-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
From the Ars report:There's some info in the Rocket Report,
Rocket Report: NASA buys a SpinLaunch, Space Force brass visits Starbase
"It’s an amazing facility that gives you a lot of ideas of what the future could be."arstechnica.com
It is what I expect actually. Writing is on the wall. Edited to add - I think TX is going to be lucky to get a dozen test launch's. Speculation could be that endangered species are a big issue or it could be something as simple as the launch paths from there really don't work. Others have said this before, it was discussed quite a bit at some point.
Last edited:
Starbase is limited to 12 launches from everything I've read. It was never going to be a major launching hub. I expect SpaceX will continue development there and use Florida for more major launch activities. The two old oil rigs will be converted and probably not be limited in how many launches can happen from them. Especially if they move them beyond the 12 mile international waters limit. Knowing Elon, he'll do whatever works best to get things done. He wants to eventually get to 1000 launches a year. That is probably not going to happen in those numbers in one area only.
As I think about it, it would be a huge logistical nightmare to be loading payload to the oil rig launch platforms. I can see those being used for refueling launches. Have huge floating tankers alongside the rigs pumping LOX and Methane into tanks which superchill the fuel before loading it on a Super Heavy and Starship. I can see passengers being loaded there as well. I don't see hundreds of Starlinks being loaded onto a Starship.
As I think about it, it would be a huge logistical nightmare to be loading payload to the oil rig launch platforms. I can see those being used for refueling launches. Have huge floating tankers alongside the rigs pumping LOX and Methane into tanks which superchill the fuel before loading it on a Super Heavy and Starship. I can see passengers being loaded there as well. I don't see hundreds of Starlinks being loaded onto a Starship.
Disagree. I think the OLT at Starbase will be used many times for test launches over the next few years. The FAA will come around, they just move slowly. SpaceX doesn’t need a second OLT to have a useful test launch program at Starbase.
How many launches, neither of us knows. But SpaceX isn’t building the new Wide Bay just for show. The company is serious about building a lot of vehicles at Starbase.
Well, passengers are “payload”, correct?
I think launching payloads from offshore would be easier than Starship tanker launches, but I agree with you that given how many tanker launches are going to be required for Moon and Mars missions the offshore launch platforms would be useful for that purpose.
? It seems like Starship will be the most cost effective way to loft the thousands of Starlilnks needed to complete the constellation. Hasn’t Elon stated that the goal is for Starship to make the F9 obsolete?
Or do you mean that, despite the huge cargo volume Starship could provide per launch, SpaceX is likely to limit each launch to less than 100 satellites?
The new proposal for Starship based Starlink launches is single plane per launch with 120 satellites as the most in a plane (I assume ignoring spares).
Genaral musings:
Offshore is needed for sound abatement. Also reduces collateral damage in the event of a failure/ crash (if tanker boats stand off). Tankers, undersea pipline, and undersea power cable for local LOX/CH4 (if not well sourced) production are all possible.
RTLS can't be eliminated unless they get a full great circle hop ring. So Starship round trips will likely be on flight lengths of a mutiple of 12 hours.
For refueling: East coast can launch on ascending and descending nodes to launch twice a day into the same plane per tower.
Yes, but they are easily mobile to transport to the oil rig for launching.
I'm commenting about the oil rig launch platforms. Loading hundreds of Starlinks on the limited space of a platform seems like a logistical nightmare compared to loading them in Florida or Starbase.
Nope. I'm sure the Starship will be loaded with as many as possible. Just not on an oil rig launch platform.
Video from NSF showing the latest expansion work at SpaceX’s Roberts Road facility in Florida, new OLT sections under construction which will be installed at LC-39A where the foundation is being installed (shown below just to the left of the existing tower) and a rendering of what the finished OLT will look like (second image).
The rendering of the Starship OLT looks weirdly tall compared to the existing launch tower on LC-39A. I have to remind myself that the existing tower is completely different from what was used at that pad during the Apollo era. A Saturn V at 110m was only slightly shorter than Starship/Super Heavy at about 120m, and the Saturn V tower was part of the transporter vehicle.
Tim Dodd has an Elon interview coming up. Teaser:
A recent NASAspaceflight video shows SpaceX starting construction of a large permanent structure and a new tent structure. My conclusion is that SpaceX remains committed to Boca Chica and expects to build a lot of vehicles there. I cannot predict how many will be launched from there. Maybe the plan is to barge some of them out to an offshore launch platform(s)? At this point we just don’t know.
Attachments
Regarding the new construction at Starbase, Teslerati reporting (not always a reliable source) says:
Starbase continues to transform itself to boost vehicle construction capacity.
Not to go OT, but I believe Teslarati and a bunch of social media superstars (Nasaspace Flight, Everyday Astronaut), IMO, are a far more reliable source than much of MSM (Eric Berger excluded)
Its mostly a function of depth vs breadth for the media outlet. There's a set of superfans that want to consume hyper detail, and so a few folks in the media cater to that market. But even when you jump up to broader space outlets, the market appetite for that level of detail simply isn't there. Most space fans actually don't care which SN boosters are being built right now, which highway they're in, or what their state of build is, for instance.
Its also fun to see the lag in 'new news', and what they still get wrong.
According to this report the B7 downcomer failed pressure testing. There is a photo, which must have come from a SpaceX employee. Not cool.
Fair enough, though I do not equate Teslerati with Eric Berger, who operates on a much higher level.
Methane tank to engine feed tube that passes through oxygen tank. Has external braces.
Whole thing is collapsed and tore the tank seam.
The booster has two tanks, one LOX and the other Liquid Methane. (I don't know which is which, and a quick search doesn't tell me either definitively, but I think the bottom one is the LOX tank. LOX is denser than Methane, makes sense to put it at the bottom.) Anyway, there has to be a way for the contents of the top tank to get to the bottom where the motors are, and it has to be able to move a lot of liquid. The photo shows what is supposed to be a circular cross-section pipe going through the bottom tank, all crushed by pressure from outside. The rings welded around the pipe are there to provide rigidity to resist exactly these kinds of crushing force, and as the pipe crushed they got distorted in weird ways.
Similar threads
- Article
