SpaceX And/Or Rocketry In General

robl
robl
Joined: 2 Jan 13
Posts: 1,706
Credit: 1,424,073,021
RAC: 8,739

RE: A new post at

Quote:

A new post at spaceflightnow.com asserts that the next SpaceX launch is now firmed up to be a Dragon to ISS launching to a 1-second wide launch window at 4:33 p.m. EDT (2033 UTC) on April 13.

While I don't spot a mention of recovery attempt in this posting, my most recent information is that this specific mission planned an attempt.


Could not find anything about 1st stage recovery either. I guess we will just have to look at the configuration on the pad to determine the presence of the recovery gear.

Mike Hewson
Mike Hewson
Moderator
Joined: 1 Dec 05
Posts: 6,376
Credit: 196,120,752
RAC: 109,052

Following that link there is

Following that link there is :

Quote:
SpaceX shuffled the order of its upcoming launches earlier this month to inspect rockets at Cape Canaveral for leaky helium pressurization systems after discovering a problem in the Falcon 9 factory in Southern California.


So that probably explains the Vandenberg thing. Other than that I guess the focus is on payload to orbit, market competition for that role ( even loss leading ), and not so much of the development of reuse.

Cheers, Mike.

I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...

... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal

mikey
mikey
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 9,071
Credit: 1,077,164,509
RAC: 5,795,805

RE: Following that link

Quote:

Following that link there is :

Quote:
SpaceX shuffled the order of its upcoming launches earlier this month to inspect rockets at Cape Canaveral for leaky helium pressurization systems after discovering a problem in the Falcon 9 factory in Southern California.

So that probably explains the Vandenberg thing. Other than that I guess the focus is on payload to orbit, market competition for that role ( even loss leading ), and not so much of the development of reuse.

Cheers, Mike.

NASA came out the other day saying they may need to rethink the whole Space Shuttle idea, NOT the past actual shuttle, but the ISS is starting to need parts and with no way to get parts up there that THEY control it is a problem for them. IMHO this could be an opportunity for someone to come up with a plan to step up and make some serious money. The solar panels are starting to fail, etc, etc, ETC!! They are talking by 2024 the ISS being abandoned if they don't start doing something soon.

All this coincided with the launch of a one year mission of one of a set of twin brothers to monitor the changes between them as one is on the IIS while the other stays here on Earth.

robl
robl
Joined: 2 Jan 13
Posts: 1,706
Credit: 1,424,073,021
RAC: 8,739

Russia is proposing another

Russia is proposing another joint venture with the US to build a new space station. I sort of lean towards a new station rather then trying to patch the old one. There is new technology available, i.e., the "bounce house" modules which are "kevlar" inflatibles. They would be lighter to lift and provide ample work space (they are compressed and inflated on station). The downside: they have yet to be tested but my understanding is that one will be launched soon and attached to the current space station for evaluation. In any event to rebuild a new one seems to be the correct approach but how to lift the components. In either case new or refurbished, getting new parts there will pose a problem with our current fleet.

Chris S
Chris S
Joined: 27 Aug 05
Posts: 2,469
Credit: 19,071,673
RAC: 0

Inflatable Kevlar modules?

Inflatable Kevlar modules? Have you got a link for that, sounds like April the 1st.

Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)

Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now

archae86
archae86
Joined: 6 Dec 05
Posts: 3,103
Credit: 6,105,796,996
RAC: 1,237,498

RE: Inflatable Kevlar

Quote:
Inflatable Kevlar modules? Have you got a link for that, sounds like April the 1st.


He's probably referring to the Bigelow Aerospace work. Here is a link.

I can't support any particular claims as to how good this concept is, nor how likely it is to get used for any particular purpose, but it has been around for a good while.

robl
robl
Joined: 2 Jan 13
Posts: 1,706
Credit: 1,424,073,021
RAC: 8,739

RE: Inflatable Kevlar

Quote:
Inflatable Kevlar modules? Have you got a link for that, sounds like April the 1st.

Oops forgot about April 1st. Archae86 got it right. Here is another link: inflatibles with animated video of how it should work. As for kevlar I do not know the composition of these modules, kevlar seems to be able to "stop a speeding bullet/meteor" though.

And guess who is going to launch the first one: yep!, SpaceX

Mike Hewson
Mike Hewson
Moderator
Joined: 1 Dec 05
Posts: 6,376
Credit: 196,120,752
RAC: 109,052

It would appear that these

It would appear that these Bigelow modules have two design thrusts : light weight + impact proofing. I guess Kevlar is at the intersection here, but you can separate these requirements into distinctly optimised products though. I'd go for redundancy. If there is any lesson to be learned in the history of space exploration that would have to be it I reckon. Keep the current metal shells for structural strength, have a shell inner to that for environmental seal, and an outer anti-spalling layer for debris etc. Each layer can perform another's function to some degree. While nothing is absolutely foolproof against the million-mile-per-hour magic BB even a graceful degradation can buy time to evacuate ...

Cheers, Mike.

I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...

... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal

robl
robl
Joined: 2 Jan 13
Posts: 1,706
Credit: 1,424,073,021
RAC: 8,739

Redundancy is always good.

Redundancy is always good. When I see videos of men/women floating around in the station I ask myself "How much time do they have to dawn a space suit should the space station take a hit?". If its basketball size not much I would assume. This is not a job for me, not even if it had 8 inches of armor plate.

archae86
archae86
Joined: 6 Dec 05
Posts: 3,103
Credit: 6,105,796,996
RAC: 1,237,498

If they get a basketball size

If they get a basketball size hit, they are dead. But there has also been a major failure of the combined detection, decision, and maneuvering scheme.

Their current doctrine is to shield for objects up to 1 cm, and to detect and avoid the ones over 10 centimeter (your basketball, for example). The sticky bit is in between, as they have not got great assurance of noticing things that small, but the modules don't pretend to have the shielding required for perfect safety. For the in between stuff they "implement procedures to mitigate the damaging effects of impacts with objects between about 1 and 10 cm in diameter". Hummm...

Still, hitting debris comes in only number six on the top ten list of ISS risks I came across. So, leaving basketballs aside, I think you don't want that job.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.