-
Draft Environmental Assessment for the SpaceX Starship/Super Heavy at KSC
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2019 02:44
-
-
#1
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2019 02:45
-
Starship/Super Heavy would be delivered by barge from SpaceX facilities at Boca Chica in Texas and Cidco
Road in Cocoa through the Turn Basin.
-
#2
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2019 02:48
-
Looks like Super Heavy lands on an ASDS.
Starship LZ-1 at first. Pad inside the fence at 39A still under evaluation!
-
#3
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2019 02:49
-
"The launch mount would be elevated up to approximately 30 m to reduce excess
recirculation and erosion from rocket exhaust. A flame diverter would be constructed instead of a flame
trench as is currently used at the Falcon launch mount. The flame diverter would be composed of metal
piping similar in construction to the SLC-40 water-cooled diverter. It would measure approximately 20 m
wide by 20 m tall and be positioned directly under the rocket. It would divert the heat and rocket exhaust
plume away from the launch pad and commodities."
"SpaceX would also construct a landing pad for potential future launch vehicle returns within the LC-39A
boundary. The landing pad location would be inside the LC-39A fence line. SpaceX is still determining the
exact location of the landing pad, but it is tentatively planned for the area southeast of the new launch
mount. The landing pad would be approximately 85 m in diameter and similar to the existing LZ-1 landing
pads on CCAFS. "
"The new methane farm would accommodate a total capacity of approximately 2 million kg.
Approximately 1.5 million kg of liquid nitrogen would also be stored in the methane farm. The liquid
nitrogen is a cryogenic and would be used to cool the methane. The methane and nitrogen farm would
require lighting similar to the existing RP-1 farm located at LC-39A. If a new methane flare stack is
needed, the flare would be approximately 30 m tall. The flare stack and any required anchors would be
contained inside the construction project area. There are no planned modifications to the existing LOX
farm capacity; however, as the program develops, an additional tank and piping may need to be installed
to support the Proposed Action."
-
#4
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2019 02:50
-
"SpaceX plans to launch the Starship/Super Heavy up to 24 times per year from LC-39A. A static fire test would be conducted on each stage prior to each launch."
-
#5
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2019 02:52
-
-
#6
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2019 02:53
-
"The rocket would be integrated vertically on the pad at LC-39A using a mobile crane. This would involve
the booster being mated to the launch mount followed by Starship being mated to the booster. Initial
flights would use a temporary or mobile crane, with a permanent crane tower constructed later. The
height of the permanent crane tower would be approximately 120 to 180 m"
-
#7
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2019 02:54
-
"The Super Heavy booster would land downrange on a droneship in the Atlantic Ocean no closer than 20
nm off the coast. Recovery support vehicles would be similar to those used for Falcon booster landings on
the droneship. In the event there is an anomaly during the descent, the booster would land in the open
ocean. SpaceX is developing the technology and capability of Super Heavy booster. If SpaceX develops the
ability to land Super Heavy booster on land, a supplemental EA will be developed.
After launch and landing at a downrange location, Super Heavy booster would be delivered by barge from
the landing site utilizing the KSC Turn Basin wharf as a delivery point and transported the remaining
distance to the launch complex over the Crawlerway. A downrange landing would be a contingency
landing location for Starship and transport would be similar to the Super Heavy booster."
-
#8
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2019 02:55
-
"The Max A-Weighted
Level (LAmax) would be 90 dB and Sound Exposure Level (SEL) would be less than 110
dB on CNS during a Super Heavy booster static fire at LC-39A"
-
#9
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2019 02:56
-
Big point of this kind of report:
"There are no historic or archaeologic resources at LZ-1, therefore landing of Starship at the site would have no impact to cultural resources"
-
#10
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2019 02:57
-
Make Static Fires Great Again!
"Super Heavy booster static fire tests are planned to occur at LC-39A where all 31 engines are fired for 15 seconds"
Holy moly!
-
#11
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2019 03:01
-
Incoming Starship. Incoming Super Heavy.....
-
#12
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2019 03:06
-
Meanwhile...
"SpaceX plans to increase the Falcon launch frequency to 20 launches per year from LC-39A and up to 50 launches per year from LC-40 by the year 2024."
-
-
Make Static Fires Great Again!
"Super Heavy booster static fire tests are planned to occur at LC-39A where all 31 engines are fired for 15 seconds"
Holy moly!
We know that they recently changed it to 35 engines, though
-
#14
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2019 03:14
-
Such a long report they probably started writing it years ago. Even the all-shiny Starship isn't in there.
PS 35 is more than 31, so Moar Cowbell to the point
--
Right, I'm going blind reading all this content in that PDF, so keep adding anything obviously interesting and missed into this thread. I've got to be up in four hours
-
#15
by
AU1.52
on 02 Aug, 2019 03:20
-
Make Static Fires Great Again!
"Super Heavy booster static fire tests are planned to occur at LC-39A where all 31 engines are fired for 15 seconds"
Holy moly!
We know that they recently changed it to 35 engines, though
Also I read that Starship will have 7 Raptors. I thought we were down to 6.
-
#16
by
vaporcobra
on 02 Aug, 2019 03:21
-
The Super Heavy booster would be delivered by barge from the landing site utilizing the KSC Turn Basin wharf as a delivery point and transported the remaining distance to the launch complex over the Crawlerway. A downrange landing would be a contingency landing location for Starship and transport would be similar to the Super Heavy booster."
Is anyone familiar with what access is like at the Turn Basin? AFAIK, only NASA employees and accredited members of the press (during events) would be in a position to take photos of returns.
-
#17
by
DigitalMan
on 02 Aug, 2019 03:31
-
The document is talks about sonic booms and shows a peak overpressure contour around 2.0 psf near Orlando. I can hear F9 landing booms just fine I am curious how it will compare to Super Heavy / Starship.
-
#18
by
DigitalMan
on 02 Aug, 2019 03:44
-
Well, I'm really looking forward to these launches:
"Regarding launches, the EA assumes 20 percent of annual Starship/Super Heavy launches and static fire tests (about five per year) would occur at night."
-
#19
by
DigitalMan
on 02 Aug, 2019 03:49
-
To add to the note Chris posted above regarding 20 launches/year of Falcon going up to 50:
"However, as Starship/Super Heavy launches gradually increase to 24 launches per year, the number of launches of the Falcon would decrease."
