banner
banner

19 May 2022, 17:54 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Greenwich AeroGroup (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 91 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Starship & Moon Landing Complexity …
PostPosted: 12 Sep 2021, 00:52 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 14779
Post Likes: +18317
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
For the size of that thing, maybe somewhere in New Mexico… :eek:

More spectacular than the liftoff and flight would be if they have to abort using FTS (flight termination system).

There will be a LOT of stuff raining down from the sky! The empty weight is about 900,000 lbs.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Starship & Moon Landing Complexity …
PostPosted: 12 Sep 2021, 04:40 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/11/17
Posts: 639
Post Likes: +264
Location: San Francisco, CA
Aircraft: '76 V35B (IO550)
I think people are confusing Virgin Galactic with these planetary goals. My impression is that VG is building toward suborbital travel to skip the various technical and legislative problems with supersonic transport. Just head up high where none of that is an issue and get me from San Francisco to Europe in a few hours? Okay.

_________________
really, really loving this plane


Top

 Post subject: Re: Starship & Moon Landing Complexity …
PostPosted: 12 Sep 2021, 08:09 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/22/07
Posts: 10391
Post Likes: +9928
Company: Midwest Chemtrails LLC
Location: KPTK (SE Michigan)
Aircraft: C205
Few seem to remember Virgin Orbit vs. Virgin Galactic.

_________________
!neercs eht dniheb deppart ma I !PLEH


Top

 Post subject: Re: Starship & Moon Landing Complexity …
PostPosted: 12 Sep 2021, 13:29 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 04/26/13
Posts: 13889
Post Likes: +12636
Location: Columbus , IN (KBAK)
Aircraft: 1968 Baron D55
Username Protected wrote:
Thinking about attending the first launch. Anyone familiar with the best viewing areas for Boca China?

The exclusion zone is likely to extend at least to South Padre island for this launch due to the potential blast radius. There are good views from the beach there, but of course the better the seat the closer you are to the "event". Marcus House goes into some serious speculation and mathematical detail in his video HERE. There's no clear answer, but the presumed worst case would see windows broken on the southern tip of South Padre Island. That would really hurt if you were standing outdoors in the same area. My guess is that the exclusion zone may end just south of that, simply because evacuation of that area would be very difficult.

So, I'm expecting the exclusion radius to stop at the inlet to Brazos Santiago Pass and arc south of Port Isabel. The short answer would be "just outside of the exclusion zone", but we don't yet know where that is. Assuming I'm right, the jetty at the end of South Padre Island would be the best location you'll likely get. It is about 8Km (5 SM) from the launch site, so you'll get to see the rocket, but it'll be from a distance, which in this case may be a good thing.

I'm a huge SpaceX fan, but I agree with Mike that given all of the variables involved, the chance of a fully successful mission for the entire vehicle system is extremely small. The most important hurdle is to get off the pad and down range over the ocean. After that, you're not going to kill anybody or break anything important. I think the biggest realistic risk is to the launch facility itself if there's an anomaly at or just after launch.

_________________
My last name rhymes with 'geese'.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Starship & Moon Landing Complexity …
PostPosted: 12 Sep 2021, 18:19 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 14779
Post Likes: +18317
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
The rocket won't "explode" like a bomb. The fuel and oxidizer are not mixed when it goes. Thus it will be a much slower fireball than a bomb, taking 1-2 seconds. So I do not expect a blast wave that knocks out windows.

The main risk is debris falling down from the sky, so the downrange area needs to be clear. There is almost a million pounds of hardware in the sky, so imagine two 747s falling.

A worst case scenario is that much of the SpaceX ground installation gets destroyed since a blow up on the pad is a distinct possibility.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Starship & Moon Landing Complexity …
PostPosted: 23 Sep 2021, 10:18 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 06/19/08
Posts: 711
Post Likes: +582
Location: Australia
Musk said himself that an on pad or airborne explosion would be more like a mushy fireball than a weapons style blast. But the FAA may err on the side of a perfect stoichiometric mixing of propellants and set the zone accordingly. Best guide would be what is set for Space Shuttle or Saturn launches as a guide and expect similar.

_________________
I like to answer rhetorical questions because who’s to say what’s right or wrong?


Top

 Post subject: Re: Starship & Moon Landing Complexity …
PostPosted: 29 Sep 2021, 20:29 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/22/07
Posts: 10391
Post Likes: +9928
Company: Midwest Chemtrails LLC
Location: KPTK (SE Michigan)
Aircraft: C205
NASA burns Blue Origin’s protest of the SpaceX award:

Attachment:
338F2AC0-5238-4EBF-9FB5-254383554955.jpeg


Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.

_________________
!neercs eht dniheb deppart ma I !PLEH


Top

 Post subject: Re: Starship & Moon Landing Complexity …
PostPosted: 29 Sep 2021, 22:37 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 4359
Post Likes: +2334
Location: San Carlos, CA - KSQL
Aircraft: Mitsubishi MU-2B-40
Username Protected wrote:
NASA burns Blue Origin’s protest of the SpaceX award:

Ouch! That language is, um, less diplomatic, than one is used to seeing in govt reports…

_________________
-Jon C.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Starship & Moon Landing Complexity …
PostPosted: 30 Sep 2021, 13:29 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 04/26/13
Posts: 13889
Post Likes: +12636
Location: Columbus , IN (KBAK)
Aircraft: 1968 Baron D55
That's some no nonsense stuff right there.

Who wrote that? Do you have a link to the source?

_________________
My last name rhymes with 'geese'.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Starship & Moon Landing Complexity …
PostPosted: 30 Sep 2021, 13:59 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/22/07
Posts: 10391
Post Likes: +9928
Company: Midwest Chemtrails LLC
Location: KPTK (SE Michigan)
Aircraft: C205
NASA: Page 2, 3rd paragraph

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_ ... dacted.pdf

There is also the matter that NASA requires the lander to be able to operate in darkness. Blue Origin’s proposal is also deficient in this regard.

_________________
!neercs eht dniheb deppart ma I !PLEH


Top

 Post subject: Re: Starship & Moon Landing Complexity …
PostPosted: 05 Oct 2021, 08:53 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 04/26/13
Posts: 13889
Post Likes: +12636
Location: Columbus , IN (KBAK)
Aircraft: 1968 Baron D55
Username Protected wrote:
There is also the matter that NASA requires the lander to be able to operate in darkness. Blue Origin’s proposal is also deficient in this regard.

What, are they using landing lights and flying manually? "can't land in the dark" :lol:

Thanks for the link.

_________________
My last name rhymes with 'geese'.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Starship & Moon Landing Complexity …
PostPosted: 03 Dec 2021, 09:38 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/22/07
Posts: 10391
Post Likes: +9928
Company: Midwest Chemtrails LLC
Location: KPTK (SE Michigan)
Aircraft: C205
Musk worries about SpaceX bankruptcy?

Unfortunately, the Raptor production crisis is much worse than it seemed a few weeks ago. As we have dug into the issues following exiting prior senior management, they have unfortunately turned out to be far more severe than was reported. There is no way to sugarcoat this.
I was going to take this weekend off, as my first weekend off in a long time, but instead I will be on the Raptor line all night and through the weekend.

Unless you have critical family matters or cannot physically return to Hawthorne, we need all hands on deck to recover from what is, quite frankly, a disaster.

The consequences for SpaceX if we can’t get enough reliable Raptors made is that we then can’t fly Starship, which means we then can’t fly Starlink Satellite V2 (Falcon has neither the volume *nor* the mass to orbit needed for satellite V2). Satellite V1 by itself is financially weak, whereas V2 is strong.

In addition, we are spooling up terminal production to several million units per year, which will consume massive capital, assuming that satellite V2 will be on orbit to handle the bandwidth demand. These terminals will be useless otherwise.

What it comes down to is that we face genuine risk of bankruptcy if we cannot achieve a Starship flight rate of at least once every two weeks next year.

Thanks,
Elon

Four days later he explained himself:

Attachment:
99B41DB9-C187-4562-ACAF-7563FBC10C7F.jpeg


Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.

_________________
!neercs eht dniheb deppart ma I !PLEH


Top

 Post subject: Re: Starship & Moon Landing Complexity …
PostPosted: 03 Dec 2021, 09:58 
Online


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 05/06/14
Posts: 5577
Post Likes: +5974
Company: The French Tradition
Location: KCRQ - Carlsbad - KTOA
Aircraft: 89 A36 TN, 78 Tiger
For Musk, landing on the moon is just a practice to land on Mars.
It's all about Mars. It has always been about Mars.
Everything he does is with this in mind.
We will be paying him to make his dream to go to Mars.

Clever guy.

_________________
Bonanza 89 A36 Turbo Norm
Grumman Tiger 78


Top

 Post subject: Re: Starship & Moon Landing Complexity …
PostPosted: 03 Dec 2021, 10:02 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/22/07
Posts: 10391
Post Likes: +9928
Company: Midwest Chemtrails LLC
Location: KPTK (SE Michigan)
Aircraft: C205
Musk also says he needs Starship to make Starlink profitable …

_________________
!neercs eht dniheb deppart ma I !PLEH


Top

 Post subject: Re: Starship & Moon Landing Complexity …
PostPosted: 03 Dec 2021, 11:18 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 14779
Post Likes: +18317
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Northrop Grumman just got a contract to supply boosters for SLS launches.

$3.19B for 9 launches, $355M per launch.

Using OLD shuttle booster segments! They don't even have to build new ones. The boosters are not even recovered, thrown away after each use.

Meanwhile, SpaceX is aiming for Starship launches to cost a fraction of that for the entire mission.

SLS cost per launch, all in, about $2B each. This is with using old shuttle parts, too!

SLS represents obsolete thinking. It is becoming increasingly embarrassing how expensive and late SLS is.

When Starship does a successful orbital flight, the questions about why we have SLS will become very hard to ignore.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 91 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next



Marsh Brothers Aviation (Banner)

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us

BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner, Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.

BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates. Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.

Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2022

.forge-85x50.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.echelon-85x50.png.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.bkool-85x50-2014-08-04.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.AAI.jpg.
.jetshades-85x150.png.
.Marsh.jpg.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.kingairdom.jpg.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.
.camguard.jpg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.avionwealth-85x50.png.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.airpower-85x50.jpg.
.xnaut-85x50.jpg.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.ps_engineering.gif.
.dshannon.jpg.
.nexus-85x50.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.blr-85x200.jpg.
.EagleFuelCellsTriple.jpg.
.Foreflight_85x50_color.png.
.komn-85x50.png.
.ssv-85x50.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.STLAir_85x50.jpg.
.garmin-85x200-2021-11-22.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.Expert_Aircraft_Solution_85x50.jpg.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.greenwich-85x50-2020-08-10.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.instar.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.Davis_Aviation_85x50.jpg.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.avionicssource-85x50.jpg.