Author Topic: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination  (Read 29203 times)

Offline Vultur

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1919
  • Liked: 762
  • Likes Given: 184
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #100 on: 08/16/2023 10:13 pm »
But docking together prefab modules is pretty limiting: you can't build any pressurised volume with more than a 9m diameter, if launching on Starship
Even 9m diameter volumes will have to be subdivided to make them usable. For eg, Skylab (~6m diam) had issues with astros getting "stuck" in the central volume.
What near-future activity requires a single open volume more than 9 metres in diameter?

Also, this wasn't rhetorical. I'm genuinely curious what activity in cis-Earth space requires a single volume more than 9m in diameter.
Certain zero-g sports could make use of such a space, but since they have not been invented yet, we can start with a repurposed LOX tank and create the rules of play to fit.  This might even be economically justified as part of a tourist CLD.

I have wondered about this before... the possibility of zero-gravity sports, dance, performance etc. as a significant money maker once we have spacious volumes in zero'g.

The ISS modes are pretty low diameter; while the total volume is large, it's not spacious like Skylab was. And nothing like Skylab has existed in the modern media era.

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17220
  • Liked: 7078
  • Likes Given: 3050
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #101 on: 09/02/2023 03:39 am »
Haven’t seen a current thread for the Starship aspect to this:

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/seven-us-companies-collaborate-with-nasa-to-advance-space-capabilities

Quote
Jun 15, 2023
RELEASE 23-069
Seven US Companies Collaborate with NASA to Advance Space Capabilities

NASA will partner with seven U.S. companies to meet future commercial and government needs, ultimately benefitting human spaceflight and the U.S. commercial low Earth orbit economy.

Through unfunded Space Act Agreements, the second Collaborations for Commercial Space Capabilities-2 initiative (CCSC-2) is designed to advance commercial space-related efforts through NASA contributions of technical expertise, assessments, lessons learned, technologies, and data. Structured sharing of NASA expertise demands minimal government resources but fosters development of capabilities that can be crucial to development of a robust low Earth orbit economy.

The companies selected for the Collaborations for Commercial Space Capabilities-2 are:

Blue Origin, Kent, Washington
Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, Dulles, Virginia
Sierra Space Corporation, Broomfield, Colorado
Space Exploration Technologies Corporation, Hawthorne, California
Special Aerospace Services, Boulder, Colorado
ThinkOrbital Inc., Lafayette, Colorado
Vast Space LLC, Long Beach, California

Later in the press release:

Quote
SpaceX is collaborating with NASA on an integrated low Earth orbit architecture to provide a growing portfolio of technology with near-term Dragon evolution and concurrent Starship development. This architecture includes Starship as a transportation and in-space low-Earth orbit destination element supported by Super Heavy, Dragon, and Starlink, and constituent capabilities including crew and cargo transportation, communications, and operational and ground support.

Here is copy of the SAA:
https://www.nasa.gov/saa/domestic/38918_SpaceX_CCSC2_SAA-UA-23-38918_Baseline_signed.pdf

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47532
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80438
  • Likes Given: 36393
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #102 on: 09/02/2023 05:33 am »
PDR (Preliminary Design Review) for Starship LEO station is Q4 2028

Offline MichaelBlackbourn

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 186
  • Liked: 305
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #103 on: 09/02/2023 05:34 am »
Also potential
Moneymakers:

Film production
Adult film production
Competitive sports
Martial arts
MMA fighting
Laser tag/Enders game
Dance
Cirque Du Soleil type mixed shows
Maybe a low G swimming pool if we can spin them up.


Online redneck

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 285
  • swamp in Florida
  • Liked: 151
  • Likes Given: 115
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #104 on: 09/02/2023 09:58 pm »
Also potential
Moneymakers:

Film production
Adult film production
Competitive sports
Martial arts
MMA fighting
Laser tag/Enders game
Dance
Cirque Du Soleil type mixed shows
Maybe a low G swimming pool if we can spin them up.

Part of this might be attending audience. Not being a sports fan, I was amazed hearing about people paying five figure numbers for a prime seat. (here on Earth) It could be the viewing is the  important revenue source, with the in person attendance beefing up demand along with revenue.

Offline MichaelBlackbourn

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 186
  • Liked: 305
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #105 on: 09/02/2023 10:29 pm »
For sure! Unsure about the adult film production’s viewing audience.. but whatever… spectacle guaranteed.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14127
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14001
  • Likes Given: 1391
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #106 on: 09/03/2023 06:48 am »
For sure! Unsure about the adult film production’s viewing audience.. but whatever… spectacle guaranteed.
"Both the pleasures and difficulties of zero g sex have been greatly exaggerated".  Clarke, right?

I expect it may also apply to sports and arts.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Online redneck

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 285
  • swamp in Florida
  • Liked: 151
  • Likes Given: 115
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #107 on: 09/03/2023 09:13 am »
For sure! Unsure about the adult film production’s viewing audience.. but whatever… spectacle guaranteed.
"Both the pleasures and difficulties of zero g sex have been greatly exaggerated".  Clarke, right?

I expect it may also apply to sports and arts.

It seems like yet another of those things that won't be known until it's tried.

 Not being a sports fan, it is hard for me to wrap my mind around spectator sports being a multi billion (trillion?) dollar industry annually. I also have a problem understanding high dollar spectator porn. I don't understand those industries, but would be a fool to deny that they exist.   

I suspect positive answers are a decade or more out, while negative answers will start cropping up shorter term.

Offline Paul451

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3548
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2511
  • Likes Given: 2172
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #108 on: 09/03/2023 01:23 pm »
Either way, pack your safety goggles, people!

Online chopsticks

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1059
  • Québec, Canada
  • Liked: 1076
  • Likes Given: 164
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #109 on: 09/04/2023 03:24 am »
What sort of thread have I wandered into.

Offline Kspbutitscursed

Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #110 on: 09/04/2023 03:42 am »
What sort of thread have I wandered into.
a chaotic thread i guess IDK either lmao
I attempt to fly in ksp
WEN OFT-3                 #Wen Booster 11/12 engines installation

Offline MichaelBlackbourn

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 186
  • Liked: 305
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #111 on: 09/04/2023 04:11 am »
It’s probably good we have another launch on the books for sep 23. Need something more concrete to talk about.

Offline Kspbutitscursed

Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #112 on: 09/04/2023 05:17 am »
It’s probably good we have another launch on the books for sep 23. Need something more concrete to talk about.
i made the same mistake its september 8th to 13th at presen i personally think the 15th is more realistic but im happy to be wrong
I attempt to fly in ksp
WEN OFT-3                 #Wen Booster 11/12 engines installation

Offline MichaelBlackbourn

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 186
  • Liked: 305
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #113 on: 09/04/2023 05:56 am »
Even better. Let’s go!

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17220
  • Liked: 7078
  • Likes Given: 3050
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #114 on: 11/23/2023 03:23 am »
See below:

Update on the CLD Program:
https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cldp-heo-nac-11-20-23.pdf

https://www.nasa.gov/nac/heo-committee/

Slide 13 is interesting it says:

Quote from: page 13 of Angela Hart's presentation
SpaceX – Starship as a CLD (first with Dragon for crew and cargo, later as crewed sortiable CLD). Related Dragon and Starlink upgrades.

It seems to confirm that SpaceX intends to eventually certify Starship for commercial crew.
« Last Edit: 11/23/2023 03:29 am by yg1968 »

Offline Brigantine

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 303
  • NZ
  • Liked: 146
  • Likes Given: 445
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #115 on: 11/24/2023 10:19 am »
once you start wanting to push in orbit lifetime beyond that, you start running up against harder limits without major design changes. Starship is designed around ending up on the surface at the end of each mission, so that impacts systems design.
[...]
modify as many components as possible for replacement in a vacuum, whoops! more unique items and one-off costs. Etc, etc.
By the time you've gone over the vehicle, found all the lifetime-limiting components and systems, designed replacement, and built them, all whilst accommodating systems you don't actually need for your station (propellant tanks, engines, etc), you might as well have started from a more suitable structure in the first place and design that for mass production.

Long-duration central core, but continually churned attached "modules" with ground-installed systems, to allow rapid adaptability and upgrades.



That said, the iterative development process might reveal that the market wants specialised labs in space, not a single all-purpose space-station. Animal research, human life-science, materials science, materials manufacturing and systems development, etc. Plus space tourism, film-making, etc. Instead of a single large station made up of a bunch of modules, the market might prefer each "module" to be a specialised station, stand-alone, with specialised crews.

My takeaways from this whole thread:
- EDL means the economics favours "send it to Earth for servicing"
- There is some need for multi-decadal continuity on orbit, e.g. for long term experiments, but this is a minority
- There is a "no man-rated EDL" era and "Full Starship crew" era, and expect a lot to change in between
- Re transport & provisioning, some things are better if you don't have to transfer them around much off-Earth

The resulting plan I see:

- Multi-decade → You have a relatively small, relatively expensive "Science Continuity Sub-assembly", designed for on-orbit servicing and launched as (a) standard payload(s) on Cargo Starship. Uses a modular concept for the sake of future-proofing. Has a pressurized working volume (lab) but not designed for habitation. Any solar arrays etc. are just to keep the lights on in a contingency. Despite being the most permanent part, this is not the "core" of the station, just a restricted-access appendage. A special place for a special purpose.

- Multi-year
→ The heart of station is this EDL-capable Station Starship. It does everything ISS does, and provides power & consumables etc. to the Science Continuity Sub-assembly. Has habitation for a small crew, but mostly is a working area. When it needs servicing, just swap it out with another one and EDL it.
→ Not many Earth-servicable (via Cargo Starship) modules - but at least a multinode, which can later be replaced by a more capable one. More modules if the SSS starts getting limited by downmass.

- Multi-month → Choose your crew transport vehicle(s). CCP class in the early days with small crews supported by the Station SS - Then when "Full Starship crew" becomes a thing, you get bigger crews living comfortably in & supported by the crew vehicle(s).


There are also design considerations around orbit raising and CoM and torques... which I don't have answers for, unless you use very low thrust over a very long period. (electric propulsion?).
« Last Edit: 11/24/2023 10:35 am by Brigantine »

Offline Twark_Main

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3577
  • Technically we ALL live in space
  • Liked: 1857
  • Likes Given: 1181
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #116 on: 11/24/2023 11:15 am »
once you start wanting to push in orbit lifetime beyond that, you start running up against harder limits without major design changes. Starship is designed around ending up on the surface at the end of each mission, so that impacts systems design.
[...]
modify as many components as possible for replacement in a vacuum, whoops! more unique items and one-off costs. Etc, etc.
By the time you've gone over the vehicle, found all the lifetime-limiting components and systems, designed replacement, and built them, all whilst accommodating systems you don't actually need for your station (propellant tanks, engines, etc), you might as well have started from a more suitable structure in the first place and design that for mass production.

Long-duration central core, but continually churned attached "modules" with ground-installed systems, to allow rapid adaptability and upgrades.



That said, the iterative development process might reveal that the market wants specialised labs in space, not a single all-purpose space-station. Animal research, human life-science, materials science, materials manufacturing and systems development, etc. Plus space tourism, film-making, etc. Instead of a single large station made up of a bunch of modules, the market might prefer each "module" to be a specialised station, stand-alone, with specialised crews.

My takeaways from this whole thread:
- EDL means the economics favours "send it to Earth for servicing"
- There is some need for multi-decadal continuity on orbit, e.g. for long term experiments, but this is a minority
- There is a "no man-rated EDL" era and "Full Starship crew" era, and expect a lot to change in between
- Re transport & provisioning, some things are better if you don't have to transfer them around much off-Earth

The resulting plan I see:

- Multi-decade → You have a relatively small, relatively expensive "Science Continuity Sub-assembly", designed for on-orbit servicing and launched as (a) standard payload(s) on Cargo Starship. Uses a modular concept for the sake of future-proofing. Has a pressurized working volume (lab) but not designed for habitation. Any solar arrays etc. are just to keep the lights on in a contingency. Despite being the most permanent part, this is not the "core" of the station, just a restricted-access appendage. A special place for a special purpose.

- Multi-year
→ The heart of station is this EDL-capable Station Starship. It does everything ISS does, and provides power & consumables etc. to the Science Continuity Sub-assembly. Has habitation for a small crew, but mostly is a working area. When it needs servicing, just swap it out with another one and EDL it.
→ Not many Earth-servicable (via Cargo Starship) modules - but at least a multinode, which can later be replaced by a more capable one. More modules if the SSS starts getting limited by downmass.

- Multi-month → Choose your crew transport vehicle(s). CCP class in the early days with small crews supported by the Station SS - Then when "Full Starship crew" becomes a thing, you get bigger crews living comfortably in & supported by the crew vehicle(s).


There are also design considerations around orbit raising and CoM and torques... which I don't have answers for, unless you use very low thrust over a very long period. (electric propulsion?).

A Modest Simplification:

Return to ground for servicing is good. This suggests a Soyuz-like model where every 6 or 12 months a new Starship docks and swaps for the old one. Naturally this requires a fleet of two ships, but the payoff is continuous operation without adding another hardware R&D program.

I'd even prefer a "buddy" architecture with a total of three Starships (one on the ground and two in space), so the nominal on-orbit configuration has two redundant Starships docked to each-other.


To achieve science continuity, during the swap you simply float your experiments through the door from one Starship to the other.  :)
"The search for a universal design which suits all sites, people, and situations is obviously impossible. What is possible is well designed examples of the application of universal principles." ~~ David Holmgren

Offline Asteroza

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2808
  • Liked: 1062
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: SpaceX studying Starship as a LEO destination
« Reply #117 on: 11/26/2023 09:24 pm »
This just sounds like an optionally manned free flyer with minimal ACS and probably no reboost, and accommodation for swapping consumables/service modules in the form of a Starship. If humans need to stay, they stay in the Starship.

At a minimum you probably need a core node/strongback, then a long-ish docking node to handle two visiting starships while giving the strongback enough clearance for solar and radiators, all other nodes have to string out beyond the strongback node. You could probably pack both nodes and the PV/radiators into a four-pack on a single Starship launch with clever packaging with some minor robot arm use for berthing bits.


Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1