SpaceX Starship : First Flight : Starbase, TX : 20 April 2023 - DISCUSSION

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/infographictony/status/1646701133803520000

Here is my NEW updated 2.0 (unofficial) infographic poster with all the information you need to know about the upcoming #SpaceX #Starship Orbital Flight Test (I removed the "flip and burn" maneuver). A big thank you to @LunarCaveman. Now all good to go!

[pedz]

I don't know if this is right or not... 3B you have "All 13 gimbaled Raptor engines..." ... Are 20 of the engines not gimbaled or is that suppose to be "All 33 gimbaled Raptor engines" ?

[Alvian@IDN]

I don't know if this is right or not... 3B you have "All 13 gimbaled Raptor engines..." ... Are 20 of the engines not gimbaled or is that suppose to be "All 33 gimbaled Raptor engines" ?

Two clusters, inner & outer. The inner (13 engines) will gimbal, the outer (20 engines) will not

[Slothman]

With a mature rocket like the F9, with no other constraints, it will almost always launch on the minute.  With a prototype, not so likely.  Expect scrubs and holds while they tune the system.

Also weather, as illustrated by today's transporter mission scrub

[Eer]

I see S24 is still lowered from its perch atop B7.  No road closures until Monday the 17th.

Haven't heard about when they plan to restack, other than L-2 mentioned earlier - that may have been the destack target.

I wonder if they'll stack (lift), load (prop) and go (launch) Monday morning? Audacious, but maybe they're getting comfortable with the lift and alignment process - or maybe they're just waiting for the NASA guests to assemble before the lift.

I need more coffee...my mind is wandering.

[JCopernicus]

[...]. How is the boost back burn illustrated in the wrong direction? Isn't the burn pointing in the correct direction to remove horizontal velocity? https://sxcontent9668.azureedge.us/cms-assets/assets/SPACEX_STARSHIP_INFOGRAPHIC_041223_web_096b650bff.png

The image has been corrected. The original had the flamey end on the wrong side of the booster.

Roger that: flamey end now looks good!

Is there information/discussion about how many engines will/would be used for the boost back burn?

The graphic implies the booster does two flip manuevers, (one not show to put the engines facing down again).  Is that how it works or is the graphic still wrong as to the positioning?

[pedz]

[...]. How is the boost back burn illustrated in the wrong direction? Isn't the burn pointing in the correct direction to remove horizontal velocity? https://sxcontent9668.azureedge.us/cms-assets/assets/SPACEX_STARSHIP_INFOGRAPHIC_041223_web_096b650bff.png

The image has been corrected. The original had the flamey end on the wrong side of the booster.

I looked for “flames end” in Wikipedia and didn’t see it.  🤷‍♂️  😊

Roger that: flamey end now looks good!

Is there information/discussion about how many engines will/would be used for the boost back burn?

The graphic implies the booster does two flip manuevers, (one not show to put the engines facing down again).  Is that how it works or is the graphic still wrong as to the positioning?

[whitelancer64]

[...]. How is the boost back burn illustrated in the wrong direction? Isn't the burn pointing in the correct direction to remove horizontal velocity? https://sxcontent9668.azureedge.us/cms-assets/assets/SPACEX_STARSHIP_INFOGRAPHIC_041223_web_096b650bff.png

The image has been corrected. The original had the flamey end on the wrong side of the booster.

Roger that: flamey end now looks good!

Is there information/discussion about how many engines will/would be used for the boost back burn?

The graphic implies the booster does two flip manuevers, (one not show to put the engines facing down again).  Is that how it works or is the graphic still wrong as to the positioning?

The first one is called a "flip" because it's a pretty aggressive maneuver; the faster they can do the boostback burn, the less fuel they need to use to do it. After the boostback burn, a much slower rotation will orient the rocket to the correct angle for its glide path.

This is pretty much exactly what the Falcon 9 booster does now. It should look pretty much the same from the ground and on the webcasts.

[JCopernicus]

[...]. How is the boost back burn illustrated in the wrong direction? Isn't the burn pointing in the correct direction to remove horizontal velocity? https://sxcontent9668.azureedge.us/cms-assets/assets/SPACEX_STARSHIP_INFOGRAPHIC_041223_web_096b650bff.png

The image has been corrected. The original had the flamey end on the wrong side of the booster.

Roger that: flamey end now looks good!

Is there information/discussion about how many engines will/would be used for the boost back burn?

The graphic implies the booster does two flip manuevers, (one not show to put the engines facing down again).  Is that how it works or is the graphic still wrong as to the positioning?

The first one is called a "flip" because it's a pretty aggressive maneuver; the faster they can do the boostback burn, the less fuel they need to use to do it. After the boostback burn, a much slower rotation will orient the rocket to the correct angle for its glide path.

This is pretty much exactly what the Falcon 9 booster does now. It should look pretty much the same from the ground and on the webcasts.

Thanks, just realized my confusion.  Falcon 9 has two flip maneuvers, one for the barge, and one when they get back to land.

The SS Booster they're showing is like a hybrid of the two since they're not going back.

[testguy]

Take this as pure speculation, I am NOT a lawyer.  There was some speculation a while back that an injunction stopping Star Ship launch may happen due to environmental issues.  I would think you can't get an injunction without a launch license in place.  Therefore, might SpaceX try to delay the license until late Friday after the courts are closed and try to get a launch off on Monday before the courts reopen?

[alugobi]

With a mature rocket like the F9, with no other constraints, it will almost always launch on the minute.  With a prototype, not so likely.  Expect scrubs and holds while they tune the system.

Also weather, as illustrated by today's transporter mission scrub

Notice that I did write, "with no other constraints".  Weather is certainly one of them.

[golosio]

https://twitter.com/infographictony/status/1646701133803520000

Here is my NEW updated 2.0 (unofficial) infographic poster with all the information you need to know about the upcoming #SpaceX #Starship Orbital Flight Test (I removed the "flip and burn" maneuver). A big thank you to @LunarCaveman. Now all good to go!

Very nice poster! Can I ask if we have an estimate of the speed at stage separation, and of the maximum speed of Starship in the orbit?

[alastairmayer]

Take this as pure speculation, I am NOT a lawyer.  There was some speculation a while back that an injunction stopping Star Ship launch may happen due to environmental issues.  I would think you can't get an injunction without a launch license in place.  Therefore, might SpaceX try to delay the license until late Friday after the courts are closed and try to get a launch off on Monday before the courts reopen?

IANAL either,  but an emergency injunction can theoretically be obtained by finding an appropriate judge willing to issue one, even after hours.  Mind, if you're disturbing a judge on his days off, you'd better have a pretty solid case, and since the FAA already went through the environmental evaluation last year, good luck with that.

[geza]

When the licence is issued, it is public immediately?

[joek]

When the licence is issued, it is public immediately?

No. Publication on FAA public site often lags well behind issuance (could be days-weeks).

[Fireworking]

When the licence is issued, it is public immediately?

No. Publication on FAA public site often lags well behind issuance (could be days-weeks).

Which could mean the only way we can tell when they have the license, aside from a tweet, would be when they arm the FTS?

[Hog]

When the licence is issued, it is public immediately?

No. Publication on FAA public site often lags well behind issuance (could be days-weeks).

Which could mean the only way we can tell when they have the license, aside from a tweet, would be when they arm the FTS?

Does  that really help? Is there any sort of external cue that the FTS is armed?  Liftoff is a surefire external cue.

[geza]

When the licence is issued, it is public immediately?

No. Publication on FAA public site often lags well behind issuance (could be days-weeks).

Which could mean the only way we can tell when they have the license, aside from a tweet, would be when they arm the FTS?

Does  that really help? Is there any sort of external cue that the FTS is armed?  Liftoff is a surefire external cue.

Do we know for sure that the licence has not been issued yet?

[Fireworking]

When the licence is issued, it is public immediately?

No. Publication on FAA public site often lags well behind issuance (could be days-weeks).

Which could mean the only way we can tell when they have the license, aside from a tweet, would be when they arm the FTS?

Does  that really help? Is there any sort of external cue that the FTS is armed?  Liftoff is a surefire external cue.

Well of course the only way to be sure of a license is when they launch, but I think if they arm the FTS they will rather promptly commence restacking. If we're looking for external cues we could just look for when a cherrypicker goes over to that side of the ship. (unless they no longer arm them by hand)

By now i wouldn't be surprised if they already have the license.

[ChrisC]

I don't know why the tweets haven't been posted in the Updates thread (I think they're worthy of such, but I tread lightly in Updates threads), but this afternoon both Eric Berger and Joey Roulette tweeted some good insight into what the delay is, and how Monday launch attempt is still likely.