The Space Thread - Launches, Events, Live Streams, Governments, Corporations, drama in Spaaaaaaaaaaaace

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Hype and potential aside, SLS is actually a real production rocket that has been to the moon while Starship isn't even a prototype, it's a "hardware rich" agile development effort that hasn't produced anything they can sell yet. It looks cool that they're building all these flying test articles but they're of no practical use to anybody at this stage.
 
Pedophobe said:
Hype and potential aside, SLS is actually a real production rocket that has been to the moon while Starship isn't even a prototype, it's a "hardware rich" agile development effort that hasn't produced anything they can sell yet. It looks cool that they're building all these flying test articles but they're of no practical use to anybody at this stage.
Click to expand...
The SLS has had one successful unmanned orbit yes, but even that one was plagued with issues.

As for starship, the previous v1 and v2 were concept tests yes. As I stated earlier though, the v3 starship launch coming up for Flight 12 is the prototype this time.

If its successful, SpaceX can start thinking about manned lunar missions too. Which might explain why NASA is trying to rush a manned mission now with Artemis II despite all its issues, which are the same issues as with Artemis I. If Elon beats them to the moon that will be a serious kick in the nuts.
 
mindlessobserver said:
If its successful, SpaceX can start thinking about manned lunar missions too. Which might explain why NASA is trying to rush a manned mission now with Artemis II despite all its issues, which are the same issues as with Artemis I. If Elon beats them to the moon that will be a serious kick in the nuts.
Click to expand...
I don't think SpaceX wants to "compete" with NASA, their customer. Elon's not going to send anything to the moon on his own dime if NASA will pay for it. The reason I heard why Artemis is being rushed is so they can complete the landing before Trump's term is up but I haven't been able to find any confirmation of that (unlike in Trump's first term where it was widely recognized that the 2024 landing deadline was specifically for Trump's edification).
 
Pedophobe said:
I don't think SpaceX wants to "compete" with NASA, their customer. Elon's not going to send anything to the moon on his own dime if NASA will pay for it. The reason I heard why Artemis is being rushed is so they can complete the landing before Trump's term is up but I haven't been able to find any confirmation of that (unlike in Trump's first term where it was widely recognized that the 2024 landing deadline was specifically for Trump's edification).
Click to expand...
Well, its not that SpaceX is competing with NASA, more that its competing with NASAs in house vehicle development program. SpaceX getting Starship to work and the SLS continuing to not work means Congress is going to be asking some pointed questions about NASAs budget.
 
mindlessobserver said:
If its successful, SpaceX can start thinking about manned lunar missions too. Which might explain why NASA is trying to rush a manned mission now with Artemis II despite all its issues, which are the same issues as with Artemis I. If Elon beats them to the moon that will be a serious kick in the nuts.
Click to expand...
Jumping the orbital refueling hurdle still seems like major obstacle for Starship/Falcon Superheavy. Their pace of innovation and revision is impressive, but I have a hard time believing they will nail a procedure that complex the first time.

As for NASA trying to push through the Artemis delays to bring the timeline up, I suspect that has more to do with the Trump admin pushing to have Americans back on the moon before the end of his term.
 
Post Reply said:
Jumping the orbital refueling hurdle still seems like major obstacle for Starship/Falcon Superheavy. Their pace of innovation and revision is impressive, but I have a hard time believing they will nail a procedure that complex the first time.

As for NASA trying to push through the Artemis delays to bring the timeline up, I suspect that has more to do with the Trump admin pushing to have Americans back on the moon before the end of his term.
Click to expand...

Docking in orbit is routine. I imagine the hurdle is primarily about actually getting Starship working and reusable. Once that happens, the many inefficient flights to refuel will not be too much of a challenge.
 
Despite all the SpaceX fapping, it's funny to see how cursed Starliner remains after its first flight. Mike Fincke was actually meant to fly on the crewed flight test, when it was meant to be a 3 person crew. NASA ended up making it a two person crew (it was originally meant to be a two person crew, the changes in the crew of Starliner's first crewed flight is actually sorta crazy.
 
mindlessobserver said:
Artemis II being rolled back to the assembly hall:'(

Click to expand...
That's ok


Sad it won't be a March 6th launch but hopefully early April

NASA is INSANELY paranoid about losing astronauts (as is the CCP actually).

I have a feeling SpaceX will kill a crew in the next few years.... Probably on a starship as it has ZERO crew escape options once the engines light up.
 
Falcos_Commisar said:
I have a feeling SpaceX will kill a crew in the next few years.... Probably on a starship as it has ZERO crew escape options once the engines light up.
Click to expand...
If the dumb Artemis program proceeds without a major overhaul, astronauts will rendezvous with the Starship lunar variant in space, where it is relatively safe, and abandon that Starship near the Moon when finished. SpaceX has officially deemphasized Mars, pivoted to getting lunar landings back on track, and wants to launch 1 million AI satellites, or at least a lot more Starlink satellites. The Yusaku Maezawa #dearMoon Starship artist joyride was cancelled. There will be fewer Falcon 9 Crew Dragon trips after 2031 due to the ISS being dismantled/deorbited.

So there won't be that many opportunities for SpaceX to kill crew within the next 10 years. They could carry crew to some private space stations like Axiom and Starlab, probably using Crew Dragon. Starship could be doing what it's best for: getting thousands of tons of stuff into low Earth orbit cheaply (including the Starlab space station, allegedly).
 
I think if the helium purge isn't working it's less of a safety issue and more that they won't even be able to refuel the rocket and launch it.
 
Pedophobe said:
I think if the helium purge isn't working it's less of a safety issue and more that they won't even be able to refuel the rocket and launch it.
Click to expand...
I've said this previously, but the Helium leaks are just a really common occurrence when used as a rocket fuel. It happened a lot with both Delta IV and the Shuttle. It's again, because of how small Helium is and how cold the fuel needs to be. It's just that it seems more of a rarity now because both rockets no longer fly.

Plus, Artemis 2 is not in any hurry to fly. Hardware for Artemis 3 is still being built, and can be put into storage until the landers are ready to fly. The only important thing will be the re-entry of Artemis 2 when planning the trajectory for the return of Artemis 3 and how they want to deal with reentry. SLS + Orion is pretty much mature now before further flights. It is really just HLS that is being waited on. Like, it can be a 6 month delay for Artemis 2 and nothing will be changed.
 
Space Kiwibros I'm scared why does this mean for us beating the Chicoms to the moon????


Screenshot_20260227-115841.png
 
Falcos_Commisar said:
Space Kiwibros I'm scared why does this mean for us beating the Chicoms to the moon????


View attachment 8627540
Click to expand...
They are saying they want to speed shit up and do more launches of the SLS. Artemis III will be launched in 2027 instead of 2028. But it will be for further testing of tbe system. Artemis IV will be the moon landing, still in 2028 though.

They just have to figure out how to get fuel into the rocket.
 
Falcos_Commisar said:
Space Kiwibros I'm scared why does this mean for us beating the Chicoms to the moon????
Click to expand...
The logic is fairly simple, increase SLS cadence. Get it flying more. This will make the SLS program cheaper, and help save costs in the long term. Cadence is the main issue with SLS, where a lot of NASA's requested budget goes to renting facilities used for SLS which are only used for SLS. Take the VAB, funding from SLS included the maintenance of the facility. And this includes many other facilities, which is why SLS is important because it keeps those centres available. These are fixed costs with SLS.

Now, when it comes to beating China to the moon? China was planning for the 2030s, this is meant to be an in orbit crewed test of the human landers (if available) which would be a stripped down form. In theory, SpaceX could potentially be ready for such a mission next year if they sort out Starship (I'd give it 50/50) and feel as if they could launch a stripped down HLS with only critical systems + life support. What Issacman is wanting to do is basically get SLS' production up and be ready to fly in 2028 with probably a Centaur-V in the stead of the Interim Cryogenic Upper Stage. Especially with EUS being on the way out.

All the hardware pretty much works. There's only a few things needed to be done. First, is to create two new interstages/adapters for the stage used. The next, is modify the launch tower. After this, verify the code and the final is human rating it.

This being the new graphic:

1772216545279.png

Edit: China's architecture for lunar exploration is also substantially different than NASA's and doesn't really scale well. I'll explain this later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom