Science implications of Starship (and Starlink) in space and on Earth

[e-FTW]

This is another great, long piece by Casey, but well worth the read.

We already knew that launch costs was not the major line item in a science mission (see James Webb, going on $9bn). What I failed to realize fully until now is how the removal of size, mass and launch cadence constraints that Starship enables is what will bring down the costs of the instruments. More off-the-shelf parts, less over-engineered gizmos, produced in an assembly-line and launched regularly changes the cost dynamic entirely.

The kicker is the part about Starlink at the end, where he shows how we could fully realize the potential of Starlink for science.

(Since this covers Starship, Starlink, NASA contracts, the entire industry, etc, I figured it can be its own thread)

Science upside for Starship

This blog is a direct follow up of Starship Is Still Not Understood, and is part of the series on popular misconceptions in space journalism. Now available in audio form. I think it is relatively s…

caseyhandmer.wordpress.com

 

[adiggs]

Wow. Uhm ... wow.

 

[dazedNconfuzed]

That’s essentially what Starlink is demonstrating: with launch costs so low, the imperative to get everything perfectly right the first time is obviated.

 

[Grendal]

Nice link.

 

[scaesare]

(Resurrecting the 2 yr old thread, as it seemed the apropos place for this)

Interesting Ars article on Astronomers say[ing] new telescopes should take advantage of “Starship paradigm”

Webb had to fit within it's 6m diameter mirror within existing launcher capacity, and look at the incredible imagery it's returned... imagine what a telescope launched on Starship with a 10-12m (>= 3x the surface area) mirror could do...

 

[JB47394]

imagine what a telescope launched on Starship with a 10-12m (>= 3x the surface area) mirror could do...

I'm not sure we can really grasp what will be possible, especially if we throw in a man-rated Starship. Imagine structures being built in LEO from parts that can be packed into multiple 9x18m cargo bays and then pushed to where they are going to be used. What would be the limit on such a telescope?

Then there's the question of standardization, leading to mass production. We need to end the era of bespoke spacecraft. Habitation modules, storage tanks, frameworks, manipulator arms, robots, etc. They should all be standardized so people can start cranking them out in volume. We can loft the mass, so let's start manufacturing it.

 

[scaesare]

I'm not sure we can really grasp what will be possible, especially if we throw in a man-rated Starship. Imagine structures being built in LEO from parts that can be packed into multiple 9x18m cargo bays and then pushed to where they are going to be used. What would be the limit on such a telescope?

Then there's the question of standardization, leading to mass production. We need to end the era of bespoke spacecraft. Habitation modules, storage tanks, frameworks, manipulator arms, robots, etc. They should all be standardized so people can start cranking them out in volume. We can loft the mass, so let's start manufacturing it.

Agreed.

And if Starship's launch cadence is anything like Elon wants, standardization of those modules will be required just to be able to build 'em fast enough to keep up...