Maybe the horizontal link connected to the mid strut joint moves in/out. Otherwise, they look rigid.
(They also look splayed, maybe using differential thrust instead of gimbaling? I prefer in/out)
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Maybe the horizontal link connected to the mid strut joint moves in/out. Otherwise, they look rigid.
(They also look splayed, maybe using differential thrust instead of gimbaling? I prefer in/out)
Presumably the structure ~below the propellant tank is the white assembly stand we see in other photos? It would otherwise be odd to have flight structure extend down to the exit plane(ish) of the nozzles.
Also interesting to note the amount of imperfections on the nozzles. Traditionally that's a super no-no because it can create hotspots that can burn through. I'm sure the light is making some of the imperfections seem much worse than they are and I'm sure the total load expected on these nozzles enables looser quality control, and we've seen time and again that SpaceX bucks traditional in favor of first principals, but...still...
Also interesting to note the amount of imperfections on the nozzles. Traditionally that's a super no-no because it can create hotspots that can burn through. I'm sure the light is making some of the imperfections seem much worse than they are and I'm sure the total load expected on these nozzles enables looser quality control, and we've seen time and again that SpaceX bucks traditional in favor of first principals, but...still...
Presumably the structure ~below the propellant tank is the white assembly stand we see in other photos? It would otherwise be odd to have flight structure extend down to the exit plane(ish) of the nozzles.
Also interesting to note the amount of imperfections on the nozzles. Traditionally that's a super no-no because it can create hotspots that can burn through. I'm sure the light is making some of the imperfections seem much worse than they are and I'm sure the total load expected on these nozzles enables looser quality control, and we've seen time and again that SpaceX bucks traditional in favor of first principals, but...still...
Good call on the assembly stand, I was thinking that level of grid work and engine coverage didn't seem right.
It is imperfections or just rubbed off deposits from previous testing?
This is probably diving down the rabbit hole of subjective, but I'd consider the latter as a subset of the former. No doubt SpaceX has criteria for acceptable 'non perfect material finish', and one has to assume that because those nozzles are bolted to The Thing, anything some idiot on the internet identifies as an imperfection has already passed SpaceX's criteria.
The features that stand out the most to me are the lighter features that almost seem like someone took a whizzer wheel to the bell, and what appears to be a ring of not-perfectly-ground welds around the inside of the bell, maybe 8-10" from the lip.
Also kinda funny to see all the fingerprints around the inside lip of the nozzles. Human oils are so gross.
It is a big rocket. But yeah, was also impressed by the clearance down the middle in the bottom up view.
BTW folks, let us stay on-topic: am thinking we should move the overall Starship chat to: Falcon Super Heavy/Starship - General Development Discussion
Oh wait...this is Starship, with 4 controllable fins; maybe they don’t have to gimbal. I was looking at those photos with an F9 perspective.
pdx_m3s
Active Member
The engines need to be nearly fully enclosed, as they are, due to the fact that this is a fully reusable vehicle that will be smacking the atmosphere at a near 90 degree angle of attack. Also, remember Starship will ultimately have 3 vacuum raptors which will extend WAY below the stainless structure. When entering the atmosphere, you want all the plumbing bits protected.
None of the plumbing is connected (yet) and the Raptor with angle grinder job has a "Not for flight" label on the ground handling collar...
And TVC is not integrated at Raptor block; clearly visible now without the extra testing gear and plumbing. I guess that struts (marked with green in the image) will be replaced with TVC actuators.
And TVC is not integrated at Raptor block; clearly visible now without the extra testing gear and plumbing. I guess that struts (marked with green in the image) will be replaced with TVC actuators.
Last edited:
They'll need some form of thrust vectoring. Trim engine trust direction, maneuvering at low speeds or in vacuum, in the event of an engine loss.
@HVM is likely right that the struts will be replaced with actuators later.
@pdx_m3s great point on the entry attitude. Even in a tail first return, could this shell be advantageous in creating a pocket of still(er) air to protect the engines? If it is part of the rocket, I wonder how they will deal with CH4 or O2 collecting in the space.
That makes a lot of sense...but...it seems to be at odds with the following sentence:
This suggests that the way exit plane of the nozzles (and thus, some significant part of the engines) will in fact be ‘way below’ the flight structure as opposed to the images which shows the three on this one ‘enclosed’. Please elaborate.
Last edited:
pdx_m3s
Active Member
Primary concern is to enclose and protect the bits above the nozzle. I would think the nozzle can handle re-entry heat. But now that I think about it, perhaps not... previous renderings showed everything enclosed.
Reviewing the entry clip that @ecarfan pointed out upthread, it seems like the attitude isn’t too far off the velocity vector until it gets down to Mach 2.5. Intuitively you’d want to dissipate most of your energy with a shuttle-ish hypersonic profile, so that attitude makes first order sense. I’d actually postulate that any kind of engine skirt is most useful in this phase of entry, relative to physical protection from thermal/atmospheric loading.
I’m admittedly too lazy to Googs an equivalent F9 landing profile, but it seems like 2.5 is too slow for motor protection—either physically from a skirt or behind shock cones propagated by a skirt or other feature—to be super useful.
Just realized, there is no separate disposable interstage on Starship/ SH, so this is the new permanent interstage. Explains the strong structure since this is how all the 1st stage thrust transfers to the second stage. I think F9 transfers it via the struts to the single 2nd stage engine (maybe a little through the composite shell).
pdx_m3s
Active Member
Which isn't to say the interstage may not be on attached to Super Heavy in the stacked version. That would make sense from a purely mass standpoint. However, it seems like having it on Starship for testing would indicate it will be that way in the final version.
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
I am incredibly excited for Musk's presentation tomorrow. The progress on the Mk1 has been amazing to watch.
Live cam of the Mk1 being assembled. Stacking almost complete.
Live cam of the Mk1 being assembled. Stacking almost complete.
Similar threads
