Author Topic: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion  (Read 316552 times)

Offline laszlo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 915
  • Liked: 1230
  • Likes Given: 529
Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
« Reply #640 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

Offline fael097

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.
« Last Edit: 12/02/2019 12:12 pm by fael097 »
Rafael Adamy

Offline Johnnyhinbos

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3863
  • Boston, MA
  • Liked: 8095
  • Likes Given: 943
Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
« Reply #642 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
John Hanzl. Author, action / adventure www.johnhanzl.com

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8142
  • Liked: 6799
  • Likes Given: 2963
Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
« Reply #643 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.

Offline Captain Crutch

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...

Offline 50_Caliber

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 309
  • Oklahoma
  • Liked: 522
  • Likes Given: 1544
Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
« Reply #645 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...

Offline Thunderscreech

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
  • Liked: 949
  • Likes Given: 583
Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
« Reply #646 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?  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Ben Hallert - @BocaRoad, @FCCSpace, @Spacecareers, @NASAProcurement, and @SpaceTFRs on Twitter

Offline Mandella

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 524
  • Liked: 799
  • Likes Given: 2586
Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
« Reply #647 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).

Offline Wolfram66

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.....

Offline GWH

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1741
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1925
  • Likes Given: 1277
Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
« Reply #649 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

Offline Seamore Holdings

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
  • Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Liked: 55
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
« Reply #650 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.
Space Coast Aerial Photographer

Offline matt_ellis

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 148
  • Woking, Surrey, UK
  • Liked: 164
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
« Reply #651 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.

Offline Sciencefan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 422
  • Liked: 320
  • Likes Given: 208
Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
« Reply #652 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.

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5180
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2587
  • Likes Given: 2895
Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
« Reply #653 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. 

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.

Online Lampyridae

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2635
  • South Africa
  • Liked: 947
  • Likes Given: 2046
Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
« Reply #655 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).

Offline ZChris13

https://twitter.com/julia_bergeron/status/1201350135768330240

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.

Offline AUricle

« Last Edit: 12/03/2019 04:34 pm by AUricle »

Offline Seamore Holdings

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
  • Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Liked: 55
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
« Reply #658 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.
Space Coast Aerial Photographer

Offline Seamore Holdings

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
  • Cocoa Beach, FL
  • Liked: 55
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: SpaceX Starship : Florida Prototype(s) Thread 2 : Discussion
« Reply #659 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
Space Coast Aerial Photographer

Tags:
 

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