Subdeacon Joe Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 This one was more successful. Still crashed, but more things went right this time. 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trailrider #896 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 Well, not sure if it burned up, but probably broke up on reentry. Terrific views while it lasted however! Some problems getting good telemetry link with the TDRS (Tracking & Data Relay Satellite). They did apparently open and close the cargo hatch. They did NOT get a relight of the Raptor engine they were hoping to get in space, but will have to study what data they got. Also, the booster failed to light the center engines for simulated touchdown (by splashdown) in the Atlantic. Have to see what happened there. But at least no RUD's this time, so maybe the FAA won't get their knickers in a knot about issuing the next license. Build a little, test a little, modify and fly again! I don't recall how many unsuccessful landing attempts on Falcon 9 before they got the first one landed okay. Now they've landed nearly 300, including a couple that have reflown 19 times. Starship and booster are an order of magnitude more complex. They'll get it pretty soon! 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cypress Sun Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 I'd still rather ride on the Starship rather than anything that Boeing makes. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Rick Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 @Trailrider #896 they did get the cargo hatch to open but could not get it closed. We watched the live feed and while they were showing the cargo hatch it abruptly fell inward, dangling (what appeared to be) several inches inboard. Couple that with quite a few lost heat tiles and what appeared to be a slow roll as it re-entered the atmosphere, I'm surprised they had telemetry for as long as they did. The camera views were awesome! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abilene Slim SASS 81783 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 After burning thru somewhat more than a few billion $$$, they might be able to achieve what was done back in the 60s. Yes, I have an opinion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdeacon Joe Posted March 15 Author Share Posted March 15 56 minutes ago, Abilene Slim SASS 81783 said: After burning thru somewhat more than a few billion $$$, they might be able to achieve what was done back in the 60s. Yes, I have an opinion. In the '60s everything was throw-away and up & back. And landing within 50 miles to a wet splash down was a success. SpaceX is working for reusable and landing within a couple of feet on a platform. Even working towards a "Chopsticks catch" recovery. Just like in the '60s. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abilene Slim SASS 81783 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 My priorities are a bit different. We know less about what lies under this planet’s ocean than we do about outer space. There’s more useful stuff to be discovered down there for less money than what’s on the moon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdeacon Joe Posted March 15 Author Share Posted March 15 Which has nothing to do with the statement I responded to. Or the fact that what SpaceX is doing is far beyond the space program of 1960s. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Sage, SASS #49891 Life Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 11 hours ago, Subdeacon Joe said: Which has nothing to do with the statement I responded to. Or the fact that what SpaceX is doing is far beyond the space program of 1960s. I am a product of the 60's thru the 80"s. I started working on the Apollo/Saturn Program when I graduated from college in 1963. Worked on the Space Shuttle after the Apollo was done. Stayed in the Industry until I retired in 2000 at 58 years old. Back then if our people had access to the computer technology we have today, they would have knocked it out of the ballpark a lot faster (and cheaper) then we did then. We had brilliant minds that advanced state of the art technology with tools that would seem like those the Wright Brothers used to todays engineers! I consulted for Space X when they were just starting before 2000 and they have done one thing that I thought impossible when I first worked with them....that is recovery and reuse of their booster . We did that on the Space Shuttle, but it was very rudimentry when compared to what they do today. 2 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trailrider #896 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 Uh, Slim...it ain't your money. What SpaceX is doing with Starship is private/commercial enterprise. Yes, once it is developed, NASA will pay for the lunar landing flights, but if we (America) doesn't do it, the Chinese will for whatever reasons to go back to the Moon. Big Sade...and we did all that with sliderules and maybe a Friden desktop mechanical calculator, or later with large mainframe computers. We recovered Space Shuttle SRB's using parachutes, not backing down on their own exhaust plumes like Falcon 9. Eventually, Starship will be developed to be more useful than what most people can imagine. The fact that it didn't make it this time is part of the development process. I have NO DOUBT it will be a success eventually! They are planning at least 3 or 4 more development flights this year. Ad Astra! (To the stars!) 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abilene Slim SASS 81783 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Trailrider #896 said: Uh, Slim...it ain't your money. What SpaceX is doing with Starship is private/commercial enterprise. Yes, once it is developed, NASA will pay for the lunar landing flights, but if we (America) doesn't do it, the Chinese will for whatever reasons to go back to the Moon. Uh, Trailrider...NASA has a lot of money already invested in this project. From an NPR article: "In addition to private investment, SpaceX has won around $4 billion in contracts from NASA to develop Starship into a lander that can put astronauts on the moon." "They have a lot of money now from the government specifically to do this," says Lori Garver, former NASA deputy administrator and author of the forthcoming book Escaping Gravity, about NASA's relationship with commercial space companies. "I think those deep pockets will serve them well through a test program." Edited March 15 by Abilene Slim SASS 81783 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trailrider #896 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 31 minutes ago, Abilene Slim SASS 81783 said: Uh, Trailrider...NASA has a lot of money already invested in this project. From an NPR article: "In addition to private investment, SpaceX has won around $4 billion in contracts from NASA to develop Starship into a lander that can put astronauts on the moon." "They have a lot of money now from the government specifically to do this," says Lori Garver, former NASA deputy administrator and author of the forthcoming book Escaping Gravity, about NASA's relationship with commercial space companies. "I think those deep pockets will serve them well through a test program." Granted, NASA and Space Force are acting as customers, but it is still necessary that it be done. U.S. military is looking at Starship as a potential way of moving supplies from place-to-place here on Earth! If you want to object to what is being spent by NASA on getting astronauts back to the Moon, then get them to terminate Artemis and Gateway, and let SpaceX do it right and a lot cheaper. As Musk eventually wants to use Starships to explore and later colonize Mars, he will do it anyway, and get us to the Moon in the process. When Space Shuttle was cancelled, 2500 peole were laid off at the Cape. At the time they had nowhere else down there to get jobs. As a result, 10,000 jobs were lost in Brevad County alone! Apollo put between $9M and $20M into the economy for every dollar spent directly on that program. SpaceX is hiring a lot of people at both Boca Chica and the Cape who are not rocket people. I bet a welder can make good money assembling the booster and Ship, and will use that money to feed, clothe and put a roof over his/her family's heads. Same for a heavy equipment operator. If I were fifty-five years younger, I'd be down in Texas banging on Musk's door and asking if he could use a rocket engine engineer, or even a janitor! Ad Astra! 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Sage, SASS #49891 Life Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 1 hour ago, Trailrider #896 said: Big Sade...and we did all that with sliderules and maybe a Friden desktop mechanical calculator, or later with large mainframe computers. We recovered Space Shuttle SRB's using parachutes, not backing down on their own exhaust plumes like Falcon 9. I still have my slide rule. I remember all the IBM cards we punched to ad data and program the old mainframes. The SRB's were towed into port by tug. Flushed down with fresh water and disassembled for reuse. Sometimes the cases used to make the SRB bodies could not be reused, depending how much erosion was present around the O ring seals. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Sage, SASS #49891 Life Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 33 minutes ago, Trailrider #896 said: If I were fifty-five years younger, I'd be down in Texas banging on Musk's door and asking if he could use a rocket engine engineer, or even a janitor! Ad Astra! Amen to that! Or in Hawthorne < Ca at the Northrop buildings at Hawthorn Airport that it bought from Northrop when the 747 Program was sold by Northrop and moved out. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abilene Slim SASS 81783 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 25 minutes ago, Trailrider #896 said: Granted, NASA and Space Force are acting as customers, but it is still necessary that it be done. U.S. military is looking at Starship as a potential way of moving supplies from place-to-place here on Earth! If you want to object to what is being spent by NASA on getting astronauts back to the Moon, then get them to terminate Artemis and Gateway, and let SpaceX do it right and a lot cheaper. As Musk eventually wants to use Starships to explore and later colonize Mars, he will do it anyway, and get us to the Moon in the process. When Space Shuttle was cancelled, 2500 peole were laid off at the Cape. At the time they had nowhere else down there to get jobs. As a result, 10,000 jobs were lost in Brevad County alone! Apollo put between $9M and $20M into the economy for every dollar spent directly on that program. SpaceX is hiring a lot of people at both Boca Chica and the Cape who are not rocket people. I bet a welder can make good money assembling the booster and Ship, and will use that money to feed, clothe and put a roof over his/her family's heads. Same for a heavy equipment operator. If I were fifty-five years younger, I'd be down in Texas banging on Musk's door and asking if he could use a rocket engine engineer, or even a janitor! Ad Astra! My point is that we have more critical concerns here on earth. China is already a global threat to control of the oceans as are other bad actors. We've already seen what can happen to the economy when trade routes are blocked or choked. This planet is 75% water and is the medium in which global trade travels. No amount of airplanes or spaceships will ever achieve what shipping does. Yet our Navy is severely depleted and in disrepair. We lack the ability to maintain our current submarine fleet and surface ships. We need new and upgraded ports and facilities not just for our Navy, but for commercial shipping as well. We need to embark on a building program comparable to what was done for WWII. Think of the jobs that would provide for those engineers, welders, fabricators, the steel industry and on and on. That will take an extraordinary amount of money and time. Right now the world is a tinderbox as in the 1930s, and we're running out of time to be prepared for when the SHTF. I believe that will happen long before the moon or Mars are colonized. We need to keep the oceans open now. Solve that, and then we can talk about manned deep space exploration. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdeacon Joe Posted March 18 Author Share Posted March 18 Perspective. Those fins that look so small and delicate in the videos are not all that small. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trailrider #896 Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 On 3/15/2024 at 1:58 PM, Abilene Slim SASS 81783 said: My point is that we have more critical concerns here on earth. China is already a global threat to control of the oceans as are other bad actors. We've already seen what can happen to the economy when trade routes are blocked or choked. This planet is 75% water and is the medium in which global trade travels. No amount of airplanes or spaceships will ever achieve what shipping does. Yet our Navy is severely depleted and in disrepair. We lack the ability to maintain our current submarine fleet and surface ships. We need new and upgraded ports and facilities not just for our Navy, but for commercial shipping as well. We need to embark on a building program comparable to what was done for WWII. Think of the jobs that would provide for those engineers, welders, fabricators, the steel industry and on and on. That will take an extraordinary amount of money and time. Right now the world is a tinderbox as in the 1930s, and we're running out of time to be prepared for when the SHTF. I believe that will happen long before the moon or Mars are colonized. We need to keep the oceans open now. Solve that, and then we can talk about manned deep space exploration. Our military is strongly considering contracting with SpaceX, once Starship/booster are developed, to use that system to logistically support materiel for our troops using it surface-to-surface. Space Force is also working on a backup to GPS, utilizing SpaceX's Starlink system derivatives, as well as maintaining our surveilence satellites from possible destruction by Russia and the PRC . Development of lunar resources, including rare earth materials, will be directly in competition with the PRC, which has stated as a definite program the landing of taikonauts on the Moon within the next few years. As far as our submarine and other naval ships are concerned, that is what Congress needs to figure out on a fiscal year basis, rather than this continuing resolution crap that has been going on for years! Take that up with your representatives and senators. (Right now, as of the end of the month, I won't have a congressman until a special election is held, as he is quitting!) Ad Astra! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Sage, SASS #49891 Life Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 Well said! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sedalia Dave Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 Truth is we have to develop both abilities ASAP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Shoer 27979 Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Here is a pic of their last launch 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.