Fire at SpaceX Starship facility in Cocoa causes damages to equipment
https://ift.tt/2YGyKtJ

Submitted July 09, 2019 at 01:17AM by rustybeancake
via reddit https://ift.tt/2JtTaQ6

<b>Should SpaceX use LC39-A for Starship or build a new launch site</b>
Yesterday Elon Musk said they will <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1148265981275336707">announce details for constructing Starship at the Cape</a>, in response to a question about launch centres. It seems likely Elon has jumped the gun a little by building Starship MK.2 at Coastal Steel in Cocoa and is now looking to move construction as close as possible to the prospective launch site, similar to the way they work at Boca Chica Texas. However, this raises the interesting question: should Starship operate from LC39-A or an entirely new flight centre yet to be built? Let’s examine the suitability of using either option for operating Starship.<strong>LC39-A Suitability</strong>LC39-A is a ready built launch centre, which was originally designed for the Nova rocket, the launch vehicle NASA intended to use for Mars flights.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nova_(rocket)#Mars_rockets">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nova_(rocket)#Mars_rockets</a>In other words, the launch centre is massively overengineered and appears a perfect fit for full stack Starship, also intended for Mars. However, it has since undergone numerous modifications which could affect its suitability: -One of the flame trenches has been infilled and concreted over (reducing overall volume of exhaust it can handle) which they now use as loading ramp for raising the TEL (Transporter Erector Launcher) to the launch pad.For operational reasons, the SpaceX HIF (Horizontal Integration Facility) is situated close to the launch pad, hence would risk damage if a large and powerful rocket such as Starship were operated relatively close by (220+ Db volume is very loud and disruptive).LC39-A is currently optimized for Falcon Heavy and Commercial Crew launches, which could be disrupted by the substantial work required to adapt it for Starship use. For instance, Falcon 9 and Heavy are both kerosene fuelled rockets where Starship relies on liquid methane, so a lot of additional tankage and plumbing would need to be installed.Of course, SpaceX could re-excavate the flame trench and move the HIF to a safe distance, construct a new TEL loading ramp and perform construction work around their busy launch schedule. To its advantage, there appears plenty of space available, and any new HIF could be built of sufficient size to accommodate multiple Starship rockets.<strong>New Launch Site Suitability</strong>Building a new launch site would be time consuming and expensive, Starship is the most powerful rocket ever built and requires a lot of pampering. However, building from scratch should offer a number of opportunities: -Greenfield sites are generally preferred for large construction projects because they don’t require old foundations to be excavated and any chance of disrupting buried utilities lines (electricity, water, drainage) is much reduced.Construction work can proceed continuously and not interrupt existing users.The design of the launch site will likely be more efficient and not have to work around legacy installations.New site can be situated close to the Starship construction facility, which could double as a hangar.Operating Starship from its own facility should also minimize any disruption cause by a mishap during launch and landing operations. Normally launch centres are isolated from one another for good reason, rocketry is still a developing art and considering what’s at stake (i.e. manned launches from LC39-A) it seems wise to exercise a little caution.<strong>Conclusion</strong>Overall then considering the disruption to LC39-A and the possibilities for improvements offered by a new design launch centre, we shouldn’t be surprised if SpaceX announce an entirely new approach for Starship operations at the Cape. LC39-A is a historic launch site, perhaps it is best to preserve that heritage and construct a new “Starship Operations Centre” at some new location (e.g. the original site for…

Teslarati: SpaceX's attempts to buy bigger Falcon fairings foiled by contractor's ULA relations
https://ift.tt/2xIBOcE

Submitted July 10, 2019 at 04:10PM by CardBoardBoxProcessr
via reddit https://ift.tt/2JpW7Cm

July 2019 META Thread - New mods, new bots, transparency report, rules discussions
Welcome to another r/SpaceX META thread where we talk about how the sub is running, stuff going on behind the scenes and everyone can give input on things they think are good, bad or anything in between.Our last metathread took forever to write up and it was too long for most people to read so this time we're going to try a little bit different format, and a good bit less formal.Basically, we're leaving the top as a stub and writing up a handful of topics as top level comments, and invite you to reply to those comments. And of course, anyone can write their own top level comments, bringing up their own comments/topics, the mod team is just getting the ball rolling with a few topics.As usual, you can ask or say anything in here freely. We've so far never had to remove a comment from a meta thread (only bigotry and spam is off limits)Direct topic links for the lazy:New Mods! Subreddit StatsReview of our last META threadTransparency reportLooking for VolunteersMachine Learning AutomodTeslarati, Payloads posts, Paywalls

Submitted July 11, 2019 at 06:53AM by Ambiwlans
via reddit https://ift.tt/2G5NsCY

NSF on Twitter: “SN6 Raptor completed its McGregor testing yesterday and headed off in the RaptorVan. Will be at Boca Chica and set to be installed on Starhopper for a Static Fire test and Hop (probably after the weekend).”
https://twitter.com/nasaspaceflight/status/1149310601505771521?s=21

Submitted July 11, 2019 at 04:54PM by rustybeancake
via reddit https://ift.tt/2Y04htk

Elon: "Raptor engine mounted on Starhopper. Aiming for hover test Tues."
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1149548807765389313

Submitted July 12, 2019 at 07:23AM by spacegurl07
via reddit https://ift.tt/2xLnxw6

Elon on Starship payload capacity: "100mT to 125mT for true useful load to useful orbit (eg Starlink mission), including propellant reserves. 150mT for reference payload compared to other rockets. This is in fully reusable config. About double in fully expendable config, which is hopefully never."
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1149571338748616704

Submitted July 12, 2019 at 08:53AM by Keavon
via reddit https://ift.tt/32kgSqx

ULA CEO Tory Bruno clarifies RUAG and SpaceX fairing situation
https://ift.tt/2JCRNPi

Submitted July 12, 2019 at 12:52PM by thomastaitai
via reddit https://ift.tt/2GaNpGa

<b>Starship is the Beginning</b>
Recently we received a welcome preview of Starship’s performance figures which are expected to be revealed later this month. The payload figures are huge, <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1149571338748616704">150 mt to LEO</a> or <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1149582084031184897">40 mt to GTO</a>, all without refueling and fully reusable. However, this raises one possible criticism that Starship might only have a limited role, because there are little to no payloads envisioned that could require this kind of launch muscle. No doubt, SpaceX will need all that payload capacity for Moon and Mars flights but they also intend to use Starship as their workhorse launch vehicle for all other payloads; whether commercial, civil or military.Unfortunately, these black and white figures don’t evoke the full ‘colourama’ of capabilities made possible by Starship. So let’s dive into the ocean of potential that will spring from this higher magnitude launch capacity. <strong>Satellite Maintenance and Discipline</strong>It’s not uncommon for satellites to fail prematurely, for relatively simple reasons, which could easily be rectified if access were possible. Similarly, some satellites could continue in useful service long after their propellant is exhausted, if they were able to be refueled in situ. Gwynne Shotwell revealed at her <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWPaopcU_hE&feature=youtu.be&t=431">Madrid conference</a>: -“Let’s say you have a satellite and you launch and something goes wrong… BFR has a capability to open its payload bay, either bring the satellite back in, close it, pressurize it, work on it and redeploy it. If you want to go see how your satellite is doing and if you’re getting interference in the GEO belt, maybe you want to go up there and take a look at your neighbors, seeing if they’re cheating or not, BFR will basically allow people to work and live in space and deploy technology that has not been able to be deployed.”This capability to capture, refurbish, refuel and then redeploy satellites is a game changer. This would be of particular interest to the military, who have a huge investment in GEO (some military sats cost more than a billion and viewed as indispensable). No doubt the military would love to cruise the GEO belt and ‘discipline’ <a href="https://spacenews.com/russian-satellite-maneuvers-silence-worry-intelsat/">illegal sig-int satellites</a> used to tap into their classified communications, given the opportunity.A mysterious Russian military satellite parked itself between two Intelsat satellites in geosynchronous orbit for five months this year, alarming company executives and leading to classified meetings among U.S. government officials.The Russian satellite, alternatively known as Luch or Olymp, launched in September 2014 and seven months later moved to a position directly between the Intelsat 7 and Intelsat 901 satellites, which are located within half a degree of one another 36,000 kilometers above the equator. At times, the Russian satellite maneuvered to about 10 kilometers of the Intelsat space vehicles, sources said, a distance so close that company leaders believed their satellites could be at risk. <strong>TOR</strong><a href="https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/07/buzz-aldrin-is-looking-forward-not-back-and-he-has-a-plan-to-bring-nasa-along/">Buzz Aldrin recently proposed</a> the best place to launch future space missions is from Low Earth Orbit. Very significant payloads and spacecraft could be assembled in LEO, assuming some facility to refuel is available before departure. Starship gives us the ability to create a spaceport at LEO, complete with construction, servicing and refueling capabilities. Such a facility would be international and inclusive, serving everything from Starship class vehicles down to the smallest cube-sats. Arguably such a facility would be crucial to our space endeavors as they progressively increase in…

Raptor SN6 TVC Checks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pD5CZZfnYk

Submitted July 13, 2019 at 07:30PM by 675longtail
via reddit https://ift.tt/2lePn0x

Bridenstine on Twitter: “[After Crew Dragon mishap] Communication with NASA was good. Communication with the public (taxpayers) was not. Media was frustrated. NASA and SpaceX have agreed to improve the public communication after such events. Other contractors have done the same.”
https://twitter.com/jimbridenstine/status/1150123569994698753?s=21

Submitted July 13, 2019 at 10:16PM by rustybeancake
via reddit https://ift.tt/2Sc6BZ0

[Official] Update on the in-flight about static fire anomaly investigation
https://ift.tt/2k5gJpA

Submitted July 15, 2019 at 09:32PM by RootDeliver
via reddit https://ift.tt/32pQbAN

<b>CRS-18 Launch Viewing Thread</b>
<a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/cdnrym/crs18_launch_viewing_thread/#siteTable_t3_cdnrym">-> Jump to Comments <-<strong>This thread is for discussing considerations related to watching this specific launch in person. Please see the CRS-18 Launch Campaign Thread for news and technical questions related to the launch campaign itself, and please check the Watching a Launch page in the FAQ for detailed answers to many general launch viewing queries, as well as check this post for answers to those specifically related to this launch. Thanks!</strong>Where can I watch this launch?Check out the Watching a Launch page on this sub's FAQ, which gives a detailed breakdown of every viewing site as well as a lot of other information, and <a href="http://www.launchphotography.com/Delta_4_Atlas_5_Falcon_9_Launch_Viewing.html">Ben Cooper's authoritative page on launch viewing.In summary, KSCVC is confirmed to be offering tickets; the LC-39 Gantry will get you closest to the launch with a fantastic view, though it is moderately expensive and space is very limited. The Saturn V Center ("Feel the Heat") is the next best choice for launch and may or may not require dedicated tickets. However, view of landing from both locations is obscured. For a more optimal view of the spectacular RTLS landing, Jetty Park in Port Canaveral, the USAF viewing stands at the end of Rt. 401, KARS Park and Rt. 528 will get you much closer and with better visibility, while being modestly further for launch than the aforementioned locations with varying degrees of an obstructed view.Max Brewer and other Titusville locations are not generally recommended, as they are further for both launch and landing than Port Canaveral. Similarly, Playalinda beach is a lower-cost option to get physically close to launch, but its view of LC-40 is partially obstructed and it is even worse for landing than the KSCVC locations. Likewise, the KSC Visitor's Center ("Feel the Fun") is further away, has an obstructed view of both and requires KSC admission, so there's no real reason to choose it over the Port Canaveral locations that are nearly as good for launch and far better for landing.For an optimal view of the landing and an unobstructed view of the launch, we are again running our boat viewing party before, during and possibly after launch from both our location offshore of the Cape, and on the Banana River. This gives you a completely unobstructed view of both launch and landing and get you closer than any other publicly-accessible location to the spectacular RTLS landing. A <a href="https://www.star-fleet.tours/">group of r/SpaceX members (including myself, <a href="/u/CAM-Gerlach">u/CAM-Gerlach , in the interests of full disclosure), have again stepped up and will be hosting these, as well as pre-launch tours of the rocket on the pad and historic KSC sites led by notable community members.Mission-Specific Viewing FAQWill [X] be open for this launch?Playalinda, Jetty Park, Rt. 528 and the USAF viewing stands at the end of Rt. 401 should all be open, and the KSC Visitor Complex and Star Fleet Tours will be offering tickets. However, Rt. 401 itself appears to be permanently closed for parking.I want the best possible view of the launch itself. Where should I go?The LC-39 gantry is the best option if you can get the tickets and an incredible experience, and the Saturn V Center is second best. Playalinda beach is the closest low-cost option by a considerable margin, but a clearer view may be had from KARS park, the boats or other locations despite being much further away. The Port Canaveral locations are not so good for launch, but are far better for landing.I want the closest possible view of this launch's RTLS landing. What's my best option?The Star Fleet boat watch party has the closest and clearest view (N.B. I, <a href="/u/CAM-Gerlach">u/CAM-Gerlach , am one of the organizers), assuming you can get tickets, and also offers a clear…

Crew flight of Dragon 2 possible this year.
"We fly when we're ready." -Hans. Not comment on schedule.Chris G - NSFKathy from NASA not ruling out DM-2 happening this year, but lots to get through on the milestone list aside from this Crew Dragon SuperDraco thruster issue.Chris G - NSFHans optimistic in possibility of flying DM-2 this year, but also acknowledges that it's difficult.Chris G - NSFKoenigsmann says the resolution of this won't exactly be "minor," but that "I feel like we can do this pretty much in parallel while we are working other issues." Still have a lot of issues to work before the first crewed flight.Eric BergerBill Harwood asks if Demo-2 has a chance of flying this year. Kathy Lueders of NASA says "there's always a chance." As I noted recently, the goal is to complete the in-flight abort test for Dragon before the end of 2019, with a crew mission early in 2020.Eric BergerNASA’s Kathy Lueders: “There’s always a chance we’re going to fly a crew on a #SpaceX vehicle this year, but we’re still paying very close attention.” Still a lot more testing to be done, and not just related to the explosion (parachutes).Emre Kelly

Submitted July 15, 2019 at 10:12PM by LeJules
via reddit https://ift.tt/2JCv19W

SpaceX Ready to Resume Starhopper Testing with Static Fire and Hop
https://ift.tt/2Lpamti

Submitted July 16, 2019 at 03:13AM by TGMetsFan98
via reddit https://ift.tt/2k14rPk

Scott Manley breaks down the anomaly report that destroyed the Dragon Capsule a couple months ago
https://youtu.be/6P063KnI5NI

Submitted July 16, 2019 at 06:09PM by Bulevine
via reddit https://ift.tt/2k4Xk8A

​​​​Apollo 11 50th anniversary
Apollo 11 was the spaceflight that first landed humans on the Moon. Commander Neil Armstrong and lunar module pilot Buzz Aldrin, both American, landed the Apollo Lunar Module Eagle on July 20, 1969, at 20:17 UTC - Wikipedia

To celebrate, we would like to share the 2019 Apollo 11 documentary:
From director Todd Douglas Miller (Dinosaur 13) comes a cinematic event fifty years in the making. Crafted from a newly discovered trove of 65mm footage, and more than 11,000 hours of uncatalogued audio recordings, Apollo 11 takes us straight to the heart of NASA’s most celebrated mission—the one that first put men on the moon, and forever made Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin into household names. Immersed in the perspectives of the astronauts, the team in Mission Control, and the millions of spectators on the ground, we vividly experience those momentous days and hours in 1969 when humankind took a giant leap into the future.

Click here to watch it now on DR Documentaries
Watch the trailer here

Share this with your friends and family!

Source
@DRDocumentaries
@EverythingScience

SpaceX StarHopper Static Fire (LIVE 1.5 miles away)
https://youtu.be/ACYW4RDCS90?t=2834

Submitted July 17, 2019 at 06:02AM by corourke
via reddit https://ift.tt/2LlG0YZ

Um, did no one HAZOP the thruster system?
ChemE here, 20 yrs in mostly semiconductor, UHP gases and chems like elemental fluorine, TCS, even ClF3, and I am bewildered... are we getting information filtered through SocMed interns, or actually from engineers? Either the press release was written by people that don't understand system design, or the system was designed by people that don't understand design... I wouldn't be so frustrated but I've been a HUGE SpaceX fan and the 'investigation results' just aren't making sense .So what's my problem? For starters, you never depend on a check valve to be a positive shutoff. Never. At least, not any check valves I've ever been able to find/spec/use/hear about. Normally, if you want positive isolation, you install an isolation valve. The check valve stops a reverse flow (mostly), but is never a guarantee for 100.0000%. All the diagrams on this accident I've been able to find show it be used in this incorrect way, and I can not understand how no one raised their hand in the HAZOP (Hazard and Operability Study, a type of Process Hazard Analysis) and said "what if the oxidizer leaks past the check valve?" I've heard or said that literally dozens and dozens of times in my career. It's a tried and true standard question.And then we get to the talk about surprise with titanium and oxidizers having an issue. Really? Powerful oxidizers moving at speed in most metals, including Ti, are well known to be candidates for fires, since the 60s? 50s? That's why you design systems with velocity limits, and passivate the heck out of them prior to operation.Which makes me wonder, has anyone talked about flaking of the passivation layer, possibly from an impact, as the ignition source in that check valve? Small flakes at speed can impact (like on a check valve disk, or better yet, the soft seal) and create the point heat source necessary to start the larger fire. And they DID say there was a fire in the check valve... We always trained the heck out of our operators about the risk of impacts to piping, and the lengthy clean and re-passivation steps necessary to recover from it before placing the system back in service. Makes my stomach churn a little to think this might've been the result of someone under a schedule not admitting to an impact, or someone signing off on skipping a repassivation. Or there were contaminants in the piping upstream of the check valve from poor cleaning after manufacture that got swept up by the NTO. Whatever it was that "investigation result" is skipping over some key details.And finally there's the "we've fixed it by adding a rupture disk" spiel. Huh? You install an RD to protect against over pressure, nothing to do with flow. I've used them here and there (bulk silane trailer, etc) with always great success, so sure I like'em in their place, but where EXACTLY in this system does an RD stop the NTO from backflowing into the Helium pressurization system? Are they installing them as "one-time valves" of some type? I doubt it, the particle and debris generation would be <ahem> detrimental downstream.So at the end of the day I'm sure there's a lot we aren't hearing, and never will, and the engineer in me just wishes they would share honest results so those of us who do our best to keep others safe could learn and incorporate the lessons as well.And if I can run a HAZOP on the next system for you I'll do it for free, just let me tour a site, give me a hat, and please, please be safe up there.

Submitted July 17, 2019 at 08:32AM by davedigerati
via reddit https://ift.tt/2M1rqp3