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

PlacidCasual said:
Well if you look at the changes that each company makes to their pad they are very bespoke. The quick disconnects and hold down arrangements being the first things to consider. Some rockets will want early release and engines throttle up some want the engines flat out before release. The rockets will have different resonances, rigidity, slosh arrangements that call for different release arrangements. Also Methane Oxygen used by New Glen and StarShip is not common and historically the kerosene oxygen of Flacon 9 isn't mega common without going into hypergolic propellants. Until very recently rockets have been ultra bespoke low use items highly optimised for their own profile and hence ground arrangements.

Edit: Ultimately any commonality is a constraint on innovation. These companies are each trying to make a vehicle that is their vision of the best solution with the technology they have.
Click to expand...
Thank you, that was very helpful and detailed answer.
Guess I should do some research now. I watch launches but never delved into the detail.
 
the soyuz manned one, said they had a 6second heads-up on a problem to allow escape , but in the recent incident we'll see if there would have been similar notice.
 
It just depends how quick the onboard computer knows there is an issue - if the computer detected a fuel leak 6 seconds before the boom then it would have time to launch the capsule
 
Yeah these safety systems can kick in both automatically and manually if required, based on sensors, if many are feeding back 'this is bad' data then it kicks in. It's probably a brutal ride, high g-force, but its better than the alternative. So if this had been a manned capsule it would have fired maybe within the first +1 second (I'm just guessing based on seeing fire right from the start that shouldn't be there) it would have been 300-500 metres away from the rocket when it went boom.

A sensor could just be a simple 'this should never be an open circuit' or 'this should not be on fire' and if it is that means something just failed in a really bad way, but it wont just be one sensor it'll likely be a few for confirmation it isn't just a faulty sensor.

I recommend following Scott Manley, he deep dives into lots of subjects around space exploration and rockets.


Once they're officially in some kind of orbit/suborbit and have got past the most risky part of the launch they can jettison the those systems to save mass.


There must also be various engine out/failed scenarios as well, like in the future if there are crew onboard a SpaceX Super Heavy rocket and there is an engine out, do they just carry on or would the safety systems kick in? I don't actually know the answer to that.
 
keyser van someone said:
There must also be various engine out/failed scenarios as well, like in the future if there are crew onboard a SpaceX Super Heavy rocket and there is an engine out, do they just carry on or would the safety systems kick in? I don't actually know the answer to that.
Click to expand...

At last check, I don’t think Starship had a crew abort system.

Any made for passenger flights would have to be met in orbit by something else and transferred over.
 
Penfold101 said:
At last check, I don’t think Starship had a crew abort system.

Any made for passenger flights would have to be met in orbit by something else and transferred over.
Click to expand...
Yeah you're right, Starship is too big to scale up to any launch abort system, they're pushing towards it being reliable and reusable. So SpaceX need to demonstrate that before the various organisations sign off that it's safe for crewed missions.
 
keyser van someone said:
Yeah you're right, Starship is too big to scale up to any launch abort system, they're pushing towards it being reliable and reusable. So SpaceX need to demonstrate that before the various organisations sign off that it's safe for crewed missions.
Click to expand...

It never will be in its current form. Heavy lift to Low Earth Orbit is about as much as it might end up doing, but they’re years away from it being capable of carrying people, if it ever does.

No sign of the moon landing starship either, 5 years after that contract was awarded!
 
Apparently the old Russian section of the ISS has sprung a leak and the astronauts are currently sheltering in the spacecraft while they decide how to proceed. Some news agencies report preparation to evacuate the station.

*EDIT*

They have now been told to return to the station so all good.
 
Last edited:
The Chinese have just landed a rocket booster (a bit like SpaceX) but using landing hooks and a net.

www.abc.net.au

China achieves first-ever controlled rocket recovery

China has successfully tested an experimental rocket retrieval system, state media reported, in the hope of breaking US dominance in reusable rockets.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au

And it seems there's a lot of money (and IPO acceleration) being thrown at Chinese space companies.
 
Last edited:
RxR said:
The Chinese have just landed a rocket booster (a bit like SpaceX) but using landing hooks and a net.

www.abc.net.au

China achieves first-ever controlled rocket recovery

China has successfully tested an experimental rocket retrieval system, state media reported, in the hope of breaking US dominance in reusable rockets.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au

And it seems there's a lot of money (and IPO acceleration) being thrown at Chinese space companies.
Click to expand...
China showing off their precision missile guidance system. :D

So EU and UK, when are you guys going to up your game or are you waiting for India to start demonstrating their own system.
 
Chuk_Chuk said:
China showing off their precision missile guidance system. :D

So EU and UK, when are you guys going to up your game or are you waiting for India to start demonstrating their own system.
Click to expand...

Probably never - it’s just cheaper in annual budgets to fund disposable boosters than research and develop reusable ones for the number of launches we actually have.

SpaceX have made it worthwhile due to the number of launches their Starlink system needs - it takes up 80-90% of them as the most profitable part of their business.
 
Penfold101 said:
SpaceX have made it worthwhile due to the number of launches their Starlink system needs - it takes up 80-90% of them as the most profitable part of their business.
Click to expand...
One thing I would say is that the Falcon 9 is cheaper even single use than European rockets and probably by quite a wide margin. Even without reusability I think there is significant work needed to bring launch costs down, the engines are like Ferrari's not Ford's. Very early on Falcon 9 was the cheapest per tonne to orbit. Merlin is a straightforward engine that didn't seek bleeding edge performance. RocketLab have taken a similar approach and it's an approach that makes the legacy majors looks expensive and niche.
 
PlacidCasual said:
One thing I would say is that the Falcon 9 is cheaper even single use than European rockets and probably by quite a wide margin. Even without reusability I think there is significant work needed to bring launch costs down, the engines are like Ferrari's not Ford's. Very early on Falcon 9 was the cheapest per tonne to orbit. Merlin is a straightforward engine that didn't seek bleeding edge performance. RocketLab have taken a similar approach and it's an approach that makes the legacy majors looks expensive and niche.
Click to expand...

I think my opinion on SpaceX, Musk and Starship is fairly well known on here, but I’ve always said the Falcon 9 is an absolute masterpiece of engineering. From the reliability to the engines (nine small appears to be a better design choice than one large) to the landing and the stack up of the Heavy giving us the twin booster landings, it all just works.

For stats, there were 125 F9 launches in 2025 (which is insane) and 90 of them were for Starlink.
 
RxR said:
The Chinese have just landed a rocket booster (a bit like SpaceX) but using landing hooks and a net.

www.abc.net.au

China achieves first-ever controlled rocket recovery

China has successfully tested an experimental rocket retrieval system, state media reported, in the hope of breaking US dominance in reusable rockets.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au

And it seems there's a lot of money (and IPO acceleration) being thrown at Chinese space companies.
Click to expand...
Came down smoking like a Victorian chimney stick. The only thing missing was Fred Dibnah hanging off the side with a few ropes and a plank of wood.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom