In this photo by BocaChicaGal, one of the header tanks appears to have a heat shield section and further mounting assemblies for its place in the outer hull.
Quote from: RotoSequence on 09/23/2019 05:20 pmIn this photo by BocaChicaGal, one of the header tanks appears to have a heat shield section and further mounting assemblies for its place in the outer hull.I was thinking that object might be a heat exchanger.
Quote from: capoman on 09/23/2019 04:41 pmQuote from: intrepidpursuit on 09/23/2019 04:27 pmThe Shuttle Orbiter had a propulsion section in the nose ahead of the crew compartment. It supplied local engines rather than feeding down to the main engines, but I don't see that as much different.In the attached picture from Twitter of LUVOIR in the Starship cargo bay, you can see that there is a lot of wasted space in the nose. Filling that with mechanical components and tankage saves space and provides better center of mass. For crew, the windows are all on the side anyway so I don't think scooting them down a bit will make any notable difference. Not everything about shuttle was bad. The placement of its cargo bay may just be proving itself an idea worth keeping for a massive reusable orbital craft.Also, moving the header tanks out of the main tanks may allow them to reduce the size of the main tanks, giving a bit more wide space above the main tanks. No real payload space should be lost, and may actually be more useful since it will be full width.Also easier to apply insulation to tanks that are not immersed in cryogens. And as others have said the conical space was hard to use efficiently.
Quote from: intrepidpursuit on 09/23/2019 04:27 pmThe Shuttle Orbiter had a propulsion section in the nose ahead of the crew compartment. It supplied local engines rather than feeding down to the main engines, but I don't see that as much different.In the attached picture from Twitter of LUVOIR in the Starship cargo bay, you can see that there is a lot of wasted space in the nose. Filling that with mechanical components and tankage saves space and provides better center of mass. For crew, the windows are all on the side anyway so I don't think scooting them down a bit will make any notable difference. Not everything about shuttle was bad. The placement of its cargo bay may just be proving itself an idea worth keeping for a massive reusable orbital craft.Also, moving the header tanks out of the main tanks may allow them to reduce the size of the main tanks, giving a bit more wide space above the main tanks. No real payload space should be lost, and may actually be more useful since it will be full width.
The Shuttle Orbiter had a propulsion section in the nose ahead of the crew compartment. It supplied local engines rather than feeding down to the main engines, but I don't see that as much different.In the attached picture from Twitter of LUVOIR in the Starship cargo bay, you can see that there is a lot of wasted space in the nose. Filling that with mechanical components and tankage saves space and provides better center of mass. For crew, the windows are all on the side anyway so I don't think scooting them down a bit will make any notable difference. Not everything about shuttle was bad. The placement of its cargo bay may just be proving itself an idea worth keeping for a massive reusable orbital craft.
Quote from: OTV Booster on 09/22/2019 10:42 pmQuote from: livingjw on 09/22/2019 02:42 amQuote from: oiorionsbelt on 09/22/2019 02:20 amQuote from: BrianPeterson on 09/22/2019 01:59 amQuote from: moreno7798 on 09/22/2019 01:30 amLet's not forget that this is a test vehicle and SpaceX is going to test only what it needs to test to get the data they need.Except if the intent is to slam this test model into the upper atmosphere and simulate as much as possible a return from LEO to test reentry heating on the outer skin, which is one of the stated intended purposes... Then aluminum fins with rivets makes to my limited knowledge, no sense. I don't buy into the few on here that think MK1 will never be launched or be a 1 and done. From what I have read my guesstimate is MK1 and 2 will probably see at least 5 flights each if they don't RUD. But with aluminum wings, I'm trying to wrap my head around how they will not RUD the first time they get slammed into the atmosphere. Heat shield tiles, yet to be added?I have not seen any TPS. We are looking at bare airframe. All windward surfaces will require TPS.JohnIt’s hard to make out the structural detail on the ‘leading’ edge of the fins. The outer and rear look open and unfinished. As y’all have patiently mentored on EDL this won’t fly, so to speak. The shock holding the plasma off from the windward face would, AIUI, squeeze closer to the fin face as it approaches the edges and and as it slips close to and past the edge, cause high local heating.IIRC, there is a formula for calculating the optimal radius to minimize this at various Mach numbers. Don’t know it and can’t find it. My guess is there will be radiused edge treatment, maybe not symmetrical from windward to lee. Probably with heat tiles.Sure wish I could make out that top edge better. PhilThey're not finished. Since the edges of the fins will tend to be hot spots during reentry, its probably safe to assume that they will put tiles on them. In this case, the sharp angle and flat surfaces should make them easier to fabricate and/or attach.
Quote from: livingjw on 09/22/2019 02:42 amQuote from: oiorionsbelt on 09/22/2019 02:20 amQuote from: BrianPeterson on 09/22/2019 01:59 amQuote from: moreno7798 on 09/22/2019 01:30 amLet's not forget that this is a test vehicle and SpaceX is going to test only what it needs to test to get the data they need.Except if the intent is to slam this test model into the upper atmosphere and simulate as much as possible a return from LEO to test reentry heating on the outer skin, which is one of the stated intended purposes... Then aluminum fins with rivets makes to my limited knowledge, no sense. I don't buy into the few on here that think MK1 will never be launched or be a 1 and done. From what I have read my guesstimate is MK1 and 2 will probably see at least 5 flights each if they don't RUD. But with aluminum wings, I'm trying to wrap my head around how they will not RUD the first time they get slammed into the atmosphere. Heat shield tiles, yet to be added?I have not seen any TPS. We are looking at bare airframe. All windward surfaces will require TPS.JohnIt’s hard to make out the structural detail on the ‘leading’ edge of the fins. The outer and rear look open and unfinished. As y’all have patiently mentored on EDL this won’t fly, so to speak. The shock holding the plasma off from the windward face would, AIUI, squeeze closer to the fin face as it approaches the edges and and as it slips close to and past the edge, cause high local heating.IIRC, there is a formula for calculating the optimal radius to minimize this at various Mach numbers. Don’t know it and can’t find it. My guess is there will be radiused edge treatment, maybe not symmetrical from windward to lee. Probably with heat tiles.Sure wish I could make out that top edge better. Phil
Quote from: oiorionsbelt on 09/22/2019 02:20 amQuote from: BrianPeterson on 09/22/2019 01:59 amQuote from: moreno7798 on 09/22/2019 01:30 amLet's not forget that this is a test vehicle and SpaceX is going to test only what it needs to test to get the data they need.Except if the intent is to slam this test model into the upper atmosphere and simulate as much as possible a return from LEO to test reentry heating on the outer skin, which is one of the stated intended purposes... Then aluminum fins with rivets makes to my limited knowledge, no sense. I don't buy into the few on here that think MK1 will never be launched or be a 1 and done. From what I have read my guesstimate is MK1 and 2 will probably see at least 5 flights each if they don't RUD. But with aluminum wings, I'm trying to wrap my head around how they will not RUD the first time they get slammed into the atmosphere. Heat shield tiles, yet to be added?I have not seen any TPS. We are looking at bare airframe. All windward surfaces will require TPS.John
Quote from: BrianPeterson on 09/22/2019 01:59 amQuote from: moreno7798 on 09/22/2019 01:30 amLet's not forget that this is a test vehicle and SpaceX is going to test only what it needs to test to get the data they need.Except if the intent is to slam this test model into the upper atmosphere and simulate as much as possible a return from LEO to test reentry heating on the outer skin, which is one of the stated intended purposes... Then aluminum fins with rivets makes to my limited knowledge, no sense. I don't buy into the few on here that think MK1 will never be launched or be a 1 and done. From what I have read my guesstimate is MK1 and 2 will probably see at least 5 flights each if they don't RUD. But with aluminum wings, I'm trying to wrap my head around how they will not RUD the first time they get slammed into the atmosphere. Heat shield tiles, yet to be added?
Quote from: moreno7798 on 09/22/2019 01:30 amLet's not forget that this is a test vehicle and SpaceX is going to test only what it needs to test to get the data they need.Except if the intent is to slam this test model into the upper atmosphere and simulate as much as possible a return from LEO to test reentry heating on the outer skin, which is one of the stated intended purposes... Then aluminum fins with rivets makes to my limited knowledge, no sense. I don't buy into the few on here that think MK1 will never be launched or be a 1 and done. From what I have read my guesstimate is MK1 and 2 will probably see at least 5 flights each if they don't RUD. But with aluminum wings, I'm trying to wrap my head around how they will not RUD the first time they get slammed into the atmosphere.
Let's not forget that this is a test vehicle and SpaceX is going to test only what it needs to test to get the data they need.
Per Musk's indication that the header tanks will be in the nose and Mary's latest photos, I get the feeling that Starships Mk1/Mk2 are going to have one or two raceways running almost top to bottom. That design choice obviously isn't compatible with Starship cargo/crew sections as we know them, could be that outfitting for either role will provide enough balance on its own.Edit: I see they could also be chines, but seems probable that it/they will also serve as raceways for cabling/plumbing/ACS pods.
Quote from: vaporcobra on 09/23/2019 02:40 amPer Musk's indication that the header tanks will be in the nose and Mary's latest photos, I get the feeling that Starships Mk1/Mk2 are going to have one or two raceways running almost top to bottom. That design choice obviously isn't compatible with Starship cargo/crew sections as we know them, could be that outfitting for either role will provide enough balance on its own.Edit: I see they could also be chines, but seems probable that it/they will also serve as raceways for cabling/plumbing/ACS pods.Chines all the way to the top make sense. Space for the lines to the header tanks and they would broaden the profile and ease max heat a bit during EDL. I’m surprised they’re not blended into the curve better and reaching further down towards the centerline. I also expect the gap between the fineraters and the chine to be filled in. Leave it open and I’d expect shock impingement. Phil
Did Elon say anything about how the real Starship would be fabricated? I'm assuming they won't weld the circular sections like this, there has to be a better way to make the shell?
Quote from: Semmel on 09/23/2019 01:52 pmArticle with image by BCG of the three Raptors installed at Starship prototype.https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-starship-three-raptors-installed-says-elon-musk/"artist's impression" - It's a picture of StarHopper with the engine copy-pasted.
Article with image by BCG of the three Raptors installed at Starship prototype.https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-starship-three-raptors-installed-says-elon-musk/
BocaChicaGal's latest pics show a band on the windward side with slots cut into it. This may be for anchoring a fairing from here aft to cover the landing gear and smooth out the windward surface. If the front of this fairing (possibly mythical) is free to expand when heated, how would TPS deal with it? Something special is going to be needed. Mysteries.John
Ok, so it looks like header tanks and batteries and whatnot are being installed in the fairing, as per Elon. At first I was like, “That’s odd - header tanks are supposed to go inside the main tanks!”But what if... that’s actually the production design? What if the cargo/crew section is now between the main tanks and the headers in the nose? That would allow canard actuators and internal bracing to take up the nose section, make a more predictable load distribution during EDL, and place the variable mass of cargo closer to the center of drag?
Quote from: RotoSequence on 09/23/2019 05:20 pmIn this photo by BocaChicaGal, one of the header tanks appears to have a heat shield section and further mounting assemblies for its place in the outer hull.Can it be battery that EM was talking about?
Quote from: Rix4 on 09/23/2019 05:26 pmQuote from: RotoSequence on 09/23/2019 05:20 pmIn this photo by BocaChicaGal, one of the header tanks appears to have a heat shield section and further mounting assemblies for its place in the outer hull.Can it be battery that EM was talking about?Yes, it's a Model S/X battery pack...Would be funny if they even left the motor on there for the compressor
Um, what's going on here?Image credit: BocaChicaGal
Quote from: exilon on 09/23/2019 06:30 pmQuote from: Rix4 on 09/23/2019 05:26 pmQuote from: RotoSequence on 09/23/2019 05:20 pmIn this photo by BocaChicaGal, one of the header tanks appears to have a heat shield section and further mounting assemblies for its place in the outer hull.Can it be battery that EM was talking about?Yes, it's a Model S/X battery pack...Would be funny if they even left the motor on there for the compressorLooks like it might even be two of them, back to back. Wow.
Quote from: raketa on 09/23/2019 04:26 pmQuote from: Spindog on 09/23/2019 03:28 pmI think the header tanks were moved up to the nosecone probably just for the prototype since there's so little mass up there. Presumably, in production versions there will be enough forward weight where this doesn't need to be done and the header tanks can be inside the main tanks.I think move header tanks is design change.It will give them better center of gravity, shield crew from radiation, easy access to fix it cryogenic device if will not work properly. LOX will could be used also as source of oxygen for crew.Agreed. That is too big a change to be just for a prototype. At least at the moment they intend that to be the orbital design.
Quote from: Spindog on 09/23/2019 03:28 pmI think the header tanks were moved up to the nosecone probably just for the prototype since there's so little mass up there. Presumably, in production versions there will be enough forward weight where this doesn't need to be done and the header tanks can be inside the main tanks.I think move header tanks is design change.It will give them better center of gravity, shield crew from radiation, easy access to fix it cryogenic device if will not work properly. LOX will could be used also as source of oxygen for crew.
I think the header tanks were moved up to the nosecone probably just for the prototype since there's so little mass up there. Presumably, in production versions there will be enough forward weight where this doesn't need to be done and the header tanks can be inside the main tanks.
How much power do they actually need for spacecraft operations, I wonder?