Search results

https://cosmicchroniclesnews.com/2023/12/04/nasa-researchers-propose-using-spacex-starship-falcon-heavy-for-a-crewed-near-earth-asteroid-exploration-mission/?fbclid=IwAR3MDWouSCSEYkPJbjDRkgg6aW2_BWYKEhfoCB43iZa3Ilu1Ai26bH5kCgM#google_vignette

If that is what will happen then SpaceX needs to actually get to orbit instead of "almost orbit?" Unless NASA will consider it a success in an almost orbit situation. One full orbit around the planet before the landing near Hawaii. The reality is that once you're there it isn't much more to...

Nitty bitty breakdown speculating on what happened:

Launch Date: December 20 Launch Window: TBD Launch site: SLC-4E, Vandenberg Space Force Base, California Core Booster Recovery: ASDS - OCISLY Booster: B10... Fairings: Reused Mass: 22 v2 mini Starlink satellites Orbit: SSO - Polar LEO Yearly Launch Number: 91 - 2 suborbital losses A SpaceX...

Launch Date: December 6 Launch Window: TBD Launch site: SLC-40, Cape Canaveral Space Force Station (CCSFS), Florida Core Booster Recovery: ASDS Booster: B10... Fairings: Reused Mass: 23 Starlink 2.0 mini Satellites Orbit: LEO Yearly Launch Number: 90 orbital, 2 suborbital losses A SpaceX Falcon...

https://techcrunch.com/2023/11/29/spacex-acquires-parachute-company-for-2-2m-because-it-turns-out-space-rated-parachutes-are-very-hard/ https://floridamedianow.com/2023/11/29/pioneer-aerospace-acquired-by-spacex/?fbclid=IwAR0HQjzD6p1xQtTjRA6Tqz72dynZxoc_84SEp3N0hSIKXyWPY2wce__opRA

https://spacenews.com/satellite-imagery-reveals-explosion-at-chinas-jiuquan-spaceport/

I just looked it up and from NASA.com: "There are some parts of the Moon that never see sunlight. These areas are called permanently shadowed regions, and they appear dark because unlike on the Earth, the axis of the Moon is nearly perpendicular to the direction of the Sun's light. The result is...

Realistically, we will soon have the opportunity to put a very big telescope on the dark side of the Moon. It's not that far away and you put a couple satellites in Moon Lagrange points to send the observational data back to Earth. That would be pretty spectacular. Add in a telescope...

Launch Date: December 10 Launch Window: TBD Launch site: SLC-40, Cape Canaveral Space Force Station (CCSFS), Florida Core Booster Recovery: ASDS Booster: B10... Fairings: Reused Mass: 23 Starlink 2.0 mini Satellites Orbit: LEO Yearly Launch Number: 92 orbital, 2 suborbital losses A SpaceX...

Speculative. Possible though.

It will spell "Gateway To Mars."

And success....again.

Launch Date: December 3 Launch Window: 03:00AM EST (12:00AM PST, 08:00 UTC) Launch site: SLC-40, Cape Canaveral Space Force Station (CCSFS), Florida Core Booster Recovery: ASDS - ASOG Booster: B1078.6 Fairings: Reused Mass: 23 Starlink 2.0 mini Satellites Orbit: LEO Yearly Launch Number: 89...

Launch Date: December 1 Launch Window: 10:04AM PST (1:04PM EST, 18:04 UTC) Launch site: SLC-4E, Vandenberg Space Force Base, California Core Booster Recovery: RTLS - LZ-4 Booster: B1061.17 Fairings: Reused Mass: 800 kg (rideshare w/24 additional saatellites) Orbit: SSO - Polar LEO Yearly Launch...

That is the maximum allowed for the Starbase facility in a year. 12 is it, unless they change the rules.

Full burn main engine test for Ariane 6:

Of course. However, this Starship test was never going to reach full orbit. There was a whole thread here discussing this. The FAA probably considers it close enough that they are going to call it that.

I think we're just nitpicking over "need" and "makes sense." The need is connected to Mars colonization which is now on Starship's shoulders. I also think that Elon has realized that numbers are more important than speed. You definitely don't need a quick turnaround time when your vehicle is...

https://spacenews.com/sierra-space-lays-off-165-in-workforce-realignment/ https://spacenews.com/starliner-on-track-for-april-crewed-test-flight/

Off topic here, but the question comes up: What comes next? Starship is definitely the candidate for building a new and much better station. However, let's say they had to do it today. Can F9 build a new ISS and how long would it take? And how much would it cost? The current ISS took a...

SpaceX sure beat the heck out of last years number. Realistically, I think the launch cadence proves that Elon's "24 hour turnaround" between launches was unnecessary for Falcon 9.

You've gotten some good answers already but I'll take a shot at it too. F9 is pressurized internally with helium in COPVs to keep the fuel at the bottom for engine intake. Obviously this system works well as they have never had an engine go out in an F9 from the fuel not reaching the intakes...

Launch Date: December 10 Launch Window: TBD Launch site: LC-39A, Cape Canaveral, Florida Side Booster Recovery: RTLS - LZ-1 and LZ-2 Core Booster Recovery: Expended Boosters: Side Boosters: B1064.4 and B1065.4 Center Core: B1084.1 Mass: 6350 kg ? Orbit: GTO highly elliptical Yearly Launch...

Launch Date: November 27 Launch Window: 11PM EST (8PM PST, 04:00 UTC on the 28th) Launch site: SLC-40, Cape Canaveral Space Force Station (CCSFS), Florida Core Booster Recovery: ASDS Booster: B1062.17 Fairings: Reused Mass: 23 Starlink 2.0 mini Satellites Orbit: LEO Yearly Launch Number: 87...

Booster B1067 will be the sixth booster to 15 launches! Now that is reusability. This also Falcon 9's 275th launch.

Launch Date: November 22 Launch Window: 1:47AM EST (10:47PM PST on the 21st, 06:47 UTC on the 22nd) Launch site: SLC-40, Cape Canaveral Space Force Station (CCSFS), Florida Core Booster Recovery: ASDS Booster: B1067.15 Fairings: Reused Mass: 23 Starlink 2.0 mini Satellites Orbit: LEO Yearly...

Latest update (to Starlink 6-29): Falcon 9 Standard Boosters B1058.18 B1060.17 B1061.16 Vandenberg booster B1062.16 B1063.15 Vandenberg booster B1067.15 B1069.11 B1071.12 Vandenberg Booster B1072.0 New - Being held for Cygnus launch in Dec '23 B1073.11 B1075.7 Vandenberg booster B1076.9 B1077.8...

So it's an "art" piece instead of a photo... :cool:

The SpaceX website has additional information. It says FTS was initiated on Starship when it was going off course. If I interpret this correctly, FTS was not used on the booster. It blew itself up. And did a good job of it too...

Ellie showcases the post launch lack of damage to the launch area.

SpaceX doesn't want to add in all the mechanisms (more mass) needed for "fin deployment." They probably did the math and figured the weight gain versus aero loss was not worth it.

And....Complete success.

Probably delayed - Lots of wind.

Launch Date: 2023 (with luck) Launch Window: TBD Launch site: LC-1 - Starbase, Boca Chica Beach, Texas Core Booster Recovery: Expended in Gulf with a landing burn Starship Recovery: Water landing near Hawaii Booster: Super Heavy Booster 10 Starship: Starship 26 Mass: No mass simulator mentioned...

Breakdown of events from RGV aerial:

So on reflection, I think my WAG on post 321 is pretty accurate. Scott Manley added some more details as to why some engines didn't relight properly. Slowing down the stream as he did showcased the possible reason. Plumbing stress makes a lot of sense. We didn't see any eruptions or events...

The booster seemed to do everything correct through staging. My impression is that on relight for the boostback burn maybe one or two engines didn't relight properly. That would put it off nominal course, which would activate FTS for safety reasons. There was a visual event on Starship at...

John Insprucker believed ATS was initiated. There was some visual events prior to loss of the vehicle. It hit 24,124 km per hour and 148 km in altitude. A huge success. Overall about a 75% full success.

Booster success past hot staging! A RUD for some reason just past boostback burn. It may have been an intentional destruction if it was even slightly off course. Loss of Second stage after a long burn.

John Insprucker!!

First post is accurate with everything we know. 7:00am CST, 9:00am EST, 5:00am PST (20 minute window)

It is post #217.