User Panel
|
That’s going to get aimless all hot and bothered.
|
|
Seriously... unTex the Mex..
|
Never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end—which you can never afford to lose—with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be. - Adm James Stockdale
|
animation
|
|
|
|
|
|
videos
|
|
|
Originally Posted By Chokey: videos
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GSjLS-uawAASjkW?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GSjLTxsbIAQFX2-?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GSjLUoBacAESCQh?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GSjLVfnbIAA-YiB?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 View Quote
|
|
|
It’s… probably not as bad as you think it is.
|
Originally Posted By Chokey: videos
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GSjLS-uawAASjkW?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GSjLTxsbIAQFX2-?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GSjLUoBacAESCQh?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GSjLVfnbIAA-YiB?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 View Quote Attached File |
|
|
|
|
|
Someone catch me up.
|
|
-Women should always wear tight clothes and men should carry powerful handguns
-Eamus Brandonus |
Originally Posted By BB: Someone catch me up. View Quote I would say Boca Chica has gone from crawling to walking to almost a full run. If they succeed with catching the booster on the next flight which will probably be sometime in August then Starship will probably be ready to carry payloads to orbit on the following flight. After another year of work we might have tankers ready to gas up a lunar lander. If the Chinese get even more ambitious than they currently are we might just have us an olde fashioned space race. Or maybe their entire country will disintergrate into a stomach churning horror of political violence and rival warlords after Comrade Xi keels over and we won't need to go to the moon or anywhere in space? It would be nice if they could whip up a lunar lander mockup at Boca Chica. But the way they do things there I wouldn't be surprised if they went for making the real deal on their first go around. Attached File |
|
It’s… probably not as bad as you think it is.
|
Groovy
|
|
-Women should always wear tight clothes and men should carry powerful handguns
-Eamus Brandonus |
Originally Posted By Hesperus: I would say Boca Chica has gone from crawling to walking to almost a full run. If they succeed with catching the booster on the next flight which will probably be sometime in August then Starship will probably be ready to carry payloads to orbit on the following flight. View Quote The balls on that guy. |
|
The long term future is a mash up of Idiocracy and 1984. "Ow, my balls" meets "He loved Big Brother". The boot on your face will likely be a big red clown shoe, but it'll be there regardless. - pmacb
|
Originally Posted By RarestRX: The balls on that guy. View Quote I think Elon either is himself or has reality warping entities on his payroll. Starship has been the kind of program that in the very recent past would only be attempted by the most ambitious and powerful of nation states and it has proceeded far faster and smoother than anything else like it. No parallel program has been as ambitious. Not Ariane 6, Vulcan, New Glenn or anything the Chinese or Russians have been able to cobble together. The Space Shuttle is probably our nearest analog and we all know how that turned out. And yet as insanely ambitious as it is. He and others proceed because they know, it's necessary. So Elon is going to keep going until something stops him. |
|
It’s… probably not as bad as you think it is.
|
|
|
But he sure found out the hard way
That dreams don't always come true |
|
Pretty soon there will will be a Tower Segment factory, right on the water - somewhere.
|
|
"Freedom isn't free. It costs a hefty fuckin' fee. And if we don't toss in our buck 'o five, who will?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Pronoun: Space Lord Mutherfucker
|
https://www.faa.gov/space/stakeholder_engagement/spacex_starship |
|
|
|
https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/spacex-talks-land-recover-starship-rocket-off-australias-coast-2024-07-29/ |
|
|
Ooh, that sounds pretty cool. NZ has been humiliating Australia in the space game for the past few years. Almost entirely because of Rocket Lab. Building a Starship recovery site, perhaps even a launch tower would be a way the Australians could leap ahead. It could be a first step towards a network of launch and recovery sites which would make Starship more viable by landing SHB downrange.
NZ has proven to be a suprisingly good place to launch orbital rockets from. It would be nice if Australia could show that they could support such operations. Real big boy country stuff. |
|
It’s… probably not as bad as you think it is.
|
While I like the idea of being able to land and recover boosters in Australia, I don't think it adds much to normal operations. The trajectory of the booster is not nearly orbital. I think they are currently turning it around when it is only 60 or so miles out. I question if it is practical to give it enough speed to be semi-orbital. Getting the speed would cost more fuel, would require more fuel to slow down, and subject it to more heat (it lacks heat shielding - which weighs). Now landing Starship itself - sounds great.
|
|
|
Not recover the booster, recover the Starship
|
|
Preferred Pronoun: Space Lord Mutherfucker
|
I guess the booster and ship sank shortly after splashdown during the last flight. Not shocking considering the ship had a rather large hole burned through it.
|
|
It’s… probably not as bad as you think it is.
|
video
https://www.spacex.com/updates/#starship-sonic-boom July 29, 2024 STARSHIP’S SONIC BOOM With each flight of Starship and the Super Heavy booster, we get closer to our goal of making life multiplanetary. The most important advancement to make this happen is full and rapid reusability of the entire launch system, operating Starship like an airplane which is fully and rapidly reusable after each flight. To do this, we have designed Starship’s upper stage and the Super Heavy booster to be capable of returning to the launch site. The returning vehicles will slow down from supersonic speeds, resulting in audible sonic booms in the area around the return location. A sonic boom is a brief, thunder-like noise a person on the ground hears when an aircraft or other object travels faster than the speed of sound. As a fast-moving object travels through the air, it pushes the air aside and creates a wave of pressure which eventually reaches the ground. The change in air pressure associated with a sonic boom, known as overpressure, increases only a few pounds per square foot. A person could experience a similar pressure change by riding down several floors in an elevator. What makes sonic booms audible is the quick speeds at which the pressure change occurs. Generally, the only impact to those in the surrounding area of a sonic boom is the brief noise. There are many variables that determine the impact of sonic booms, including the mass, shape and size of the object traveling at high speeds, along with its altitude and flight path. External factors like weather conditions can also affect the intensity of a sonic boom. The strongest effects of the sonic boom’s pressure change are localized to the area directly beneath the vehicle, concentrated under the rocket’s flight path and the landing site. Sonic booms in spaceflight have typically only been experienced by observers on Earth when encountering vehicles designed to be reused, such as SpaceX’s Falcon family of rockets. When the first stage booster of a Falcon rocket returns for landing, its size and speed generate multiple sonic booms heard on the ground as a double clap of thunder. Similar sonic booms were heard during the return and landing of the NASA’s space shuttle. In each case, the sonic boom marks the end of just one in a series of missions for the vehicle returning from flight. Data gathered from the first ever Super Heavy landing burn and splashdown on Starship’s fourth flight test indicates that while Super Heavy’s sonic boom will be more powerful than those generated by Falcon landings, it does not pose any risk of injury to those in the surrounding areas. The strongest effects will be localized to the area immediately around the Starbase launch pad. This area is cleared well in advance of launch and has been rigorously designed to withstand the environments of launching and returning the most powerful rocket ever flown. Sonic booms announce the return of rockets and spacecraft built to be reused. With Starship, they’ll signal the arrival of a rapidly reusable future in spaceflight to travel to Earth orbit, the Moon, Mars, and beyond. |
|
|
Originally Posted By Hesperus: Ooh, that sounds pretty cool. NZ has been humiliating Australia in the space game for the past few years. Almost entirely because of Rocket Lab. Building a Starship recovery site, perhaps even a launch tower would be a way the Australians could leap ahead. It could be a first step towards a network of launch and recovery sites which would make Starship more viable by landing SHB downrange. NZ has proven to be a suprisingly good place to launch orbital rockets from. It would be nice if Australia could show that they could support such operations. Real big boy country stuff. View Quote Sounds like the problem is ITAR, not the Aussies per se. And the plan right now is for a single Starship to land near Australia and be barged to land for further study as part of the flight test program. |
|
Scepticism is an exercise, not a life; it is a discipline fit to purify the mind of prejudice and render it all the more apt, when the time comes, to believe and to act wisely. -- George Santayana
Never mistake a clear view for a short distance. |
Originally Posted By vmpglenn: Sounds like the problem is ITAR, not the Aussies per se. And the plan right now is for a single Starship to land near Australia and be barged to land for further study as part of the flight test program. View Quote Peter Beck has said that they have learned far more from recovered Electron boosters than they ever could have learned from instrumentation alone. I would be stunned if the engineers at SpaceX said something different about studying their recovered boosters. As for this ITAR bullshit. I suppose all I can say there is that Australia is not North Korea. |
|
It’s… probably not as bad as you think it is.
|
Sitting hear heavily drugged up this morning, a couple questions made it through the fog.
Could the military be quietly considering an Aussie base for using the Starships they plan to buy? If it's a Space X launch facility, but not manufacturing facility, could Space X launch or barge boosters and SS's there to be launched to keep the required cadence up? Would that bypass ITAR? Also, could Space X build a concrete and steel launch structure out into the gulf resembling the Palms in Dubai but not islands? Ya know, big thick concrete and steel bridge type thing with launch platforms on the left and recovery platforms on the right. Flame diverters would keep the fire from blasting into the water, it's away from the beach turtles and birds nest, but connected so you could run pipelines out to each platform to fuel and have a bridge wide enough to drive everything out and back. Or am I just thinking stupid drug thoughts? |
|
|
Originally Posted By BigGrumpyBear: Sitting hear heavily drugged up this morning, a couple questions made it through the fog. Could the military be quietly considering an Aussie base for using the Starships they plan to buy? If it's a Space X launch facility, but not manufacturing facility, could Space X launch or barge boosters and SS's there to be launched to keep the required cadence up? Would that bypass ITAR? Also, could Space X build a concrete and steel launch structure out into the gulf resembling the Palms in Dubai but not islands? Ya know, big thick concrete and steel bridge type thing with launch platforms on the left and recovery platforms on the right. Flame diverters would keep the fire from blasting into the water, it's away from the beach turtles and birds nest, but connected so you could run pipelines out to each platform to fuel and have a bridge wide enough to drive everything out and back. Or am I just thinking stupid drug thoughts? View Quote Pretty sure ITAR covers removing items from US territory in addition to manufacturing....so mode of transport would have no change. If it was related to military use, they would just give SpaceX an exception to the ITAR restrictions and SpaceX would figure out the easiest way to get them there. SpaceX could figure out a way to build an island, or revisit the oil rig conversation but I don't believe that would help them with ITAR restrictions without .gov signoff if that's what you were thinking. I'm also not an expert on ITAR. |
|
EP429: Today's lesson - Don't provoke ARFCOM. People will see your butthole.
|
Originally Posted By fox2008: Pretty sure ITAR covers removing items from US territory in addition to manufacturing....so mode of transport would have no change. If it was related to military use, they would just give SpaceX an exception to the ITAR restrictions and SpaceX would figure out the easiest way to get them there. SpaceX could figure out a way to build an island, or revisit the oil rig conversation but I don't believe that would help them with ITAR restrictions without .gov signoff if that's what you were thinking. I'm also not an expert on ITAR. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By fox2008: Originally Posted By BigGrumpyBear: Sitting hear heavily drugged up this morning, a couple questions made it through the fog. Could the military be quietly considering an Aussie base for using the Starships they plan to buy? If it's a Space X launch facility, but not manufacturing facility, could Space X launch or barge boosters and SS's there to be launched to keep the required cadence up? Would that bypass ITAR? Also, could Space X build a concrete and steel launch structure out into the gulf resembling the Palms in Dubai but not islands? Ya know, big thick concrete and steel bridge type thing with launch platforms on the left and recovery platforms on the right. Flame diverters would keep the fire from blasting into the water, it's away from the beach turtles and birds nest, but connected so you could run pipelines out to each platform to fuel and have a bridge wide enough to drive everything out and back. Or am I just thinking stupid drug thoughts? Pretty sure ITAR covers removing items from US territory in addition to manufacturing....so mode of transport would have no change. If it was related to military use, they would just give SpaceX an exception to the ITAR restrictions and SpaceX would figure out the easiest way to get them there. SpaceX could figure out a way to build an island, or revisit the oil rig conversation but I don't believe that would help them with ITAR restrictions without .gov signoff if that's what you were thinking. I'm also not an expert on ITAR. I was thinking they could build the bridge at the site in Texas where they manufacture everything. Build it, put it on a transporter roll on out across the bridge to the series of launch/ recovery platforms, not islands or moveable rigs, just big steel and concrete launch/ recovery platforms out over the water. The water is relatively shallow there. For non crewed missions you wouldn't need all the other stuff for crewed missions so you could leave the current pads for crewed missions or design the closest of the platforms for crewed missions. Just pondering shit while lying here. |
|
|
Originally Posted By BigGrumpyBear: I was thinking they could build the bridge at the site in Texas where they manufacture everything. Build it, put it on a transporter roll on out across the bridge to the series of launch/ recovery platforms, not islands or moveable rigs, just big steel and concrete launch/ recovery platforms out over the water. The water is relatively shallow there. For non crewed missions you wouldn't need all the other stuff for crewed missions so you could leave the current pads for crewed missions or design the closest of the platforms for crewed missions. Just pondering shit while lying here. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By BigGrumpyBear: Originally Posted By fox2008: Originally Posted By BigGrumpyBear: Sitting hear heavily drugged up this morning, a couple questions made it through the fog. Could the military be quietly considering an Aussie base for using the Starships they plan to buy? If it's a Space X launch facility, but not manufacturing facility, could Space X launch or barge boosters and SS's there to be launched to keep the required cadence up? Would that bypass ITAR? Also, could Space X build a concrete and steel launch structure out into the gulf resembling the Palms in Dubai but not islands? Ya know, big thick concrete and steel bridge type thing with launch platforms on the left and recovery platforms on the right. Flame diverters would keep the fire from blasting into the water, it's away from the beach turtles and birds nest, but connected so you could run pipelines out to each platform to fuel and have a bridge wide enough to drive everything out and back. Or am I just thinking stupid drug thoughts? Pretty sure ITAR covers removing items from US territory in addition to manufacturing....so mode of transport would have no change. If it was related to military use, they would just give SpaceX an exception to the ITAR restrictions and SpaceX would figure out the easiest way to get them there. SpaceX could figure out a way to build an island, or revisit the oil rig conversation but I don't believe that would help them with ITAR restrictions without .gov signoff if that's what you were thinking. I'm also not an expert on ITAR. I was thinking they could build the bridge at the site in Texas where they manufacture everything. Build it, put it on a transporter roll on out across the bridge to the series of launch/ recovery platforms, not islands or moveable rigs, just big steel and concrete launch/ recovery platforms out over the water. The water is relatively shallow there. For non crewed missions you wouldn't need all the other stuff for crewed missions so you could leave the current pads for crewed missions or design the closest of the platforms for crewed missions. Just pondering shit while lying here. I have zero doubt that SpaceX could pull that off, assuming they wanted too and were able to get the .gov to sign off on it. It would have been really cool to see a booster land on a modified oil rig. |
|
EP429: Today's lesson - Don't provoke ARFCOM. People will see your butthole.
|
Originally Posted By Chokey: 4th piece https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GTXP961agAAHpOs?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 View Quote Someone in the know tell me, what are those bags hanging from the 4th piece for? |
|
|
Originally Posted By RinsableTick: Someone in the know tell me, what are those bags hanging from the 4th piece for? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By RinsableTick: Originally Posted By Chokey: 4th piece https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GTXP961agAAHpOs?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 Someone in the know tell me, what are those bags hanging from the 4th piece for? bag o' bolts |
|
|
Life is about choices.
If you make a mistake once, it's a mistake. You make the same mistake again, that's a choice. |
|
|
|
Originally Posted By Chokey:
View Quote |
|
Life is about choices.
If you make a mistake once, it's a mistake. You make the same mistake again, that's a choice. |
Originally Posted By BigGrumpyBear: Would that bypass ITAR? View Quote Nothing 'bypasses' ITAR. ITAR is not just equipment, gear, or technology - it's also information / data / etc. I have no doubt that could be worked out between US / Australia / SpaceX, but it's not something you avoid. You tackle it head on and get it settled, or face the wrath of the USG & significant fines in your companies future, and potentially jail time. |
|
|
Originally Posted By fox2008: Pretty sure ITAR covers removing items from US territory in addition to manufacturing....so mode of transport would have no change. If it was related to military use, they would just give SpaceX an exception to the ITAR restrictions and SpaceX would figure out the easiest way to get them there. SpaceX could figure out a way to build an island, or revisit the oil rig conversation but I don't believe that would help them with ITAR restrictions without .gov signoff if that's what you were thinking. I'm also not an expert on ITAR. View Quote Or they could just get a permit. Those F-35’s get sold overseas somehow. |
|
Preferred Pronoun: Space Lord Mutherfucker
|
Originally Posted By AlonzoHarris: Nothing 'bypasses' ITAR. ITAR is not just equipment, gear, or technology - it's also information / data / etc. I have no doubt that could be worked out between US / Australia / SpaceX, but it's not something you avoid. You tackle it head on and get it settled, or face the wrath of the USG & significant fines in your companies future, and potentially jail time. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By AlonzoHarris: Originally Posted By BigGrumpyBear: Would that bypass ITAR? Nothing 'bypasses' ITAR. ITAR is not just equipment, gear, or technology - it's also information / data / etc. I have no doubt that could be worked out between US / Australia / SpaceX, but it's not something you avoid. You tackle it head on and get it settled, or face the wrath of the USG & significant fines in your companies future, and potentially jail time. Then I guess our .gov not being upset about Chinaisassho stealing everything that isn't nailed down is similar to the FATF going after honest citizens and leaving criminals alone because that's hard. |
|
|
Originally Posted By BigGrumpyBear: Then I guess our .gov not being upset about Chinaisassho stealing everything that isn't nailed down is similar to the FATF going after honest citizens and leaving criminals alone because that's hard. View Quote They do catch Chinese industrial spies now and then. But other than that what are they supposed to do? Arrest rich and powerful foreign nationals? This is current day America. If you're rich with the right political views you're basically above the law. |
|
It’s… probably not as bad as you think it is.
|
Noticed that SpaceX apparently is trying to get their launch license increased to 25 launches and 50 landings a year. Likewise, heard that Musk has pushed the target for the next launch back a month due to needing FAA approval for a change in flight program - the change for attempting the catch.
--- Well at least that means I have a month to fix my Jeep for another drive to the beach. AC is out for about the 4th time in 2 years. |
|
|
You all see the rendering of the possible flame trench at the new launch tower?
|
|
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: 'In God is our trust.' And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave! |
154 page FAA report on: Draft Tiered Environmental Assessment for SpaceX Starship/Super Heavy Vehicle Increased Cadence at the SpaceX Boca Chica Launch Site
https://www.faa.gov/media/82786 |
|
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: 'In God is our trust.' And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave! |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.