Poll

So, anyone want to guess if Blue Origin will be ready for Artemis V?

Yeah, they'll build a robust lander with time to spare.
6 (20%)
They will need many waivers for non-conforming hardware, but they'll make it.
3 (10%)
They will delay Artemis V by some noticeable time span, but eventually they will make it.
13 (43.3%)
SpaceX will have to provide hardware for Artemis V.
8 (26.7%)
Other (please specify)
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 30

Voting closed: 06/01/2023 07:41 pm


Author Topic: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)  (Read 825740 times)

Offline eriblo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1153
  • Sweden
  • Liked: 1429
  • Likes Given: 240
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2060 on: 01/29/2022 03:57 pm »
I agree fully with Jim - while there is a requirement for a manual landing mode on HLS it is as a backup in case of significant failures and will most likely never be needed. The autonomous landing precision and accuracy is likely going to be such that you can chose a specific 1 m rock and which landing leg you want to put on it ;)

It is worth noting that landing one leg on a 1 m rock (~6į tilt) is within the 8į self leveling requirement. I think that the largest uncertainty by far will be the plume/surface interactions, especially if they decide to go with a Raptor landing, for which extra surveys are of limited utility (as opposed to uncrewed test landings).

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2061 on: 01/29/2022 04:00 pm »
<snip>

That was 53 years ago. It's a lot different now.
Camera technology today is several orders of magnitude better than what Apollo had. Orbiting cameras back then had difficulty seeing rocks on the surface the size of a Volkswagen, while orbital surveys today are capable of resolving small rocks on the surface the size of a tennis ball. It is simply not necessary to send a ground survey mission to determine whether or not the selected site can be safely landed on.

Perhaps I miss-read the landing site paper linked by Su27 below  (Attachment_A20_Lunar_Landing_Site_Characterization_White_Paper.pdf). It looked to me like reliable resolution was about one meter, not "tennis ball". I don't think you want to risk putting a landing foot down on a 1-meter tippy rock.

Despite all its other overwhelming advantages, Starship HLS has one disadvantage: No downward-looking window for the pilot. This means reliance on cameras, and that apparently makes it a little bit harder for even a highly-trained astronaut to do a semi-manual landing. This is all about risk reduction. It's not a yes/no choice.

At this point I think NASA will choose to land without an on-surface survey, and I think the landing will succeed.

You may have missed what I said earlier.

"At low sun angles, any rocks cast shadows on the ground. These shadows can be used to derive how rough or smooth an area is. That's more than sufficient to find a clear area to land, a rover on the ground isn't needed."

Using data over time from shadows, much smaller rocks can be found, due to their long shadows, than can be seen directly during a high sun angle. I.e., at local morning and evening, if an area doesn't have any shadows, then it doesn't have any protruding surface rocks, and we know that area is free of obstructions. 
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3745
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 2995
  • Likes Given: 1085
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2062 on: 01/29/2022 04:19 pm »

Despite all its other overwhelming advantages, Starship HLS has one disadvantage: No downward-looking window for the pilot. This means reliance on cameras, and that apparently makes it a little bit harder for even a highly-trained astronaut to do a semi-manual landing. This is all about risk reduction. It's not a yes/no choice.

At this point I think NASA will choose to land without an on-surface survey, and I think the landing will succeed.

A.  What says the landing is going to be piloted at all?  See MSL, M2020 and every F9 first stage.  Not to mention the intend of every uncrewed Starship returning to earth. 
The demo mission is uncrewed, so certainly not piloted.
All Starhip Earth landings will be to surveyed sites.
F9 is not relevant: there are no rocks on the drone ships or the RLTS site: they have been surveyed on the surface.
You originally cited the Apollo landings as examples, and we know those were crewed and depended on real-time site analysys by the crew as part of the landing.
Quote
B.  And even if piloted, what says cameras are not good enough?
Not me: I'm not an astronaut or an aerospace engineer. However, NASA raised the lack of downward-facing windows as an issue in the evaluation of the HLS system.
Quote
C.  There is no "risk reduction" required.  Landers already use cameras for terrain and hazard avoidance
NASA adds redundant risk reduction for crewed missions all the time. It's a question of cost/benefit, and NASA appears to be willing to pay quite a bit for even a small benefit in risk reduction.
Quote
D.  No basis to make a claim for on-surface survey.
You are certainly better qualified to assess the cost/benefit of an on-surface survey than I am. The only "basis" is that an on-surface survey can see much smaller rocks than an LRO survey, and the difference might be useful.
« Last Edit: 01/29/2022 04:26 pm by DanClemmensen »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36590
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 19673
  • Likes Given: 407
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2063 on: 01/29/2022 06:03 pm »

1. The demo mission is uncrewed, so certainly not piloted.
All Starhip Earth landings will be to surveyed sites.
F9 is not relevant: there are no rocks on the drone ships or the RLTS site: they have been surveyed on the surface.

2.Not me: I'm not an astronaut or an aerospace engineer. However, NASA raised the lack of downward-facing windows as an issue in the evaluation of the HLS system.

3. It's a question of cost/benefit, and NASA appears to be willing to pay quite a bit for even a small benefit in risk reduction.

4. The only "basis" is that an on-surface survey can see much smaller rocks than an LRO survey, and the difference might be useful.

1.  You conveniently ignore the Mars landers and their capabilities.

2.  It wasn't a disqualifier.

3.  no facts support that comment.

4.  again, no need for a "survey".  The landing vehicle can see the terrain and make the necessary adjustments.
« Last Edit: 01/29/2022 06:03 pm by Jim »

Offline MichaelBlackbourn

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 150
  • Liked: 261
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2064 on: 01/29/2022 06:40 pm »
A 30cm protrusion will have a more than 2m shadow at a low sun angle.   They arenít going to target a spot with 1m rocks.  Itíll be clear.

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6320
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4199
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2065 on: 01/30/2022 07:24 pm »
Michael Sheetz (CNBC) Twitter thread about Starship HLS and NASA ASAP

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1486775351246217218?t=JO6oruypLgC99Wylel67Mg
DM

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6320
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4199
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2066 on: 01/30/2022 07:25 pm »
Michael Sheetz (CNBC) Twitter thread about Starship HLS and NASA ASAP

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1486775351246217218?t=JO6oruypLgC99Wylel67Mg
DM

Offline cechk01

  • Member
  • Posts: 1
  • USA
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2067 on: 01/31/2022 01:43 pm »
What are the chances that the "integrated master schedule" is available via a FOIA request? I bet it would be an interesting read.

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2068 on: 01/31/2022 03:17 pm »
What are the chances that the "integrated master schedule" is available via a FOIA request? I bet it would be an interesting read.

I would guess it's almost certainly a proprietary SpaceX document, not subject to FOIA requests.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline philw1776

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1829
  • Seacoast NH
  • Liked: 1837
  • Likes Given: 924
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2069 on: 01/31/2022 03:21 pm »
What ever happened to that oft promised always missed "Starship Update" from Elon? inquiring minds want to know.
FULL SEND!!!!

Offline AC in NC

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2478
  • Raleigh NC
  • Liked: 3618
  • Likes Given: 1929
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2070 on: 01/31/2022 11:23 pm »
What ever happened to that oft promised always missed "Starship Update" from Elon? inquiring minds want to know.
I believe we've been Lucy'd once again.

« Last Edit: 01/31/2022 11:25 pm by AC in NC »

Offline Tuna-Fish

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 137
  • Finland
  • Liked: 228
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2071 on: 02/02/2022 07:54 am »
What ever happened to that oft promised always missed "Starship Update" from Elon? inquiring minds want to know.

I believe it will happen after the orbital shot, not before. Every time Elon gives a date for a presentation, it's just been his current (over-optimistic) launch date for the orbital shot.

Offline Ben Baley

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 228
  • Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  • Liked: 257
  • Likes Given: 240
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2072 on: 02/04/2022 07:46 am »
What ever happened to that oft promised always missed "Starship Update" from Elon? inquiring minds want to know.

Next Thursday February 10th

https://www.theverge.com/2022/2/3/22916863/elon-musk-spacex-starship-presentation-update

Offline Tuna-Fish

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 137
  • Finland
  • Liked: 228
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2073 on: 02/04/2022 08:02 am »
What ever happened to that oft promised always missed "Starship Update" from Elon? inquiring minds want to know.

I believe it will happen after the orbital shot, not before. Every time Elon gives a date for a presentation, it's just been his current (over-optimistic) launch date for the orbital shot.

What ever happened to that oft promised always missed "Starship Update" from Elon? inquiring minds want to know.

Next Thursday February 10th

https://www.theverge.com/2022/2/3/22916863/elon-musk-spacex-starship-presentation-update

Lol, that aged well.

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6415
  • Liked: 9072
  • Likes Given: 885
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2074 on: 02/20/2022 03:55 am »
https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1494393484534558722

Quote
Cummings [SpaceX director Nicholas Cummings]: "I love that the theme of this panel is sustainable space exploration is being enable by commercial space technology" as "Starship is a commercial space platform ... designed to do many, many things" such as the HLS part of Artemis.



Cummings: "The thing I'm most excited about" with NASA's Artemis "is all of the surface elements," since "Starship is fundamentally designed to transport very, very large amounts of cargo."



Cummings: SpaceX is "excited to integrate things like habitats and rovers and supplies" with Starship to make a "rich ecosystem of technologies" for an "incredible Moon base."

"I can say Moon base, right? We're at a space conference."



Cummings: Thinking about a Moon base analogous to Everest base camp, "staffed by hundreds or thousands of scientists and explorers."

Online pyromatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 897
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 3331
  • Likes Given: 18

Offline billh

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 741
  • Houston
  • Liked: 990
  • Likes Given: 689
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2076 on: 03/11/2022 05:00 pm »
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20220003725/downloads/22%203%207%20Kent%20IEEE%20paper.pdf
Can anyone tell from the building in the background where that elevator work is taking place? Hawthorne? Starbase?

Online pyromatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 897
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 3331
  • Likes Given: 18
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2077 on: 03/11/2022 05:03 pm »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16421
  • Liked: 6486
  • Likes Given: 2817
Re: Starship Artemis Contract (Lunar Starship)
« Reply #2078 on: 03/11/2022 05:28 pm »
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20220003725/downloads/22%203%207%20Kent%20IEEE%20paper.pdf

From that image, it doesn't look like the Propellant Starship is coming back to Earth. I guess that it can stay in Earth orbit and be used more than once.
« Last Edit: 03/11/2022 05:32 pm by yg1968 »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16421
  • Liked: 6486
  • Likes Given: 2817

Tags:
 

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