhead, while for mk1 they first installed the bulkhead into a ring, then stacked the ring, and then started adding stuff such as ladder steps, cable mounts, etc. maybe that's why it's taking so long to install this dome into the stack. but at this point I'd be surprise if they scrap this, there's a lot done on top of it already.
and last I already mentioned before but I spotted fin root covers under the tent where they previously were making the rings, although I still don't see any signs of fins here
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gongora on 10/18/2019 03:29 pm
Wouldn't it be better to build these sections horizontally? You could put the rings around a mandrel and weld them in one continuous rotation with a machine. You'll get more consistent higher quality welds that way.

The only reasons I can think of why they aren't doing this, is it needs to be done indoors and they have no facility built to do this, and they are wanting to avoid transitions from horizontal to vertical and instead want to keep it always vertical.

There is a separate thread for discussion of that topic:
Spiral-Welded Tankage and SpaceX (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=49142.0)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: MaladjustedPlatypus on 10/18/2019 06:44 pm
Wouldn't it be better to build these sections horizontally? You could put the rings around a mandrel and weld them in one continuous rotation with a machine. You'll get more consistent higher quality welds that way.

The only reasons I can think of why they aren't doing this, is it needs to be done indoors and they have no facility built to do this, and they are wanting to avoid transitions from horizontal to vertical and instead want to keep it always vertical.

There is a separate thread for discussion of that topic:
Spiral-Welded Tankage and SpaceX (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=49142.0)

I don't think he meant spiral when typing "continuously". The point seemed to be that you could make continuous ring welds by rotating the structure along a horizontal support, resulting in even welds between rings. The manufacturing thread might be a better place to ask, not the spiral thread.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: cppetrie on 10/18/2019 07:03 pm
Wouldn't it be better to build these sections horizontally? You could put the rings around a mandrel and weld them in one continuous rotation with a machine. You'll get more consistent higher quality welds that way.

The only reasons I can think of why they aren't doing this, is it needs to be done indoors and they have no facility built to do this, and they are wanting to avoid transitions from horizontal to vertical and instead want to keep it always vertical.

There is a separate thread for discussion of that topic:
Spiral-Welded Tankage and SpaceX (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=49142.0)

I don't think he meant spiral when typing "continuously". The point seemed to be that you could make continuous ring welds by rotating the structure along a horizontal support, resulting in even welds between rings. The manufacturing thread might be a better place to ask, not the spiral thread.
Isnít that the function of the girth welder? And it still allows it to remain vertical so you donít have to worry about keeping the ring from deforming under its own weight.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: SteveU on 10/18/2019 07:20 pm
Wouldn't it be better to build these sections horizontally? You could put the rings around a mandrel and weld them in one continuous rotation with a machine. You'll get more consistent higher quality welds that way.

The only reasons I can think of why they aren't doing this, is it needs to be done indoors and they have no facility built to do this, and they are wanting to avoid transitions from horizontal to vertical and instead want to keep it always vertical.

There is a separate thread for discussion of that topic:
Spiral-Welded Tankage and SpaceX (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=49142.0)

I don't think he meant spiral when typing "continuously". The point seemed to be that you could make continuous ring welds by rotating the structure along a horizontal support, resulting in even welds between rings. The manufacturing thread might be a better place to ask, not the spiral thread.
Isnít that the function of the girth welder? And it still allows it to remain vertical so you donít have to worry about keeping the ring from deforming under its own weight.

A lot of discussion in the Manufacturing Thread

Start here for discussion on one method for automatically creating rings vertically:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=49166.msg2003483#msg2003483
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: vaporcobra on 10/20/2019 10:48 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RR-Zc5OuWw

That's almost certainly the first curved section of Mk4 in the hangar :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: IvanDogovich on 10/21/2019 03:41 pm
One interesting take away for me from Paul Wooster's talk was that Mk2 is using thinner material and is therefore lighter that Mk1.  Nice to have it confirmed from a SpaceX source.


SpaceX Principal Mars Development Engineer Paul Wooster talks about SpaceX Starship & Super Heavy (BFR) at Mars Society Convention 2019. 
Video on YouTube  here by Space News Pod;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2gyo1hbheE
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 10/22/2019 12:38 pm
So a quick question - why integrate the two halves at Cocoa?  It's not like there's a permanent crane there.

All they need at Roberts is a circular wall base  and they can continue there, no?  They've already shown that the stack-up can happen almost anywhere.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 10/22/2019 12:56 pm
So a quick question - why integrate the two halves at Cocoa?  It's not like there's a permanent crane there.

All they need at Roberts is a circular wall base  and they can continue there, no?  They've already shown that the stack-up can happen almost anywhere.

That does leave a lot of pipe and wiring to connect, in addition to the hull welds.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: HeartofGold2030 on 10/22/2019 01:01 pm
One interesting take away for me from Paul Wooster's talk was that Mk2 is using thinner material and is therefore lighter that Mk1.  Nice to have it confirmed from a SpaceX source.


SpaceX Principal Mars Development Engineer Paul Wooster talks about SpaceX Starship & Super Heavy (BFR) at Mars Society Convention 2019. 
Video on YouTube  here by Space News Pod;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2gyo1hbheE


Iím guessing the thinner material is why Mk2 is much more crumpled and dented than MK1 then... :(
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 10/22/2019 01:36 pm
Quote from: HeartofGold2030

Iím guessing the thinner material is why Mk2 is much more crumpled and dented than MK1 then... :(

It'll buff out.  ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 10/22/2019 01:42 pm
he mentioned that they'll see how the heat shield performs. it's one of my concerns, shuttle's heat shield was one of the reasons why refurbishing it was so expensive and slow, it's the opposite of what spacex wants. so hopefully transpiration cooling isn't off the table
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: IvanDogovich on 10/22/2019 02:15 pm
he mentioned that they'll see how the heat shield performs. it's one of my concerns, shuttle's heat shield was one of the reasons why refurbishing it was so expensive and slow, it's the opposite of what spacex wants. so hopefully transpiration cooling isn't off the table

There is a significant difference between the Shuttle and what Starship will be doing. 

The heat tolerance differential alone between the Shuttle's aluminum and Starship's 301 Stainless hull is significant.  This puts a ton less demand on the tiles.  The tiles themselves are an advanced ceramic.  They are using a newer material than shuttle tiles, but because of 301, they don't have to handle as much of the heat budget. 

Finally, for high velocity approaches (ie return from Mars, or Moon)  Starship will have the capacity to "skip" on the atmosphere using lift at hypersonic speeds and return to space.  This allows another method of heat management as the speed is bled off,  and once into reentry, the atmosphere will cool the vessels during freefall.

Edit:  yeah, forgot to mention the difference between tile attachment:  Shuttle used complicated adhesives, and Starship's tiles will be mechanically (ie "bolted") attached.  This should make any replacements much faster and simpler.

Tl/dr: different tiles and different requirements should make this system much less maintenance intensive than Shuttle's tile system.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: marsbase on 10/22/2019 03:00 pm
Finally, for high velocity approaches (ie return from Mars, or Moon)  Starship will have the capacity to "skip" on the atmosphere using lift at hypersonic speeds and return to space. 
Except that Elon addressed this question.  He specifically said that Starship would not return to space but instead would use lift to keep Starship at a temperature near 1500C, the maximum that can be safely sustained by the 301 stainless without melting.  His tweeted comment said that T^4 is your friend, a reference to the Stephan-Boltzmann law and the fact that total heat load will be dissipated most rapidly if the windward skin is kept constantly as hot as possible.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan%E2%80%93Boltzmann_law

What is a bit confusing is that Elon also said that for Earth, reentry would require several "passes" while Mars reentry might be accomplished in one pass.  I think that by the term "pass" he meant orbits around the planet but I can see how this might make people think of returning to space.
 
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: rsdavis9 on 10/22/2019 03:17 pm

What is a bit confusing is that Elon also said that for Earth, reentry would require several "passes" while Mars reentry might be accomplished in one pass.  I think that by the term "pass" he meant orbits around the planet but I can see how this might make people think of returning to space.

The tweet was the reverse:
Earth entry one pass.
From Lunar or Mars earth reentry "probably" will require one or more pass into and out of atmosphere(skip) and then a reentry.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: marsbase on 10/22/2019 03:49 pm

What is a bit confusing is that Elon also said that for Earth, reentry would require several "passes" while Mars reentry might be accomplished in one pass.  I think that by the term "pass" he meant orbits around the planet but I can see how this might make people think of returning to space.

The tweet was the reverse:
Earth entry one pass.
Lunar or Mars reentry "probably" will require one or more pass into and out of atmosphere(skip) and then a reentry.
Surely you don't mean that Starship will skip out of the lunar atmosphere. :)  That is not my recollection.  The Earth reentry requires more heat dissipation because the reentry velocity is higher. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: rsdavis9 on 10/22/2019 03:58 pm

What is a bit confusing is that Elon also said that for Earth, reentry would require several "passes" while Mars reentry might be accomplished in one pass.  I think that by the term "pass" he meant orbits around the planet but I can see how this might make people think of returning to space.

The tweet was the reverse:
Earth entry one pass.
Lunar or Mars reentry "probably" will require one or more pass into and out of atmosphere(skip) and then a reentry.
Surely you don't mean that Starship will skip out of the lunar atmosphere. :)  That is not my recollection.  The Earth reentry requires more heat dissipation because the reentry velocity is higher.

Fixed above. I was only talking about earth reentry from different velocities. I missed you were talking about mars reentry from earth.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: sevenperforce on 10/22/2019 06:42 pm
What is a bit confusing is that Elon also said that for Earth, reentry would require several "passes" while Mars reentry might be accomplished in one pass.  I think that by the term "pass" he meant orbits around the planet but I can see how this might make people think of returning to space.
For nominal Earth entry from LEO, you use only a single pass and use L/D to stay at the optimal descent trajectory, riding T^4 all the way down.

For hyperbolic trajectories (Mars entry from Earth, Earth entry from Mars) you use a single pass to perform aerocapture, then use another pass or two to lower your apogee, then perform a nominal entry from low orbit.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: groundbound on 10/23/2019 12:00 am
To add to the above, I'll summarize a portion of another thread where I asked something similar to above.

The reading of Elon's statements that SS would return with a single long pass through the atmosphere for multiple orbits is very likely incorrect. Simple BOTE calculations show it is nonsensical for nearly any orbit. For low orbits you decelerate too quickly for it to take multiple orbits. For high speed returns you either dip too low and get way too hot, or you cannot manage enough negative Gs to stay in the atmosphere for long enough.

Multiple passes for high speed returns is a more practical reading of things Elon said.

Apologies if my poor comprehension mangled the results of that discussion.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 10/23/2019 04:52 am
High energy reentries. The same aerodynamic lift that can be used to stay in the upper atmosphere to manage heating can also be used to pull one down thus allowing one to stay in the upper atmosphere longer for a longer aerodynamic drag phase. If it is strong enough, one could stay in the upper atmosphere and not skip out and need another pass. It all depends on they way you orientate the Starship and how much lift can be generated. Nose up to stay up in the upper atmosphere against gravity. Nose down to stay in the upper atmosphere against excess orbital velocity. Obviously heatshield to windward.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Oersted on 10/23/2019 08:58 am
I found it interesting that the friction of Earth entry will remove 99,9 percent of the kinetic energy and the friction of Mars entry will remove 99 percent of the kinetic energy. Didn't know the numbers were that high.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Semmel on 10/23/2019 09:45 am
I found it interesting that the friction of Earth entry will remove 99,9 percent of the kinetic energy and the friction of Mars entry will remove 99 percent of the kinetic energy. Didn't know the numbers were that high.

Yes, the energy statement is misleading because energy scales with velocity square. In the end, the rocket needs to come up with the dV for landing. I would rather state the lost dV by the atmosphere. But of course, the heat shield needs to protect against the lost energy, so there is merit to the number.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Robotbeat on 10/23/2019 01:11 pm
So it was leaking water... Does that mean they were (ambient pressure) hydrotesting Starship, in prep for full pressure hydrotesting?
Pics of the bottom section.

A close up (original picture from bocachicagal):
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Robotbeat on 10/23/2019 01:13 pm
I found it interesting that the friction of Earth entry will remove 99,9 percent of the kinetic energy and the friction of Mars entry will remove 99 percent of the kinetic energy. Didn't know the numbers were that high.

Yes, the energy statement is misleading because energy scales with velocity square. In the end, the rocket needs to come up with the dV for landing. I would rather state the lost dV by the atmosphere. But of course, the heat shield needs to protect against the lost energy, so there is merit to the number.
That's not misleading at all because dV becomes exponentially difficult due to the rocket equation. If anything, it might understate the importance of using the atmosphere to slow down.

There's nothing fundamentally more true about expressing orbital maneuvering budget in terms of velocity instead of characteristic energy (proportional to velocity squared). In fact, in actual mission design, characteristic energy is sometimes used more than delta-v.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: IvanDogovich on 10/23/2019 01:52 pm
So it was leaking water... Does that mean they were (ambient pressure) hydrotesting Starship, in prep for full pressure hydrotesting?

I think the water leak is from drain holes drilled into the hull just above the mating joint of the upper bulkhead and the hull.  This allows rain water that collects on the top to drain away out the hole.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: envy887 on 10/23/2019 02:00 pm
One interesting take away for me from Paul Wooster's talk was that Mk2 is using thinner material and is therefore lighter that Mk1.  Nice to have it confirmed from a SpaceX source.


Iím guessing the thinner material is why Mk2 is much more crumpled and dented than MK1 then... :(

I'm not seeing that at all. Mk.2 looks a lot less wrinkled to me.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: mwfair on 10/23/2019 07:41 pm
Looks like the Mk2 leg mounts are already fabricated, ready to go.
From pic by FarryFaz
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Oersted on 10/23/2019 07:41 pm
https://twitter.com/farryfaz/status/1187082453975912449

The quality of these latest drone photos from FarryFaz..... Wauw.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 10/23/2019 09:48 pm
https://twitter.com/farryfaz/status/1187082453975912449

The quality of these latest drone photos from FarryFaz..... Wauw.

if I'm not mistaken, he/she takes dslr pictures from a plane
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 10/23/2019 10:33 pm
Some interesting observations. New cuts in the lower section for the wing hinge on one side cut on the 16th or 17th October. There is a new dome in the main facility doorway. I am guessing another in the hangar and one at Kennedy Space Center Facility. They really want MK4 to come together quickly once they have room. The MK4 nosecone might have two portals.
I am also guessing that after MK2 leaves the site the Super Heavy construction will begin. Check out the 12 rolls under the small tent wrapped in blue, I think they might be for the Super Heavy rings.

https://twitter.com/farryfaz/status/1187082453975912449

The quality of these latest drone photos from FarryFaz..... Wauw.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 10/23/2019 10:33 pm
I found it interesting that the friction of Earth entry will remove 99,9 percent of the kinetic energy and the friction of Mars entry will remove 99 percent of the kinetic energy. Didn't know the numbers were that high.

Yes, the energy statement is misleading because energy scales with velocity square. In the end, the rocket needs to come up with the dV for landing. I would rather state the lost dV by the atmosphere. But of course, the heat shield needs to protect against the lost energy, so there is merit to the number.
Sure but that energy is lost primarily to the atmosphere, not into the ship..

And I suspect that the faster you go, the lower the fraction lost into the ship.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Nevyn72 on 10/24/2019 02:02 am
https://twitter.com/farryfaz/status/1187082453975912449

The quality of these latest drone photos from FarryFaz..... Wauw.

From the first image in the tweet you can see what appears to be the beginning of a new nose cone inside the cathedral, possibly for Mk4?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Norm38 on 10/24/2019 02:15 am
So it was leaking water... Does that mean they were (ambient pressure) hydrotesting Starship, in prep for full pressure hydrotesting?

I think the water leak is from drain holes drilled into the hull just above the mating joint of the upper bulkhead and the hull.  This allows rain water that collects on the top to drain away out the hole.

A feature that SH will need when it isnít stacked.  Having to cover it is a lot of labor.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Semmel on 10/24/2019 12:17 pm
I found it interesting that the friction of Earth entry will remove 99,9 percent of the kinetic energy and the friction of Mars entry will remove 99 percent of the kinetic energy. Didn't know the numbers were that high.

Yes, the energy statement is misleading because energy scales with velocity square. In the end, the rocket needs to come up with the dV for landing. I would rather state the lost dV by the atmosphere. But of course, the heat shield needs to protect against the lost energy, so there is merit to the number.
Sure but that energy is lost primarily to the atmosphere, not into the ship..

And I suspect that the faster you go, the lower the fraction lost into the ship.

Hmm, I might have misstated what I meant (One could say my statement was misleading). What I meant is, that when you look at the numbers, the perception is scewed. As humans, we are good at comparing linearly, but square comparison, normalized to 100%, is hard to grasp. So I didnt ment to say that the concept is misleading, or that the information is wrong. I wanted to say that the perception of 99% looks like 'basically the same as 100%'. In truth, if you approach Mars at, say, 10km/s then there is still 1km/s dV left to kill after removing 99% of the energy in the atmosphere. So the 99% look much, much closer to 100% than 1km/s looks to 0km/s.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: _MECO on 10/24/2019 02:00 pm
I found it interesting that the friction of Earth entry will remove 99,9 percent of the kinetic energy and the friction of Mars entry will remove 99 percent of the kinetic energy. Didn't know the numbers were that high.

Yes, the energy statement is misleading because energy scales with velocity square. In the end, the rocket needs to come up with the dV for landing. I would rather state the lost dV by the atmosphere. But of course, the heat shield needs to protect against the lost energy, so there is merit to the number.
Sure but that energy is lost primarily to the atmosphere, not into the ship..

And I suspect that the faster you go, the lower the fraction lost into the ship.

Not that it has anything to do with the discussion surrounding Starship's entry techniques, but isn't it true that the mechanism by which a reentering object loses energy is through compression shock heating, rather than through friction? As in the leading surface of an object entering an atmosphere at supersonic speeds is like a piston performing work on a compressible fluid (air), increasing its temperature and losing kinetic energy- friction being the mechanism of energy loss which dominates at subsonic regimes, right?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 10/26/2019 06:13 am
hey I thought we had pics of the header tanks in cocoa, lying on the ground. did I imagine it? I can't find any.

I'm trying to measure the tanks, but the super hi res shots from boca chica usually don't have a reliable reference
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: TorenAltair on 10/26/2019 12:10 pm
hey I thought we had pics of the header tanks in cocoa, lying on the ground. did I imagine it? I can't find any.

I'm trying to measure the tanks, but the super hi res shots from boca chica usually don't have a reliable reference

It was after Dorian, the tank lying in the mud. I'll try to find it.

edit:
haven't found it yet but..
for measuring: how about those images from bc by bocachicagirl?

with measure tape from SpaceX
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48895.msg1995229#msg1995229
(https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=48895.0;attach=1583510;image)

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48895.msg1986853#msg1986853
(https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/assets/48895.0/1580398.jpg)

or this one from austinbarnard45:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48895.msg1988630#msg1988630
(https://twitter.com/austinbarnard45/status/1168948892903325696/photo/1)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 10/26/2019 03:37 pm
hey I thought we had pics of the header tanks in cocoa, lying on the ground. did I imagine it? I can't find any.

I'm trying to measure the tanks, but the super hi res shots from boca chica usually don't have a reliable reference

It was after Dorian, the tank lying in the mud. I'll try to find it.

edit:
haven't found it yet but..
for measuring: how about those images from bc by bocachicagirl?
...

ohhhh I went through all of those pictures, but missed the measuring tape. thanks! that will help
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 10/26/2019 10:17 pm
the tank I measured appear to be 2.50m in diameter and 3.60m tall. a volume of 15.71m≥ according to their dimensions and curvature.

I wonder if both tanks are the same size though, they certainly are the same diameter, but there aren't pictures of both where you can see their height side by side.

I'd assume they would follow the 1:3.6 oxidizer/fuel weight ratio, I mean if LOX is 2.7 times denser than LCH4 but the main tanks carry 3.6 times more mass of LOX than of LCH4, then the LOX tank should be 1.33 times larger than the LCH4 tank (like the main LOX tank is 1.33 times larger than the main LCH4 tank), but both header tanks seem to be exactly the same dimensions.

that's where that pic of them at the cocoa site could come in handy.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 10/27/2019 12:13 am
Header tank size: Send me 4 tanks of Model XXYYZZ. Place mounts at these locations.

This is early days. Size is over large, capacity will be tuned at a later revision.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 10/27/2019 12:17 am
Header tank size: Send me 4 tanks of Model XXYYZZ. Place mounts at these locations.

This is early days. Size is over large, capacity will be tuned at a later revision.

Surely the absolute capacity isn't written in stone for these prototypes, what is odd is the ratio.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: erv on 10/27/2019 08:59 am
Header tank size: Send me 4 tanks of Model XXYYZZ. Place mounts at these locations.

This is early days. Size is over large, capacity will be tuned at a later revision.

Surely the absolute capacity isn't written in stone for these prototypes, what is odd is the ratio.

I'd guess the ratio is part of the simplification - one of the tanks will be "less full" for those prototypes.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 10/27/2019 02:29 pm
Header tank size: Send me 4 tanks of Model XXYYZZ. Place mounts at these locations.

This is early days. Size is over large, capacity will be tuned at a later revision.

Surely the absolute capacity isn't written in stone for these prototypes, what is odd is the ratio.

I'd guess the ratio is part of the simplification - one of the tanks will be "less full" for those prototypes.

That I dont know, not sure how the pressurization work on the header tanks, and if with autogenous pressurization you can just have a half full tank before firing the engines
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: SkyRate on 10/27/2019 07:55 pm
That I dont know, not sure how the pressurization work on the header tanks, and if with autogenous pressurization you can just have a half full tank before firing the engines
The point of header tanks (for short-duration flights) is that they are full at ignition. No slosh/bubble problems.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: waveney on 10/27/2019 08:10 pm
I don't think we have seen any evidence of autogenous pressurisation pipes running to the header tanks.

Is it needed? 
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: MrWeezy on 10/27/2019 08:24 pm
I don't think we have seen any evidence of autogenous pressurisation pipes running to the header tanks.

Is it needed?

I think the Headertanks might use Helium in this early stage of development for simplification purposes. Would add huge amount of complexity to autogenousely pressurize the header tanks.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 10/27/2019 08:42 pm
The reason to buy a batch of off the shelf tanks all the same, is cost and time to acquire. During this stage of testing, who cares if the methane tanks have excess capacity. The point of testing is to find out how much propellant is needed under various scenarios. Then tank sizes can be optimized for production units.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 10/28/2019 05:18 am
The reason to buy a batch of off the shelf tanks all the same, is cost and time to acquire. During this stage of testing, who cares if the methane tanks have excess capacity. The point of testing is to find out how much propellant is needed under various scenarios. Then tank sizes can be optimized for production units.

Sounds fair, but also it's odd seeing them slacking with the tanks. I mean, 4 big tanks aren't cheaper than 2 big and 2 slightly smaller.

I still think one might be slightly shorter than the other, same diameter though. We just have never seen both standing next to each other in a position where we can see the full length of both. (Even though I thought we had)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 10/28/2019 05:43 am
The reason to buy a batch of off the shelf tanks all the same, is cost and time to acquire. During this stage of testing, who cares if the methane tanks have excess capacity. The point of testing is to find out how much propellant is needed under various scenarios. Then tank sizes can be optimized for production units.

Sounds fair, but also it's odd seeing them slacking with the tanks. I mean, 4 big tanks aren't cheaper than 2 big and 2 slightly smaller.

I still think one might be slightly shorter than the other, same diameter though. We just have never seen both standing next to each other in a position where we can see the full length of both. (Even though I thought we had)
I don't see it as odd. Buying an off the shelf tank that has enough capacity to meet needs is much cheaper and faster than having custom tanks made. For a first prototype it isn't a stretch. It allows the designers to work on other parts.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: envy887 on 10/28/2019 01:41 pm
That I dont know, not sure how the pressurization work on the header tanks, and if with autogenous pressurization you can just have a half full tank before firing the engines
The point of header tanks (for short-duration flights) is that they are full at ignition. No slosh/bubble problems.

The long feedlines and 1+ minutes of steady 1 gee fall at terminal velocity will help with those issues, even with a partially-full header tank.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: livingjw on 10/28/2019 03:42 pm
I don't think we have seen any evidence of autogenous pressurisation pipes running to the header tanks.

Is it needed?

I think the Headertanks might use Helium in this early stage of development for simplification purposes. Would add huge amount of complexity to autogenousely pressurize the header tanks.

Once they have the gaseous RCS system, they can use that to pressurize the header tanks.

John
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: jpo234 on 10/28/2019 07:38 pm
I don't think we have seen any evidence of autogenous pressurisation pipes running to the header tanks.

Is it needed?

I think the Headertanks might use Helium in this early stage of development for simplification purposes. Would add huge amount of complexity to autogenousely pressurize the header tanks.

Once they have the gaseous RCS system, they can use that to pressurize the header tanks.

John

Will the header tanks stay in the tip of the nose cone or will they move back inside the main tanks? I thought the relocation was only temporary while they don't have actual payloads in the payload bays...
The main tanks were supposed to be vented to isolate the header tanks during long duration flights.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: burger on 10/28/2019 09:55 pm
I don't think we have seen any evidence of autogenous pressurisation pipes running to the header tanks.

Is it needed?

I think the Headertanks might use Helium in this early stage of development for simplification purposes. Would add huge amount of complexity to autogenousely pressurize the header tanks.

Once they have the gaseous RCS system, they can use that to pressurize the header tanks.

John

Will the header tanks stay in the tip of the nose cone or will they move back inside the main tanks? I thought the relocation was only temporary while they don't have actual payloads in the payload bays...
The main tanks were supposed to be vented to isolate the header tanks during long duration flights.


From Everyday Astronaut's interview with Elon (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIQ36Kt7UVg?t=830):
Quote from: Elon Musk
We want the header tanks to be integral to the tip... use the tip of the rocket as half of the header tank, and essentially mirror the main tanks, but in small form, in the nose.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: CraigLieb on 10/29/2019 02:00 am
The reason to buy a batch of off the shelf tanks all the same, is cost and time to acquire. During this stage of testing, who cares if the methane tanks have excess capacity. The point of testing is to find out how much propellant is needed under various scenarios. Then tank sizes can be optimized for production units.

Sounds fair, but also it's odd seeing them slacking with the tanks. I mean, 4 big tanks aren't cheaper than 2 big and 2 slightly smaller.

I still think one might be slightly shorter than the other, same diameter though. We just have never seen both standing next to each other in a position where we can see the full length of both. (Even though I thought we had)
I don't see it as odd. Buying an off the shelf tank that has enough capacity to meet needs is much cheaper and faster than having custom tanks made. For a first prototype it isn't a stretch. It allows the designers to work on other parts.
It also means that mounting hardware can be the same form factor for both tanks, designed for worst case stresses and strains on the heavier filled tanks. Beats having to design and analyze two sets of different parts for those mounts. Particularly for early prototype where weight savings is lower priority than speed to develop and install tanks that wonít be in the same place in final products.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 10/29/2019 09:49 am
The reason to buy a batch of off the shelf tanks all the same, is cost and time to acquire. During this stage of testing, who cares if the methane tanks have excess capacity. The point of testing is to find out how much propellant is needed under various scenarios. Then tank sizes can be optimized for production units.

Sounds fair, but also it's odd seeing them slacking with the tanks. I mean, 4 big tanks aren't cheaper than 2 big and 2 slightly smaller.

I still think one might be slightly shorter than the other, same diameter though. We just have never seen both standing next to each other in a position where we can see the full length of both. (Even though I thought we had)
I don't see it as odd. Buying an off the shelf tank that has enough capacity to meet needs is much cheaper and faster than having custom tanks made. For a first prototype it isn't a stretch. It allows the designers to work on other parts.
It also means that mounting hardware can be the same form factor for both tanks, designed for worst case stresses and strains on the heavier filled tanks. Beats having to design and analyze two sets of different parts for those mounts. Particularly for early prototype where weight savings is lower priority than speed to develop and install tanks that wonít be in the same place in final products.
One part multiple uses type optimization.

This is a case like the use of Tesla Model S & X battery packs. I can guarantee they are not optimal for capacity, weight, and form factor. What I can guarantee is they were available off the shelf now, didn't require new engineering or tooling to make, and would do the job so they can learn the real requirements.

Will SpaceX ever use purpose built battery packs? I'd bet so, but I'd bet they will also be the same ones used in a Tesla Moon/Mars rover, and vacuum capable Powerwalls. That allows greater amortizing development costs over multiple uses, and greater production volume. It also allows for fewer special use spare parts needed to be shipped to the Moon or Mars.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 10/30/2019 07:57 pm
The Mark 2 has been stalled out for a little while now, with the upper bulkhead sitting around for quite some time. I've been wondering if there's a significant modification in work between the Mark 1 and Mark 2 that's delaying the completion of this particular ship.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: CraigLieb on 10/30/2019 09:17 pm
The Mark 2 has been stalled out for a little while now, with the upper bulkhead sitting around for quite some time. I've been wondering if there's a significant modification in work between the Mark 1 and Mark 2 that's delaying the completion of this particular ship.
Or the mark 2 is at the stop point  point necessary for transport, and is held up waiting on construction at the cape to finish sufficiently where it will be transported ( just like what we saw today with mark 1) to the pad where upon it will have its final assembly activity. The only reason we was mark 1 put together was for the show. Then they stripped all the exterior traces and such off it. Why put stuff on mk2 now if it has to be removed for transport to pad?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 10/30/2019 09:24 pm
The Mark 2 has been stalled out for a little while now, with the upper bulkhead sitting around for quite some time. I've been wondering if there's a significant modification in work between the Mark 1 and Mark 2 that's delaying the completion of this particular ship.
Or the mark 2 is at the stop point  point necessary for transport, and is held up waiting on construction at the cape to finish sufficiently where it will be transported ( just like what we saw today with mark 1) to the pad where upon it will have its final assembly activity. The only reason we was mark 1 put together was for the show. Then they stripped all the exterior traces and such off it. Why put stuff on mk2 now if it has to be removed for transport to pad?

There are too many missing structural elements for that. Moving it to the launch pad doesn't make any sense because the ship isn't far enough along for pressure testing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: gemmy0I on 10/30/2019 10:27 pm
The Mark 2 has been stalled out for a little while now, with the upper bulkhead sitting around for quite some time. I've been wondering if there's a significant modification in work between the Mark 1 and Mark 2 that's delaying the completion of this particular ship.
I've been wondering about that too. My thinking has been that they're probably just assembling the Mk2 in a little different order than Mk1 - perhaps a more efficient order, on account of lessons learned from Mk1 and the fact that they didn't have to prioritize getting it "cosmetically complete" before it was actually complete.

We've seen them doing a lot of work on Mk2's upper bulkhead (piping, etc.) while it's on the ground, which on Mk1 was all done after it was installed on the vehicle. I'm sure it saves them a lot of time not having to ride up and down on the man-lifts all the time to work on it.

Likewise, we've seen work done already on the tank section that wasn't done on Mk1 until after the upper bulkhead was attached - particularly, the long vertical propellant pipes along the sides of the vehicle. There's also smaller pipes (autogenous pressurization, etc.) and lots of wiring bundles that they need to run alongside the big pipes. That's not especially "visible" work (especially with our farther-away views of Mk2) but it took them quite a bit of time to do on Mk1 after the September 28 presentation. We've had lots of days where Mk1 didn't look like it was making much progress from our external view, both before and after the September 28 presentation. That's bound to happen on Mk2 as well, but at different externally-visible stages in the process.

Not having the upper tank capped off by the bulkhead probably also simplifies airflow for the folks working inside it. (OTOH they have to deal with weather, but that might be preferable to piping air in through hoses, which I suspect might leave the environment within rather stuffy.)

I suspect that when they finally get to the point of welding the upper bulkhead onto Mk2 and integrating the "big" pieces (fairing, fins, and chines/raceway covers), nearly all of the other "little stuff" will have already been done, and there won't be much left before they can wrap production and ship Mk2 to the Cape.

Have we found out yet whether Mk2 is supposed to have its two major "halves" integrated before or after transport to the Cape? Before would make sense so they only have to do the big road closure once. If that's the case then we'll likely see Mk2 rolled out onto the pad for tanking, static fire, etc. tests in a much more complete configuration than what's happening with Mk1 now (just the tank section at the pad). At Boca Chica it's easy to "just" roll the tank section back to the shipyard for integration with the fairing (or vice versa), but in Florida road transport is a much bigger event.

Have we seen any of the big fin pieces (lower or upper) at the Cidco Rd. site yet? I know we've seen the chine/raceway covers, so those are likely to be integrated there before transport to the Cape, but if we haven't seen the wings yet, those might get installed at the Cape. (From what we've seen in Texas, the wings are pretty easy to attach/detach, so they are likely prepared to do that at the Cape, and might even do so for inspections/refurbishment after test flights.)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 10/31/2019 07:55 am
The Mark 2 has been stalled out for a little while now, with the upper bulkhead sitting around for quite some time. I've been wondering if there's a significant modification in work between the Mark 1 and Mark 2 that's delaying the completion of this particular ship.

Several times I have convinced myself that they have decided to skip Mk.2 and go straight for Mk.4. Then they add just a little bit more, like the header pipe or the leg mounts.

My suspicion is that they are delaying installing higher risk Mk.2 components until Mk.1 testing provides confidence. With a slower pace on Mk.2 they are throwing resources at lower risk components of Mk.4. This gives a much better staggered completion of vehicles (1,2,4,3) with incremental improvements, rather than delivering essentially identical pairs.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 10/31/2019 11:40 am
The Mark 2 has been stalled out for a little while now, with the upper bulkhead sitting around for quite some time. I've been wondering if there's a significant modification in work between the Mark 1 and Mark 2 that's delaying the completion of this particular ship.

Several times I have convinced myself that they have decided to skip Mk.2 and go straight for Mk.4. Then they add just a little bit more, like the header pipe or the leg mounts.

My suspicion is that they are delaying installing higher risk Mk.2 components until Mk.1 testing provides confidence. With a slower pace on Mk.2 they are throwing resources at lower risk components of Mk.4. This gives a much better staggered completion of vehicles (1,2,4,3) with incremental improvements, rather than delivering essentially identical pairs.

Agree totally. MK2 was never intended to be a clone of MK1. There are likely some unknowns being tested on MK1 that affect the MK2 construction, and likely some reengineering already in play for MK2. We already know that MK2 will be lighter than MK1. There are likely some knowns for MK4, such as single weld rings, and it's building those in parallel, but I expect MK4 won't go too far until more testing is done with MK1 and MK2.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: JamesH65 on 10/31/2019 11:46 am
Anyone know if the Mk2 crew is currently in BC working on Mk1? That would certainly slow down Mk2 construction.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: SteveU on 10/31/2019 12:33 pm
The Mark 2 has been stalled out for a little while now, with the upper bulkhead sitting around for quite some time. I've been wondering if there's a significant modification in work between the Mark 1 and Mark 2 that's delaying the completion of this particular ship.

Several times I have convinced myself that they have decided to skip Mk.2 and go straight for Mk.4. Then they add just a little bit more, like the header pipe or the leg mounts.

My suspicion is that they are delaying installing higher risk Mk.2 components until Mk.1 testing provides confidence. With a slower pace on Mk.2 they are throwing resources at lower risk components of Mk.4. This gives a much better staggered completion of vehicles (1,2,4,3) with incremental improvements, rather than delivering essentially identical pairs.

Agree totally. MK2 was never intended to be a clone of MK1. There are likely some unknowns being tested on MK1 that affect the MK2 construction, and likely some reengineering already in play for MK2. We already know that MK2 will be lighter than MK1. There are likely some knowns for MK4, such as single weld rings, and it's building those in parallel, but I expect MK4 won't go too far until more testing is done with MK1 and MK2.
Based on the latest videos there are sure a lot of cars parking at the site.  Don't think many are in Boca Chica. Not sure what they are working on - my guess is you're both right - as much of MK4 they feel safe building and all the MK2 stuff that won't changes no matter what happens to MK1 - fairing/chine sheet metal, header tanks, etc.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 10/31/2019 02:47 pm
The Mark 2 has been stalled out for a little while now, with the upper bulkhead sitting around for quite some time. I've been wondering if there's a significant modification in work between the Mark 1 and Mark 2 that's delaying the completion of this particular ship.
I've been wondering about that too. My thinking has been that they're probably just assembling the Mk2 in a little different order than Mk1 - perhaps a more efficient order, on account of lessons learned from Mk1 and the fact that they didn't have to prioritize getting it "cosmetically complete" before it was actually complete.

We've seen them doing a lot of work on Mk2's upper bulkhead (piping, etc.) while it's on the ground, which on Mk1 was all done after it was installed on the vehicle. I'm sure it saves them a lot of time not having to ride up and down on the man-lifts all the time to work on it.

Likewise, we've seen work done already on the tank section that wasn't done on Mk1 until after the upper bulkhead was attached - particularly, the long vertical propellant pipes along the sides of the vehicle. There's also smaller pipes (autogenous pressurization, etc.) and lots of wiring bundles that they need to run alongside the big pipes. That's not especially "visible" work (especially with our farther-away views of Mk2) but it took them quite a bit of time to do on Mk1 after the September 28 presentation. We've had lots of days where Mk1 didn't look like it was making much progress from our external view, both before and after the September 28 presentation. That's bound to happen on Mk2 as well, but at different externally-visible stages in the process.

Not having the upper tank capped off by the bulkhead probably also simplifies airflow for the folks working inside it. (OTOH they have to deal with weather, but that might be preferable to piping air in through hoses, which I suspect might leave the environment within rather stuffy.)

I suspect that when they finally get to the point of welding the upper bulkhead onto Mk2 and integrating the "big" pieces (fairing, fins, and chines/raceway covers), nearly all of the other "little stuff" will have already been done, and there won't be much left before they can wrap production and ship Mk2 to the Cape.

Have we found out yet whether Mk2 is supposed to have its two major "halves" integrated before or after transport to the Cape? Before would make sense so they only have to do the big road closure once. If that's the case then we'll likely see Mk2 rolled out onto the pad for tanking, static fire, etc. tests in a much more complete configuration than what's happening with Mk1 now (just the tank section at the pad). At Boca Chica it's easy to "just" roll the tank section back to the shipyard for integration with the fairing (or vice versa), but in Florida road transport is a much bigger event.

Have we seen any of the big fin pieces (lower or upper) at the Cidco Rd. site yet? I know we've seen the chine/raceway covers, so those are likely to be integrated there before transport to the Cape, but if we haven't seen the wings yet, those might get installed at the Cape. (From what we've seen in Texas, the wings are pretty easy to attach/detach, so they are likely prepared to do that at the Cape, and might even do so for inspections/refurbishment after test flights.)

All good points.

Julia B posted an FDOT filing for transport to the cape showing the entire Mk2 transported horizontal in one piece.

My guess is that they will do leak testing and at least minimal pressure testing at Cocoa so it can be pressurized for transport. Fins would complicate transport so theyíd go on at the cape.

Another guess is Mk1&2 both have roots in the same engineering plans with assembly technique being the biggest variable. That said, SpaceX is SpaceX.

This leads to another hunch hunch that not all Mk1 design detail was finalized when construction started and some of it changed in mid flow. Same for Mk2 of course and as is the SpaceX way, some changes didnít make it into Mk1 but did or will make it into Mk2. No show stoppers, just minor stuff. Mk3&4 will have the big changes.

Yet another guess (hey, itís what you do when data is lacking) is SH construction is waiting for the Mk1 flight at minimum. They may mate some rings but dollars to donuts SX is waiting for flight data to inform some design decisions yet to be finalized.

I reason this from yet another hunch that they want the first SH to be fairly high fidelity so they can get some starlinks up with Mk5&6.

Phil


Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: _MECO on 10/31/2019 03:19 pm
The Mark 2 has been stalled out for a little while now, with the upper bulkhead sitting around for quite some time. I've been wondering if there's a significant modification in work between the Mark 1 and Mark 2 that's delaying the completion of this particular ship.
I've been wondering about that too. My thinking has been that they're probably just assembling the Mk2 in a little different order than Mk1 - perhaps a more efficient order, on account of lessons learned from Mk1 and the fact that they didn't have to prioritize getting it "cosmetically complete" before it was actually complete.

We've seen them doing a lot of work on Mk2's upper bulkhead (piping, etc.) while it's on the ground, which on Mk1 was all done after it was installed on the vehicle. I'm sure it saves them a lot of time not having to ride up and down on the man-lifts all the time to work on it.

Likewise, we've seen work done already on the tank section that wasn't done on Mk1 until after the upper bulkhead was attached - particularly, the long vertical propellant pipes along the sides of the vehicle. There's also smaller pipes (autogenous pressurization, etc.) and lots of wiring bundles that they need to run alongside the big pipes. That's not especially "visible" work (especially with our farther-away views of Mk2) but it took them quite a bit of time to do on Mk1 after the September 28 presentation. We've had lots of days where Mk1 didn't look like it was making much progress from our external view, both before and after the September 28 presentation. That's bound to happen on Mk2 as well, but at different externally-visible stages in the process.

Not having the upper tank capped off by the bulkhead probably also simplifies airflow for the folks working inside it. (OTOH they have to deal with weather, but that might be preferable to piping air in through hoses, which I suspect might leave the environment within rather stuffy.)

I suspect that when they finally get to the point of welding the upper bulkhead onto Mk2 and integrating the "big" pieces (fairing, fins, and chines/raceway covers), nearly all of the other "little stuff" will have already been done, and there won't be much left before they can wrap production and ship Mk2 to the Cape.

Have we found out yet whether Mk2 is supposed to have its two major "halves" integrated before or after transport to the Cape? Before would make sense so they only have to do the big road closure once. If that's the case then we'll likely see Mk2 rolled out onto the pad for tanking, static fire, etc. tests in a much more complete configuration than what's happening with Mk1 now (just the tank section at the pad). At Boca Chica it's easy to "just" roll the tank section back to the shipyard for integration with the fairing (or vice versa), but in Florida road transport is a much bigger event.

Have we seen any of the big fin pieces (lower or upper) at the Cidco Rd. site yet? I know we've seen the chine/raceway covers, so those are likely to be integrated there before transport to the Cape, but if we haven't seen the wings yet, those might get installed at the Cape. (From what we've seen in Texas, the wings are pretty easy to attach/detach, so they are likely prepared to do that at the Cape, and might even do so for inspections/refurbishment after test flights.)

All good points.

Julia B posted an FDOT filing for transport to the cape showing the entire Mk2 transported horizontal in one piece.

My guess is that they will do leak testing and at least minimal pressure testing at Cocoa so it can be pressurized for transport. Fins would complicate transport so theyíd go on at the cape.

Another guess is Mk1&2 both have roots in the same engineering plans with assembly technique being the biggest variable. That said, SpaceX is SpaceX.

This leads to another hunch hunch that not all Mk1 design detail was finalized when construction started and some of it changed in mid flow. Same for Mk2 of course and as is the SpaceX way, some changes didnít make it into Mk1 but did or will make it into Mk2. No show stoppers, just minor stuff. Mk3&4 will have the big changes.

Yet another guess (hey, itís what you do when data is lacking) is SH construction is waiting for the Mk1 flight at minimum. They may mate some rings but dollars to donuts SX is waiting for flight data to inform some design decisions yet to be finalized.

I reason this from yet another hunch that they want the first SH to be fairly high fidelity so they can get some starlinks up with Mk5&6.

Phil

Hunch that not all the Mk 1 design was finalized when they started building it? It might still not be finalized! One thing's for sure, is that the three leg/flap thing was still being considered when they started building it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 10/31/2019 11:57 pm
<snip>
I reason this from yet another hunch that they want the first SH to be fairly high fidelity so they can get some starlinks up with Mk5&6.

Phil
Quote
"& some fun things."

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1179624066375774209 (https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1179624066375774209)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/02/2019 06:27 pm
The interior scaffolding has been removed from the lower section of MK2 as of 2 November 2019 meaning the top dome/bulkhead should be attached very soon. The scaffolding was first installed back in early July and was removed only one time since then.  Just before the hurricane, the mid dome/Bulkhead was installed and the scaffolding was removed to accommodate the bulkhead. The scaffolding was reinstalled soon after the lower section emerged from the hangar sometime before 10 September. The scaffolding is the round ring in the picture.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 11/05/2019 07:38 pm
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EInVyZMXUAUT3Ak?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

Did they rebuild the upper tank bulkhead, or are they charging away at the Mark 4?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: nuukee on 11/05/2019 08:11 pm
Did they rebuild the upper tank bulkhead, or are they charging away at the Mark 4?

It's probably the latter.

Also, according to the latest flyby (Nov 5th) they just installed a new ring!
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/05/2019 11:35 pm
Has it been announced when the Starships will start flying 6 engines? I think MK2 might have support for six engines. Might be why it is taking so much longer than MK1.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Nevyn72 on 11/06/2019 01:19 am
Also, according to the latest flyby (Nov 5th) they just installed a new ring!

I do believe you're right, where are our pixel counters?

We need to see if this makes Mk2 shorter, the same height or taller than Mk1.......
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/06/2019 01:34 am
Also, according to the latest flyby (Nov 5th) they just installed a new ring!

I do believe you're right, where are our pixel counters?

We need to see if this makes Mk2 shorter, the same height or taller than Mk1.......

currently 51.2m tall without the nose tip, but I believe that's not so relevant as they cut off a ring from mk1 prior to stacking it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: guckyfan on 11/06/2019 07:57 am
currently 51.2m tall without the nose tip, but I believe that's not so relevant as they cut off a ring from mk1 prior to stacking it.

Yeah, that was interesting. Stack full rings and just cut off some at the bottom when finished to achieve the desired total length.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: groknull on 11/06/2019 03:50 pm
currently 51.2m tall without the nose tip, but I believe that's not so relevant as they cut off a ring from mk1 prior to stacking it.

Yeah, that was interesting. Stack full rings and just cut off some at the bottom when finished to achieve the desired total length.

That may be an effect rather than a cause.  Discussion over on the Texas Prototype thread posited that the discarded bottom ring sections were essentially workholding material.  To install and weld in the various rings, stringers, and braces at the bottom, one needs a bit of elbow room above the concrete ring.

Pixel counting sums would add up to the total vehicle height plus the sacrificial workholding height(s).

Edit: plural bottom ring sections
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Cheapchips on 11/07/2019 04:33 pm
Looks like a couple of leeward leg covers parked out back on John Winkopp's 7-Nov video.

Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/07/2019 05:41 pm
Looks like a couple of leeward leg covers parked out back on John Winkopp's 7-Nov video.

I noticed these sitting there for a while.

but how do you know they are leeward?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Cheapchips on 11/07/2019 06:09 pm
Looks like a couple of leeward leg covers parked out back on John Winkopp's 7-Nov video.

I noticed these sitting there for a while.

but how do you know they are leeward?

Just that they are leeward designs. Based on what they cobbled together for the Mk1 presentation they could end up windward.  I'm half expecting Mk1 to end up with the flat windward leg cover when it actually flies. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/07/2019 07:07 pm
Looks like a couple of leeward leg covers parked out back on John Winkopp's 7-Nov video.

I noticed these sitting there for a while.

but how do you know they are leeward?

Just that they are leeward designs. Based on what they cobbled together for the Mk1 presentation they could end up windward.  I'm half expecting Mk1 to end up with the flat windward leg cover when it actually flies.

gotcha.

I think that the smoother transition from the fuselage to the leg covers from the starship renders makes it more aerodynamic and also easier to attach the hex tiles, but at the same time, manufacturing a cover shaped like that needs better machinery and should be more expensive too. leeward leg covers from the renders have a less smooth transition, but still aren't shaped quite like those form mk1 so more complex to manufacture too. current covers are just three steel plates cut, bent to a radius and welded to each other. If mk1 isn't going to experience reentry forces / heat, I guess there's no need to change the current leg covers. another point is that the leg mounts have the same shape as the covers, so changing them now isn't likely

I guess the same could apply to mk2, but I'm not sure if it's going to do a more agressive flight profile. it's also not clear if it's going to be covered in hex tiles. perhaps mk2 might have a smoother / flatter windward side transition to the leg covers. we will know when elon reveals what kind of testing mk2 is going to do, if it's the same as mk1 or not
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 11/08/2019 09:12 am
Looks like a couple of leeward leg covers parked out back on John Winkopp's 7-Nov video.

I noticed these sitting there for a while.

but how do you know they are leeward?

Just that they are leeward designs. Based on what they cobbled together for the Mk1 presentation they could end up windward.  I'm half expecting Mk1 to end up with the flat windward leg cover when it actually flies.

gotcha.

I think that the smoother transition from the fuselage to the leg covers from the starship renders makes it more aerodynamic and also easier to attach the hex tiles, but at the same time, manufacturing a cover shaped like that needs better machinery and should be more expensive too. leeward leg covers from the renders have a less smooth transition, but still aren't shaped quite like those form mk1 so more complex to manufacture too. current covers are just three steel plates cut, bent to a radius and welded to each other. If mk1 isn't going to experience reentry forces / heat, I guess there's no need to change the current leg covers. another point is that the leg mounts have the same shape as the covers, so changing them now isn't likely

I guess the same could apply to mk2, but I'm not sure if it's going to do a more agressive flight profile. it's also not clear if it's going to be covered in hex tiles. perhaps mk2 might have a smoother / flatter windward side transition to the leg covers. we will know when elon reveals what kind of testing mk2 is going to do, if it's the same as mk1 or not


Why do the same testing twice?  Each Mark should be more aggressive than the one previous. Mk2 might get six engines, go higher and dive in and get fast before skydiving. Canít test the flight envelope much more than that without SH - assuming nothing RUDís. If that happens, retest.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 11/08/2019 01:41 pm
Looks like a couple of leeward leg covers parked out back on John Winkopp's 7-Nov video.

I noticed these sitting there for a while.

but how do you know they are leeward?

Just that they are leeward designs. Based on what they cobbled together for the Mk1 presentation they could end up windward.  I'm half expecting Mk1 to end up with the flat windward leg cover when it actually flies.

gotcha.

I think that the smoother transition from the fuselage to the leg covers from the starship renders makes it more aerodynamic and also easier to attach the hex tiles, but at the same time, manufacturing a cover shaped like that needs better machinery and should be more expensive too. leeward leg covers from the renders have a less smooth transition, but still aren't shaped quite like those form mk1 so more complex to manufacture too. current covers are just three steel plates cut, bent to a radius and welded to each other. If mk1 isn't going to experience reentry forces / heat, I guess there's no need to change the current leg covers. another point is that the leg mounts have the same shape as the covers, so changing them now isn't likely

I guess the same could apply to mk2, but I'm not sure if it's going to do a more agressive flight profile. it's also not clear if it's going to be covered in hex tiles. perhaps mk2 might have a smoother / flatter windward side transition to the leg covers. we will know when elon reveals what kind of testing mk2 is going to do, if it's the same as mk1 or not


Why do the same testing twice?  Each Mark should be more aggressive than the one previous. Mk2 might get six engines, go higher and dive in and get fast before skydiving. Canít test the flight envelope much more than that without SH - assuming nothing RUDís. If that happens, retest.

Agree. It might go on the first SH for a suborbital flight for integration testing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/08/2019 06:25 pm
Looks like a couple of leeward leg covers parked out back on John Winkopp's 7-Nov video.

I noticed these sitting there for a while.

but how do you know they are leeward?

Just that they are leeward designs. Based on what they cobbled together for the Mk1 presentation they could end up windward.  I'm half expecting Mk1 to end up with the flat windward leg cover when it actually flies.

gotcha.

I think that the smoother transition from the fuselage to the leg covers from the starship renders makes it more aerodynamic and also easier to attach the hex tiles, but at the same time, manufacturing a cover shaped like that needs better machinery and should be more expensive too. leeward leg covers from the renders have a less smooth transition, but still aren't shaped quite like those form mk1 so more complex to manufacture too. current covers are just three steel plates cut, bent to a radius and welded to each other. If mk1 isn't going to experience reentry forces / heat, I guess there's no need to change the current leg covers. another point is that the leg mounts have the same shape as the covers, so changing them now isn't likely

I guess the same could apply to mk2, but I'm not sure if it's going to do a more agressive flight profile. it's also not clear if it's going to be covered in hex tiles. perhaps mk2 might have a smoother / flatter windward side transition to the leg covers. we will know when elon reveals what kind of testing mk2 is going to do, if it's the same as mk1 or not


Why do the same testing twice?  Each Mark should be more aggressive than the one previous. Mk2 might get six engines, go higher and dive in and get fast before skydiving. Canít test the flight envelope much more than that without SH - assuming nothing RUDís. If that happens, retest.

Considering that building mk1/mk2 is a competition to "orbit" (let's say to see who launches first), then I'd say while the methods clearly differ, the design they are following is the same, or it wouldn't be a fair competition.

Imho, I believe the mission is to do the 20km / belly flop with whoever finishes first, which is pointing to mk1 right now, see how it goes, how they can improve, and apply to the other prototype.

As I said on the mk1 thread, I don't think Musk is expecting it to go smoothly and that the first test article will land perfectly and pristine for another flight. Of course you can change the flight profile, push mk2 harder, but I guess what I'm saying is that one test will be complimentary to the other, and not fundamentally different, such as one doing 20km and the other having vacuum engines, attaching to a superheavy, etc.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/11/2019 02:36 pm
3 or 6? credit Seamore Holdings
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 11/11/2019 03:56 pm
3 or 6? credit Seamore Holdings


Not to be dense (well, not more than usual), what are we looking at? Could the large tube be the beginnings of a downcomer?  What might be those smaller tubes with branches?


Phil
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 11/11/2019 04:22 pm
I think he was talking about the manifolds, but I'm not sure those would be used on Starship from the shape of them. I'd expect a manifold to be star shaped for Starship.

I suspect those may be water manifolds to be used at the launch site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RobLynn on 11/11/2019 06:26 pm
3 or 6? credit Seamore Holdings
No application for linear branching manifold arrays in starship, and probably not in superheavy either - will more likely be tree structures, so I am picking launch pad water deluge system
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: FutureSpaceTourist on 11/11/2019 07:36 pm
Is Mk 2 a bit taller than Mk 1?

https://twitter.com/13ericralph31/status/1193987322762547201

Quote
You made me want to compare them and... intriguing! Looks like Mk2's barrel section is already substantially taller than Mk1 if you account for the foot or two that will be cut off Mk2 to remove it from the concrete stand.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/11/2019 08:45 pm
Is Mk 2 a bit taller than Mk 1?

https://twitter.com/13ericralph31/status/1193987322762547201

Quote
You made me want to compare them and... intriguing! Looks like Mk2's barrel section is already substantially taller than Mk1 if you account for the foot or two that will be cut off Mk2 to remove it from the concrete stand.

they will probably cut off half a ring from the bottom of each section like they did with mk1, so I'd say no.

my understanding is that mk1 and mk2 are different approaches to building the same design.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/12/2019 04:48 pm
John's new picture on twitter:

https://twitter.com/John_Winkopp/status/1194288326800560128

on bottom right corner now we can see 2 raceway covers that transition to bottom fin aero covers, one of those new aero covers for the top fins (that were just installed on mk1) and one of the covers that will transition to the top end, which are yet to be installed on mk1 too.

edit: inside the nose cone there's a rectangular section, most likely the slot for the fin actuator piece.

gonna reupload so you can see in full res: credits John Winkopp / Seamore Holdings
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: kevindbaker2863 on 11/12/2019 06:05 pm
Usually SpaceX does not spend time doing something without a reason.  Is it possible that the rings that have been done a long time but just laying around are actually some kind of welding or orther manufacturing process test to see how much it corrodes or if different processes corrode differently?   instead of "lets go ahead and put some rings together to get ahead?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/12/2019 06:42 pm
Usually SpaceX does not spend time doing something without a reason.  Is it possible that the rings that have been done a long time but just laying around are actually some kind of welding or orther manufacturing process test to see how much it corrodes or if different processes corrode differently?   instead of "lets go ahead and put some rings together to get ahead?

Can't speak for SpaceX, but I wouldn't make dozens of rings 9m in diameter, weighing hundres of pounds just to see how a weld behaves.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: rcoppola on 11/12/2019 06:54 pm
It would appear that the reason Mk2 (tanks) section is currently taller than MK1 was that they added that last ring section to the top of Mk2 tanks instead of the bottom of the fairing as it is on Mk1.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: FutureSpaceTourist on 11/13/2019 08:52 am
I missed this in Maryís photo:

https://twitter.com/spacechri/status/1194518476687388675

Quote
Sittiní on the top of a ... s t a r s h i p !
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: tyrred on 11/13/2019 09:52 am
Unpopular opinion... Compared to Texas Mk 1, Florida prototype Mk 2 just doesn't look like it has moved forward much in months. 

To paraphrase a young Fred Savage from The Princess Bride... "When does it get good?"

Are they ever going to put the domes in and fins on?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 11/13/2019 12:12 pm
Unpopular opinion... Compared to Texas Mk 1, Florida prototype Mk 2 just doesn't look like it has moved forward much in months. 

To paraphrase a young Fred Savage from The Princess Bride... "When does it get good?"

Are they ever going to put the domes in and fins on?

Agreed, but there appears to be some things likely in play here. First, preassembly seems to be getting tested in Florida such as many of the dome components, and possibly internal components before attaching the dome. They also may be looking to complete internal components first for EHS reasons as there is better internal airflow with the dome off. Preassembly may make final assembly very fast once it does occur.

Mk2 may also be waiting on testing results of Mk1, and there may be some engineering changes in progress for Mk2 already after learnings of MK1. The fact they have started work on MK4 for known components (rings) points to the fact there might be an engineering hold going on as well at times.

There is also the possibility that Mk2 may not fly if MK1 is successful and may go right to work on orbital versions. If that is true, MK4 could be assembled much more quickly since most of it's rings appear to be completed.

It's also possible that personnel from Florida may be in Texas assisting in getting MK1 ready for flight sooner. There are a lot of cranes in use in Texas, not unlike when they rushed to fit Starship for the presentation.

These are all possibles of course, and we have no facts here, but I'm sure SpaceX has their reasons, some of which I may have gotten above.

Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 11/13/2019 12:40 pm
Unpopular opinion... Compared to Texas Mk 1, Florida prototype Mk 2 just doesn't look like it has moved forward much in months. 

To paraphrase a young Fred Savage from The Princess Bride... "When does it get good?"

Are they ever going to put the domes in and fins on?
I believe itís all but confirmed that a large part of the Florida team is in Texas getting MK1 ready for flight.

It seems pretty logical to let MK1 testing inform / confirm MK 2 design decisions. Therefore itís unsurprising to see little work happening at Coco. Personally Iíd be more surprised if they were running full bore over there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Ionmars on 11/13/2019 12:57 pm
Unpopular opinion... Compared to Texas Mk 1, Florida prototype Mk 2 just doesn't look like it has moved forward much in months. 

To paraphrase a young Fred Savage from The Princess Bride... "When does it get good?"

Are they ever going to put the domes in and fins on?
I believe itís all but confirmed that a large part of the Florida team is in Texas getting MK1 ready for flight.

It seems pretty logical to let MK1 testing inform / confirm MK 2 design decisions. Therefore itís unsurprising to see little work happening at Coco. Personally Iíd be more surprised if they were running full bore over there.
Also waiting for Raptors. Elon said they could be the crimp in the pipeline, so SpX trying to ramp up production.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: TorenAltair on 11/13/2019 02:17 pm
[...] Personally Iíd be more surprised if they were running full bore over there.
I don't think they are in some kind of stand-by mode. In each video of John Winkopp you can see lots of cars, though I agree with you that they are waiting for some results from Texas regarding MK2. I wonder what that layout of the large factory building is. Is there a large workspace inside or mostly smaller "offices".

PS: There's a BBQ going on in the latest video from John Winkopp  8)  (bottom right, near the pool)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 11/13/2019 02:24 pm
[...] Personally Iíd be more surprised if they were running full bore over there.
I don't think they are in some kind of stand-by mode. In each video of John Winkopp you can see lots of cars, though I agree with you that they are waiting for some results from Texas regarding MK2. I wonder what that layout of the large factory building is. Is there a large workspace inside or mostly smaller "offices".

PS: There's a BBQ going on in the latest video from John Winkopp  8)  (bottom right, near the pool)

Looking at the manifolds and such, looks like they are also working on non-Starship components as well, possibly launch pad components.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: CowardlyWookiee on 11/13/2019 08:12 pm
We saw components like the control surfaces, raceway covers, mounting brackets, leg assemblies all being trucked into Boca Chica, could it be that all of these parts for both MK1 and MK2 are being built indoors at the Cocoa facility?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 11/13/2019 10:38 pm
Unpopular opinion... Compared to Texas Mk 1, Florida prototype Mk 2 just doesn't look like it has moved forward much in months. 

To paraphrase a young Fred Savage from The Princess Bride... "When does it get good?"

Are they ever going to put the domes in and fins on?
I believe itís all but confirmed that a large part of the Florida team is in Texas getting MK1 ready for flight.

It seems pretty logical to let MK1 testing inform / confirm MK 2 design decisions. Therefore itís unsurprising to see little work happening at Coco. Personally Iíd be more surprised if they were running full bore over there.


I knew the Fl crew was in Tx for the presentation but havenít heard one way or the other about them being down there now.


Boy Iíd like to hear some of those bar conversations. ďYíall donít know whacher doin. Itís all wrong.Ē
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Nevyn72 on 11/13/2019 11:09 pm
Maybe there's a bit of a go-slow on the Florida build because there's nowhere for it go yet.

Boca Chica launch facilities are nearly finished....
Florida? Well, they've started pouring concrete and put up a couple of frames, most of the supporting infrastructure is yet to appear.

Wasn't there another location for assembly pictured recently among the trees somewhere?
What happened to that?

See the Tweets in this post.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg2004407#msg2004407
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/14/2019 12:42 am
Wasn't there another location for assembly pictured recently among the trees somewhere?
What happened to that?

See the Tweets in this post.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg2004407#msg2004407
KSC Roberts road facility. It's on Kennedy Space Center property.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/14/2019 01:23 am
Wasn't there another location for assembly pictured recently among the trees somewhere?
What happened to that?

See the Tweets in this post.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg2004407#msg2004407
KSC Roberts road facility. It's on Kennedy Space Center property.

are drones prohibited on that road? if not, someone could take some pictures a little higher so we can see better what's going on there
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: harrystranger on 11/14/2019 04:53 am
Wasn't there another location for assembly pictured recently among the trees somewhere?
What happened to that?

See the Tweets in this post.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg2004407#msg2004407
KSC Roberts road facility. It's on Kennedy Space Center property.

are drones prohibited on that road? if not, someone could take some pictures a little higher so we can see better what's going on there

 A little further away than a drone,but  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/14/2019 05:40 am
KSC Roberts road facility. It's on Kennedy Space Center property.

are drones prohibited on that road? if not, someone could take some pictures a little higher so we can see better what's going on there
Yes, it is on NASA property.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/14/2019 06:27 am
KSC Roberts road facility. It's on Kennedy Space Center property.

are drones prohibited on that road? if not, someone could take some pictures a little higher so we can see better what's going on there
Yes, it is on NASA property.

The road itself is inside NASA property? Because the drone wouldn't have to fly above the property or anything, just going up and snatching some pictures from the road would be enough to provide a better understanding of the location
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/14/2019 06:56 am
Wasn't there another location for assembly pictured recently among the trees somewhere?
What happened to that?

See the Tweets in this post.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg2004407#msg2004407
KSC Roberts road facility. It's on Kennedy Space Center property.

are drones prohibited on that road? if not, someone could take some pictures a little higher so we can see better what's going on there

 A little further away than a drone,but  ;)
A good DSLR with telephoto and image stabilization would get sharp images. Even a gyroscopic stabilizer would help, but they are more costly. Can be rented, but costly. They also take learning how to use. Especially how to get it to pan with what you are photographing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/14/2019 07:15 am
KSC Roberts road facility. It's on Kennedy Space Center property.

are drones prohibited on that road? if not, someone could take some pictures a little higher so we can see better what's going on there
Yes, it is on NASA property.

The road itself is inside NASA property? Because the drone wouldn't have to fly above the property or anything, just going up and snatching some pictures from the road would be enough to provide a better understanding of the location
KSC boundary is red. Spacex Roberts Road place it pointed to by the tag. Images is from an environmental assessment doc.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Herobrine on 11/15/2019 11:57 am
The Roberts Road site is inside the FAA's restricted area R-2932. Flight below 5000 ft is prohibited at any time here, so sadly, no drones.

Details on R-2932 can be found at: https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/7400.8SBasic.pdf

The relevant bit:
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Zpoxy on 11/15/2019 12:02 pm
Wasn't there another location for assembly pictured recently among the trees somewhere?
What happened to that?

See the Tweets in this post.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg2004407#msg2004407
KSC Roberts road facility. It's on Kennedy Space Center property.

are drones prohibited on that road? if not, someone could take some pictures a little higher so we can see better what's going on there
Yes, all privately owned drones are prohibited on the Kennedy Space Center.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: aero on 11/16/2019 03:51 pm
You don't suppose they are slow rolling until they get some results from the Mk1 flight coming up, do you? They may be at a point in the construction where test flight results would help to refine the design of Starship. I can't imagine what it would be though.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/16/2019 05:16 pm
You don't suppose they are slow rolling until they get some results from the Mk1 flight coming up, do you? They may be at a point in the construction where test flight results would help to refine the design of Starship. I can't imagine what it would be though.
I see three reasons.
1. Most of the Mk2 crew is working on Mk1.
2. Waiting for results. (Have them work on #1 to speed it up)
3. KSC is getting a full launch tower instead of the minimal stand BC is getting.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/16/2019 05:30 pm
You don't suppose they are slow rolling until they get some results from the Mk1 flight coming up, do you? They may be at a point in the construction where test flight results would help to refine the design of Starship. I can't imagine what it would be though.
I see three reasons.
1. Most of the Mk2 crew is working on Mk1.
2. Waiting for results. (Have them work on #1 to speed it up)
3. KSC is getting a full launch tower instead of the minimal stand BC is getting.

I thought Mk2 crew went to texas to help assembling Mk1 for the presentation and left. I remember the parking lot at Cocoa site being almost empty those days, and back to normal soon after.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/16/2019 08:26 pm
You don't suppose they are slow rolling until they get some results from the Mk1 flight coming up, do you? They may be at a point in the construction where test flight results would help to refine the design of Starship. I can't imagine what it would be though.
I see three reasons.
1. Most of the Mk2 crew is working on Mk1.
2. Waiting for results. (Have them work on #1 to speed it up)
3. KSC is getting a full launch tower instead of the minimal stand BC is getting.
I thought Mk2 crew went to texas to help assembling Mk1 for the presentation and left. I remember the parking lot at Cocoa site being almost empty those days, and back to normal soon after.
OK scratch #1.
Maybe the welders are working on parts they have a good idea won't change, and doing it in the buildings. Stuff like thrust structures, manifolds, flaps, fairings, etc. They could also be making build jigs. If they are made out of 301 stainless steel they expand and contract the same as the metal in the parts. Another thing I haven't seen is cradles for holding the SS as it is moved.

I know some have wondered if the Cocoa welders were working on tower parts. A while back EM mentioned the launch tower was being built off site in parts, and could be erected relatively fast when the time came. I figured it was an outside contractor building it, not Cocoa, because I considered that was the sane way to handle it. Maybe Cocoa welders are just doing the plumbing because the contractor wasn't willing to do cryogenic piping. Hence why we see manifolds that don't look right for a SS. What they are assembling at Pad 39A is much bigger than the stand at Boca Chica. Having the tower crane will allow lifting to vertical and stacking with only a short crane to help. We could see the final integration and testing at the pad while facilities at Roberts road are finished.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Anjin_ on 11/18/2019 05:55 pm
More shots

https://twitter.com/julia_bergeron/status/1196495171468374019

Quote
The upper bulkhead for Starship MK2 has officially been lifted. The Cocoa yard seems to have taken a different approach than they did in Boca Chica for the design.
#MK2 #SpaceX

Wow, the bulkhead looks a lot more well finished than the MK1
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/18/2019 06:15 pm
Noticed a new vent by the top access port. I'm assuming the bulkhead is going to be installed below the top access port
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Zpoxy on 11/19/2019 09:17 am
I noticed the first signs of activity along the 528 Beachline transportation route yesterday afternoon on the way home from work. There was a large pile of debris (garbage, junk, tree limbs etc.) staged on the cement seawall. Also preparation on the ground, there is a long deep swale that will have to be filled and levelled. I saw signs of activity there around some drainage pipes that will need to be covered. Slow but sure.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BrianPeterson on 11/19/2019 12:26 pm
I wonder if the parts we are seeing at Roberts Road are MK3 and Coca is staking MK4. During the presentation Elon kept talking MK1&2 and MK4&5 and never said anything about MK3. Then someone found Roberts Road and a dome sitting there. COCa just installed the final dome on MK2 and has I believe a dome sitting in the building garage. Last we saw Roberts Road dome is still sitting there. Coca doesn't need a dome they are building their own dome for the next MK or Heavy.

My gut is telling me that the roberts site isn't an assembly area, but a full construction area for additional Starships. If his timeline is to be met they need Roberts Road not doing final assembly of Coca Starships but it's own construction. The genius of pitching a sprung building in a field and start construction of Rockets. I also believe but can't remember where Elon said that final assembly will be at 39A, which would be as we are seeing it in Boca. Roberts IMO is it's own Starship, MK3.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: SteveU on 11/19/2019 01:40 pm
I wonder if the parts we are seeing at Roberts Road are MK3 and Coca is staking MK4. During the presentation Elon kept talking MK1&2 and MK4&5 and never said anything about MK3. Then someone found Roberts Road and a dome sitting there. COCa just installed the final dome on MK2 and has I believe a dome sitting in the building garage. Last we saw Roberts Road dome is still sitting there. Coca doesn't need a dome they are building their own dome for the next MK or Heavy.

My gut is telling me that the roberts site isn't an assembly area, but a full construction area for additional Starships. If his timeline is to be met they need Roberts Road not doing final assembly of Coca Starships but it's own construction. The genius of pitching a sprung building in a field and start construction of Rockets. I also believe but can't remember where Elon said that final assembly will be at 39A, which would be as we are seeing it in Boca. Roberts IMO is it's own Starship, MK3.
Just a guess - Roberts Road will start the production of SuperHeavy - leave the more complicated assembly of SS at Coca for the time being.  I believe that eventually all Florida construction will be at KSC - Roberts Road or elsewhere.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: marsbase on 11/19/2019 02:35 pm
I wonder if the parts we are seeing at Roberts Road are MK3 and Coca is staking MK4. During the presentation Elon kept talking MK1&2 and MK4&5 and never said anything about MK3. Then someone found Roberts Road and a dome sitting there. COCa just installed the final dome on MK2 and has I believe a dome sitting in the building garage. Last we saw Roberts Road dome is still sitting there. Coca doesn't need a dome they are building their own dome for the next MK or Heavy.

My gut is telling me that the roberts site isn't an assembly area, but a full construction area for additional Starships. If his timeline is to be met they need Roberts Road not doing final assembly of Coca Starships but it's own construction. The genius of pitching a sprung building in a field and start construction of Rockets. I also believe but can't remember where Elon said that final assembly will be at 39A, which would be as we are seeing it in Boca. Roberts IMO is it's own Starship, MK3.
Nope.  Elon was clear that Mk3 will be built, probably starting in October, in Boca.  Mention of Mk3 is at 51:00 in the presentation video.  https://youtu.be/sOpMrVnjYeY?t=3012
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: retrojet on 11/20/2019 09:47 pm
I wonder if they will change the design of the bulkhead from MK2 after the RUD of MK1 at boca ?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: smndk on 11/20/2019 09:59 pm
I wonder if they will change the design of the bulkhead from MK2 after the RUD of MK1 at boca ?
It does not look like that it was the bulkhead that failed. It looks like the complete top ring or two blew off.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 11/20/2019 10:02 pm
I wonder if they will change the design of the bulkhead from MK2 after the RUD of MK1 at boca ?
It does not look like that it was the bulkhead that failed. It looks like the complete top ring or two blew off.

Looked to me like Mk2's dome is a different design anyhow.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: tenkendojo on 11/21/2019 02:41 pm
I wonder if they will change the design of the bulkhead from MK2 after the RUD of MK1 at boca ?
It does not look like that it was the bulkhead that failed. It looks like the complete top ring or two blew off.

Looked to me like Mk2's dome is a different design anyhow.

Grain silo design in contrast to the Texas Water tower...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/21/2019 11:12 pm
Very disappointed to report, SpaceX is scrapping the single weld rings at Cocoa already created. There were 23 single weld rings. 1 is installed on MK2. On Monday, before MK1's problem, SpaceX started scrapping them. They have scrapped 5 already as of 21 November. In the picture two rings can be seen being chopped up. credit Seamore Holdings
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 11/21/2019 11:24 pm
Sounds like new tooling is on the way, again.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: marsbase on 11/22/2019 12:28 am
Very disappointed to report, SpaceX is scrapping the single weld rings at Cocoa already created. There were 23 single weld rings. 1 is installed on MK2. On Monday, before MK1's problem, SpaceX started scrapping them. They have scrapped 5 already as of 21 November. In the picture two rings can be seen being chopped up. credit Seamore Holdings
Could you explain how these single weld rings at Cocoa were made?  Does this mean one ring made of a single band of steel and welded end to end?  Is this two rings welded together top to base in a single weld?  Or something else.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BrianPeterson on 11/22/2019 12:41 am
Very disappointed to report, SpaceX is scrapping the single weld rings at Cocoa already created. There were 23 single weld rings.

I just thought of something, could these be rejects? We know before they started stacking them two high and aren't some 4 high that some were marked to be discarded. Since they started joining them I don't know if those were disposed of or were still sitting there.

Also these would be what was thought of as MK4 or SuperHeavy. So is the next design iteration that Elon spoke of not even going to be single weld rings? Could spiral welding be coming? Spiral welding was ruled out due to the varying thickness of the plates but if the skin is now going to be all the same thickness, spiral could be an option...

But I'm wondering if these aren't rejected rings and the double stack ones will go forward.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 11/22/2019 01:14 am
Very disappointed to report, SpaceX is scrapping the single weld rings at Cocoa already created. There were 23 single weld rings. 1 is installed on MK2. On Monday, before MK1's problem, SpaceX started scrapping them. They have scrapped 5 already as of 21 November. In the picture two rings can be seen being chopped up. credit Seamore Holdings

Could you explain how these single weld rings at Cocoa were made?  Does this mean one ring made of a single band of steel and welded end to end?  Is this two rings welded together top to base in a single weld?  Or something else.

Yes

Credit: John Winkoop
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: CJ on 11/22/2019 01:18 am
Very disappointed to report, SpaceX is scrapping the single weld rings at Cocoa already created. There were 23 single weld rings. 1 is installed on MK2. On Monday, before MK1's problem, SpaceX started scrapping them. They have scrapped 5 already as of 21 November. In the picture two rings can be seen being chopped up. credit Seamore Holdings

Bolding mine.

Thank you for this report, sad though it is. However, per the bolded part, this does seem to put an end to the speculation that Mk1s problem was the reason for the design change.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/22/2019 01:45 am
Scrapping lots of stuff. Rumors of Mk1 wasn't going to fly even before the RUD. Sunk costs already being discarded. It all suggests,,, radical change... Something Musk is known for. That's all it can be. I can see either 9m is out and/or there is a materials change. I'd love to know what their simulations are telling them. I wonder how much the Raptor sans throttle has changed things? It's a thrust beast.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ShSch on 11/22/2019 07:44 am
Very disappointed to report, SpaceX is scrapping the single weld rings at Cocoa already created. There were 23 single weld rings. 1 is installed on MK2. On Monday, before MK1's problem, SpaceX started scrapping them. They have scrapped 5 already as of 21 November. In the picture two rings can be seen being chopped up. credit Seamore Holdings
You can see that this ring (and a few others) was marked as "Scrap" back in September:
   https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48892.msg1990480#msg1990480

Also, all the rings that are currently being cut don't have the internal rib reinforcement, I believe. I will start worrying when they begin to chop those that do :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: sferrin on 11/22/2019 09:44 am
So if the Mk3 is the new design going forward, what happens to this partially complete Mk2?  Scrap?  Modify it to the Mk3 standard?  Could that be why little has happened to it over the last month or so?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/22/2019 11:56 am
I think retooling for the next generation of Starship has already begun. On 8 November 2019, a new rig was delivered to the Cocoa Facility re: 1st picture (credit Seamore Holdings). The other pictures were Tweeted by @BocachicaMaria1 Maria Pointer on 21 November 2019 (credit Maria Pointer). They will probably raise the wide tent at Cocoa by one or two containers, and we can expect to see Ultra-Tall single weld rings very soon.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/22/2019 12:02 pm
The wide tent in foreground of this picture (credit Seamore Holdings) is the tent, I suspect will be raise up soon to fit Ultra-tall single weld ring manufacturing. Notice the white rectangles between the two tent areas. Those are stacks of newly delivered steel sheets. I do not expect changes in dome construction or nose cone construction.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/22/2019 12:55 pm
The wide tent in foreground of this picture (credit Seamore Holdings) is the tent, I suspect will be raise up soon to fit Ultra-tall single weld ring manufacturing. Notice the white rectangles between the two tent areas. Those are stacks of newly delivered steel sheets. I do not expect changes in dome construction or nose cone construction.

there are aero/raceway and leg covers that were never installed on mk2. wonder if those are being scrapped too
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Nomadd on 11/22/2019 01:59 pm
Very disappointed to report, SpaceX is scrapping the single weld rings at Cocoa already created. There were 23 single weld rings. 1 is installed on MK2. On Monday, before MK1's problem, SpaceX started scrapping them. They have scrapped 5 already as of 21 November. In the picture two rings can be seen being chopped up. credit Seamore Holdings
The fact that they stopped after making one ring in Boca Chica had me suspicious that they'd decided to change things.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: rsdavis9 on 11/22/2019 03:39 pm
I am beginning to think human welded rings is out.
I think pre welding rings is out.
More of a continuous build process.
1. One ring vertical weld.
2. Next ring positioned on top or bottom of first ring for precise fit. Weld.
3. etc.

They may go to electronic welding with doubling ring(10 cm wide?) Atlas SS tank?

The domes may be manufactured with spin forming. Or some other kind of continuous forming. Weight is the enemy here. Less welds the better for maximum strength per weight.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: SteveU on 11/22/2019 03:54 pm
I am beginning to think human welded rings is out.
I think pre welding rings is out.
More of a continuous build process.
1. One ring vertical weld.
2. Next ring positioned on top or bottom of first ring for precise fit. Weld.
3. etc.

They may go to electronic welding with doubling ring(10 cm wide?) Atlas SS tank?

The domes may be manufactured with spin forming. Or some other kind of continuous forming. Weight is the enemy here. Less welds the better for maximum strength per weight.
Agree with a more continuous assembly process.  we've already seen how much additional effort is involved in field stacking pre-assembled ring sections.

I think the other thing we'll see is a completely different method in building the nose section.  It is so very difficult to accurately create a "stack-able" nose, there are only a few ways to go - construct an inner frame, place all the hardware in the frame then construct the skin - or - build the complete curved section of nose and lift all components up from bottom.
[edit spelling]
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Anjin_ on 11/22/2019 03:55 pm
The wide tent in foreground of this picture (credit Seamore Holdings) is the tent, I suspect will be raise up soon to fit Ultra-tall single weld ring manufacturing. Notice the white rectangles between the two tent areas. Those are stacks of newly delivered steel sheets. I do not expect changes in dome construction or nose cone construction.

I wonder if these blue cylinders are double height steel rolls. Whatever they are, the blue stuff is definitely a removable protective layer since you can see some of it that has been removed and discarded on the ground outside of the tent.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 11/22/2019 06:06 pm
If those are 8' tall shipping containers the rolls could be 8-10 feet long.

Stretching the guesswork further, they may have had them pre-cut for length to where 1 roll = 1 ring circumference.

Extra points if somewhere they're using the bulletproof* 3mm 301 stainless steel they're using on Cybertruck.

* for 9mm
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: marsbase on 11/22/2019 06:18 pm
Extra points if somewhere they're using the bulletproof* 3mm 301 stainless steel they're using on Cybertruck.
Makes me wonder about the massive viewports on Starship.  Better stay away from dense, spherical space debris.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 11/22/2019 06:57 pm
Extra points if somewhere they're using the bulletproof* 3mm 301 stainless steel they're using on Cybertruck.
Makes me wonder about the massive viewports on Starship.  Better stay away from dense, spherical space debris.

I think Starship windows should incorporate ALON, aluminum oxynitride - which can stop a .50 BMG sniper round.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BrianPeterson on 11/22/2019 07:09 pm
I think Starship windows should incorporate ALON, aluminum oxynitride - which can stop an .50 BMG sniper round.

Transparent Aluminum! Star Trek the Voyage Home comes to Starship! Wow, I didn't even know that existed, scifi becomes science fact. Yahoo.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/22/2019 08:32 pm
If those are 8' tall shipping containers the rolls could be 8-10 feet long.

Stretching the guesswork further, they may have had them pre-cut for length to where 1 roll = 1 ring circumference.

Extra points if somewhere they're using the bulletproof* 3mm 301 stainless steel they're using on Cybertruck.

* for 9mm

taller than tose ~70" mk2 rings but not much taller than the double ring assembly used on mk1, which was 100".
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/22/2019 10:19 pm
Noticed today, 22 November 2019, several portable generators being loaded on flatbed trucks at the Cocoa site. I also noticed somebody parking their boat in the new parking lot. Looks like things will be slow for awhile.
I also noticed two "new" shorty containers on site being washed down. They will probably be getting some white paint. They have enough containers on site to raise the wide tent by placing it on top of the two shortys and two normal size containers.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/22/2019 10:53 pm
Is it time to say MK4 is not going to be assembled and go with MK6? To support my argument, I would say that MK4 was pretty much build. With the 22 rings in the yard and the upper curved section in the hangar (see picture). One ring actually got stacked on a base. There is at least one bulkhead in the main building and the one at the Kennedy Space Center that might have also been produced for MK4.
In my opinion MK4 was almost completely built just not assembled. Now that 5 rings have been scraped so far, I can also report that the upper curved section in the hangar has also "disappeared" since 15 November 2019.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/22/2019 11:06 pm
The wide tent in foreground of this picture (credit Seamore Holdings) is the tent, I suspect will be raise up soon to fit Ultra-tall single weld ring manufacturing. Notice the white rectangles between the two tent areas. Those are stacks of newly delivered steel sheets. I do not expect changes in dome construction or nose cone construction.

I wonder if these blue cylinders are double height steel rolls. Whatever they are, the blue stuff is definitely a removable protective layer since you can see some of it that has been removed and discarded on the ground outside of the tent.
Those look too tightly wound to be stainless steel plate rolls.

I'm betting very little of the new 30X stainless steel is on site yet if any. I wonder if they can even roll it before use. It bounced a sledge hammer in the Cybrtrk reveal.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BrianPeterson on 11/23/2019 02:02 am
They will probably raise the wide tent at Cocoa by one or two containers, and we can expect to see Ultra-Tall single weld rings very soon.

Who says they are going to raise the tent with cargo containers?

Quote
Notice the white rectangles between the two tent areas.

Okay who says they contain steel? I've dug through the available drone footage and can't tell what they are. They are containers they could contain anything? I've also seen no origin to the insistence that ultar tall rings will be made. Where is your info coming from?

Quote
Noticed today, 22 November 2019, several portable generators being loaded on flatbed trucks at the Cocoa site. I also noticed somebody parking their boat in the new parking lot. Looks like things will be slow for awhile.

All the drone footage from today shows is a flatbed truck sitting with generators on it. No loading or unloading visible? Are you in FL at the yard? I can think of a dozen reasons some generators are being moved out, doesn't mean they aren't going ahead with their work and a boat? Seriously a boat in the parking lot means... nothing. I got a friend who tows his boat on Fridays to work because he leaves for the lake after work.

As for the nosecone are you sure it's not been moved somewhere else inside that sprung fabric VAB? I mean seriously a structure like that from the distance is pretty hard to see into it everywhere.


Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/23/2019 07:02 pm


Who says they are going to raise the tent with cargo containers?
Hi Brian,
Just me, based on seeing a large new overhead rig that has not made an appearance yet, but was delivered in early November. Also the two new containers that appeared yesterday made me conclude some tent on site was getting lifted.  After seeing pictures from Boca Chica of their new containers being stacked up, I am guessing the new equipment will need more height. With other large containers on site they have enough to lift the wide tent. However, they can lift any tent on site as high as they want. Just a guess that they will lift the wide tent.

Quote
Okay who says they contain steel? I've dug through the available drone footage and can't tell what they are. They are containers they could contain anything? I've also seen no origin to the insistence that ultar tall rings will be made. Where is your info coming from?

The large white rectangles are not containers. There look just like the steel sheets that were on site back in July. These were recently delivered. I am using photos to make my conclusions, not the videos.

Quote
All the drone footage from today shows is a flatbed truck sitting with generators on it. No loading or unloading visible? Are you in FL at the yard? I can think of a dozen reasons some generators are being moved out, doesn't mean they aren't going ahead with their work and a boat? Seriously a boat in the parking lot means... nothing. I got a friend who tows his boat on Fridays to work because he leaves for the lake after work.

The generators were being loaded, you will just have to trust me on that. The boat doesn't have to mean anything, except that they have gone from parking on the grass to filling a new parking lot to having space to park your boat on a Friday. In the first week of November that lot was full. I found it interesting.

Quote
As for the nosecone are you sure it's not been moved somewhere else inside that sprung fabric VAB? I mean seriously a structure like that from the distance is pretty hard to see into it everywhere.
Not talking about the nosecone, but the top of the upper section where it starts to curve. All I can say is there is a lot of cut up steel pieces sitting out side the hangar right now. Pretty sure that curved section is not there any longer.

I will try to only provide what I see and try not to make too many conclusions in the same post from now on.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: nuukee on 11/23/2019 07:08 pm
I will try to only provide what I see and try not to make too many conclusions in the same post from now on.

Hi John, you can do this in the updates thread. Please don't hold back your speculation here, this is what the discussion thread is for and I like your input.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BrianPeterson on 11/23/2019 07:56 pm
Just me, based on seeing a large new overhead rig that has not made an appearance yet, but was delivered in early November.

Thank you, that makes it clearer. Way I was reading is you had first hand info no one else had. Also the rig could be intended for use in the VAB or whatever you want to call the multistory stretched fabric structure.

Quote
The large white rectangles are not containers. There look just like the steel sheets that were on site back in July. These were recently delivered. I am using photos to make my conclusions, not the videos.

Hmmm, I doubt we are going to see a return to plate construction for the main cylinder. Single weld rings are likely here to stay. It could be metal for bulkheads, nose cone, fins, raceway covers... But I doubt cylinders. With consistent thickness all around it makes no sense to go back to plate and increase weld count. Unless they are going back to perspiration cooling, which i doubt. But then never say never with SpaceX. The new Steel for cybertruck is impressive.

Quote
Not talking about the nosecone, but the top of the upper section where it starts to curve. All I can say is there is a lot of cut up steel pieces sitting out side the hangar right now. Pretty sure that curved section is not there any longer.

Sorry I know I'm technically wrong but where it starts to narrow I've always considered the nosecone. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't have another botched one. They keep trying to free hand these narrowing curved pieces, so to speak and I don't think it's ultimately going to work. Boca went through two top sections and still really didn't get a good fit. At some point they are going to have to break down and just build a jig, similar to the builkhead jig, or pre-build the internal structure and wrap the metal around it.

Boca I remember cut apart an early bulkhead before they had a jig. The tapering sections are obviously a problem for both Boca and Coca.

Quote
will try to only provide what I see and try not to make too many conclusions in the same post from now on.

Don't let me stop you. This whole forum is 99% speculation, it was just worded more as fact to me, instead of speculation and that was throwing me.

We live in interesting times so have fun.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: vaporcobra on 11/24/2019 03:43 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80tZcbVTKjo

Color me intrigued! Possible horizontal transport hardware?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: kkattula on 11/24/2019 03:49 am
So what appear to be transport cradles have appeared on the newly paved section leading through to Fedex?

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg2018599#msg2018599
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: FutureSpaceTourist on 11/24/2019 11:13 am
So what appear to be transport cradles have appeared on the newly paved section leading through to Fedex?

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg2018599#msg2018599

Yep, looking like Mk 2 may be on the move soon?

https://twitter.com/john_winkopp/status/1198564630597120002

Quote
The big move of @SpaceX #Starship #MK2 appears to be happening soon. (credit @Andy_trains screen capture) There was activity at the barge loading point last week. There have been taking scaffolding out of the lower section.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/24/2019 11:25 am
Equipment coming out of lower section. Scaffolding coming out of upper section. Area around nose cone getting moved out of the way.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/24/2019 11:30 am
Work at the barge loading point at Hyw 528. Cleaning out trash and some new concrete.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/24/2019 02:32 pm
I don't think the plans changed that much from when they started building Mk1 and Mk2, I think public expectations were just a bit off (maybe Elon helped with that). The very reason there was a competition between Boca Chica and Cococa was to test different manufacturing methods, which they did (and are still doing), and now are applying the results. The race to orbit was never about if either Mk1 or Mk2 can do it first, it was always about which team does it first.

RUDs, embarassing or not, were always on the table, and not flying Mk1 and/or Mk2 may have been too.

I find interesting that recently they scrapped more of the mk4 rings, but not all of them. the fact that they scrapped the first mk3 ring maybe isn't a signal that they are changing the fabrication method, maybe just that one ring didn't turn out so good and they decided to scrap it, just like many of the mk4 rings.

They might do another max pressure test with Mk2 to compare the results of the same test using their different manufacturing methods.

There's a single weld ring on top of the Mk2's bottom section. I don't think the bulkhead is welded onto this ring, but still significant. Might affect the test results and give them some interesting data.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Ulysses S on 11/24/2019 04:58 pm
What I see.              The ship called mk2    goes to the launch site and is finished with out landing gear and the tanks tested  then  is launched to 20K with three non vac raptors. The foils are activated to sky dive / float and the ship slowed and the flip and ignite sequence tested.  Mk 2 lands in the ocean and becomes a reef. Then the new designs will follow               
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: marsbase on 11/24/2019 05:14 pm
Is that evidence that we're seeing the new 30X cold-rolled stainless steel?
I haven't seen anything on 30X.  Perhaps I missed the relevant thread.  Can you give me a link to what you have seen on 30X?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 11/24/2019 05:16 pm
What I see.              The ship called mk2    goes to the launch site and is finished with out landing gear and the tanks tested  then  is launched to 20K with three non vac raptors. The foils are activated to sky dive / float and the ship slowed and the flip and ignite sequence tested.  Mk 2 lands in the ocean and becomes a reef. Then the new designs will follow               
So - you're saying that SpaceX is willing to risk 39A with a tank test (after what they just had happen in BC), let alone launch AND landing of a first iteration of Starship? Keep in mind that a 6,000kg chunk of metal just blew 300' into the air and landed on the other side of the highway...


No - personally I don't see SpaceX risking any of that. MK3 will be the first test and flight.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BigPony on 11/24/2019 05:40 pm
The panels on the new bulkhead look like a different color than the previous ones we've seen. They have a darker patina than the usual mirror-like SS we are used to, and not unlike the color of the recently unveiled Tesla Cybertruck (https://www.tesla.com/cybertruck).

Is that evidence that we're seeing the new 30X cold-rolled stainless steel?

I sure hope not. Look at the section with the yellow writing on it. It is misshapen and even gouged up at the bottom. If that is new it does not speak well of the new technique.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Coastal Ron on 11/24/2019 07:04 pm
Is that evidence that we're seeing the new 30X cold-rolled stainless steel?
I haven't seen anything on 30X.  Perhaps I missed the relevant thread.  Can you give me a link to what you have seen on 30X?

I deleted my post because it was not from Florida activity, but activity in Texas  :o

To answer your question, all I know is from the Cybertruck unveil, where Elon Musk said (https://techcrunch.com/2019/11/22/teslas-cybertruck-is-made-of-the-same-stainless-steel-alloy-that-spacex-is-using-for-starship/):

Quote
It is, it is literally bulletproof to a nine millimeter handgun,Ē Musk said onstage during the unveiling. ďThatís how strong the skin is ó itís ultra-hard, cold-rolled stainless steel alloy that weíve developed. Weíre going to be using the same alloy in the Starship rocket, and in the Cybertruck.

And on the Tesla website for the Cybertruck (https://www.tesla.com/cybertruck):

Quote
ULTRA-HARD 30X COLD-ROLLED STAINLESS STEEL
If there was something better, weíd use it. Help eliminate dents, damage and long-term corrosion with a smooth monochrome exoskeleton that puts the shell on the outside of the car and provides you and your passengers maximum protection.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Wargrim on 11/24/2019 07:20 pm
What I see.              The ship called mk2    goes to the launch site and is finished with out landing gear and the tanks tested  then  is launched to 20K with three non vac raptors. The foils are activated to sky dive / float and the ship slowed and the flip and ignite sequence tested.  Mk 2 lands in the ocean and becomes a reef. Then the new designs will follow               
So - you're saying that SpaceX is willing to risk 39A with a tank test (after what they just had happen in BC), let alone launch AND landing of a first iteration of Starship? Keep in mind that a 6,000kg chunk of metal just blew 300' into the air and landed on the other side of the highway...


No - personally I don't see SpaceX risking any of that. MK3 will be the first test and flight.

Jea, and even if SpaceX was willing to take that risk, NASA would likely have a word or two about tests that endanger the very tower it expects to use to put astronauts on a rocket to the ISS. Which they pay SpaceX for.

So the higher risk profile tests are most likely to remain a Boca Chica speciality.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Rocket Science on 11/24/2019 07:54 pm
Is that evidence that we're seeing the new 30X cold-rolled stainless steel?
I haven't seen anything on 30X.  Perhaps I missed the relevant thread.  Can you give me a link to what you have seen on 30X?

I deleted my post because it was not from Florida activity, but activity in Texas  :o

To answer your question, all I know is from the Cybertruck unveil, where Elon Musk said (https://techcrunch.com/2019/11/22/teslas-cybertruck-is-made-of-the-same-stainless-steel-alloy-that-spacex-is-using-for-starship/):

Quote
It is, it is literally bulletproof to a nine millimeter handgun,Ē Musk said onstage during the unveiling. ďThatís how strong the skin is ó itís ultra-hard, cold-rolled stainless steel alloy that weíve developed. Weíre going to be using the same alloy in the Starship rocket, and in the Cybertruck.

And on the Tesla website for the Cybertruck (https://www.tesla.com/cybertruck):

Quote
ULTRA-HARD 30X COLD-ROLLED STAINLESS STEEL
If there was something better, weíd use it. Help eliminate dents, damage and long-term corrosion with a smooth monochrome exoskeleton that puts the shell on the outside of the car and provides you and your passengers maximum protection.
They were "super-sure" about the glass strength as well... What did Murphy say? ???
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/24/2019 08:18 pm
Is that evidence that we're seeing the new 30X cold-rolled stainless steel?
I haven't seen anything on 30X.  Perhaps I missed the relevant thread.  Can you give me a link to what you have seen on 30X?

I deleted my post because it was not from Florida activity, but activity in Texas  :o

To answer your question, all I know is from the Cybertruck unveil, where Elon Musk said (https://techcrunch.com/2019/11/22/teslas-cybertruck-is-made-of-the-same-stainless-steel-alloy-that-spacex-is-using-for-starship/):

Quote
It is, it is literally bulletproof to a nine millimeter handgun,Ē Musk said onstage during the unveiling. ďThatís how strong the skin is ó itís ultra-hard, cold-rolled stainless steel alloy that weíve developed. Weíre going to be using the same alloy in the Starship rocket, and in the Cybertruck.

And on the Tesla website for the Cybertruck (https://www.tesla.com/cybertruck):

Quote
ULTRA-HARD 30X COLD-ROLLED STAINLESS STEEL
If there was something better, weíd use it. Help eliminate dents, damage and long-term corrosion with a smooth monochrome exoskeleton that puts the shell on the outside of the car and provides you and your passengers maximum protection.
EM tweeting about it now.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1198700591465156608
Quote
Reason Cybertruck is so planar is that you canít stamp ultra-hard 30X steel, because it breaks the stamping press
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1198701215376216064
Quote
Even bending it requires a deep score on inside of bend, which is how the prototype was made
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Yazata on 11/24/2019 08:38 pm
If they are preparing to move Mk.2's tank cylinder, which John Winkopp's photos suggest, then presumably they are planning to use it for something. A redo of the pressure test might be the most likely thing, given that they haven't made much effort to install flight hardware on Mk.2 like they did with Mk.1.

We'll know pretty quickly, when we see whether they move the cylinder, where it goes, or whether they start cutting it up for scrap in situ
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Ulysses S on 11/24/2019 08:39 pm
Maybe a pressure check/leak check in the new parking lot at the iron works before the move.  That should appease NASA.   I'll bet we see mk2 fly.   What great PR to watch that big bird fly after the mkI  top off.      Ten to one they put a new top on that mk1 and do some more testing there also                         
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/24/2019 08:43 pm
Maybe a pressure check/leak check in the new parking lot at the iron works before the move.  That should appease NASA.   I'll bet we see mk2 fly.   What great PR to watch that big bird fly after the mkI  top off.      Ten to one they put a new top on that mk1 and do some more testing there also                         

don't you needed some level of basic GSE to fill the tanks?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Ulysses S on 11/24/2019 08:54 pm
I think just a liquid and a pump would be sufficient to pressure and leak test.  I used to do it with boilers all the time
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Coastal Ron on 11/24/2019 08:55 pm
If they are going to move Mk2, and we've heard that Mk3 will be the first to fly, then maybe Mk2 will be moved to Pad 39A for testing purposes? Like validating the Starship pad is ready for a future rocket launch?

Otherwise moving Mk2 to KSC would be a pretty expensive way to scrap it...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Wargrim on 11/24/2019 09:00 pm
If they are going to move Mk2, and we've heard that Mk3 will be the first to fly, then maybe Mk2 will be moved to Pad 39A for testing purposes? Like validating the Starship pad is ready for a future rocket launch?

Otherwise moving Mk2 to KSC would be a pretty expensive way to scrap it...

If they put MK2 on a barge and ship it down to Boca Chica everyone here will lose the few marbles we still have left...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 11/24/2019 09:29 pm
If they are going to move Mk2, and we've heard that Mk3 will be the first to fly, then maybe Mk2 will be moved to Pad 39A for testing purposes? Like validating the Starship pad is ready for a future rocket launch?

Otherwise moving Mk2 to KSC would be a pretty expensive way to scrap it...
If it’s for fit checks at 39A, and MK3 is first to fly, then they should cut off the engine section and just send that to the Cape. Again, highly doubt they will pressure check it there until design is verified at Cape.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/24/2019 09:46 pm
If they are going to move Mk2, and we've heard that Mk3 will be the first to fly, then maybe Mk2 will be moved to Pad 39A for testing purposes? Like validating the Starship pad is ready for a future rocket launch?

Otherwise moving Mk2 to KSC would be a pretty expensive way to scrap it...

If they put MK2 on a barge and ship it down to Boca Chica everyone here will lose the few marbles we still have left...

ha, wouldn't that be something
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Coastal Ron on 11/24/2019 09:56 pm
If itís for fit checks at 39A, and MK3 is first to fly, then they should cut off the engine section and just send that to the Cape. Again, highly doubt they will pressure check it there until design is verified at Cape.

Good points, but then we see the fixtures below that look like they are for moving something substantially big - maybe bigger than an engine section?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 11/24/2019 10:03 pm
If it’s for fit checks at 39A, and MK3 is first to fly, then they should cut off the engine section and just send that to the Cape. Again, highly doubt they will pressure check it there until design is verified at Cape.

Good points, but then we see the fixtures below that look like they are for moving something substantially big - maybe bigger than an engine section?
Agreed - however not to belabor this, but I’m firmly in the camp that SpaceX pivoted around the time of the tank failure, meaning the cradles has already been specified and manufactured.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/24/2019 11:50 pm
If itís for fit checks at 39A, and MK3 is first to fly, then they should cut off the engine section and just send that to the Cape. Again, highly doubt they will pressure check it there until design is verified at Cape.

Good points, but then we see the fixtures below that look like they are for moving something substantially big - maybe bigger than an engine section?
Agreed - however not to belabor this, but Iím firmly in the camp that SpaceX pivoted around the time of the tank failure, meaning the cradles has already been specified and manufactured.

Still, they didn't have to put the cradles out there in the open if they are not going to use it anymore, just scrap them where they built them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BrianPeterson on 11/25/2019 12:08 am
Still, they didn't have to put the cradles out there in the open if they are not going to use it anymore, just scrap them where they built them.

Why would they scrap them? MK4, MK6, Heavy. They'll be needed for future transport.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/25/2019 01:03 am
Still, they didn't have to put the cradles out there in the open if they are not going to use it anymore, just scrap them where they built them.

Why would they scrap them? MK4, MK6, Heavy. They'll be needed for future transport.

Fair enough, let me rephrase

Why would they put the cradles out there in the open if they are not going to use it any time soon? Just keep them where they built them?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: sferrin on 11/25/2019 01:07 am
Is that evidence that we're seeing the new 30X cold-rolled stainless steel?
I haven't seen anything on 30X.  Perhaps I missed the relevant thread.  Can you give me a link to what you have seen on 30X?

I deleted my post because it was not from Florida activity, but activity in Texas  :o

To answer your question, all I know is from the Cybertruck unveil, where Elon Musk said (https://techcrunch.com/2019/11/22/teslas-cybertruck-is-made-of-the-same-stainless-steel-alloy-that-spacex-is-using-for-starship/):

Quote
It is, it is literally bulletproof to a nine millimeter handgun,Ē Musk said onstage during the unveiling. ďThatís how strong the skin is ó itís ultra-hard, cold-rolled stainless steel alloy that weíve developed. Weíre going to be using the same alloy in the Starship rocket, and in the Cybertruck.

And on the Tesla website for the Cybertruck (https://www.tesla.com/cybertruck):

Quote
ULTRA-HARD 30X COLD-ROLLED STAINLESS STEEL
If there was something better, weíd use it. Help eliminate dents, damage and long-term corrosion with a smooth monochrome exoskeleton that puts the shell on the outside of the car and provides you and your passengers maximum protection.
They were "super-sure" about the glass strength as well... What did Murphy say? ???
Bullet proof and scratch proof are not the same thing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BrianPeterson on 11/25/2019 01:12 am
Fair enough, let me rephrase
Why would they put the cradles out there in the open if they are not going to use it any time soon? Just keep them where they built them?

I can think of many reasons. A couple: There were made by a subcontractor on the subcontractor's property and the subcontractor wanted them out when there were finished.
Those things can't be easy to move or cheap so it's possible the transport was already hired and possibly paid or a cancelation fee would have cost more money... So they just moved them and left them there for use later.

I can think of many reasons. I assume that is spaceX property or at least rented and they are out of the way. No place better to dump them till needed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: TorenAltair on 11/25/2019 02:45 am
I agree with Johnnyhinbos that it seems unlikely that they run pressure tests at 39A.
Is there a possibility that they can pressure-test MK2 at Roberts Road? Any current information/images from there? Is it far enough away from any critical or public locations? Is it even reachable by the barge+land route?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Rocket Science on 11/25/2019 03:31 am
Is that evidence that we're seeing the new 30X cold-rolled stainless steel?
I haven't seen anything on 30X.  Perhaps I missed the relevant thread.  Can you give me a link to what you have seen on 30X?

I deleted my post because it was not from Florida activity, but activity in Texas  :o

To answer your question, all I know is from the Cybertruck unveil, where Elon Musk said (https://techcrunch.com/2019/11/22/teslas-cybertruck-is-made-of-the-same-stainless-steel-alloy-that-spacex-is-using-for-starship/):

Quote
It is, it is literally bulletproof to a nine millimeter handgun,Ē Musk said onstage during the unveiling. ďThatís how strong the skin is ó itís ultra-hard, cold-rolled stainless steel alloy that weíve developed. Weíre going to be using the same alloy in the Starship rocket, and in the Cybertruck.

And on the Tesla website for the Cybertruck (https://www.tesla.com/cybertruck):

Quote
ULTRA-HARD 30X COLD-ROLLED STAINLESS STEEL
If there was something better, weíd use it. Help eliminate dents, damage and long-term corrosion with a smooth monochrome exoskeleton that puts the shell on the outside of the car and provides you and your passengers maximum protection.
They were "super-sure" about the glass strength as well... What did Murphy say? ???
Bullet proof and scratch proof are not the same thing.
They performed the identical impact glass test just before the reveal and it passed. My point is about "reproducibility of results" which is the "standard" for all experiments... That's what my students take with them when they learn experimental design...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c20skm7w1NE
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: AC in NC on 11/25/2019 03:41 am
I agree with Johnnyhinbos that it seems unlikely that they run pressure tests at 39A.
Is there a possibility that they can pressure-test MK2 at Roberts Road? Any current information/images from there? Is it far enough away from any critical or public locations? Is it even reachable by the barge+land route?

If I'm not mistaken, this is Roberts Road to the Turning Basin (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/28.5420112,-80.6639961/28.5827863,-80.6464856/@28.5553831,-80.6644111,7262m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m9!4m8!1m5!3m4!1m2!1d-80.6604519!2d28.5408521!3s0x88e0b026d4af300f:0x576216e42566a20a!1m0!3e0).

Reachable? Yes 
Pressurization at RR? Not Likely
Pressurization At 39A? Agree Very Unlikely

I do think there is value in shipping the intact Mk2 tank section(vs just engine section) to 39A for fit (and even fill perhaps) but not press.

Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: JessieJanson on 11/25/2019 04:58 am
Is that evidence that we're seeing the new 30X cold-rolled stainless steel?
I haven't seen anything on 30X.  Perhaps I missed the relevant thread.  Can you give me a link to what you have seen on 30X?

I deleted my post because it was not from Florida activity, but activity in Texas  :o

To answer your question, all I know is from the Cybertruck unveil, where Elon Musk said (https://techcrunch.com/2019/11/22/teslas-cybertruck-is-made-of-the-same-stainless-steel-alloy-that-spacex-is-using-for-starship/):

Quote
It is, it is literally bulletproof to a nine millimeter handgun,Ē Musk said onstage during the unveiling. ďThatís how strong the skin is ó itís ultra-hard, cold-rolled stainless steel alloy that weíve developed. Weíre going to be using the same alloy in the Starship rocket, and in the Cybertruck.

And on the Tesla website for the Cybertruck (https://www.tesla.com/cybertruck):

Quote
ULTRA-HARD 30X COLD-ROLLED STAINLESS STEEL
If there was something better, weíd use it. Help eliminate dents, damage and long-term corrosion with a smooth monochrome exoskeleton that puts the shell on the outside of the car and provides you and your passengers maximum protection.
They were "super-sure" about the glass strength as well... What did Murphy say? ???
Bullet proof and scratch proof are not the same thing.
They performed the identical impact glass test just before the reveal an it passed. My point is about "reproducibility of results" which is the "standard" for all experiments... That's what my students take with them when they learn experimental design...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c20skm7w1NE

That test in the video is flawed. They did it with the door open and on stage they had it closed. the stiffness of the frame didnt allow the glass to flex and is likely why it broke. all other tests shown allowed it to flex.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 11/25/2019 06:09 am
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1198772995021406209

Quote
Yup. Sledgehammer impact on door cracked base of glass, which is why steel ball didnít bounce off. Should have done steel ball on window, *then* sledgehammer the door. Next time Ö
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/25/2019 10:18 am
I agree with Johnnyhinbos that it seems unlikely that they run pressure tests at 39A.
Is there a possibility that they can pressure-test MK2 at Roberts Road? Any current information/images from there? Is it far enough away from any critical or public locations? Is it even reachable by the barge+land route?

If I'm not mistaken, this is Roberts Road to the Turning Basin (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/28.5420112,-80.6639961/28.5827863,-80.6464856/@28.5553831,-80.6644111,7262m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m9!4m8!1m5!3m4!1m2!1d-80.6604519!2d28.5408521!3s0x88e0b026d4af300f:0x576216e42566a20a!1m0!3e0).

Reachable? Yes 
Pressurization at RR? Not Likely
Pressurization At 39A? Agree Very Unlikely

I do think there is value in shipping the intact Mk2 tank section(vs just engine section) to 39A for fit (and even fill perhaps) but not press.

Wasn't there talk several months ago about SpaceX leasing part of the crawler road near pad 39A, what ever became of that?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/25/2019 10:28 am
I do think there is value in shipping the intact Mk2 tank section(vs just engine section) to 39A for fit (and even fill perhaps) but not press.
At the minimum they could put it into the Roberts Road rocket garden. Considering the NASA tour bus goes by, it is a big statement.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: su27k on 11/25/2019 11:24 am
They'll need a place in Florida to do the pressurization tests, it's not just a mk2 problem, they'll need to test mk4 and later too. Unless they want to ship them to Texas for testing, which is very unlikely. If can't test at 39A/Cocoa/Robert Rds, then the only place left seems to be LZ-1...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Slothman on 11/25/2019 12:18 pm
They'll need a place in Florida to do the pressurization tests, it's not just a mk2 problem, they'll need to test mk4 and later too. Unless they want to ship them to Texas for testing, which is very unlikely. If can't test at 39A/Cocoa/Robert Rds, then the only place left seems to be LZ-1...

Would it be possible to use an autonomous pressurization drone ship? The ground systems are remote controlled anyways so why not test out at sea?

Clamp the test article onto the ship, Disconnected from GSE.
transport to a safe location on water,
fill storage tanks via support ships,
evacuate any personnel
Connect GSE remotely
Test
Return to shore
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: sferrin on 11/25/2019 01:10 pm
They performed the identical impact glass test just before the reveal an it passed. My point is about "reproducibility of results" which is the "standard" for all experiments... That's what my students take with them when they learn experimental design...

It's astonishing to me that you seem to be completely unware of the fact that damage/stress accumulates.  The structure doesn't get reset back to zero after each impact.  Nor is "hand tossed from an unmeasured distance" a calibrated method of test. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 11/25/2019 01:19 pm
Do we even know if the GSE/launch mount for SH would even work on SS? I suspect the launch mount and GSE may be quite different as the aft ends of both are quite different. I agree with others saying that 39A probably will not be used for SS pressure tests. I'd guess SpaceX will do this elsewhere. Question is where? LZ1 or other nearby location might be feasible and close enough to the tank farm, could use the simple launch frame and GSE we see in BC. Have we seen any movement there to indicate that possibility?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Rocket Science on 11/25/2019 01:32 pm
Is that evidence that we're seeing the new 30X cold-rolled stainless steel?
I haven't seen anything on 30X.  Perhaps I missed the relevant thread.  Can you give me a link to what you have seen on 30X?

I deleted my post because it was not from Florida activity, but activity in Texas  :o

To answer your question, all I know is from the Cybertruck unveil, where Elon Musk said (https://techcrunch.com/2019/11/22/teslas-cybertruck-is-made-of-the-same-stainless-steel-alloy-that-spacex-is-using-for-starship/):

Quote
It is, it is literally bulletproof to a nine millimeter handgun,Ē Musk said onstage during the unveiling. ďThatís how strong the skin is ó itís ultra-hard, cold-rolled stainless steel alloy that weíve developed. Weíre going to be using the same alloy in the Starship rocket, and in the Cybertruck.

And on the Tesla website for the Cybertruck (https://www.tesla.com/cybertruck):

Quote
ULTRA-HARD 30X COLD-ROLLED STAINLESS STEEL
If there was something better, weíd use it. Help eliminate dents, damage and long-term corrosion with a smooth monochrome exoskeleton that puts the shell on the outside of the car and provides you and your passengers maximum protection.
They were "super-sure" about the glass strength as well... What did Murphy say? ???
Bullet proof and scratch proof are not the same thing.
They performed the identical impact glass test just before the reveal an it passed. My point is about "reproducibility of results" which is the "standard" for all experiments... That's what my students take with them when they learn experimental design...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c20skm7w1NE

That test in the video is flawed. They did it with the door open and on stage they had it closed. the stiffness of the frame didnt allow the glass to flex and is likely why it broke. all other tests shown allowed it to flex.
Welcome  to the forum! :) There are excuses all over the net right now... Once again they failed at the "first rule" of experimental design "control your variables"...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: clongton on 11/25/2019 01:36 pm
Videos and discussion of the Cybertruck, while interesting, have no place here. Not only is it off topic for this thread, it doesn't belong anywhere on this entire forum, which is dedicated to spaceflight. It's in the name: NASA SPACEFLIGHT.COM. Go to the Tesla website to find EV discussion forums.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Rocket Science on 11/25/2019 01:44 pm
Videos and discussion of the Cybertruck, while interesting, have no place here. Not only is it off topic for this thread, it doesn't belong anywhere on this entire forum, which is dedicated to spaceflight. It's in the name: NASA SPACEFLIGHT.COM. Go to the Tesla website to find EV discussion forums.
I agree with you Chuck but my point is about "testing culture and braggadocios assumptions" with two high profile failures within days... I have no problem with failures, what it says to me that it's not ready for prime time... Something's not right here... Admit it, fix it and keep moving forward...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 11/25/2019 01:50 pm
If they are going to move Mk2, and we've heard that Mk3 will be the first to fly, then maybe Mk2 will be moved to Pad 39A for testing purposes? Like validating the Starship pad is ready for a future rocket launch?

Otherwise moving Mk2 to KSC would be a pretty expensive way to scrap it...


Maybe use it to do a final check on horizontal transport and then for fit checks on the pad?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 11/25/2019 02:02 pm
I agree with Johnnyhinbos that it seems unlikely that they run pressure tests at 39A.
Is there a possibility that they can pressure-test MK2 at Roberts Road? Any current information/images from there? Is it far enough away from any critical or public locations? Is it even reachable by the barge+land route?

If I'm not mistaken, this is Roberts Road to the Turning Basin (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/28.5420112,-80.6639961/28.5827863,-80.6464856/@28.5553831,-80.6644111,7262m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m9!4m8!1m5!3m4!1m2!1d-80.6604519!2d28.5408521!3s0x88e0b026d4af300f:0x576216e42566a20a!1m0!3e0).

Reachable? Yes 
Pressurization at RR? Not Likely
Pressurization At 39A? Agree Very Unlikely

I do think there is value in shipping the intact Mk2 tank section(vs just engine section) to 39A for fit (and even fill perhaps) but not press.


There's some open space at the pad. IIUC pressing with water is relatively low energy. Could this not be done safely?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 11/25/2019 02:12 pm
If they are going to move Mk2, and we've heard that Mk3 will be the first to fly, then maybe Mk2 will be moved to Pad 39A for testing purposes? Like validating the Starship pad is ready for a future rocket launch?

Otherwise moving Mk2 to KSC would be a pretty expensive way to scrap it...


Maybe use it to do a final check on horizontal transport and then for fit checks on the pad?

Do we even know if Starship will fit on the pad? My understanding is that 39A is being fitted for SuperHeavy, not for Starship. Not sure the two would be compatible on the launch pad. I have seen nothing to say that they are, yet.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: AC in NC on 11/25/2019 03:12 pm
My understanding is that 39A is being fitted for SuperHeavy, not for Starship.

My understanding was SS now.  SH later.  I believe based on one of the filings.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 11/25/2019 03:15 pm
My understanding is that 39A is being fitted for SuperHeavy, not for Starship.

My understanding was SS now.  SH later.  I believe based on one of the filings.
I second that - and from what Iíve read I believe SH Mount is an order of magnitude larger than even the upsized one theyíre building now.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/25/2019 03:24 pm
My understanding is that 39A is being fitted for SuperHeavy, not for Starship.
My understanding was SS now.  SH later.  I believe based on one of the filings.
Do we even know if Starship will fit on the pad? My understanding is that 39A is being fitted for SuperHeavy, not for Starship. Not sure the two would be compatible on the launch pad. I have seen nothing to say that they are, yet.
The lower hold down mounts for SS and SH could be identical. At this point we don't know. Even if they are not, I would not find it difficult to believe that a mount could be built that would accept either one, and not hinder the other. I would consider this to be a very minor issue. Edit: To add a bit.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: space_snap828 on 11/25/2019 03:26 pm
The lower hold down mounts for SS and SH could be identical. At this point we don't know. Even if they are not, I would not find it difficult to believe that a mount could be built that would accept either one, and not hinder the other.
The diameter of the Superheavy engine section is larger than the 9 meter body, so it would be incompatible with Starship.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: AC in NC on 11/25/2019 03:30 pm
The lower hold down mounts for SS and SH could be identical. At this point we don't know. Even if they are not, I would not find it difficult to believe that a mount could be built that would accept either one, and not hinder the other.
The diameter of the Superheavy engine section is larger than the 9 meter body, so it would be incompatible with Starship.
Engineering is more flexible than that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 11/25/2019 03:50 pm
If they *are* building the 39A pad to be compatible with SS, and especially if it's built for SS and not SH at this moment then I would fully expect them to test it there. Pressure test, BC event and all.

Considering the simple ground support and launch stand set up they used in BC, why bother doing it on 39A? They have lots of land there to work with. Why not just get it ready for SH? They want to go orbital soon, so I would think it's either for SH or both, but not just for SS alone.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: AC in NC on 11/25/2019 04:16 pm
If they *are* building the 39A pad to be compatible with SS, and especially if it's built for SS and not SH at this moment then I would fully expect them to test it there. Pressure test, BC event and all.

I'm asking because I honestly don't know.  Assuming Mk2 isn't to fly, what advantage is there to Pressure Testing it.  Cannot most everything GSE-related be tested with fits and fills short of full pressure test that would risk any bursting?   
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: CraigLieb on 11/25/2019 04:29 pm
If they *are* building the 39A pad to be compatible with SS, and especially if it's built for SS and not SH at this moment then I would fully expect them to test it there. Pressure test, BC event and all.

I'm asking because I honestly don't know.  Assuming Mk2 isn't to fly, what advantage is there to Pressure Testing it.  Cannot most everything GSE-related be tested with fits and fills short of full pressure test that would risk any bursting?
They would be testing single weld rings process vs sheet build
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 11/25/2019 05:38 pm
If they *are* building the 39A pad to be compatible with SS, and especially if it's built for SS and not SH at this moment then I would fully expect them to test it there. Pressure test, BC event and all.

I'm asking because I honestly don't know.  Assuming Mk2 isn't to fly, what advantage is there to Pressure Testing it.  Cannot most everything GSE-related be tested with fits and fills short of full pressure test that would risk any bursting?

There's a lot more to a pressure test than just the pressure vessel. They are also testing handling cryogenic fluids, valves, control systems, etc, many of which will be on future ships. Still valuable data. Cryo hardening data might be valuable too, even if there is a formulation change.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/25/2019 05:52 pm
The lower hold down mounts for SS and SH could be identical. At this point we don't know. Even if they are not, I would not find it difficult to believe that a mount could be built that would accept either one, and not hinder the other.
The diameter of the Superheavy engine section is larger than the 9 meter body, so it would be incompatible with Starship.
OK, then make an adapter ring that can be dropped in place to hold a SS when one is to be launched. There is a convenient crane to install and remove it. It can also have all the plumbing needed. It can have SH mounts so it locks into them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 11/25/2019 06:05 pm
The lower hold down mounts for SS and SH could be identical. At this point we don't know. Even if they are not, I would not find it difficult to believe that a mount could be built that would accept either one, and not hinder the other.
The diameter of the Superheavy engine section is larger than the 9 meter body, so it would be incompatible with Starship.
OK, then make an adapter ring that can be dropped in place to hold a SS when one is to be launched. There is a convenient crane to install and remove it. It can also have all the plumbing needed. It can have SH mounts so it locks into them.

Certainly not unheard of before with SpaceX as they do something similar with F9 and Falcon Heavy. But I think a dedicated launch mount that can be replicated for P2P would make more sense as far as parallel development, and limiting early dev risk to the 39A pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: JamesH65 on 11/25/2019 07:23 pm
Videos and discussion of the Cybertruck, while interesting, have no place here. Not only is it off topic for this thread, it doesn't belong anywhere on this entire forum, which is dedicated to spaceflight. It's in the name: NASA SPACEFLIGHT.COM. Go to the Tesla website to find EV discussion forums.
I agree with you Chuck but my point is about "testing culture and braggadocios assumptions" with two high profile failures within days... I have no problem with failures, what it says to me that it's not ready for prime time... Something's not right here... Admit it, fix it and keep moving forward...

Well since both these failure events were with prototype devices, and therefor by definition not ready for prime time, it seems they are doing exactly as you want!
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Rocket Science on 11/25/2019 07:44 pm
Videos and discussion of the Cybertruck, while interesting, have no place here. Not only is it off topic for this thread, it doesn't belong anywhere on this entire forum, which is dedicated to spaceflight. It's in the name: NASA SPACEFLIGHT.COM. Go to the Tesla website to find EV discussion forums.
I agree with you Chuck but my point is about "testing culture and braggadocios assumptions" with two high profile failures within days... I have no problem with failures, what it says to me that it's not ready for prime time... Something's not right here... Admit it, fix it and keep moving forward...

Well since both these failure events were with prototype devices, and therefor by definition not ready for prime time, it seems they are doing exactly as you want!
On prime time? ???
Let's leave it there as to upset the good folks...
Edit to Add:
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Lemurion on 11/25/2019 08:03 pm
Videos and discussion of the Cybertruck, while interesting, have no place here. Not only is it off topic for this thread, it doesn't belong anywhere on this entire forum, which is dedicated to spaceflight. It's in the name: NASA SPACEFLIGHT.COM. Go to the Tesla website to find EV discussion forums.
I agree with you Chuck but my point is about "testing culture and braggadocios assumptions" with two high profile failures within days... I have no problem with failures, what it says to me that it's not ready for prime time... Something's not right here... Admit it, fix it and keep moving forward...

Well since both these failure events were with prototype devices, and therefor by definition not ready for prime time, it seems they are doing exactly as you want!
On prime time? ???
Let's leave it there as to upset the good folks...
Edit to Add:

I would call the Cybertruck accident prime time, but not the MK1 pressurization failure.

While the construction and testing process at Boca Chica has a worldwide audience, it's not being done for that audience. SpaceX is following its internal testing process for Starship; the accident was the result of finding out how strong it was, not showing off how strong it was. That's an important difference.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Rocket Science on 11/25/2019 08:20 pm
Videos and discussion of the Cybertruck, while interesting, have no place here. Not only is it off topic for this thread, it doesn't belong anywhere on this entire forum, which is dedicated to spaceflight. It's in the name: NASA SPACEFLIGHT.COM. Go to the Tesla website to find EV discussion forums.
I agree with you Chuck but my point is about "testing culture and braggadocios assumptions" with two high profile failures within days... I have no problem with failures, what it says to me that it's not ready for prime time... Something's not right here... Admit it, fix it and keep moving forward...

Well since both these failure events were with prototype devices, and therefor by definition not ready for prime time, it seems they are doing exactly as you want!
On prime time? ???
Let's leave it there as to upset the good folks...
Edit to Add:

I would call the Cybertruck accident prime time, but not the MK1 pressurization failure.

While the construction and testing process at Boca Chica has a worldwide audience, it's not being done for that audience. SpaceX is following its internal testing process for Starship; the accident was the result of finding out how strong it was, not showing off how strong it was. That's an important difference.
I was using a "double entendre", plus it's the wrong thread to discuss so once again let's leave it there please...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: TergenFlerg on 11/25/2019 08:38 pm
I noticed in FutureSpaceTourist's most recent fly-over, there are 2 U shaped (mounts?) sitting in the gravel lot in front of the build site.  Any agreement that these will be used to mount Mk2 horizontally on the Roll-Lift?  Here's the link:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48893.msg2018592#msg2018592
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/25/2019 08:46 pm
In Flix's latest "What About It" YouTube video(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYAUXi8b-Ls) it included some pictures by David Lavoie of the Robert's Road site. David's pictures showed a stockpile of rolled steel. The Cocoa site does not have any rolled steel right now, just sheets of steel, the kind used in bulkhead and nose cone construction. Today, 25 November 2019 at the Cocoa site, the ring that was on the base came down. There was plenty of banging like normal, sounding like the shaping of the steel sheets. The scaffolding around the outside of the nose cone came down, and more equipment left the premises.

My guesses: The Cocoa site will become a dome and cone manufacturing site, and the Robert's Road site will be where the towers are created. I expect the big move of MK2, all three pieces, very soon. The base that the ring was on will probably move first. There is another base at the Robert's Road site, ref David's pictures. That would give them two bases for the two big sections of MK2 at the Robert's site to have ready for the move.
Picture Seamore Holdings 25 November 2019 shows the ring being prepped for removal from the base.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: SkyRate on 11/25/2019 10:12 pm
I noticed in FutureSpaceTourist's most recent fly-over, there are 2 U shaped (mounts?) sitting in the gravel lot in front of the build site.  Any agreement that these will be used to mount Mk2 horizontally on the Roll-Lift?
They certainly look exactly how I'd expected SS cradles to look.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RoboGoofers on 11/26/2019 04:19 pm
With the top bulkhead installed it doesn't fit in the tent anymore. good thing hurricane season is over.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 11/26/2019 04:36 pm
Felix makes pretty good case about Roberts road in that video. We haven't discussed it that much here because we have had little observation of that area. We have had a couple of pics of that area and knew something was going on there, but have to thank Felix for the interesting pics and observations.

I hope we can get more observations of that area in the future, especially if stacking is going to happen there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/26/2019 08:21 pm
Well bummer, the two extra bases are ready to move. They are sitting on flatbed trailers. Most work spaces are bugging out. The rig that was used to make rings is sitting on the ground out side of the wide tent. No more rings have been cut up yet, still sitting at 16 rings. The machine shop that was in the small tent next to the hangar is getting cleaned out. The containers that we saw arrive appear to be for equipment making the move, although they are still on site. All parts having to do with the Starship seem to have been left in place for now, that includes pipes, fairings, even the straps used to raise the top bulkhead. The upper and lower sections and nose cone appear ready to move.
My guesses, they will move the Upper and Lower section after moving the two bases. They will move the two bases when they get some of the work stations set up. We will know where they will move the two sections after they move the bases, remember there is already at least one base at Robert's Road. I have not been able to see any clues as to what they will do to the MK2. It seems like every thing came to a halt as soon as the MK1 had its problems. They had just installed the dome on MK2 when the pressure event happened. It was like they just dropped everything including the straps on top and started to get it ready to move.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: BrianPeterson on 11/27/2019 02:50 am
It was like they just dropped everything including the straps on top and started to get it ready to move.

It wasn't "like" they just did exactly that. They cut losses and bugged out. It really didn't hit me they were bugging out until I saw the video yesterday posted above and the steel coils sitting at Robert's Road. I wonder how Coca feels, they just spent all that money burying lines, altering streets in order to make way for MK2 and now it may never happen. Or did SpaceX pay for the work?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: leetdan on 11/27/2019 07:35 am
I wonder how Coca feels, they just spent all that money burying lines, altering streets in order to make way for MK2 and now it may never happen. Or did SpaceX pay for the work?

COCOA.  It's bad enough that some locals still mix the city of Cocoa up with Cocoa Beach, the rest of the world could at least try to spell it right.

As for the roadwork, if the plan was to move to Roberts all along, then there was only ever going to be one tank move.  That's still what is most likely to happen, based on the arrival of the shipping mounts.  In that case, nobody should be losing any sleep over Mk.2 being descoped.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Proesterchen on 11/27/2019 09:23 am
The mounts may just be the remnants of the previous plan, now discarded along with the Cocoa site and all flight hardware produced there.

If they've already been recycling rings at Cocoa there's no better place to cut down the rest of Mk2 IMHO.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/27/2019 12:49 pm
Not moving Mk2 would save a lot of money. SpaceX likely had to pay for all the lines to be altered. That is common.

The fact we see some rings on trailers has me intrigued. Will there still be an oversize move convoy some day?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: raivo45 on 11/27/2019 01:25 pm
https://twitter.com/DopplerDougFL/status/1199478812989415424

This twitter user is saying that the 2 bases and the ring have already been moved.  ::)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ThatOldJanxSpirit on 11/27/2019 01:54 pm
https://twitter.com/DopplerDougFL/status/1199478812989415424

This twitter user is saying that the 2 bases and the ring have already been moved.  ::)

Also a suggestion from John in the thread that a Ďnose fairingí has been moved. Good news if the double rings and parts of the fairing are good enough for inclusion in Mk.4.

If as this suggests they are moving tank fabrication to Roberts Road, I wonder if they will also have to relocate the big tent.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: RotoSequence on 11/27/2019 02:12 pm
Also a suggestion from John in the thread that a Ďnose fairingí has been moved. Good news if the double rings and parts of the fairing are good enough for inclusion in Mk.4.

If as this suggests they are moving tank fabrication to Roberts Road, I wonder if they will also have to relocate the big tent.

It's also consistent with the site being mothballed while fabrication efforts are shifted in their entirely to Boca Chica.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: SteveU on 11/27/2019 02:25 pm
Also a suggestion from John in the thread that a Ďnose fairingí has been moved. Good news if the double rings and parts of the fairing are good enough for inclusion in Mk.4.

If as this suggests they are moving tank fabrication to Roberts Road, I wonder if they will also have to relocate the big tent.

It's also consistent with the site being mothballed while fabrication efforts are shifted in their entirely to Boca Chica.
given the difficulty of transporting large items to and from the Cidco Road site, it never really made sense to me that it would be long term SH/SS fabrication site.  It seems to me that if it remains a SpaceX facility, it will be used fro smaller sub-assemblies (fins, thrust structures, etc.).

I for one would be happy if they focused on MK3 in Boca Chica and followed by MK4/SH at the KSC Roberts Road site.  probably a better use of resources.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: smndk on 11/27/2019 02:38 pm
Also a suggestion from John in the thread that a ‘nose fairing’ has been moved. Good news if the double rings and parts of the fairing are good enough for inclusion in Mk.4.

If as this suggests they are moving tank fabrication to Roberts Road, I wonder if they will also have to relocate the big tent.

It's also consistent with the site being mothballed while fabrication efforts are shifted in their entirely to Boca Chica.
given the difficulty of transporting large items to and from the Cidco Road site, it never really made sense to me that it would be long term SH/SS fabrication site.  It seems to me that if it remains a SpaceX facility, it will be used fro smaller sub-assemblies (fins, thrust structures, etc.).

I for one would be happy if they focused on MK3 in Boca Chica and followed by MK4/SH at the KSC Roberts Road site.  probably a better use of resources.
Also a suggestion from John in the thread that a ‘nose fairing’ has been moved. Good news if the double rings and parts of the fairing are good enough for inclusion in Mk.4.

If as this suggests they are moving tank fabrication to Roberts Road, I wonder if they will also have to relocate the big tent.

It's also consistent with the site being mothballed while fabrication efforts are shifted in their entirely to Boca Chica.
given the difficulty of transporting large items to and from the Cidco Road site, it never really made sense to me that it would be long term SH/SS fabrication site.  It seems to me that if it remains a SpaceX facility, it will be used fro smaller sub-assemblies (fins, thrust structures, etc.).

I for one would be happy if they focused on MK3 in Boca Chica and followed by MK4/SH at the KSC Roberts Road site.  probably a better use of resources.

When they build the large tent, one would think that they must have planned with longer term production of tanks in Cocoa. Things changes quickly at SpaceX.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/27/2019 03:14 pm
When they build the large tent, one would think that they must have planned with longer term production of tanks in Cocoa. Things changes quickly at SpaceX.
I think they did plan to be there for a few years.  Then the new elevated railroad tracks camee through and would cut the site off.

Tent buildings like that are cheap. Custom design like that, likely only $100k-$200k built on site. If it fits with their plans, it will be moved to Roberts Road facility. If not, sold. I have a 30'x120' that only cost $14k for the parts. Took me and my dad a week to assemble. That includes drilling and setting a few dozen foundation posts to put it on.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/27/2019 06:36 pm
Doug saw the two iron bases and the dome that was in the doorway of the main facility getting moved.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/27/2019 06:47 pm
This picture might have a story to it. First picture was taken on 2 November 2019. No more work was done on this area after this date. Compare with a picture from today 27 November 2019.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: mmeijeri on 11/27/2019 06:51 pm
I think they did plan to be there for a few years.  Then the new elevated railroad tracks camee through and would cut the site off.

Where exactly will the railroad run and when did that decision become known?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 11/27/2019 07:05 pm
RIP Cocoa, you've been swept up in the MK1 / 2 firestorm. Troops are bugging out...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/27/2019 07:06 pm
This picture might have a story to it. First picture was taken on 2 November 2019. No more work was done on this area after this date. Compare with a picture from today 27 November 2019.

on the second picture, are those metal sheets scraps from the rings? they might be using this area to load containers of scrap metal

side note: that bulkhead inside the hangar on the previous post looks different from the ones used on mk1, it appears that it has less plates on its base.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/27/2019 07:51 pm


on the second picture, are those metal sheets scraps from the rings? they might be using this area to load containers of scrap metal

side note: that bulkhead inside the hangar on the previous post looks different from the ones used on mk1, it appears that it has less plates on its base.

Not sure if they are metal or not. There is plenty of scrap metal on site. I think those are for the move to level out certain areas or protect other areas. As per the permit request for the move, SpaceX said they would use mats at the barge loading point. I have no idea why the container pods are there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/27/2019 08:20 pm
One header tank just removed from the MK2 nosecone. The header tank protruded below the lip of the nosecone and needed to be removed if they plan on moving the nosecone without its base.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 11/27/2019 08:22 pm
One header tank just removed from the MK2 nosecone. The header tank protruded below the lip of the nosecone and needed to be removed if they plan on moving the nosecone without its base.
This should be posted in the Updates thread
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/27/2019 08:28 pm
One header tank just removed from the MK2 nosecone. The header tank protruded below the lip of the nosecone and needed to be removed if they plan on moving the nosecone without its base.
This should be posted in the Updates thread

I agree, John is always keeping us up to date
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/27/2019 08:29 pm


on the second picture, are those metal sheets scraps from the rings? they might be using this area to load containers of scrap metal

side note: that bulkhead inside the hangar on the previous post looks different from the ones used on mk1, it appears that it has less plates on its base.

Not sure if they are metal or not. There is plenty of scrap metal on site. I think those are for the move to level out certain areas or protect other areas. As per the permit request for the move, SpaceX said they would use mats at the barge loading point. I have no idea why the container pods are there.
The rusty looking ones look like new large box beams to me. Oh, something one might use for linking the two cradles together for a SS move. Edit: They could also be for making frames for the launch pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/27/2019 08:41 pm
I think they did plan to be there for a few years.  Then the new elevated railroad tracks camee through and would cut the site off.

Where exactly will the railroad run and when did that decision become known?
Roughly 3220 N Cocoa Blvd, Cocoa, FL 32926 (US 1) and Martin Andersen Beachline Expy. The elevated railroad will follow US 1.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/28%C2%B024'06.4%22N+80%C2%B045'07.1%22W/@28.401788,-80.7541687,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x0!7e2!8m2!3d28.4017882!4d-80.7519798 (https://www.google.com/maps/place/28%C2%B024'06.4%22N+80%C2%B045'07.1%22W/@28.401788,-80.7541687,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x0!7e2!8m2!3d28.4017882!4d-80.7519798)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 11/27/2019 09:11 pm
In Flix's latest "What About It" YouTube video(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYAUXi8b-Ls (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYAUXi8b-Ls)) it included some pictures by David Lavoie of the Robert's Road site. David's pictures showed a stockpile of rolled steel. The Cocoa site does not have any rolled steel right now, just sheets of steel, the kind used in bulkhead and nose cone construction. Today, 25 November 2019 at the Cocoa site, the ring that was on the base came down. There was plenty of banging like normal, sounding like the shaping of the steel sheets. The scaffolding around the outside of the nose cone came down, and more equipment left the premises.

My guesses: The Cocoa site will become a dome and cone manufacturing site, and the Robert's Road site will be where the towers are created. I expect the big move of MK2, all three pieces, very soon. The base that the ring was on will probably move first. There is another base at the Robert's Road site, ref David's pictures. That would give them two bases for the two big sections of MK2 at the Robert's site to have ready for the move.
Picture Seamore Holdings 25 November 2019 shows the ring being prepped for removal from the base.

It would make more sense for Cocoa to focus on units that donít need herculean efforts to transport. Dome segments maybe, but not the domes themselves.

Phil
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 11/27/2019 10:01 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjg-vPN59RE
It looks kinda like they are preparing to lift the top cone, either to free up the base for transport or to transport the cone itself. Reasoning - there's a manlift at the top of the cone - we've seen them rig lifting rigging in this manner, and a medium sided crane is just pulling up to beside the cone section.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: OTV Booster on 11/27/2019 10:29 pm
This picture might have a story to it. First picture was taken on 2 November 2019. No more work was done on this area after this date. Compare with a picture from today 27 November 2019.


There is also some square dimensional steel stock. Maybe for an SS shipping structure?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Zpoxy on 11/27/2019 10:46 pm
I think they did plan to be there for a few years.  Then the new elevated railroad tracks camee through and would cut the site off.

Where exactly will the railroad run and when did that decision become known?
Roughly 3220 N Cocoa Blvd, Cocoa, FL 32926 (US 1) and Martin Andersen Beachline Expy. The elevated railroad will follow US 1.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/28%C2%B024'06.4%22N+80%C2%B045'07.1%22W/@28.401788,-80.7541687,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x0!7e2!8m2!3d28.4017882!4d-80.7519798 (https://www.google.com/maps/place/28%C2%B024'06.4%22N+80%C2%B045'07.1%22W/@28.401788,-80.7541687,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x0!7e2!8m2!3d28.4017882!4d-80.7519798)
I thought the elevated section starts west of US1, paralleling 528 the Beachline westward to Orlando.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: SteveU on 11/27/2019 11:57 pm
I think they did plan to be there for a few years.  Then the new elevated railroad tracks camee through and would cut the site off.

Where exactly will the railroad run and when did that decision become known?
Roughly 3220 N Cocoa Blvd, Cocoa, FL 32926 (US 1) and Martin Andersen Beachline Expy. The elevated railroad will follow US 1.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/28%C2%B024'06.4%22N+80%C2%B045'07.1%22W/@28.401788,-80.7541687,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x0!7e2!8m2!3d28.4017882!4d-80.7519798 (https://www.google.com/maps/place/28%C2%B024'06.4%22N+80%C2%B045'07.1%22W/@28.401788,-80.7541687,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x0!7e2!8m2!3d28.4017882!4d-80.7519798)
I thought the elevated section starts west of US1, paralleling 528 the Beachline westward to Orlando.

Found this article from the Orlando Sentinel dated August 22:

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/transportation/os-ne-virgin-trains-crossing-orange-20190822-uqyijnitbrb2dgegog6uydg5be-story.html

About two-thirds down it says:

Two of the most challenging construction feats, according to Brightline officials, will occur at Goldenrod Road adjacent to the airport and at the Beachline near U.S. 1.

Tracks will cross beneath those roads via tunnels built as very large box culverts.


This implies that as it makes its turn from north-south from Miami to east-west to Orlando it will be underground. It appears to me that it wouldnít interfere with moving SS from Cidco Road to the barge landing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/28/2019 01:48 am
Two of the most challenging construction feats, according to Brightline officials, will occur at Goldenrod Road adjacent to the airport and at the Beachline near U.S. 1.

Tracks will cross beneath those roads via tunnels built as very large box culverts.


This implies that as it makes its turn from north-south from Miami to east-west to Orlando it will be underground. It appears to me that it wouldnít interfere with moving SS from Cidco Road to the barge landing.
?Do the builders know about the water table in the area? You see signs of how shallow it is all around the area.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: zodiacchris on 11/28/2019 06:07 am
Thatís why they are using box culverts, they are tanked structures that can sit in the ground water...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/30/2019 07:23 pm
Well the bulkhead and two bases that were moved out of the Cocoa Facility ended up at the port for possible shipment on the ship, Go Discovery. If that is the case, it looks like most of Starship development will move out of here.
https://twitter.com/GregScott_photo/status/1200865719245824000
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: space_snap828 on 11/30/2019 07:32 pm
Well the bulkhead and two bases that were moved out of the Cocoa Facility ended up at the port for possible shipment on the ship, Go Discovery. If that is the case, it looks like most of Starship development will move out of here.
https://twitter.com/GregScott_photo/status/1200865719245824000
There has been a lot of talk of Starship construction moving inside their property of KSC. Do we think they are moving all of the development to Boca Chica or is this an aspect of reorienting and regrouping to restart in KSC?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/30/2019 08:06 pm
The bases and bulkhead have been loaded onto the "Go Discovery" most likely going to Boca Chica. They could move the nose cone and upper section there as well and have a head start on two new prototypes.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: FlattestEarth on 11/30/2019 08:47 pm
Why would it be worth it to move those relatively simple structures to BC via ship?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 11/30/2019 08:50 pm
The bases and bulkhead have been loaded onto the "Go Discovery" most likely going to Boca Chica. They could move the nose cone and upper section there as well and have a head start on two new prototypes.

It looks like Cocoa is out, but Roberts Road is just getting started. They might be doing what they can to accelerate MK3 development in Boca Chica, but also must be preparing Roberts Road facility for starting fabrication there, right?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 11/30/2019 09:07 pm
The bases and bulkhead have been loaded onto the "Go Discovery" most likely going to Boca Chica. They could move the nose cone and upper section there as well and have a head start on two new prototypes.

It looks like Cocoa is out, but Roberts Road is just getting started. They might be doing what they can to accelerate MK3 development in Boca Chica, but also must be preparing Roberts Road facility for starting fabrication there, right?

They need to get started on the Super Heavy Booster soon, maybe already started.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 11/30/2019 09:20 pm
The bases and bulkhead have been loaded onto the "Go Discovery" most likely going to Boca Chica. They could move the nose cone and upper section there as well and have a head start on two new prototypes.

It looks like Cocoa is out, but Roberts Road is just getting started. They might be doing what they can to accelerate MK3 development in Boca Chica, but also must be preparing Roberts Road facility for starting fabrication there, right?

They need to get started on the Super Heavy Booster soon, maybe already started.
First make a SS Mk4 and then SH at Roberts Rd facility. I suppose they could make a SH first and do grasshopper tests with it, but I doubt it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Lar on 12/01/2019 12:27 am
Why would it be worth it to move those relatively simple structures to BC via ship?
I can't imagine it is worth it from purely cost of materials and sunk labor. Maybe they are testing some movement technique and they are not going to BC at all.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: su27k on 12/01/2019 02:36 am
Why would it be worth it to move those relatively simple structures to BC via ship?

Maybe it's less about saving cost but more about saving time? This is one less bulkhead mk3 needs to build. Also I assume the bulkhead jig is under the bulkhead and moving together with it, the jig would be pretty useful if they want to build multiple bulkheads in parallel at BC.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 12/01/2019 04:45 am
Why would it be worth it to move those relatively simple structures to BC via ship?

Maybe it's less about saving cost but more about saving time? This is one less bulkhead mk3 needs to build. Also I assume the bulkhead jig is under the bulkhead and moving together with it, the jig would be pretty useful if they want to build multiple bulkheads in parallel at BC.

The Mk3 bulkheads look to be going together much nicer than Mk1 & Mk2 ones did. Looks like they stamped out a set for Mk3 in BC, why not Mk4 in RR too?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Bogeyman on 12/01/2019 07:54 am
Sorry, I tried to read back a couple of pages. Can someone fill me in on the Roberts Road thing? Where is that? WhatĎs going to happen there?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: harrystranger on 12/01/2019 08:17 am
Sorry, I tried to read back a couple of pages. Can someone fill me in on the Roberts Road thing? Where is that? WhatĎs going to happen there?
This should help you out  :)
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=45813.0
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 12/01/2019 03:10 pm
Sorry, I tried to read back a couple of pages. Can someone fill me in on the Roberts Road thing? Where is that? WhatĎs going to happen there?
This should help you out  :)
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=45813.0

Felix has a video showing some pictures of RR facility:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYAUXi8b-Ls&t=688s

It's already looking ready to start pumping starships, there's a lot of steel coils, a ring base, two tents, a bulkhead, containers, a crane, and many porta potties  ::)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Lar on 12/01/2019 03:21 pm
Can't be single threaded on porta-potties!

I expect the CIA uses this potty-count metric as well as cars in the lot, when evaluating activities.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Proesterchen on 12/02/2019 12:02 am
There are two things Boca Chica has on both Florida operations:

- (mostly) working ground service infrastructure
- the ability to test to destruction, both intentionally and unintentionally

No one wants to see Pad 39A damaged by an untested vehicle. There is no place to test completed prototypes in Florida as far as we know. As such, I have a hard time seeing what contribution the Roberts Road location could bring at all.

Unless and until FL testing is sorted out, it would appear to me that Boca Chica is the right location to build and test the ships, with only Q/A-ed models then making the trip to Florida as work on 39A is completed and flight testing can begin in earnest.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: FutureSpaceTourist on 12/02/2019 06:13 am
twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1201287692723593216

Quote
Interesting rumors here about SpaceX shutting down its Cocoa, Fl. Starship work site:

-- Temporary workers let go
-- Ditching Mk. 2
-- Full speed ahead on Mk. 3 in Texas
-- May open a new Florida site on KSC for Mk. 4

Again, not substantiated.

old.reddit.com/r/spacex/commeÖ

https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1201290189408292864

Quote
This makes some sense in that a new location at Roberts Road makes for much easier movement of Starship vehicles to the test site; and maybe they've learned enough from building the early Starship prototypes to progress toward the more advanced versions.

https://twitter.com/julia_bergeron/status/1201350135768330240

Quote
You saw the rumors earlier today from Reddit, now here's the actual video from @FelixSchlang so you can go watch his take on MK2, Cidco Road and what's happening going forward at Boca Chica. #Starship #Getitfromthesource

https://youtu.be/LAXo1FdywLE
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: 50_Caliber on 12/02/2019 11:10 am
In terms of getting a Starship to orbit, the schedule has probably sped up as a result of the incident on the 20th.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: laszlo on 12/02/2019 11:34 am
In terms of getting a Starship to orbit, the schedule has probably sped up as a result of the incident on the 20th.

Dang! They should have blown it up sooner and saved even more time. ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 12/02/2019 11:50 am
In terms of getting a Starship to orbit, the schedule has probably sped up as a result of the incident on the 20th.

Agreed, that's what I've been saying for a while.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 12/02/2019 12:19 pm
In terms of getting a Starship to orbit, the schedule has probably sped up as a result of the incident on the 20th.
That's a pretty bold statement. I'd say they lost an invaluable opportunity to gather flight data on an entirely new EDL technique. Additionally, the needed infrastructure to manufacture MK3 could have easily been built in tandem while MK1 continued its production / testing. Not to mention that higher fidelity manufacturing systems, such as an automated horizontal welding system, take time to order to spec, manufacture, install, and calibrate. Plus long term infrastructure required to house such equipment and processes could also have happened in tandem with MK1 - it's not like those projects share the same resources.

So I don't see how this will get them to orbit faster. I have a feeling the Coco site shutdown was already planned, so that wasn't affected by the incident. I say this because to all intents and purposes Coco manufacture has stopped long before the incident, and the Roberts Road site was already in the works.

However, with that said I eagerly look forward to seeing what changes will be implemented. I'm curious as to how the steel stands that are being transferred from Coco will be utilized, and am very interested in the new nosecone (or what appears to be a nosecone - it could also be a fabrication jig) ,as I have been closely watching for those interesting steep plates with the rounded tabs on the end to show up after arriving on a flatbed and now they apparently have shown up in the shape of a nosecone. I am also interested in seeing what the stainless U channel will be used for that arrived on the same shipment.

John
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: envy887 on 12/02/2019 03:30 pm
In terms of getting a Starship to orbit, the schedule has probably sped up as a result of the incident on the 20th.
That's a pretty bold statement. I'd say they lost an invaluable opportunity to gather flight data on an entirely new EDL technique. Additionally, the needed infrastructure to manufacture MK3 could have easily been built in tandem while MK1 continued its production / testing. Not to mention that higher fidelity manufacturing systems, such as an automated horizontal welding system, take time to order to spec, manufacture, install, and calibrate. Plus long term infrastructure required to house such equipment and processes could also have happened in tandem with MK1 - it's not like those projects share the same resources.

So I don't see how this will get them to orbit faster. I have a feeling the Coco site shutdown was already planned, so that wasn't affected by the incident. I say this because to all intents and purposes Coco manufacture has stopped long before the incident, and the Roberts Road site was already in the works.

However, with that said I eagerly look forward to seeing what changes will be implemented. I'm curious as to how the steel stands that are being transferred from Coco will be utilized, and am very interested in the new nosecone (or what appears to be a nosecone - it could also be a fabrication jig) ,as I have been closely watching for those interesting steep plates with the rounded tabs on the end to show up after arriving on a flatbed and now they apparently have shown up in the shape of a nosecone. I am also interested in seeing what the stainless U channel will be used for that arrived on the same shipment.

John

I think reduce the time to an exoatmospheric (but not orbital) flight attempt, while increasing the chance of that attempt failing to stick the landing.

An orbital attempt will require SuperHeavy, which might be dependent on the exoatmospheric flight. So that might move up, but probably not.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Captain Crutch on 12/02/2019 03:37 pm
We must ask the question, what will happen to Mk. 2? Equipment and components have already begun being shipped to Boca, with the exception of rings that were said to be the incorrect size, is it possible we see Mk. 2 still make it to KSC or even possibly Boca Chica? Or will we just see the remianing workforce slowly tear everything apart for scrapping? Time will tell of course but it will be quite sad if they take a partially assembled Starship, one that seems to have complete tanks, and just throw it away. It would be nice if it atleast became one of the first edditions to their new rocket garden at KSC they're building now...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: 50_Caliber on 12/02/2019 04:16 pm
In terms of getting a Starship to orbit, the schedule has probably sped up as a result of the incident on the 20th.
That's a pretty bold statement. I'd say they lost an invaluable opportunity to gather flight data on an entirely new EDL technique. Additionally, the needed infrastructure to manufacture MK3 could have easily been built in tandem while MK1 continued its production / testing. Not to mention that higher fidelity manufacturing systems, such as an automated horizontal welding system, take time to order to spec, manufacture, install, and calibrate. Plus long term infrastructure required to house such equipment and processes could also have happened in tandem with MK1 - it's not like those projects share the same resources.

So I don't see how this will get them to orbit faster. I have a feeling the Coco site shutdown was already planned, so that wasn't affected by the incident. I say this because to all intents and purposes Coco manufacture has stopped long before the incident, and the Roberts Road site was already in the works.

However, with that said I eagerly look forward to seeing what changes will be implemented. I'm curious as to how the steel stands that are being transferred from Coco will be utilized, and am very interested in the new nosecone (or what appears to be a nosecone - it could also be a fabrication jig) ,as I have been closely watching for those interesting steep plates with the rounded tabs on the end to show up after arriving on a flatbed and now they apparently have shown up in the shape of a nosecone. I am also interested in seeing what the stainless U channel will be used for that arrived on the same shipment.

John

I think reduce the time to an exoatmospheric (but not orbital) flight attempt, while increasing the chance of that attempt failing to stick the landing.

An orbital attempt will require SuperHeavy, which might be dependent on the exoatmospheric flight. So that might move up, but probably not.
The MK1 was going to test the belly-flop maneuver from 20KM, are they that confident in Lars Blackmore's mastery of landing dynamics that they thought they could skip to MK3 and simply make that 1 more flight that the MK3 would attempt in the testing of the maneuver? This is going to be white-knuckle time, very exciting in the RUD sense...
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Thunderscreech on 12/02/2019 04:20 pm
We must ask the question, what will happen to Mk. 2? Equipment and components have already begun being shipped to Boca, with the exception of rings that were said to be the incorrect size, is it possible we see Mk. 2 still make it to KSC or even possibly Boca Chica? Or will we just see the remianing workforce slowly tear everything apart for scrapping? Time will tell of course but it will be quite sad if they take a partially assembled Starship, one that seems to have complete tanks, and just throw it away. It would be nice if it atleast became one of the first edditions to their new rocket garden at KSC they're building now...
After Mk I burst, SpaceX released a statement that they had already decided against flying it.  If that's accurate, perhaps the reasoning there applies to Mk II as well.  There's plenty of precedent for ditching a vehicle under these circumstances, one of the most relevant might be Enterprise.  Originally intended to be refit for orbital flight after the glide tests, the reference design had advanced sufficiently that it was considered impractical for a few reasons to do so which is why STA-99 was instead upgraded to OV-99 Challenger. 

If Mk2 and Mk1 were sufficiently 'first generation' pathfinders then whatever informed the decision to not fly the Mk1 could also have affected the Mk2.  Maybe they lost confidence in the sheet-build method, maybe there were enough other changes that they decided it was going to become a sunk cost?  Į\_(ツ)_/Į
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Mandella on 12/02/2019 04:47 pm
In terms of getting a Starship to orbit, the schedule has probably sped up as a result of the incident on the 20th.
That's a pretty bold statement. I'd say they lost an invaluable opportunity to gather flight data on an entirely new EDL technique. Additionally, the needed infrastructure to manufacture MK3 could have easily been built in tandem while MK1 continued its production / testing. Not to mention that higher fidelity manufacturing systems, such as an automated horizontal welding system, take time to order to spec, manufacture, install, and calibrate. Plus long term infrastructure required to house such equipment and processes could also have happened in tandem with MK1 - it's not like those projects share the same resources.

So I don't see how this will get them to orbit faster. I have a feeling the Coco site shutdown was already planned, so that wasn't affected by the incident. I say this because to all intents and purposes Coco manufacture has stopped long before the incident, and the Roberts Road site was already in the works.

However, with that said I eagerly look forward to seeing what changes will be implemented. I'm curious as to how the steel stands that are being transferred from Coco will be utilized, and am very interested in the new nosecone (or what appears to be a nosecone - it could also be a fabrication jig) ,as I have been closely watching for those interesting steep plates with the rounded tabs on the end to show up after arriving on a flatbed and now they apparently have shown up in the shape of a nosecone. I am also interested in seeing what the stainless U channel will be used for that arrived on the same shipment.

John

I do wonder if some in SpaceX were not falling into a version of the much referenced sunk cost fallacy. We've got this thing, we gotta do something with it, when maybe they shouldn't have even reassembled it after the big show (assuming they have pivoted to a new design then). In that case blowing it up gets them moving forward quicker.

Even though they would have still been able to get some useful tests results out of it if it had not popped its top, I do not think that losing a prototype this early in the process does much to slow the real timetable (not Musk's notoriously asperational one) much at all.

I expect them to lose some more, frankly, while still successfully flying routinely in five years (four now).
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Wolfram66 on 12/02/2019 04:51 pm
We must ask the question, what will happen to Mk. 2? Equipment and components have already begun being shipped to Boca, with the exception of rings that were said to be the incorrect size, is it possible we see Mk. 2 still make it to KSC or even possibly Boca Chica? Or will we just see the remianing workforce slowly tear everything apart for scrapping? Time will tell of course but it will be quite sad if they take a partially assembled Starship, one that seems to have complete tanks, and just throw it away. It would be nice if it atleast became one of the first edditions to their new rocket garden at KSC they're building now...

Maybe they can turn it into a water tower... :o  ducks and runs for cover.....
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: GWH on 12/02/2019 07:33 pm
I am also interested in seeing what the stainless U channel will be used for that arrived on the same shipment.

John

Take a look at the official engine photos from the Mk1 build. These are all welded to the inside of the skin as reinforcement. The profile has perforations to reduce mass.
Easy link but better photos are elsewhere: https://www.inverse.com/article/59637-spacex-starship-elon-musk-shares-dramatic-raptor-engine-photos
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 12/02/2019 08:23 pm
They continue to take parts out of the MK2 nosecone as of Monday 2 Dec 2019. They seem to be removing more than would be necessary to transport the nosecone. One header tank was removed last week, and it looks like the second header tank might be getting removed soon.

My guess is that the next generation will have a much lower center of gravity with the header tanks much further down in the rocket. Larger canards on the nosecone could compensate.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: matt_ellis on 12/02/2019 08:43 pm
They continue to take parts out of the MK2 nosecone as of Monday 2 Dec 2019. They seem to be removing more than would be necessary to transport the nosecone. One header tank was removed last week, and it looks like the second header tank might be getting removed soon.

My guess is that the next generation will have a much lower center of gravity with the header tanks much further down in the rocket. Larger canards on the nosecone could compensate.
IIRC Elon stated the header tanks were in the nose for weight distribution during the skydive.  He also suggested (again IIRC) that they would be improved - possibly moving to bulkheads similar to the main tanks rather than separate cylinders.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Sciencefan on 12/03/2019 12:04 am
We must ask the question, what will happen to Mk. 2? Equipment and components have already begun being shipped to Boca, with the exception of rings that were said to be the incorrect size, is it possible we see Mk. 2 still make it to KSC or even possibly Boca Chica? Or will we just see the remianing workforce slowly tear everything apart for scrapping? Time will tell of course but it will be quite sad if they take a partially assembled Starship, one that seems to have complete tanks, and just throw it away. It would be nice if it atleast became one of the first edditions to their new rocket garden at KSC they're building now...

I think it might sound crazy, but sending MK2 hull to BC for the flight test really possible despite the SpaceX statement.  If they clear Cocoa that much easier just scrap it on spot as they do with the rings. And storing this nearly completed prototype on either Florida site without testing just has no sense. In any case we'll see soon what happened.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: spacenut on 12/03/2019 03:10 am
Boca Chica may end up just building Starships while the Florida site may build the Superheavies to start with. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: JessieJanson on 12/03/2019 04:01 am
In terms of getting a Starship to orbit, the schedule has probably sped up as a result of the incident on the 20th.
That's a pretty bold statement. I'd say they lost an invaluable opportunity to gather flight data on an entirely new EDL technique. Additionally, the needed infrastructure to manufacture MK3 could have easily been built in tandem while MK1 continued its production / testing. Not to mention that higher fidelity manufacturing systems, such as an automated horizontal welding system, take time to order to spec, manufacture, install, and calibrate. Plus long term infrastructure required to house such equipment and processes could also have happened in tandem with MK1 - it's not like those projects share the same resources.

So I don't see how this will get them to orbit faster. I have a feeling the Coco site shutdown was already planned, so that wasn't affected by the incident. I say this because to all intents and purposes Coco manufacture has stopped long before the incident, and the Roberts Road site was already in the works.

However, with that said I eagerly look forward to seeing what changes will be implemented. I'm curious as to how the steel stands that are being transferred from Coco will be utilized, and am very interested in the new nosecone (or what appears to be a nosecone - it could also be a fabrication jig) ,as I have been closely watching for those interesting steep plates with the rounded tabs on the end to show up after arriving on a flatbed and now they apparently have shown up in the shape of a nosecone. I am also interested in seeing what the stainless U channel will be used for that arrived on the same shipment.

John

I do wonder if some in SpaceX were not falling into a version of the much referenced sunk cost fallacy. We've got this thing, we gotta do something with it, when maybe they shouldn't have even reassembled it after the big show (assuming they have pivoted to a new design then). In that case blowing it up gets them moving forward quicker.

Even though they would have still been able to get some useful tests results out of it if it had not popped its top, I do not think that losing a prototype this early in the process does much to slow the real timetable (not Musk's notoriously asperational one) much at all.

I expect them to lose some more, frankly, while still successfully flying routinely in five years (four now).

That certainly seems possible, but considering they had just started tests in the last week or so prior to that im more inclined to believe they made that decision as a result of that testing but before that accident, if it had happened earlier you would expect that news to have come out sooner and for work to have stopped sooner in general and/or for florida to have stopped working on Mk2 at the time that decision was made, instead they were still installing the bulkhead a day or so before the accident. It just sounds like a vary carefully worded statement on their part to me.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Lampyridae on 12/03/2019 04:15 am
There's still value to be had in practice. Part of the problem with Mk1 was assembly. Bunging in the bulkhead for Mk2 would have told them something and also provided experience to the Florida team and validated their processes (or not).
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: ZChris13 on 12/03/2019 02:13 pm
https://twitter.com/julia_bergeron/status/1201350135768330240
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAXo1FdywLE
He makes some interesting comments that indicate that SpaceX were skimping out on QC but not on the weld process. You really really can't skip good Quality Control, because welders make mistakes, and they don't always realize they've made mistakes. Sometimes it's factors completely outside of their control.
But notably, he says that SpaceX are using Plasma Arc Welding? I didn't think that was a hand-weldable process.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: AUricle on 12/03/2019 03:39 pm
And then there is this....open the thread

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1201650786981298176

Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 12/07/2019 05:14 pm
Looks like the fairings and landing gear for MK2 are getting recycled. One large piece of fairing can be seen in the blue container with legs and other parts piled on top. The other silver fairings parts have red paint on them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 12/08/2019 05:52 pm
@LabPadre 's tweet shows some steel rolls arriving at Brownsville on the Go Discovery ship. There were no steel rolls at Cocoa, these must have come from the Robert's Road Site.
My guess is there will not be any Starship development in Florida for quite some time.


https://twitter.com/LabPadre/status/1203700920686718976
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 12/08/2019 05:54 pm
Looks like the fairings and landing gear for MK2 are getting recycled. One large piece of fairing can be seen in the blue container with legs and other parts piled on top. The other silver fairings parts have red paint on them.
Not all fairings are getting scrapped, some will avoid the oven. The landing gear appear to be toast.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Keldor on 12/08/2019 06:24 pm
There's still value to be had in practice. Part of the problem with Mk1 was assembly. Bunging in the bulkhead for Mk2 would have told them something and also provided experience to the Florida team and validated their processes (or not).

I don't think it's possible to overemphasize the importance of learning how to manufacture the thing.  How many of those welders do you think had experience building rockets before Starship?  If you said "none", you're probably correct.  And even if some of them did come from the rocket industry, this method of construction is going to be pretty different from anything they've done before.

And there are unknowns.  What sort of jig do you really need to weld up a bulkhead, for instance?  Sure, you can go and design something that accommodates every possible need the workers may or may not have, but then you're liable to massively over-engineer the thing, the way NASA is wont to do, costing a lot of extra time and money, and you still might miss something!

If you really want to know what the minimum amount of tooling you really need for something is, you have to go and try to make it without and find out exactly what you're missing.  Then make tooling that does exactly what you *know* you need, and not what you think you *might* need.  The nice thing about this is that you can start immediately and not have to wait for everything to be ready.  Sure, you'll probably end up scrapping the first prototypes, but given that not a single person on your team has actually constructed anything much like Starship before, this was the likely outcome anyway.

What you get for jumping in head first is an experienced team of builders, with knowledge of what works and doesn't work, right in time for more and more of the real tooling to come online.  Note that the full tooling as well as the factory/production line is almost certain to cost more to construct than an individual vehicle or even a handful.  That's the part you want to get right the first time.

With conventional methods, right now the factory would still be under construction, there would still be all sorts of construction related unknowns, and their workers would still be novice rocket builders.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 12/18/2019 05:10 pm
The leg struts have been sent to the recycling plant along with some (not all) fairing pieces as of 16 December 2019.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: philw1776 on 12/18/2019 11:45 pm
The leg struts have been sent to the recycling plant along with some (not all) fairing pieces as of 16 December 2019.

I guess we can figure that MK2 is not gonna be moved to the launch pad after all
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 01/01/2020 01:36 pm
As of 1 Jan 2020, the ship, "Go Discovery" is on its way back to Port Canaveral. I am wondering if some of the MK2 will be sent to Texas. The nosecone and payload sections are ready to be moved. The amount of work to complete those sections took much longer than 2 months, the target set by Elon to make the first flight of SN1. Also during the construction phase that produced the MK's they were building three different Starships at the same time. It would be logical to conclude they are building more than one SN at the this time.
I am guessing that the next cargo load of "Go Discovery" will include the nosecone, the payload section, the dome at Robert's Road, some cut steel sheets in lower left of included picture, as well as some nosecone parts in the big hangar. The cut steel sheets appear to be destined for nosecone use.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 01/01/2020 02:23 pm
Good points. Thinking about it, we have not seen any sign of a new nose section in Boca China so far. It seems their main priority right now is building strong pressure vessels on the tank sections, so itís possible they may reuse then nose sections for first flights, which should speed things up. They wonít be testing the reduced weight nose cones, nor the integrated bulkheads in the nose if they do this, but once they get the bulkhead assembly down pat for the tank section, any learnings should apply to the integrated sections. Since the nose section as it is, is not a pressure vessel, any small welding flaws may be an non-issue for development and testing purposes.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 01/01/2020 04:06 pm
Good points. Thinking about it, we have not seen any sign of a new nose section in Boca China so far. It seems their main priority right now is building strong pressure vessels on the tank sections, so itís possible they may reuse then nose sections for first flights, which should speed things up. They wonít be testing the reduced weight nose cones, nor the integrated bulkheads in the nose if they do this, but once they get the bulkhead assembly down pat for the tank section, any learnings should apply to the integrated sections. Since the nose section as it is, is not a pressure vessel, any small welding flaws may be an non-issue for development and testing purposes.
The reason I don't think so is the fitment issues. It is a sunk cost and written off. Better to practice making a new nose cone, and fitting fairings to it, than trying to fit the fairings to the poorly made old nose cones. If they spend time fitting fairings to the old ones, they haven't learned anything new, nor found bugs in the new designs and processes. EM also said he wanted to properly integrate the header tanks into the nose structure. I expect that to happen sooner than later. Also the flap actuators are now electric, and I expect totally different in how they mount. That requires many structure changes to the nose.

And the most important reason why not. One always sends up a payload on first flights, even if it is only a cement block. SX last used a Tesla Roadster as their dummy payload. They somehow have to top that. Mk1 & Mk2 nose cons had no way to do that. I'm betting SN1 nose cone will have a door system so it can launch a load of Starlink satellites, and something interesting.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Gonz58 on 01/01/2020 07:42 pm
There was a photo from Bocachicagal of a new nose cone inside ironhendge

Good points. Thinking about it, we have not seen any sign of a new nose section in Boca China so far.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=48895.0;attach=1597254;image
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: capoman on 01/01/2020 08:09 pm
There was a photo from Bocachicagal of a new nose cone inside ironhendge

Good points. Thinking about it, we have not seen any sign of a new nose section in Boca China so far.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=48895.0;attach=1597254;image

Thanks for the reminder. I had forgotten about that. I do wonder why they havenít disassembled the nose section in BC? They only removed the fin fairings, and itís likely in the way. I agree that they probably should build a new nose section, but itís interesting we havenít seen any moves to discard them yet. Itís easy to make a case either way.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 01/02/2020 08:44 am
There was a photo from Bocachicagal of a new nose cone inside ironhendge

Good points. Thinking about it, we have not seen any sign of a new nose section in Boca China so far.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=48895.0;attach=1597254;image

Thanks for the reminder. I had forgotten about that. I do wonder why they havenít disassembled the nose section in BC? They only removed the fin fairings, and itís likely in the way. I agree that they probably should build a new nose section, but itís interesting we havenít seen any moves to discard them yet. Itís easy to make a case either way.
Is it in the way? If it was in the way it would be gone by now. It hasn't been disassembled like the bottom was so they may want it for some use. Given the way it is designed and the ring it is standing on, they could be hacking out it's internals already. We wouldn't see it from outside because that could all be done from the inside bottom.

I've thought they should hack it up, stick it on top of StarHopper, and place it out front as a lawn ornament.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Lampyridae on 01/02/2020 03:13 pm
There was a photo from Bocachicagal of a new nose cone inside ironhendge

Good points. Thinking about it, we have not seen any sign of a new nose section in Boca China so far.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=48895.0;attach=1597254;image

Thanks for the reminder. I had forgotten about that. I do wonder why they havenít disassembled the nose section in BC? They only removed the fin fairings, and itís likely in the way. I agree that they probably should build a new nose section, but itís interesting we havenít seen any moves to discard them yet. Itís easy to make a case either way.
Is it in the way? If it was in the way it would be gone by now. It hasn't been disassembled like the bottom was so they may want it for some use. Given the way it is designed and the ring it is standing on, they could be hacking out it's internals already. We wouldn't see it from outside because that could all be done from the inside bottom.

I've thought they should hack it up, stick it on top of StarHopper, and place it out front as a lawn ornament.

They might have it in mind as a training mockup for new workers to familiarise themselves with. We've already seen the marker scribbles on the other pieces.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: su27k on 01/02/2020 04:03 pm
Thanks for the reminder. I had forgotten about that. I do wonder why they havenít disassembled the nose section in BC? They only removed the fin fairings, and itís likely in the way. I agree that they probably should build a new nose section, but itís interesting we havenít seen any moves to discard them yet. Itís easy to make a case either way.
Is it in the way? If it was in the way it would be gone by now. It hasn't been disassembled like the bottom was so they may want it for some use. Given the way it is designed and the ring it is standing on, they could be hacking out it's internals already. We wouldn't see it from outside because that could all be done from the inside bottom.

I've thought they should hack it up, stick it on top of StarHopper, and place it out front as a lawn ornament.

They might have it in mind as a training mockup for new workers to familiarise themselves with. We've already seen the marker scribbles on the other pieces.

More likely they kept it because they have better things to do than disassembling it. They're busy with facility expansion and SN1, if the nosecone is not in the way, why spend time on it when they have more urgent things to do?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: TergenFlerg on 01/02/2020 06:18 pm
As of 1 Jan 2020, the ship, "Go Discovery" is on its way back to Port Canaveral. I am wondering if some of the MK2 will be sent to Texas. The nosecone and payload sections are ready to be moved. The amount of work to complete those sections took much longer than 2 months, the target set by Elon to make the first flight of SN1. Also during the construction phase that produced the MK's they were building three different Starships at the same time. It would be logical to conclude they are building more than one SN at the this time.
I am guessing that the next cargo load of "Go Discovery" will include the nosecone, the payload section, the dome at Robert's Road, some cut steel sheets in lower left of included picture, as well as some nosecone parts in the big hangar. The cut steel sheets appear to be destined for nosecone use.

They had a lot of rings waiting around at the Cocoa build site.  I would guess they're still usable as they were the first to start creating the rings from rolls of stainless steel.  Wouldn't be surprised if those rings make it to BC.  Thoughts?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: T-Space on 01/02/2020 06:21 pm
As of 1 Jan 2020, the ship, "Go Discovery" is on its way back to Port Canaveral. I am wondering if some of the MK2 will be sent to Texas. The nosecone and payload sections are ready to be moved. The amount of work to complete those sections took much longer than 2 months, the target set by Elon to make the first flight of SN1. Also during the construction phase that produced the MK's they were building three different Starships at the same time. It would be logical to conclude they are building more than one SN at the this time.
I am guessing that the next cargo load of "Go Discovery" will include the nosecone, the payload section, the dome at Robert's Road, some cut steel sheets in lower left of included picture, as well as some nosecone parts in the big hangar. The cut steel sheets appear to be destined for nosecone use.

They had a lot of rings waiting around at the Cocoa build site.  I would guess they're still usable as they were the first to start creating the rings from rolls of stainless steel.  Wouldn't be surprised if those rings make it to BC.  Thoughts?

Supposedly all the rings at the site were scrapped due to them struggling to manufacture them all to the same size.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: TergenFlerg on 01/02/2020 08:26 pm
As of 1 Jan 2020, the ship, "Go Discovery" is on its way back to Port Canaveral. I am wondering if some of the MK2 will be sent to Texas. The nosecone and payload sections are ready to be moved. The amount of work to complete those sections took much longer than 2 months, the target set by Elon to make the first flight of SN1. Also during the construction phase that produced the MK's they were building three different Starships at the same time. It would be logical to conclude they are building more than one SN at the this time.
I am guessing that the next cargo load of "Go Discovery" will include the nosecone, the payload section, the dome at Robert's Road, some cut steel sheets in lower left of included picture, as well as some nosecone parts in the big hangar. The cut steel sheets appear to be destined for nosecone use.

They had a lot of rings waiting around at the Cocoa build site.  I would guess they're still usable as they were the first to start creating the rings from rolls of stainless steel.  Wouldn't be surprised if those rings make it to BC.  Thoughts?

Supposedly all the rings at the site were scrapped due to them struggling to manufacture them all to the same size.

I don't remember seeing that anywhere.  Can you find the source?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 01/02/2020 11:52 pm
As of 1 Jan 2020, the ship, "Go Discovery" is on its way back to Port Canaveral. I am wondering if some of the MK2 will be sent to Texas. The nosecone and payload sections are ready to be moved. The amount of work to complete those sections took much longer than 2 months, the target set by Elon to make the first flight of SN1. Also during the construction phase that produced the MK's they were building three different Starships at the same time. It would be logical to conclude they are building more than one SN at the this time.
I am guessing that the next cargo load of "Go Discovery" will include the nosecone, the payload section, the dome at Robert's Road, some cut steel sheets in lower left of included picture, as well as some nosecone parts in the big hangar. The cut steel sheets appear to be destined for nosecone use.

They had a lot of rings waiting around at the Cocoa build site.  I would guess they're still usable as they were the first to start creating the rings from rolls of stainless steel.  Wouldn't be surprised if those rings make it to BC.  Thoughts?

Supposedly all the rings at the site were scrapped due to them struggling to manufacture them all to the same size.

I don't remember seeing that anywhere.  Can you find the source?

Currently, as of 2 Jan 2020 there are 12 rings left out of 23. The last group that were cut up, it appeared they were cut up for training. The remaining rings are marked for disposal.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: FutureSpaceTourist on 01/15/2020 09:01 pm
Interesting (or maybe nothing to do with SpaceX?)

https://twitter.com/julia_bergeron/status/1217559652445163520

Quote
Not sure what this is all about yet but, this is the area where #Starship MK2 would have been making the barge transfer. 🤔
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Kansan52 on 01/15/2020 09:10 pm
Could this be part of the railway system that would cut the Cocoa builds off from the outside world? (Based on memory.)
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Seamore Holdings on 01/16/2020 07:05 pm
Could this be part of the railway system that would cut the Cocoa builds off from the outside world? (Based on memory.)
Looks like it might be for dredging the river. I have not seen any hints that they plan on moving the MK2 parts. That said, they could move the parts at any time. They are prepped and the space around the parts are clear. There are no cranes on site as of 16 January 2020. Pictured is another view of the two barges tied together at the river loading spot. The white pickup trucks were not marked.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 01/16/2020 07:14 pm
Could this be part of the railway system that would cut the Cocoa builds off from the outside world? (Based on memory.)
Looks like it might be for dredging the river. I have not seen any hints that they plan on moving the MK2 parts. That said, they could move the parts at any time. They are prepped and the space around the parts are clear. There are no cranes on site as of 16 January 2020. Pictured is another view of the two barges tied together at the river loading spot. The white pickup trucks were not marked.

Are those big semi circular cradle structures still in front of the Cocoa facility?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: FutureSpaceTourist on 01/17/2020 08:36 am
https://twitter.com/therealjonvh/status/1217993610639089664

Quote
Snapped these quickly on my way home from work today. This is where @SpaceX #Starship Mk2 was to be loaded onto a barge then shipped up river to @NASAKennedy did we get any further info on this aquatic/dock construction?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Zpoxy on 01/17/2020 10:28 am
That is almost identical to the equipment they used to move the shuttle mockup that was in front of the Astronaut's Hall of Fame years ago. The vertical columns are driven into the river bed, pinning the barges in place.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 01/17/2020 11:06 am
That is almost identical to the equipment they used to move the shuttle mockup that was in front of the Astronaut's Hall of Fame years ago. The vertical columns are driven into the river bed, pinning the barges in place.
It’s called a jack up barge. Pretty common water work platform. Doesn’t look like a dredger.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: waveney on 01/17/2020 11:48 am
I wonder if they are making it ready for Go Discovery to dock there?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Eka on 01/17/2020 02:05 pm
I wonder if they are making it ready for Go Discovery to dock there?
SS Mk1 nose cone, SS Mk2 body, plus some fins for show and it would make a good lawn ornament.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 02/08/2020 03:56 pm
This is interesting. Must be the M stand from Roberts Road, since the 2 from Cocoa went to Boca Chica. But those stacked rings, not sure what's the deal, I don't remember seeing an M stand with 2 stacked rings in Cocoa, and I'm not sure how or why they would do it after they stopped activities down there. rings also don't look very reflective, look more like Hopper's.

Oh those rings are also not 1.829m tall, they appear to be 1.55m, and welds are not at 180ļ opposite sides too. Could it be an actual water tower?

https://twitter.com/julia_bergeron/status/1226163458120601600
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: billh on 02/08/2020 05:11 pm
It's getting so hard to tell when you're looking at a water tower anymore.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: enbandi on 02/08/2020 06:26 pm
This is interesting. Must be the M stand from Roberts Road, since the 2 from Cocoa went to Boca Chica. But those stacked rings, not sure what's the deal, I don't remember seeing an M stand with 2 stacked rings in Cocoa, and I'm not sure how or why they would do it after they stopped activities down there. rings also don't look very reflective, look more like Hopper's.

Oh those rings are also not 1.829m tall, they appear to be 1.55m, and welds are not at 180ļ opposite sides too. Could it be an actual water tower?

https://twitter.com/julia_bergeron/status/1226163458120601600

The other interesting part of this pic is the 4 new thruster pods arrived for the ASDSs. Since no logical connection between this two items, answer could be that they use the LZ (sorrounding area) as temporary storage.

Second best guess is something similar to bopper tests. They havent got a reeal god place to do that (now in Florida). Wheather or why they want to do such thing is still a mystery.
But they filled a permit last autumn, to improve infrastructure there. Some tanks was indicated, but without details.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: fael097 on 02/08/2020 06:32 pm
This is interesting. Must be the M stand from Roberts Road, since the 2 from Cocoa went to Boca Chica. But those stacked rings, not sure what's the deal, I don't remember seeing an M stand with 2 stacked rings in Cocoa, and I'm not sure how or why they would do it after they stopped activities down there. rings also don't look very reflective, look more like Hopper's.

Oh those rings are also not 1.829m tall, they appear to be 1.55m, and welds are not at 180ļ opposite sides too. Could it be an actual water tower?

https://twitter.com/julia_bergeron/status/1226163458120601600

The other interesting part of this pic is the 4 new thruster pods arrived for the ASDSs. Since no logical connection between this two items, answer could be that they use the LZ (sorrounding area) as temporary storage.

Second best guess is something similar to bopper tests. They havent got a reeal god place to do that (now in Florida). Wheather or why they want to do such thing is still a mystery.
But they filled a permit last autumn, to improve infrastructure there. Some tanks was indicated, but without details.

totally missed those.

it looks like there are other 2 of those short rings on the ground too
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Captain Crutch on 03/04/2020 02:26 pm
I wonder if some of the equipment that was in Florida or was destined for Florida ended up in LA... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoCY-z7pFm8?t=517
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: Nevyn72 on 03/23/2020 09:53 pm
With part of the construction structure being re-fitted in the door of the 'cathedral', I wonder if this is the first step of re-bracing the structure for disassembly?

If so, where would it go?
Boca Chica or Roberts Road?
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: StuffOfInterest on 03/24/2020 03:10 pm
With part of the construction structure being re-fitted in the door of the 'cathedral', I wonder if this is the first step of re-bracing the structure for disassembly?

If so, where would it go?
Boca Chica or Roberts Road?

I would argue that Roberts Road is more likely.  There hasn't been any ground prep at Boca Chica for this size structure that doesn't already have something built or being built on it.  Roberts Road is still a mystery site with so little on the ground observation so there could be a pad ready and waiting that we don't know about.
Title: Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
Post by: retrojet on 05/25/2020 04:46 pm
New STARSHIP FACILITY OVERVIEW
covering ROBERTS ROAD from may 2020

3D Viewer:
https://p3d.in/p7UQ5

Video:
https://youtu.be/7Yjwca7i-T4