Używasz przestarzałej przeglądarki. Może ona nieprawidłowo wyświetlać tę lub inne strony. Powinieneś zaktualizować przeglądarkę lub użyć alternatywnej przeglądarki.
The Space Thread - Launches, Events, Live Streams, Governments, Corporations, drama in Spaaaaaaaaaaaace
I'm sure we'll know more in the morning, but the pad looks wrecked. F3UjAywZ8oqsFlvn.mp4
I bet Boeing is breathing a sigh of relief today at no longer being the biggest fuckup in recent memory.
In fairness, we've yet to see the final design for crew-launched starship. The starship design that is intended to be used for the lunar landings will fly out to the moon uncrewed and rendezvous with Orion. Crew will transfer, land on the moon, do their thing, and return to Orion for the trip home, while starship will be left in orbit.
None of which are mission failure issues though. Starship's issues are based around its recovery system and the fact that some engines give out in flight after being reused. The system itself works fine functionally as a ground to orbit platform. Flight 13 will be the real test of this though, since this is the one where they are actually going to attempt an orbit with the full stack.
To be fair to Bezos and Blue Origin though, SpaceX had quite a few spectacular kabooms with its systems too. Rockets blowing up on the pad is part of the process at this point. It's happened with virtually all platforms in their development stage.
So Grok is saying this was somewhere around 3kt yield. I believe each plane hitting the WTC was around .6kt of yield each.
I demand some 150kt-1megaton full 4k video of something this scale in the pacific. The last ones were the French tests and were impressive. Just imagine that even a 'small' nuke like Hiroshima/Trinity was 5-8x this.
This has some incredibly close footage from one of the last airbursts ever. 900kt. The burning and then the blast hitting the dummy is not often seen in tests
Obviously a pretty bad day down at the Cape last night and lots to talk about. I've estimated the blast yield at somewhere around 0.9-1.2 kt but more official sources are pinning it at 1.4 to 2.2 kt. Right up there with the Halifax explosion. Root cause sounds like firing an unhappy engine.
Big thing is that this messes with all of the methane/LOX blast yield analysis that's been done over the last few years. It may be slightly higher than even the upper end of those estimates, which means that the various Starship pads on the Cape have to deal with possibly interfering with other spaceflight activities and things like the LC-39A pad might have to be scrapped. Too early to tell that though.
Damage was pretty severe. Nitrogen feed system for the whole Cape bled out (I believe it was stopped) and started threatening activities at ULA and SpaceX's pads. Obviously LC-36 is toast and is facing a 12-18 month rebuild process up to recertification. And the whole Cape lost power for an extended period of time, seems to be restored as of this morning.
Now we have a problem with Artemis. Starship is far from ready to act as a lander, which makes its role as the Artemis III docking target dubious. Obviously Blue Moon is completely frozen at this point, and that applies to Mk2. Realistically we now do not have an HLS lander from either provider available by the end of the decade. Congress is still trying to process this and Isaacman's commentary is not exactly inspiring.
Only way I see a lander manifesting by 2029 is if NASA does an about face on HLS commitments and brings EUS back from being on ice. Mk2 launched on SLS B1B, with crew going up on the last B1, is a possibility. Or NASA commits to a kitbash lander with someone like ULA managing integration (this has some precedent, in 2009 they proposed a Centaur derived lander adjacent to Constellation).
The whole commercial experiment has gone up in a fireball and we are without any landers and without a clear path ahead. A lot of SpaceX's screwups with Starship seem to have been tolerated solely because a second provider existed. Now that's off the table until 2030 or later. No clue if Isaacman is capable of responding to this in the way that he needs to.
@Deep Nozzle Throat Commercial isn't going to be any better or worse i think, but overall you're right. I've always bitched that the worst part of Atermis overall is the HLS setup. You just can't have Starship suddenly have some HLS out of the blue that'll be a mini starship and still need a bunch of refills in a few years.
The best bet was the Dynetics lander. Jared did good on Art 2, but he inherited it. They need to get off their assess quick and move now. BO now is virtually fucked for awhile. SLS is solid. It's the damn landers that are a mess.
Damage was pretty severe. Nitrogen feed system for the whole Cape bled out (I believe it was stopped) and started threatening activities at ULA and SpaceX's pads.
@Deep Nozzle Throat Commercial isn't going to be any better or worse i think, but overall you're right. I've always bitched that the worst part of Atermis overall is the HLS setup. You just can't have Starship suddenly have some HLS out of the blue that'll be a mini starship and still need a bunch of refills in a few years.
The best bet was the Dynetics lander. Jared did good on Art 2, but he inherited it. They need to get off their assess quick and move now. BO now is virtually fucked for awhile. SLS is solid. It's the damn landers that are a mess.
Now we have a problem with Artemis. Starship is far from ready to act as a lander, which makes its role as the Artemis III docking target dubious. Obviously Blue Moon is completely frozen at this point, and that applies to Mk2. Realistically we now do not have an HLS lander from either provider available by the end of the decade. Congress is still trying to process this and Isaacman's commentary is not exactly inspiring.
SpaceX has been slow rolling Starship and been doing some pretty safe tests of it. Flight 12 was a very promising proof of concept though, as it performed just like Flight 11 did for landing maneuvers. Sure the booster stage failed on landing, but its the booster stage. Landing that is bonus points, not the ball game.
Trump WANTS the Artemis program to move forward. That is why we sent a manned mission on the second flight of the SLS stack. I do not see the destruction of the cape Canaveral pad deferring the launch or Artemis III one bit. If anything, SpaceX now has the opportunity to be "the guys" for the Artemis III mission. which is to be an in orbit fuel a supply transfer.
The Canaveral pad should be fixed up by the end of the year. The SLS stack has also begun delivery and assembly for Artemis III. Bezos fucking shit up just means Bezos wont get to fly for the next big mission, which is to orbit intercept the Orion mission module with a commercial supply transport in orbit.
spaceX has an opportunity for all the marbles, because if the Artemis III mission works with SpaceX support, then Starship is going to be the supply truck for Artemis IV, which is "the mission" all of us here are praying for. Manned Lunar landing.
Low. If anything this puts them from presumptive-first-to-orbit with a moon lander to I'd say even money. Neither looks great right now, but if SpaceX does their patented 'suddenly the thing stops blowing up' quickly they could pull ahead.
A big part of the issue with SpaceX is that no one knows for sure what's the result of a test-to-failure and what's just something going wrong. For all we know, the R-Vac engine that failed in the last flight was intentionally destroyed or shut down in order to test engine-out compensation. Since SpaceX is a private company, they don't actually suffer any consequences from people thinking that an intentional test-to-failure was actually a RUD. The problem BO has is that they don't want people to see things go wrong and they want everything to look as perfect as possible. Unfortunately for them, NSF seems to have the money to put cameras everywhere and have people staying in motels near every rocket pad and that's kind of a result of SpaceX blowing so much stuff up - and letting people film it - that there's a profitable rocket filming industry that watches everyone's rocket tests with expensive cameras.
A big part of the issue with SpaceX is that no one knows for sure what's the result of a test-to-failure and what's just something going wrong. For all we know, the R-Vac engine that failed in the last flight was intentionally destroyed or shut down in order to test engine-out compensation. Since SpaceX is a private company, they don't actually suffer any consequences from people thinking that an intentional test-to-failure was actually a RUD. The problem BO has is that they don't want people to see things go wrong and they want everything to look as perfect as possible. Unfortunately for them, NSF seems to have the money to put cameras everywhere and have people staying in motels near every rocket pad and that's kind of a result of SpaceX blowing so much stuff up - and letting people film it - that there's a profitable rocket filming industry that watches everyone's rocket tests with expensive cameras.
Which is what is going to make Flight 13 the big one for SpaceX Artemis needs a partner to take to the dance, and with both New Glenn and Starliner fucking up, Starship may be "the guy" that gets to escort the queen to the stage. Provided it doesnt trip on its shoelaces too.
Which is what is going to make Flight 13 the big one for SpaceX Artemis needs a partner to take to the dance, and with both New Glenn and Starliner fucking up, Starship may be "the guy" that gets to escort the queen to the stage. Provided it doesnt trip on its shoelaces too.
Jared needs to come out and say something quick. The whole point of the Gateway was for this back and forth thing, and now it's supposed to be a base. I used to think Gateway was a great idea. Now it seems to be spare parts for this nuclear propulsion get up which is fine, but wtf is going on with the moon already.
The only really good vehicles so far are Orion and SLS. All the rest is a mess. I can't believe Starliner is even a thing at all, talk about a jobs program for nothing.
Which is what is going to make Flight 13 the big one for SpaceX Artemis needs a partner to take to the dance, and with both New Glenn and Starliner fucking up, Starship may be "the guy" that gets to escort the queen to the stage. Provided it doesnt trip on its shoelaces too.
For sure 13 will be a proof test again. They won't go orbital without a full back burn proof. I'm pretty sure 13 will be good. The landing on 12 was incredible but it wasn't perfect. Hopefully 14 will be a few orbits and return to wherevever, probably again in the Indian sea. I have my hopes that 15 will be the full orbit and returns for both.
That's right, no abort possible on Starship whatsoever. Tim Dodd during his 'Dear Moon' thing was making it clear he'd probably die but worth the risk.
That's why I liked Gateway. SLS Orion up, and landing at end. Starship/whatever BO/HLS they choose only moon to landing there.
Really when you think about it, only a very few manned missions ever aborted. A few Soviet ones and a more recent Russian one. Shuttle never really had any abort moreso than Starship does and that was a meat grinder in the end.
That's right, no abort possible on Starship whatsoever. Tim Dodd during his 'Dear Moon' thing was making it clear he'd probably die but worth the risk.
That's why I liked Gateway. SLS Orion up, and landing at end. Starship/whatever BO/HLS they choose only moon to landing there.
Really when you think about it, only a very few manned missions ever aborted. A few Soviet ones and a more recent Russian one. Shuttle never really had any abort moreso than Starship does and that was a meat grinder in the end.
It's less of a problem when you consider that the astronauts will be taking SLS, not HLS into orbit. That still leaves the lunar descent and ascent scenarios though
