That vent alone increased the CO2 in the atmosphere enough to melt whole of Greenland glaciers.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
That is the opinion of multiple people on the NSF forum. I believe the methane tank is the upper tank on the booster?
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Understood and you are correct. The point is, it is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2
Agreed. Not happy with large amounts of methane being released. I am surprised it is legal/allowed by the environmental assessment.
I'm pretty sure large releases of methane are covered by OHSA. I doubt that is methane/CH4 but is likely LOX. Which is the same as what we see with F9 and RP-1. SpaceX isn't venting superchilled RP-1 during the loading process. So there is no reason to be venting superchilled methane/CH4.
Top is CH4
It may have been CH4 due to location but an unplanned release due to overfill/ overpressure. Turned off pumps too late and value deal with the hammer effect.
Or they may have purposely tested the overpressure system.
SpaceX preparing for Super Heavy static-fire test - SpaceNews
SpaceX could attempt a long-awaited static-fire test of all 33 engines in its Super Heavy booster as soon as next week, a company executive said Jan. 27.
spacenews.com
I assume full power is needed to achieve liftoff in a fully fueled vehicle with payload once the OLM clamps are released, so the upcoming static fire will be close to 100%.
I wonder what the dummy payload will be for the first orbital launch attempt? A multi-ton wheel of cheese seems infeasible.
15Mil lbs of thrust... wowza...I assume full power is needed to achieve liftoff in a fully fueled vehicle with payload once the OLM clamps are released, so the upcoming static fire will be close to 100%.
I wonder what the dummy payload will be for the first orbital launch attempt? A multi-ton wheel of cheese seems infeasible.
Ben W
Chess Grandmaster (Supervised)
Starship + SuperHeavy's T:W ratio is about 1.5 : 1, so technically it only needs ~67% thrust to lift (slowly) off the pad. But presumably they will test it at close to 100%, to simulate a real launch. Wouldn't want to test at 80% only for the real launch to fail in a way that only manifests at 95%.
I wonder what the dummy payload will be for the first orbital launch attempt? A multi-ton wheel of cheese seems infeasible.
A Cybertruck
Ben W
Chess Grandmaster (Supervised)
F9 is around 1.4, FH around 1.6. Saturn V had a thrust:weight ratio of only around 1.2, and used up about 8% of its fuel just clearing the tower! The Space Shuttle (with SRB's!) had a total thust:weight ratio of around 1.5 at liftoff, quite similar to Starship + Super Heavy.
It is just a STUNNING statistic.
I have read about a few methods of getting the rocket moving by using external power- for example a gravity-powered "lift " with counterweight - and it seems worth a look with data like this! Would make a literally massive difference to payload capacity.
Thanks
Similar threads
- Article
