Author Topic: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion  (Read 48703 times)

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #80 on: 02/25/2018 03:43 am »
This formatting discussion is interesting and all, but c'mon... This is so .. 1994? We are not limited to 80 chars width, and welcome to the world of HTML and styled tables, everyone!  8)

(And the site's markup language even has table support)
« Last Edit: 02/25/2018 06:38 pm by Lars-J »

Offline Semmel

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2178
  • Germany
  • Liked: 2433
  • Likes Given: 11916
Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #81 on: 02/25/2018 01:37 pm »
This formatting discussion is interesting and all, but c'mon... This is so .. 1994? We are bot limited to 80 chars width, and welcome to the world of HTML and styled tables, everyone!  8)

(And the site's markup language even has table support)

well, you know.. if you go beyond 80 characters, you cant put it on punch cards!


Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933
Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #82 on: 02/25/2018 02:06 pm »
This formatting discussion is interesting and all, but c'mon... This is so .. 1994? We are bot limited to 80 chars width, and welcome to the world of HTML and styled tables, everyone!  8)

(And the site's markup language even has table support)

We're not limited to a specific width but I'm strongly in favor of keeping it at one row per mission in this table. The forum has limited table support (which we are using), the styling options are very limited.

Offline dglow

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
  • Liked: 2295
  • Likes Given: 4433
Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #83 on: 04/13/2018 10:11 pm »
One great addition would be the version/block of each F9/FH core. Could that be squeezed into this format?

Perhaps something like this:

       Local        LV  CoreRet- .                             .    Mass   .     Mis-
Est. Date,  Time/UTC.   S/N  Blockurn  Payload(s)                    Orb  (kg)   Site sion
------------------- --- ---------  ---  ----------------------------  ---  -----  -----  ----
2018-01-07*2000/-5F91043.1    4LZumaLEO?C-40(48)
2018-01-31  1625/-5F91032.2    3XGovSat-1 (SES-16)GTO4230C-4049
2018-02-06  1545/-5HRNR*  232LSLFH Demo/Tesla RoadsterESC~1.2kC-39A(50)
2018-02-22  0617/-8F91038.2    3XPAZ & Microsat 2a/2bSSO2.2k+V-4E51
2018-03-06  0033/-5F91044       4XHispasat 1F (30W-6)GTO6092C-4052
2018-03-30  0714/-7F91041.2    4XIridium NEXT (Flight 5)PLR9600V-4E53
2018-04-02  1630/-4F91039.2    4XCRS SpX-14LEO~10kC-4054
------------------- --- ---------  ---  ----------------------------  ---  -----  ----- ----
2018-04-16  1832/-4F91045       4?NASA (TESS)HEO325C-4055
2018-05-04F91046       5SBangabandhu-1GTO3.7kC-39A56
2018-05F9R             ?X?SES-12GTO5300C.
« Last Edit: 04/14/2018 05:25 am by dglow »

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2422
  • California
  • Liked: 2006
  • Likes Given: 5634
Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #84 on: 04/14/2018 06:25 am »
One great addition would be the version/block of each F9/FH core. Could that be squeezed into this format?

       Local        LV  CoreRet- .                             .    Mass   .     Mis-
Est. Date,  Time/UTC.   S/N  Blockurn  Payload(s)                    Orb  (kg)   Site sion
------------------- --- ---------  ---  ----------------------------  ---  -----  -----  ----
2018-05-04F91046       5SBangabandhu-1GTO3.7kC-39A56

Yeah, but then for Banghabandu-1 and future missions do we list them as Block 5 or Version 7?
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #85 on: 04/14/2018 06:55 am »
One great addition would be the version/block of each F9/FH core. Could that be squeezed into this format?

       Local        LV  CoreRet- .                             .    Mass   .     Mis-
Est. Date,  Time/UTC.   S/N  Blockurn  Payload(s)                    Orb  (kg)   Site sion
------------------- --- ---------  ---  ----------------------------  ---  -----  -----  ----
2018-05-04F91046    5SBangabandhu-1GTO3.7kC-39A56

Yeah, but then for Banghabandu-1 and future missions do we list them as Block 5 or Version 7?

It’s all going to be block 5 going forward soon enough, so why bother?

Offline groknull

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 227
  • U.S. West Coast
  • Liked: 431
  • Likes Given: 1013
Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #86 on: 04/14/2018 06:40 pm »
One great addition would be the version/block of each F9/FH core. Could that be squeezed into this format?

Perhaps something like this:

       Local        LV  CoreRet- .                             .    Mass   .     Mis-
Est. Date,  Time/UTC.   S/N  Blockurn  Payload(s)                    Orb  (kg)   Site sion
------------------- --- ---------  ---  ----------------------------  ---  -----  -----  ----
2018-01-07*2000/-5F91043.1    4LZumaLEO?C-40(48)
2018-01-31  1625/-5F91032.2    3XGovSat-1 (SES-16)GTO4230C-4049
2018-02-06  1545/-5HRNR*  232LSLFH Demo/Tesla RoadsterESC~1.2kC-39A(50)

Strictly speaking, block number is a subtype of the launch vehicle type.
In much the same way that passenger aircraft types are condensed in flight listings (e.g. Boeing 737-300 => B733), LV block number could be appended to the LV column info; F90, F93, F94, H232, H555 etc.:

       Local        LV  CoreRet- .                             .    Mass   .     Mis-
Est. Date,  Time/UTC.   S/Nurn  Payload(s)                    Orb  (kg)   Site sion
------------------- --- ---------  ---  ----------------------------  ---  -----  -----  ----
2018-01-07*2000/-5F941043.1  LZumaLEO?C-40(48)
2018-01-31  1625/-5F931032.2  XGovSat-1 (SES-16)GTO4230C-4049
2018-02-06  1545/-5H232RNR*  LSLFH Demo/Tesla RoadsterESC~1.2kC-39A(50)

That said, block number is not an independent value.  It can be inferred from the core number.  A separate table (core number => block number / version number) could be available to those of us more obsessed with this level of detail.  No changes would be required to the existing manifest table.

Similarly, the core number in the existing manifest table could be a link to detailed information specific to that core number - block number / version number, build date, flight list, upgrades, trivia, final disposition, etc.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933
Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #87 on: 04/14/2018 07:24 pm »
I think a separate table with more detail would be better, maybe in the Launch Log thread  (or just refer to the table in the r/spacex wiki).  You also need F9 Version in addition to Block (it would end up like F9 1.0, F9 1.2.4).

Offline Formica

Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #88 on: 04/14/2018 07:32 pm »
That said, block number is not an independent value.  It can be inferred from the core number.  A separate table (core number => block number / version number) could be available to those of us more obsessed with this level of detail.  No changes would be required to the existing manifest table.

Similarly, the core number in the existing manifest table could be a link to detailed information specific to that core number - block number / version number, build date, flight list, upgrades, trivia, final disposition, etc.

I tend to agree. The table is dense enough already. I've wanted to see the block numbers in there too, but it would probably be more appropriate to have a separate core tracking thread, or to refer to other community resources such as the r/SpaceX wiki core page. And, as is mentioned, with the advent of block 5, block number may become moot over the course of 2018.

Offline IanThePineapple

Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #89 on: 04/14/2018 07:39 pm »
I think a separate table with more detail would be better, maybe in the Launch Log thread  (or just refer to the table in the r/spacex wiki).  You also need F9 Version in addition to Block (it would end up like F9 1.0, F9 1.2.4).

I agree, I think a "Core encyclopedia" chart would be great, similar to the /r/SpaceX one but in the manifest format.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933
Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #90 on: 04/14/2018 07:57 pm »
Someone did start a core reuse tracking thread on the public side (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=45247.0), maybe that could be used, or Cartman could add that info in the Launch Log.


Offline IntoTheVoid

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 422
  • USA
  • Liked: 420
  • Likes Given: 134
Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #91 on: 12/16/2018 03:50 pm »
Minor nit...
Some reflown cores did not get their 1st flights upgraded to XXXX.1 status. (mostly the block 5 team; 1045.1 vs 1046)

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933
Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #92 on: 12/16/2018 04:00 pm »
Minor nit...
Some reflown cores did not get their 1st flights upgraded to XXXX.1 status. (mostly the block 5 team; 1045.1 vs 1046)

I kinda like the way new cores stand out if you don't put a suffix on them, now that so many of the flights are reused cores.

Offline GregTheGrumpy

Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #93 on: 04/23/2019 06:49 pm »
... do we still consider the FH center core to be a successful landing?

I'd say yes, the landing was a success pending more information.  If the leg failed due to damage during the landing then that could be considered failed because it contributed directly to the loss of the booster.  Otherwise, a big bumpy sea doesn't negate the success of the landing.  If one allots a certain percentage of loss in "handling" then this might even qualify as a success in the overall scheme of things.

Offline tleski

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 477
  • Washington, DC
  • Liked: 367
  • Likes Given: 758
Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #94 on: 04/23/2019 06:51 pm »
Looks like CRS-17 is now ASDS; also, do we still consider the FH center core to be a successful landing?
I would say the landing was successful but recovery was not. The question is what do we want to keep track of.

Offline intelati

Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #95 on: 04/23/2019 07:49 pm »
Looks like CRS-17 is now ASDS; also, do we still consider the FH center core to be a successful landing?
I would say the landing was successful but recovery was not. The question is what do we want to keep track of.

Yes.
Starships are meant to fly

Offline Hauerg

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 901
  • Berndorf, Austria
  • Liked: 520
  • Likes Given: 2574
Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #96 on: 04/23/2019 08:24 pm »
Looks like CRS-17 is now ASDS; also, do we still consider the FH center core to be a successful landing?
I would say the landing was successful but recovery was not. The question is what do we want to keep track of.
Landing.
It would also have been a successful „recovery“ if the transport of a booster from LZ to the shed would hafe failed/crashed.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #97 on: 04/23/2019 09:42 pm »
It's important to track booster loss from all causes, in my view. Until it actually launches again, it's not truly recovered. (ok I kid but yeah, if we can lose them at sea, it's a trackable thing)

Adding a whole new column for an edge case seems problematic. New code letter? Asterisk?
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline GregTheGrumpy

Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #98 on: 04/23/2019 09:46 pm »
I'd go with asterisk (*) as there are just so many things that could happen.  Detail in a notes field for anything so marked?

Offline Stefan.Christoff.19

  • Member
  • Posts: 60
  • RI USA
  • Liked: 75
  • Likes Given: 78
Re: SpaceX Manifest Table Formatting Discussion
« Reply #99 on: 04/24/2019 05:42 pm »
It's important to track booster loss from all causes, in my view. Until it actually launches again, it's not truly recovered. (ok I kid but yeah, if we can lose them at sea, it's a trackable thing)

Adding a whole new column for an edge case seems problematic. New code letter? Asterisk?

I hear you on tracking the loss, but it becomes a completely different question/purpose than the Manifest table. Manifest is forward looking and while some history is helpful the lack of real estate makes it tough to squeeze all of these tail end cases.
When I created the core schedule thread, I wanted to know what's available for the next flight in order to make speculations on core to flight assignment. I wanted it to compliment the Manifest. That thread is probably not a good historical thread either despite showing which cores are not available due to being expended or lost.
The core wiki Reddit page is really good at core history, but maybe we need one here too.
« Last Edit: 04/24/2019 05:47 pm by Stefan.Christoff.19 »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0