https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-mr-ste ... -size-net/

Omg that's just crazy! Well actually it's probably not.Hope this works for them it looks -well a little 'Heath robinson' but who cares.
I notes on an earlier post on the same site that an inflatable raft was also seen.I wonder if this is the 'bouncy castle' Elon referred to re capturing the second stage?

That's a funky looking boat. I'm guessing that this is so that they can catch 2 fairings on thee net and not need a 2nd boat. Have one aim for the left side of the net and the other for the right.

It is such a huge increase in area, I wonder if that is in part so that the approach paths are entirely abeam of the ship, with sufficient lateral comfort margin that if either fairing overshoots the net it can only drop in the sea adjacent or diagonally ahead of the boat. A fairing approaching along the ship's longitudinal axis then overshooting might otherwise drop onto the wheel-house (depending upon net geometry) or near in-front of the boat and be a high collision risk. I'm sure they've thought of these cases and hardened the ship against them if there is any perceived risk of damage, but it is better avoided entirely.

Isn't there a danger of the ship capsizing if the fairing comes in at the edge of the net? Not sure how much a fairing weighs and how much force it lands with...

aviationaware wrote:

Isn't there a danger of the ship capsizing if the fairing comes in at the edge of the net? Not sure how much a fairing weighs and how much force it lands with...

I really doubt it will have much impact on the vessel. It seems like a large and sturdy ship. In the past I've wondered what would happen if the fairing missed and hit the bridge of the ship, but the new net seems to cover the entire ship.

(a) It is a ship. They are heavy. (b) The fairing is a component from a space vehichle. They are lightweight by design.

With as much leverage as hitting the edge of the net would have and the likelihood of the ship being lightly ballasted and fueled for the best possible maneuverability and acceleration, you'll know when the fairing hits the edge, but it will just be a small rudder correction to keep things perfectly level.

Ok, like I said no idea how much the fairing weighs and very limited knowledge of maritime engineering (none). Just thought that the ship might become imbalanced if the fairing hits, but I guess smarter people than myself designed that ship and considered all obvious eventualities. Would love to see feed from Mr. Steven some time though, always thought it was a pity that there wasn't any.

aviationaware wrote:

Ok, like I said no idea how much the fairing weighs and very limited knowledge of maritime engineering (none). Just thought that the ship might become imbalanced if the fairing hits, but I guess smarter people than myself designed that ship and considered all obvious eventualities. Would love to see feed from Mr. Steven some time though, always thought it was a pity that there wasn't any.

In a recent launch there was a Mr. S. feed visible in the launch control room. Looked like it was taken by a drone flying in front of the boat. I’m sure when they finally catch one the video will be available shortly after. Once they get good at it, it’ll be part of the launch broadcast.

@Nomadd you’re famous!!!

https://greatlakesledger.com/2018/07/16/spacex-prepares-to-test-the-space-x-bfr-and-bfs/

“An immense liquid oxygen (LOX) tank just arrived at @SpaceX’s prospective Boca Chica, TX facility, likely to be dedicated to BFR & BFS testing. @NASASpaceflight forum user “Nomadd” caught some of the first detailed photos, as well as the tank’s arrival at SpaceX land on July 11,” tweeted Eric Ralph.

Mr. Steven sea trials video with the new net setup:

http://youtu.be/VlCO7gBXWNA

DarkKnight5 wrote:

Mr. Steven sea trials video with the new net setup:

http://youtu.be/VlCO7gBXWNA

Wow that looks very manoeuvrable. The net still doesn't cover the bridge and bow of the ship though. So far the fairing has missed the net by some distance. What if it hits the bridge?

JetBuddy wrote:

DarkKnight5 wrote:

Mr. Steven sea trials video with the new net setup:

http://youtu.be/VlCO7gBXWNA

Wow that looks very manoeuvrable. The net still doesn't cover the bridge and bow of the ship though. So far the fairing has missed the net by some distance. What if it hits the bridge?

Lightweight space-grade carbon fibre against heavy duty ship-grade steel... It'll be another smashed fairing vs. a small dent and a lick of paint on the boat.

I'm guessing the crew stays inside during the recovery maneuver.

Presumably, this wider net also comes with an improved guidance system for the fairing chute, as the net area increase in itself would not be sufficient.
We're getting close.

Francoflier wrote:

Lightweight space-grade carbon fibre against heavy duty ship-grade steel... It'll be another smashed fairing vs. a small dent and a lick of paint on the boat.

I'm guessing the crew stays inside during the recovery maneuver.

Presumably, this wider net also comes with an improved guidance system for the fairing chute, as the net area increase in itself would not be sufficient.
We're getting close.

There are radars and other antennae on the bridge area. The damage to those would be inconvenient. And the fairing would be toast as well. But there's probably a reason they haven't stretched the net even further.

Like you mentioned, the improved guidance system will probably be enough to make it work.

DarkKnight5 wrote:

@Nomadd you’re famous!!!

https://greatlakesledger.com/2018/07/16/spacex-prepares-to-test-the-space-x-bfr-and-bfs/

“An immense liquid oxygen (LOX) tank just arrived at @SpaceX’s prospective Boca Chica, TX facility, likely to be dedicated to BFR & BFS testing. @NASASpaceflight forum user “Nomadd” caught some of the first detailed photos, as well as the tank’s arrival at SpaceX land on July 11,” tweeted Eric Ralph.

It wasn't hard to "catch" some photos. It's sitting about 200 feet from my front door.

Telstar 19 launch coming up in about 5 minutes. Launching from complex 40 at Cape Canaveral.

Second flight of the block 5 Falcon 9. 1st stage landing planned for OCISLY.

Successful 1st stage landing.

Congrats SpaceX and Telstar. Was this the first launch and landing of a Falcon 9 Block 5?

JetBuddy wrote:

Congrats SpaceX and Telstar. Was this the first launch and landing of a Falcon 9 Block 5?

No, the first Block 5 went in May, carrying a payload for Bangladesh IIRC.

GDB wrote:

JetBuddy wrote:

Congrats SpaceX and Telstar. Was this the first launch and landing of a Falcon 9 Block 5?

No, the first Block 5 went in May, carrying a payload for Bangladesh IIRC.

I'm trying to remember how many launches it will take for NASA to man-rate the Falcon? Is it three more launches to go for NASA to certify?

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

GDB wrote:

JetBuddy wrote:

Congrats SpaceX and Telstar. Was this the first launch and landing of a Falcon 9 Block 5?

No, the first Block 5 went in May, carrying a payload for Bangladesh IIRC.

I'm trying to remember how many launches it will take for NASA to man-rate the Falcon? Is it three more launches to go for NASA to certify?

Tugg

They wanted 10 launches of identical boosters. (i. e. block 4 launches don't count)

Tugger wrote:

I'm trying to remember how many launches it will take for NASA to man-rate the Falcon? Is it three more launches to go for NASA to certify?

Tugg

7. However I don’t believe they have a final configuration yet. New COPV design is coming. Launches won’t count until then.

zanl188 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

I'm trying to remember how many launches it will take for NASA to man-rate the Falcon? Is it three more launches to go for NASA to certify?

Tugg

7. However I don’t believe they have a final configuration yet. New COPV design is coming. Launches won’t count until then.

The silence in this issue has been concerning. I assume once they finally do freeze the design, they’ll make a big deal out of it.

I know pressure bottles were the cause of the launchpad unplanned, rapid disassembly, but that was quite a long time ago. I’m surprised they’re not able to use the current bottles for man-rating. They’ve flown and reflown thirty some times since then. Maybe NASA told them to redesign the bottles or they’ll never approve the rating.

zanl188 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

I'm trying to remember how many launches it will take for NASA to man-rate the Falcon? Is it three more launches to go for NASA to certify?

Tugg

7. However I don’t believe they have a final configuration yet. New COPV design is coming. Launches won’t count until then.

That's what I understand, so they have not started counting down yet. Hence why it's thought more likely that the first manned Dragon 2 will be early next year rather than 2018.
There is an unmanned Dragon 2 coming this year, which I'm assuming will include the new COPV.

While I get NASA's caution in laying down these rules, I cannot help but recall how the most complex, certainly one of the least safe, manned launch vehicle launched for the first time manned, with no unmanned test flights! On April 12th 1981.

A beautiful series of pictures of the TelStar launch:

https://photos.tmahlmann.com/Rockets/Sp ... 9-Vantage/

The pictures when the rocket goes supersonic are truly awesome!

Tugg

GDB wrote:

zanl188 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

I'm trying to remember how many launches it will take for NASA to man-rate the Falcon? Is it three more launches to go for NASA to certify?

Tugg

7. However I don’t believe they have a final configuration yet. New COPV design is coming. Launches won’t count until then.

That's what I understand, so they have not started counting down yet. Hence why it's thought more likely that the first manned Dragon 2 will be early next year rather than 2018.
There is an unmanned Dragon 2 coming this year, which I'm assuming will include the new COPV.

While I get NASA's caution in laying down these rules, I cannot help but recall how the most complex, certainly one of the least safe, manned launch vehicle launched for the first time manned, with no unmanned test flights! On April 12th 1981.

The Columbia was equipped with ejection seats along with a couple of very brave souls.

itchief wrote:

GDB wrote:

zanl188 wrote:

7. However I don’t believe they have a final configuration yet. New COPV design is coming. Launches won’t count until then.

That's what I understand, so they have not started counting down yet. Hence why it's thought more likely that the first manned Dragon 2 will be early next year rather than 2018.
There is an unmanned Dragon 2 coming this year, which I'm assuming will include the new COPV.

While I get NASA's caution in laying down these rules, I cannot help but recall how the most complex, certainly one of the least safe, manned launch vehicle launched for the first time manned, with no unmanned test flights! On April 12th 1981.

The Columbia was equipped with ejection seats along with a couple of very brave souls.

Dragon will be fitted with an abort motor for the capsule, obviously.

DarkKnight5 wrote:

itchief wrote:

GDB wrote:

That's what I understand, so they have not started counting down yet. Hence why it's thought more likely that the first manned Dragon 2 will be early next year rather than 2018.
There is an unmanned Dragon 2 coming this year, which I'm assuming will include the new COPV.

While I get NASA's caution in laying down these rules, I cannot help but recall how the most complex, certainly one of the least safe, manned launch vehicle launched for the first time manned, with no unmanned test flights! On April 12th 1981.

The Columbia was equipped with ejection seats along with a couple of very brave souls.

Dragon will be fitted with an abort motor for the capsule, obviously.

Six abort motors.

Nomadd wrote:

DarkKnight5 wrote:

itchief wrote:

The Columbia was equipped with ejection seats along with a couple of very brave souls.

Dragon will be fitted with an abort motor for the capsule, obviously.

Six abort motors.

From my very first post in this thread:
a video can be found here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRqLNdwsPBM

Still good!

Tugg

Nomadd wrote:

DarkKnight5 wrote:

itchief wrote:

The Columbia was equipped with ejection seats along with a couple of very brave souls.

Dragon will be fitted with an abort motor for the capsule, obviously.

Six abort motors.

NASA asks for redundancy? Give them redundancy.

DarkKnight5 wrote:

Nomadd wrote:

DarkKnight5 wrote:

Dragon will be fitted with an abort motor for the capsule, obviously.

Six abort motors.

NASA asks for redundancy? Give them redundancy.

Its also the inherent design of the Dragon capsule. The abort motors are on the side so you have to have more than one. Apollo, Soyuz, even Boeing's Starliner have the tower with one big SRB instead.

itchief wrote:

GDB wrote:

zanl188 wrote:

7. However I don’t believe they have a final configuration yet. New COPV design is coming. Launches won’t count until then.

That's what I understand, so they have not started counting down yet. Hence why it's thought more likely that the first manned Dragon 2 will be early next year rather than 2018.
There is an unmanned Dragon 2 coming this year, which I'm assuming will include the new COPV.

While I get NASA's caution in laying down these rules, I cannot help but recall how the most complex, certainly one of the least safe, manned launch vehicle launched for the first time manned, with no unmanned test flights! On April 12th 1981.

The Columbia was equipped with ejection seats along with a couple of very brave souls.

Yes, in many ways the sadly late John Young was perhaps one of the greatest of Astronauts, in service, range of experience and yes, quiet but firm courage.
Though he did point out years later, if he had to use the ejector seat on Columbia he (and Crippen) would have been 'crispy critters!'

ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:

DarkKnight5 wrote:

Nomadd wrote:

Six abort motors.

NASA asks for redundancy? Give them redundancy.

Its also the inherent design of the Dragon capsule. The abort motors are on the side so you have to have more than one. Apollo, Soyuz, even Boeing's Starliner have the tower with one big SRB instead.

Yes I know. I was being flippant.

Landing leg retract on a block 5. Lots of landing leg detail here.

https://youtu.be/L2tc2r3jwhE

Next launch tonight:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjfQNBYv2IY

SpaceX is targeting launch of the Merah Putih satellite to a Geostationary Transfer Orbit during a two-hour launch window that opens at 1:18am ET Tuesday (5:18 UTC). The launch will occur from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. The first stage will attempt to make a landing on the Of Course I Still Love You drone ship after completing its primary mission. Weather conditions appear favorable.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/08 ... -falcon-9/

Tugg

Some jobs are more interesting than others....


Found it here: https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-first- ... d-records/
Liked it and had to share.

Tugg

Tugg, great shot! Thanks for making my day!

Good launch so far.

First stage is back on OCISLY, good parking orbit for Merah Putih, and is now coasting towards the second burn.

Another nice job.

I loved watching the lightening in the background just after the booster separated. Also liked the ghostly lighting and shadows cast by the departing second stage.

Tugg

https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-falcon ... r-anxiety/

Is there nothing a '9 block5' can't do?!
It has just lifted the Worlds second (by a few pounds) sat into orbit (circa 6 tons?) which went on to stationary orbit.Once again the main booster landed perfectly.It really seems like these craft are highly reusable.
No doubt US and European governments will keep their rocket. Industries in production (and keep competition).But its increasingly hard to see why a commercial sat' buyer would want to use anything else but a F9.
Next year should see the final piece of th jigsaw with manned flights to the ISS.
Also perhaps the start of building the cloud of comms' stats for his next big business venture.

2019.
Other than manned flight (big enough in itself) any other surprises? ( not talking BFR here)
Will try for a Moon orbit?
Any more to come from FH in 2019?
How about a tourist space port around the Earth- ending the dreams of Richard and Elon.Why not if it can make money? If he can lift 6+ tons in one go it should be possible.
If he genuinely wishes to get 100's of Mr. Average to Mars. Then getting them to enjoy a few Earth orbits first may be good PR.
Will he be invited to join with NASA on the Moon orbit programme?

If I'm being perfectly honest, I would be willing to pay in the neighborhood of $100,000 per person for a 7 night trip in orbit with full service, including one tethered space walk. I just don't think the numbers reach that yet.

I would be tight up there too ----if it was that price.In fact so would millions of others I am sure.
The fact (I should check) is that R Brandon is charginf $200,000-250,000 per person.For that you get 5-10 mins on the edge of space.
Sorry I. Am not a taker for that not good value for money imho.But if you had plenty to spare I guess 'why not'.
The Bezos rocket route also gives you 5-10 mins in 'space' at the same altitude.I guess he will charge a similar amount.

Musk has made few comments on space tourism.The 2billionaires who wanted (still want) to go round the moon and back.Cant remember the price.

But there is no doubt that once his capsule is man rated by NASA early next year h could in theory off people 'x' times round the Earth joy rides.If you did it for 'just' a few hours (you go round every 20- 40 mins?).Then you have no real need to worry about food,loo's,illness etc etc.

As for the cost? Well there may well be published costs (it's US taxpayers money) on what NASA is paying Spacex to take 6 people at a time to go to the ISS -and return 6.Dont see why the price per person would be so different from this number.
Anyway if it was lower $$ then NASA would start asking awkward questions!
Anyone know the agreed mission costs?

parapente wrote:

I would be tight up there too ----if it was that price.In fact so would millions of others I am sure.
The fact (I should check) is that R Brandon is charginf $200,000-250,000 per person.For that you get 5-10 mins on the edge of space.
Sorry I. Am not a taker for that not good value for money imho.But if you had plenty to spare I guess 'why not'.
The Bezos rocket route also gives you 5-10 mins in 'space' at the same altitude.I guess he will charge a similar amount.

Musk has made few comments on space tourism.The 2billionaires who wanted (still want) to go round the moon and back.Cant remember the price.

But there is no doubt that once his capsule is man rated by NASA early next year h could in theory off people 'x' times round the Earth joy rides.If you did it for 'just' a few hours (you go round every 20- 40 mins?).Then you have no real need to worry about food,loo's,illness etc etc.

As for the cost? Well there may well be published costs (it's US taxpayers money) on what NASA is paying Spacex to take 6 people at a time to go to the ISS -and return 6.Dont see why the price per person would be so different from this number.
Anyway if it was lower $$ then NASA would start asking awkward questions!
Anyone know the agreed mission costs?

90 min to do an orbit

The companies selected to provide this transportation capability and the maximum potential value of their FAR-based firm fixed-price contracts are:
-- The Boeing Company, Houston, $4.2 billion
-- Space Exploration Technologies Corp., Hawthorne, California, $2.6 billion
The contracts include at least one crewed flight test per company with at least one NASA astronaut aboard to verify the fully integrated rocket and spacecraft system can launch, maneuver in orbit, and dock to the space station, as well as validate all its systems perform as expected. Once each company’s test program has been completed successfully and its system achieves NASA certification, each contractor will conduct at least two, and as many as six, crewed missions to the space station.

itchief wrote:

parapente wrote:

I would be tight up there too ----if it was that price.In fact so would millions of others I am sure.
The fact (I should check) is that R Brandon is charginf $200,000-250,000 per person.For that you get 5-10 mins on the edge of space.
Sorry I. Am not a taker for that not good value for money imho.But if you had plenty to spare I guess 'why not'.
The Bezos rocket route also gives you 5-10 mins in 'space' at the same altitude.I guess he will charge a similar amount.

Musk has made few comments on space tourism.The 2billionaires who wanted (still want) to go round the moon and back.Cant remember the price.

But there is no doubt that once his capsule is man rated by NASA early next year h could in theory off people 'x' times round the Earth joy rides.If you did it for 'just' a few hours (you go round every 20- 40 mins?).Then you have no real need to worry about food,loo's,illness etc etc.

As for the cost? Well there may well be published costs (it's US taxpayers money) on what NASA is paying Spacex to take 6 people at a time to go to the ISS -and return 6.Dont see why the price per person would be so different from this number.
Anyway if it was lower $$ then NASA would start asking awkward questions!
Anyone know the agreed mission costs?

90 min to do an orbit

The companies selected to provide this transportation capability and the maximum potential value of their FAR-based firm fixed-price contracts are:
-- The Boeing Company, Houston, $4.2 billion
-- Space Exploration Technologies Corp., Hawthorne, California, $2.6 billion
The contracts include at least one crewed flight test per company with at least one NASA astronaut aboard to verify the fully integrated rocket and spacecraft system can launch, maneuver in orbit, and dock to the space station, as well as validate all its systems perform as expected. Once each company’s test program has been completed successfully and its system achieves NASA certification, each contractor will conduct at least two, and as many as six, crewed missions to the space station.

Of course this is for NASA crewed flights. To my knowledge you don't need "man rating" for commercial manned launches (yet), just people brave enough. But effectively if you developing such a system, the customer who pays the most is NASA/governments (and they also use the service the most... for now at least) so you need a manned rating.

Tugg

trpmb6 wrote:

If I'm being perfectly honest, I would be willing to pay in the neighborhood of $100,000 per person for a 7 night trip in orbit with full service, including one tethered space walk. I just don't think the numbers reach that yet.

Same here, the proposed flight around the moon should be around 7 days in duration, right? If they'd offer that for around 100K I'd sign up right away, and I'm certain many more would. If BFR plays out as economical as Musk claims the market for such flights would most certainly exist.

https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-privat ... n-mission/

Talking of which!
Conveniently Elon ( must have been reading this-not) has just made a major release with more to follow shortly.
So the billionaire round the moon chappie is now going to ride on the BFR.Loads more space ( pun intended).

'Spouse one day he could take 100 at a time for a few orbits of the Earth - now that really would bring the price down!
And why not that really could be a business model.

Perhaps far more importantly.....The BFR appears to have had a major major makeover.The engines are different and it appears to have grown a huge Shuttle tail.Why if it takes off and lands vertically??

parapente wrote:

https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-private-passenger-bfr-moon-mission/

Talking of which!
Conveniently Elon ( must have been reading this-not) has just made a major release with more to follow shortly.
So the billionaire round the moon chappie is now going to ride on the BFR.Loads more space ( pun intended).

'Spouse one day he could take 100 at a time for a few orbits of the Earth - now that really would bring the price down!
And why not that really could be a business model.

Perhaps far more importantly.....The BFR appears to have had a major major makeover.The engines are different and it appears to have grown a huge Shuttle tail.Why if it takes off and lands vertically??

Huh. Those three fins are spaced and shaped just right for vertical landing. No big retractable legs as the fins look like they'll do double duty. Think back to the classic scifi pictures of spaceships, like in the Tintin comic where they go to space.

I almost want to say they may think about using those as a way to do atmospheric maneuvers to shed speed, then reposition to do a vertical landing so you can take less fuel with you and more payload. May also be needed for the expected payloads they'll be taking.

trpmb6 wrote:

I almost want to say they may think about using those as a way to do atmospheric maneuvers to shed speed, then reposition to do a vertical landing so you can take less fuel with you and more payload. May also be needed for the expected payloads they'll be taking.

When they originally added the stub wings in it was to provide control while doing aerobraking in the upper atmosphere. I expect these would be the same but just pulling double duty as landing legs.

ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:

aerobraking

That was the word I sat here for 2 minutes trying to remember from college. Thanks!