SpaceX Tuesday...
Discussion
Bob Behnken describes the flight experience coming back down to Earth in the Dragon capsule.
https://twitter.com/NASA/status/129075263479058432...
"It felt like we were inside of an animal"
BTW, this is the movie they were referring to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dlG5B6eQHg
Spies Like Us
https://twitter.com/NASA/status/129075263479058432...
"It felt like we were inside of an animal"
BTW, this is the movie they were referring to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dlG5B6eQHg
Spies Like Us
Great flying grain silos Batman ! (not the first to go flying today mind you )
Then the little stubby legs deploy as it nears the ground:
And once the dust and smoke clears:
It has hopped over Starhopper.
Taken from here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ucYe0kojZ4
From about 12:56 pm UTC time mark.
Then the little stubby legs deploy as it nears the ground:
And once the dust and smoke clears:
It has hopped over Starhopper.
Taken from here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ucYe0kojZ4
From about 12:56 pm UTC time mark.
Edited by Beati Dogu on Wednesday 5th August 01:30
Beati Dogu said:
Bob Behnken describes the flight experience coming back down to Earth in the Dragon capsule.
https://twitter.com/NASA/status/129075263479058432...
"It felt like we were inside of an animal"
BTW, this is the movie they were referring to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dlG5B6eQHg
Spies Like Us
He also said about the thusters firing continuouslyhttps://twitter.com/NASA/status/129075263479058432...
"It felt like we were inside of an animal"
BTW, this is the movie they were referring to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dlG5B6eQHg
Spies Like Us
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-53658...
Presumably the capsule is aerodynamically stable so are the thrusters keeping the capsule at a bit of an angle for some lift to steer them to the landing point?
Anyone know how accurately they landed?
The Gemini and Apollo capsules both used thruster firings to refine their descent through the atmosphere - so the technique has been in use for almost 60 years. By firing the thrusters, the angle of the descending capsule can be changed, increasing or decreasing aerodynamic lift and allowing the capsule to "steer" closer to its intended landing spot. On both the Gemini and Apollo capsule, the centre of weight was off centre so the craft could be more easilly "tilted" by the thruster firings.
Back in the 1960s, there was no GPS so the accuracy was determined by onboard Inertial Guidance Systems. By the end of the Apollo missions they could get the capsules to within a mile or two of the landing spot.
Now, with the GPS, they can be pretty much spot on, I would suggest - the only deviation would be caused by wind drift once the capsule is dangling from the parachutes.
Back in the 1960s, there was no GPS so the accuracy was determined by onboard Inertial Guidance Systems. By the end of the Apollo missions they could get the capsules to within a mile or two of the landing spot.
Now, with the GPS, they can be pretty much spot on, I would suggest - the only deviation would be caused by wind drift once the capsule is dangling from the parachutes.
Great week for SpaceX, especially the splashdown. Hopefully they will make this process boring, the Falcon is a great rocket.
Enjoyed watching SN5 do its hop. It and hopper makes chuckle out loud when they went up, it is preposterous! I do like the way it slews with the gimballing offset single engine. Are they going for 3 next? I lose track of their engine requirements for sub and orbital. I assume the nose will be on a later SN model and fins.
It'll still never get into space though !
It does a lot more polished steel wise than the hopper though, I'll giver 'em that.
Enjoyed watching SN5 do its hop. It and hopper makes chuckle out loud when they went up, it is preposterous! I do like the way it slews with the gimballing offset single engine. Are they going for 3 next? I lose track of their engine requirements for sub and orbital. I assume the nose will be on a later SN model and fins.
It'll still never get into space though !
It does a lot more polished steel wise than the hopper though, I'll giver 'em that.
Eric Mc said:
The Gemini and Apollo capsules both used thruster firings to refine their descent through the atmosphere - so the technique has been in use for almost 60 years. By firing the thrusters, the angle of the descending capsule can be changed, increasing or decreasing aerodynamic lift and allowing the capsule to "steer" closer to its intended landing spot. On both the Gemini and Apollo capsule, the centre of weight was off centre so the craft could be more easilly "tilted" by the thruster firings.
Back in the 1960s, there was no GPS so the accuracy was determined by onboard Inertial Guidance Systems. By the end of the Apollo missions they could get the capsules to within a mile or two of the landing spot.
Now, with the GPS, they can be pretty much spot on, I would suggest - the only deviation would be caused by wind drift once the capsule is dangling from the parachutes.
This video from the European Space Agency explains the reentry process really well with Soyuz. Rotating the capsule clockwise or anti-clockwise allows them to steer the capsule up and down and sideways if required. The Italian astronaut interviewed, describes the actual landing like getting hit by a truck. Back in the 1960s, there was no GPS so the accuracy was determined by onboard Inertial Guidance Systems. By the end of the Apollo missions they could get the capsules to within a mile or two of the landing spot.
Now, with the GPS, they can be pretty much spot on, I would suggest - the only deviation would be caused by wind drift once the capsule is dangling from the parachutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-l7MM9yoxII
Soyuz astronauts have their bathtub-like seats individually customised before flight:
Edited by Beati Dogu on Wednesday 5th August 12:11
I'm pretty new to the actual science of what's going on here. Been following SpaceX for years though, and even saw Atlantis launch from Canaveral as a kid.
For anyone who has time, in layman's terms, what are we seeing with the Starhopper and SN5 hop? And why is it impressive?
I mean that in a respectful way, it looks amazing and that clever directional jet it uses is awesome. Is this basically the early stages of what the space vehicles of the future are going to be?
Cheers
For anyone who has time, in layman's terms, what are we seeing with the Starhopper and SN5 hop? And why is it impressive?
I mean that in a respectful way, it looks amazing and that clever directional jet it uses is awesome. Is this basically the early stages of what the space vehicles of the future are going to be?
Cheers
Edited by Pebbles167 on Wednesday 5th August 13:56
Gandahar said:
Great week for SpaceX, especially the splashdown. Hopefully they will make this process boring, the Falcon is a great rocket.
Enjoyed watching SN5 do its hop. It and hopper makes chuckle out loud when they went up, it is preposterous! I do like the way it slews with the gimballing offset single engine. Are they going for 3 next? I lose track of their engine requirements for sub and orbital. I assume the nose will be on a later SN model and fins.
It'll still never get into space though !
It does a lot more polished steel wise than the hopper though, I'll giver 'em that.
Here's the SpaceX drone & onboard camera footageEnjoyed watching SN5 do its hop. It and hopper makes chuckle out loud when they went up, it is preposterous! I do like the way it slews with the gimballing offset single engine. Are they going for 3 next? I lose track of their engine requirements for sub and orbital. I assume the nose will be on a later SN model and fins.
It'll still never get into space though !
It does a lot more polished steel wise than the hopper though, I'll giver 'em that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1HA9LlFNM0
Looks like there was a fire on the engine. Maybe a gas leak, or from burning debris thrown up by the launch.
Not sure if they'll do more flights with this one, or move on to the next model. They'll want a proper nose cone, 3 engines & I imagine some fins for the first high altitude flight.
Pebbles167 said:
I'm pretty new to the actual science of what's going on here. Been following SpaceX for years though, and even saw Atlantis launch from Canaveral as a kid.
For anyone who has time, in layman's terms, what are we seeing with the skyhopper and SN5 hop? And why is it impressive?
I mean that in a respectful way, it looks amazing and that clever directional jet it uses is awesome. Is this basically the early stages of what the space vehicles of the future are going to be?
Cheers
That's the plan. It'll be a 100% reusable heavy lift vehicle, which is something the Shuttle never was. It opens up all sorts of possibilities by lowering the cost of launching into space. They want to be able to refuel it in space as well, which opens up flights to Mars - their ultimate goal.For anyone who has time, in layman's terms, what are we seeing with the skyhopper and SN5 hop? And why is it impressive?
I mean that in a respectful way, it looks amazing and that clever directional jet it uses is awesome. Is this basically the early stages of what the space vehicles of the future are going to be?
Cheers
To add to that, the rocket engine in starship, the raptor, was the world’s first full flow staged combustion cycle rocket engine ever to fly. It flew last summer on another hop test but from memory this was only a very short hop. Only 2 previous engines using this combustion cycle have ever been “lit”. One in the 60s and one in 2000, because it is so difficult to do.
It is sort of regarded as the holy grail. All the fuel fed through the rocket engine will exit through the exhaust nozzle - none is “wasted” to run the fuel pumps like basically every other engine type.
Much more efficient in terms of fuel consumed, but also incredible power to weight. According to SpaceX it is the key to landing humans on Mars.
Oh yeah, and the fuel is liquid methane, another first.
It is sort of regarded as the holy grail. All the fuel fed through the rocket engine will exit through the exhaust nozzle - none is “wasted” to run the fuel pumps like basically every other engine type.
Much more efficient in terms of fuel consumed, but also incredible power to weight. According to SpaceX it is the key to landing humans on Mars.
Oh yeah, and the fuel is liquid methane, another first.
Edited by mstrbkr on Wednesday 5th August 14:05
Beati Dogu said:
Maybe a gas leak, or from burning debris thrown up by the launch.
Looks like there was significant damage to the pad or nearby equipment just after it took off, with big chunks flying about - probably as a result of the offset engine resulting in a significant initial horizontal transition close to he ground?Pebbles167 said:
I'm pretty new to the actual science of what's going on here. Been following SpaceX for years though, and even saw Atlantis launch from Canaveral as a kid.
For anyone who has time, in layman's terms, what are we seeing with the Starhopper and SN5 hop? And why is it impressive?
I mean that in a respectful way, it looks amazing and that clever directional jet it uses is awesome. Is this basically the early stages of what the space vehicles of the future are going to be?
Cheers
Imagine balancing a 20t pool cue on your hand and trying to lift and balance and land it uprightFor anyone who has time, in layman's terms, what are we seeing with the Starhopper and SN5 hop? And why is it impressive?
I mean that in a respectful way, it looks amazing and that clever directional jet it uses is awesome. Is this basically the early stages of what the space vehicles of the future are going to be?
Cheers
Edited by Pebbles167 on Wednesday 5th August 13:56
Thanks all for the replies to my question. It certainly will be interesting to watch the progress in the future.
Yes I see your point, but I know that SpaceX stuff has been doing these kind of landings for a while. I didnt realize the size of the SN5 thing though!
annodomini2 said:
Imagine balancing a 20t pool cue on your hand and trying to lift and balance and land it upright
Yes I see your point, but I know that SpaceX stuff has been doing these kind of landings for a while. I didnt realize the size of the SN5 thing though!
Pebbles167 said:
Yes I see your point, but I know that SpaceX stuff has been doing these kind of landings for a while. I didnt realize the size of the SN5 thing though!
A falcon 9 booster is 70m tall and over 3.5m wide, thats slightly taller than Grenfell tower!
SN-5 is only about 30m tall but I think 9m wide, which by my calculations puts it at about 2-3 times the size of a 3 bed house!
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff