** The Official Space Flight Thread - The Space Station and Beyond **

I think it's very much how they do it that matters. Launch in Starship and then re-enter in Starship, no way until it has a lot of landings under it's belt.

Launch in Dragon, transfer to a proven HLS Starship, orbit the moon, return to LEO, then re-enter in Dragon. Yeah that would be ok.
 
keyser van someone said:
The dearMoon team won't be landing on the moon, 3 days to reach to the moon, quick orbit around (doesn't take long) and back again (another 3 days).

NASA went to the moon last year again with Artemis (orbit only). As there was no rush that took a funky way to get there, a total of a 4 weeks I think to go and come back.
Click to expand...

Yes but we don't know for sure that Starship won't need to be refueled to get to the Moon and back. That is not something that Artemis requires.
 
PlacidCasual said:
I think it's very much how they do it that matters. Launch in Starship and then re-enter in Starship, no way until it has a lot of landings under it's belt.

Launch in Dragon, transfer to a proven HLS Starship, orbit the moon, return to LEO, then re-enter in Dragon. Yeah that would be ok.
Click to expand...

Yeah its the returning to Earth that is risky as hell. We've been doing capsule reentry successfully for 60 years
 
Last edited:
Chuk_Chuk said:
SLS has components that it’s reused from the space shuttle program right?
Click to expand...
Yep - and once the existing SRB casings are exhausted (~8 flights), and the stock of existing RS-25D engines (~4 flights), then NASA will have to add some more unknown variables into the mix with all the potential cost (and other) implications that flying new parts entails.
 
Armageus said:
Yep - and once the existing SRB casings are exhausted (~8 flights), and the stock of existing RS-25D engines (~4 flights), then NASA will have to add some more unknown variables into the mix with all the potential cost (and other) implications that flying new parts entails.
Click to expand...
I know I used the word reused but I just thought they were just reusing designs. Are they actually using old stock from the space shuttle program? Well that makes the comparisons even more laughable.

Do they still have the original tooling for these components or will they need to set up a new assembly line? I’m assuming that means they will need to reverify all of that.
 
Last edited:
Chuk_Chuk said:
I know I used the word reused but I just thought they were just reusing designs. Are they actually using old stock from the space shuttle program? Well that makes the comparisons even more laughable.

Do they still have the original tooling for these components or will they need to set up a new assembly line? I’m assuming that means they will need to reverify all of that.
Click to expand...

Not sure how up to date this all is, but from https://www.nasa.gov/reference/space-launch-system-rs-25-core-stage-engine/ they mention the following.

NASA has contracted with Aerojet Rocketdyne to restart production of a more affordable variant of the RS-25 tested and certified for flight at a higher thrust level. This new engine will use a simplified design, new manufacturing technologies, new inspection technologies, and processes that reduce handling and support labor, hardware defects, and production time.

One of the most promising technologies is selective laser melting (SLM). This technology uses a high-energy laser and metal powder to produce parts more quickly and at lower cost than is possible with conventional manufacturing methods. Because they are made of fewer separate parts, these SLM parts are more structurally sound, resulting in a safer vehicle.
Click to expand...

There's also https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/n...complete-testing-for-modernized-rs-25-engine/ where I think they already have production, at least the testing of the intial new designs?

But I have no idea how far along they are etc. had a quick search and most of it was just marketing stuff for Aerojet Rocketdyne and article with barely any info.
 
Last edited:
Chuk_Chuk said:
I know I used the word reused but I just thought they were just reusing designs. Are they actually using old stock from the space shuttle program? Well that makes the comparisons even more laughable.

Do they still have the original tooling for these components or will they need to set up a new assembly line? I’m assuming that means they will need to reverify all of that.
Click to expand...
en.wikipedia.org

Space Launch System - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

en.wikipedia.org

RS-25 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
"Just" another standard Starlink launch tonight, but DAMN!!! fantastic footage from the boys over at NSF. Jellyfish, stage sep, fairing sep, both stages and both fairing all in shot together with RCS from booster and fairings etc etc etc. Such fantastic coverage! Can you imagine they had the camera and tracking ability back in the Apollo/Saturn V days...

Also just a YT short but beautiful little clip from Everyday Astronaut of IFT-3
 
Last edited:
Great video of Destin chatting with ULA CEO Tory Bruno about Vulcan rocket. Tory really does come across as a nice guy in all the interviews I've seen with him, would make an amazing teacher.

 
  • Like
Reactions: SPG
For anyone still up, here's a live stream I've started watching of the manned NASA Boeing Starliner launch. Launch time is 10.34pm EDT. Countdown clock currently says 2 hours 12 minutes, so looks like 3.34am GMT.

EDIT: Bah, scrubbed due to a 2nd stage oxygen release valve issue that they weren't confident about.


 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom