few

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] few@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago

Ah yes, that would increase the separation quite quickly.

I guess they do the relight test after the simulator deploy because it is a higher risk activity - the pez dispenser is very unlikely to cause a RUD.

[–] few@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Apart from the spectator value of mounting a camera on one of the Starlink simulators, how much value would such a camera have to SpaceX in being able to monitor the re-entry? How long before the simulator was too far away / too hot to be able to continue transmitting useful images?

[–] few@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

How will the transition from 5 to 3 engines on the Booster landing burn add additional redundancy? How is that different from going straight to 3 engines?

Previously the 3 engine landing burn was for about 16 seconds. If there was a 5 second burn with 5 engines then that would be followed by a 7 or 8 second burn with 3 engines, giving a total elapsed burn time of 13 seconds.

Is there a gap between the 5 engine burn and the 3 engine burn or will they just switch off two engines after 5 seconds. Does that mean that they can then choose which two to turn off and avoid the need to allow for the 0.2 seconds engine startup time that would be needed if there was a failure of one of the 3 engines. Is that the only benefit of a 5-3 landing burn?

[–] few@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Is there a visualization anywhere of the maneuver that is intended to mimic the approach path to the launch site? Will it come in over Mexico and then do some kind of wiggle? What population centers do they need to avoid?

[–] few@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Spaceflight Now and Space Devs links added. I've also fixed the dateful link. I think it might have been the & that was also messed up and may be resolved differently by different browser - anyway I hope it is fixed now.

[–] few@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Thanks. The date link was a bit wrong but seems to give the correct result: https://dateful.com/convert/utc?t=2011&d=2024-02-23T04:11

I didn't notice the t=2011 argument and just appended T04:11 to the d argument. Seems to work ok for me.

[–] few@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago

OCISLY towed by Debra C is making 5.5 knots and currently about 60km (30 nautical miles) off the Mexican coast: https://www.vesselfinder.com/?mmsi=368351350 (MARMAC 304 is the original registered name of OCISLY)

[–] few@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago

Support ship Go Beyond is about 4 hours out of Long Beach on its way to "LZ :)" https://www.vesselfinder.com/?imo=9622655

 

Time for another Starlink mission. This one's an evening launch from Vandenburg. It will be the 19th flight of booster B1061.

| Scheduled for (UTC) | 2024-02-23 04:11 | |


|


| | Scheduled for (local) | 2024-02-22 20:11 (PST) | | Mission | Starlink Group 7-15 | | Launch site | SLC-4E, Vandenberg Space Force Base, California, USA. | | Vehicle | Falcon 9 | | Booster | B1061 19th Flight | | Landing | ADSD Of Course I Still Love You at T+00:08:23 | | Inclination | 53° Why? | | Payload | 22 x Starlink V2 Mini deployed at T+01:02:17 | | Customer | SpaceX | | Mission success criteria | Successful launch and delivery of payload to low earth orbit|

Webcasts

| Stream | Link | |


|


| | Space Affairs | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQWd7EnE8MU | The Launch Pad | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikloLxNHxvU | SpaceX | https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=sl-7-15 | SpaceFlight Now | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmHTtpdEoTA | The Space Devs | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySJ2qEwoxkE

NextSpaceflight page

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmHTtpdEoTA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySJ2qEwoxkE

[–] few@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago

Broadcast has started now.

[–] few@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 years ago (4 children)

SpaceX live streaming starts at 12:24 UTC here: https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1dRKZEWQvrXxB

[–] few@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 years ago

The flight profile here https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-flight-2 does not say there will be a flip. But concludes with "Excitement Guaranteed". So anything could happen.

 

Recent news suggests that SpaceX are pivoting to hot-staging instead of the flip maneuver for getting Starship away from the booster. Looking at the Titan II hot staging it seems like it would be a violent and explosive event. How could this be mitigated? A hardened cover on top of the booster would be a significant weight penalty. Do the expected gains really outweigh the additional weight?

view more: next ›