First details of starship's first orbital test flight:
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
First details of starship's first orbital test flight!
- Thread starter diplomat33
- Start date
I read it as booster is recovered by drone ship: it says LAND and if you look at the trajectory is certainly going for a specific target just off-shore; if it would just splashdown, further off coast I'd guess would be safer... Just my reading, I'd guess we'll learn more details sooner than later,
"achieve orbit" means reaching a certain altitude and velocity, where if you turned off the thrust, the object would continue in an uniform circular motion around the Earth. So the starship will reach that altitude and orbital speed where it could continue in a uniform circular motion around the Earth if SpaceX wanted to. But since it is a test, they will have Starship deorbit and come back down before going all the way around the Earth.
You know you have achieved orbit, when your orbital speed satisfies the orbital velocity formula:
Objects that travel in uniform circular motion around the Earth are said to be "in orbit". The velocity of this orbit depends on the distance from the object to the center of the Earth. The velocity has to be just right, so that the distance to the center of the Earth is always the same.
Ben W
Chess Grandmaster (Supervised)
The question is whether the flight will be on a ballistic trajectory (perigee in the atmosphere), or whether it will be in a true orbit and have to do a deorbit burn. Could a purely ballistic approach be precise enough to control the exact reentry+splashdown point, at such a shallow angle?
Yeah, I don't like this definition.
I reckon if they genuinely want to display "achieving orbit" then they should let the vehicle do a lap-and-a-half and THEN (powered) de-orbit to Hawaii.
I would call that achieving orbit.
Achieving orbital velocity is NOT the same thing
(This is a facetious post- they can do what they like! I just feel happier that an UNpowered lap is really orbiting
)
Yeah, I don't like this definition.
I reckon if they genuinely want to display "achieving orbit" then they should let the vehicle do a lap-and-a-half and THEN (powered) de-orbit to Hawaii.
I would call that achieving orbit.
Achieving orbital velocity is NOT the same thing
(This is a facetious post- they can do what they like! I just feel happier that an UNpowered lap is really orbiting
I agree. An unpowered lap or two around the Earth would not be necessary for the purpose of the test but it would certainly be more satisfying IMO.
Has anyone thought of a plausible reason why SpaceX would want to deorbit before at least one full orbit? Wouldn't the complexity and risks all be in achieving orbit and then reentry and landing/splashdown?
Probably because that would require doing a full deorbit burn which is not part of what they are trying to test. Right now, they are just testing reaching orbital speed. SpaceX is following an incremental testing schedule.
This is a test flight, they want to be sure that stage comes down with or without de-orbit burn. It will have orbital velocity but trajectory cuts with the Earth near Kauai. SS would makes that (stray) Chinese stage look quite small...
Pretty pedantic on this one, but the radius/altitude of an object does not need to remain constant (= circular) in order to be “in orbit”. In context this includes many objects injected into low earth orbit (and, likely Starship), where the drop off can be a stable elliptical geometry.
Ben W
Chess Grandmaster (Supervised)
I’d call it close enough to orbit for all practical purposes.
Similar threads
- Article
