SpaceX (general discussion)

Michel Van said:
Musk Tweet
Completing feed system for 29 Raptor rocket engines on Super Heavy Booster

E7fEAKSWQAEnWtX

Completing feed system for 29 Raptor rocket engines on Super Heavy Booster
Click to expand...

The N-1 Booster called . . . it wants it's plumbing back . . .

cheers,
Robin.
 
Common... SpaceX engineer is no Mishin nor Kuznetsov ... at least I hope for them. And one engine less should help (or not).
 
Archibald said:
Common... SpaceX engineer is no Mishin nor Kuznetsov ... at least I hope for them. And one engine less should help (or not).
Click to expand...

I know, but the facts still hold, the more engines, the more chances of failure . . . although, the more engines you have, the smaller the thrust loss caused by each individual engine failure, so there is that.
If it was me, I'd want fewer, bigger engines, or if it has to be done this way, each engine should have it's own, independent CH4 feed, like it has with LOX. It's the manifold and branch arrangement I'm wary of . . .

cheers,
Robin.
 
www.gao.gov

Statement on Blue Origin-Dynetics Decision

The following is a statement from Kenneth E. Patton, Managing Associate General Counsel for Procurement Law at GAO, regarding today’s decision...
www.gao.gov www.gao.gov

Press Release
Statement on Blue Origin-Dynetics Decision

The following is a statement from Kenneth E. Patton, Managing Associate General Counsel for Procurement Law at GAO, regarding today’s decision resolving the protests filed by Blue Origin Federation, LLC, and Dynetics, Inc. – A Leidos Company, B-417839 et al., Friday, July 30, 2021.

On Friday, July 30, 2021, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) denied protests filed by Blue Origin Federation, LLC, of South Kent, Washington, and Dynetics, Inc.-A Leidos Company, of Huntsville, Alabama. The protesters challenged their non-selection for awards and the award of optional contract line item numbers to Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX), of Hawthorne, California, under Option A to Appendix H of Broad Agency Announcement (the announcement) No. NNH19ZCQ001K. Broad Agency Announcements typically provide for the acquisition of basic and applied research for new and creative research or development solutions to scientific and engineering problems. The rules for these procurements are not the same as those for standard competitive federal procurements, as agencies generally enjoy broader discretion in selecting the proposals most suitable to meeting their research and development needs when utilizing broad agency announcement procedures. The announcement was issued by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), for a demonstration mission for a human landing system for lunar exploration.

NASA made award to SpaceX for a total evaluated price of $2,941,394,557. After noting that SpaceX submitted the lowest-priced proposal with the highest rating, and that the offers submitted by Blue Origin and Dynetics were significantly higher in price, NASA also concluded that the agency lacked the necessary funding to make more than one award.

In the challenge filed at GAO, the protesters argued that the agency was required to make multiple awards consistent with the announcement’s stated preference for multiple awards. Alternatively, the protesters alleged that the agency was required to open discussions, amend, or cancel the announcement when NASA, after the receipt of proposals, determined that it had less funding than it needed to support multiple HLS awards. The protesters also argued that NASA unreasonably evaluated all three of the proposals. Finally, the protesters argued that NASA improperly waived a mandatory solicitation requirement for SpaceX.

In denying the protests, GAO first concluded that NASA did not violate procurement law or regulation when it decided to make only one award. NASA’s announcement provided that the number of awards the agency would make was subject to the amount of funding available for the program. In addition, the announcement reserved the right to make multiple awards, a single award, or no award at all. In reaching its award decision, NASA concluded that it only had sufficient funding for one contract award. GAO further concluded there was no requirement for NASA to engage in discussions, amend, or cancel the announcement as a result of the amount of funding available for the program. As a result, GAO denied the protest arguments that NASA acted improperly in making a single award to SpaceX.

GAO next concluded that the evaluation of all three proposals was reasonable, and consistent with applicable procurement law, regulation, and the announcement’s terms.

Finally, GAO agreed with the protesters that in one limited instance NASA waived a requirement of the announcement for SpaceX. Despite this finding, the decision also concludes that the protesters could not establish any reasonable possibility of competitive prejudice arising from this limited discrepancy in the evaluation.

GAO’s decision expresses no view as to the merits of these proposals. Judgments about which offeror will most successfully meet the government’s needs are reserved for the procuring agencies, subject only to statutory and regulatory requirements. GAO’s bid protest process is handled by GAO’s Office of General Counsel and examines whether procuring agencies have complied with procurement laws and regulations.

Today’s decision was issued under a protective order because the decision may contain proprietary and source selection sensitive information. GAO has directed counsel for the parties to promptly identify information that cannot be publicly released so that GAO can expeditiously prepare and release a public version of the decision. When the public version of the decision is available, it will be posted to our website, “www.gao.gov.”

For more information, please contact Kenneth E. Patton at 202-512-8205, Ralph O. White at 202-512-8278, or Sarah Kaczmarek at 202-512-4800. More information about GAO’s Bid Protest process is also available on the GAO website.

#####
Click to expand...
 
robunos said:
Archibald said:
Common... SpaceX engineer is no Mishin nor Kuznetsov ... at least I hope for them. And one engine less should help (or not).
Click to expand...

I know, but the facts still hold, the more engines, the more chances of failure . . . although, the more engines you have, the smaller the thrust loss caused by each individual engine failure, so there is that.
If it was me, I'd want fewer, bigger engines, or if it has to be done this way, each engine should have it's own, independent CH4 feed, like it has with LOX. It's the manifold and branch arrangement I'm wary of . . .

cheers,
Robin.
Click to expand...

You may be correct. But you go with what you've got.

SpaceX will make larger rockets in future. Engines will be modified over time.

These are the tools they have today.
 
The space Shuttle was victim of slow development and it execution
Design began 1966 - finalized in 1972 - build in 1975 and delay by heat shield problem to 1981 launch.

SpaceX thinks out side the box,
Design began 2012, then change the Design, finalized in 2019 (but still modified the design during testing)
Build series Serial Models and test them destructive during 2019-2020 with SN01 to SN15
Now 2021 the go for first almost orbit flight of SN20/B4.
With that tempo, they could have first Cargo Starship/Superheavy on launch pads in 2022

How do SpaceX that ?!
They work in 8 hours shifts, 3 shifts a Day, 7 days in the Week non stop.
Rockwell had only 8 hour work day, 5 days in the Week and weekend off...
 
More updates because things are moving so fast:

1) Booster 4 has received all 4 grid fins and we've had confirmation that they don't fold down like the grid fins on Falcon 9. These fins are smaller than what was previously shown in renders so perhaps they don't need as much control authority as the big diamond-shaped grid fins would have provided, and these smaller fins have sufficiently low drag that the delta V impact isn't that big of a deal.
Also SpaceX are looking at alternatives to the grid fins that could provide more drag (during descent) for less weight; maybe we'll later see something like the interstage open up like a flower.
https://twitter.com/x/status/1421567416232984582
View: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1421567416232984582


2) Booster 4 has been fully stacked and is now having Raptor engines (specifically RB variants that form the outer 20-engine ring) installed.
1627866650251.png
https://twitter.com/x/status/1421996890405625856
View: https://twitter.com/NicAnsuini/status/1421996890405625856


3) There's a 4 hour road closure for moving something down the highway on Monday (between 3pm and 7pm US central time). Based on this tweet below it seems like Booster 4 will be rolling out on Monday and placed onto the new orbital launch mount on Tuesday. Booster 3 is still welded onto the Super Heavy adapter structure on Pad A and Pad B has been prepared for Starship 20, so the orbital mount is the only thing that could accept Booster 4 if it rolls out tomorrow. Also fun fact, Booster 4 began stacking on July 15th, meaning it's only taken them a little over 2 weeks to fully stack it; that's more than twice as fast as Booster 3 and might possibly be the faster than any Starship has been stacked.
https://twitter.com/x/status/1421741676255657986
View: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1421741676255657986


4) Starship 20's nosecone was stacked onto its payload fairing ring-stack, and it's also has received the first of its two forward flaps. We can likely expect S20 to be stacked in the high bay in the coming days (tiles can continue to be added after it's been stacked) and possibly ready for roll out by around next weekend.
 
A tri-propellant design might help. Lightweight kerosene strap-on fuel tanks with webbing to shuttlecock open when empty would have more surface than heavy metal inert grid fins. Wasn’t a 3-core EELV going to be called “the bat” turning into a rogallo wing?
 
Michel Van said:
Rockwell had only 8 hour work day, 5 days in the Week and weekend off...
Click to expand...
Interesting comparison. But did the Rockwell have enough workers and engineers to work overtime? And funding to do this?
With all due respect to SpaceX, they are work on the basis of many proven techlogies, and with less complex construction methods, combined with much faster calculation and computer modelling.
IMHO, the Shuttle' slow development has been typical to it's time, when space race deccelarated, with no obvious goals and many competitive projects. As far as I understand, USSR (due to another factors) has been in similar situation - with it's Buran, flying just once...
 
Silencer1 said:
Michel Van said:
Rockwell had only 8 hour work day, 5 days in the Week and weekend off...
Click to expand...
Interesting comparison. But did the Rockwell have enough workers and engineers to work overtime? And funding to do this?
With all due respect to SpaceX, they are work on the basis of many proven techlogies, and with less complex construction methods, combined with much faster calculation and computer modelling.
IMHO, the Shuttle' slow development has been typical to it's time, when space race deccelarated, with no obvious goals and many competitive projects. As far as I understand, USSR (due to another factors) has been in similar situation - with it's Buran, flying just once...
Click to expand...

NASA budget has been stuck to an aproximate $20 billion annually since 1974. Musk has $200 billion in his pockets: ten times more.

Budget of NASA - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Silencer1 said:
Interesting comparison. But did the Rockwell have enough workers and engineers to work overtime? And funding to do this?
Click to expand...
here is the course of events on construction of Orbiter Columbia (source Wiki)
March 25, 1975Start long-lead fabrication aft fuselage
November 17, 1975Start long-lead fabrication of crew module
June 28, 1976Start assembly of crew module
September 13, 1976Start structural assembly of aft fuselage
December 13, 1977Start assembly upper forward fuselage
January 3, 1977Start assembly vertical stabilizer
August 26, 1977Wings arrive at Palmdale from Grumman
October 28, 1977Lower forward fuselage on dock, Palmdale
November 7, 1977Start of Final Assembly
February 24, 1978Body flap on dock, Palmdale
April 28, 1978Forward payload bay doors on dock, Palmdale
May 26, 1978Upper forward fuselage mate
July 7, 1978Complete mate forward and aft payload bay doors
September 11, 1978Complete forward RCS
February 3, 1979Complete combined systems test, Palmdale
February 16, 1979Airlock on dock, Palmdale
March 5, 1979Complete postcheckout
March 8, 1979Closeout inspection, Final Acceptance Palmdale
March 8, 1979Rollout from Palmdale to Dryden
March 12, 1979Overland transport from Palmdale to Edwards
March 20, 1979SCA Ferry Flight from DFRC to Biggs AFB, Texas
March 22, 1979SCA Ferry flight from Biggs AFB to Kelly AFB, Texas
March 24, 1979SCA Ferry flight from Kelly AFB to Eglin AFB, Florida
March 24, 1979SCA Ferry flight from Eglin, AFB to KSC

Also were Sub-contractors:
Mid Fuselage by Convair
OMS by McDonnell-Douglas
Wings by Grummen
Vertical Tail by Fairchild-Republic
Landing Gear by Menasco
Wing leading edge by LTV Aerospace Coperation
Rausbale Surface insulation by Lookheed Missiles and Space
 
Michel Van said:
Something you not see at NASA

the Boss son growing up at Rocket yard

E7v70YmWUAMMYrM
Click to expand...
Am I looking at a real-life new novel from Heinlein? A technical-romance that imbodies SPIRIT, personal involvement, and intelligent determination. My favorite African-American... right there; immersing his kid in daddies work. America still has a chance. The FAA and government contractors can suck it!
 
merriman said:
The FAA and government contractors can suck it!
Click to expand...
I think the FAA got into hell of problems
on one hand all superrich who want to be Astronaut and can't because FAA new regulation
they will start lobby in Capitol Hill against FAA

Next to that Space Force and NASA will put allot pressure on FAA
"Why hat SpaceX no permit for Testing on Hardware OUR current programs Need ?"

I would be not surprised on news that Stephen Dickson resign from Office, after meeting with GOP or SF and NASA...
 
merriman said:
Michel Van said:
Something you not see at NASA

the Boss son growing up at Rocket yard

E7v70YmWUAMMYrM
Click to expand...
Am I looking at a real-life new novel from Heinlein? A technical-romance that imbodies SPIRIT, personal involvement, and intelligent determination. My favorite African-American... right there; immersing his kid in daddies work. America still has a chance. The FAA and government contractors can suck it!
Click to expand...
Elon Musk is a government contractor though.
 
https://twitter.com/x/status/1422664182659420168
View: https://twitter.com/erdayastronaut/status/1422664182659420168


Take a tour of @SpaceX's Starbase factory with the ultimate tour guide, @elonmusk! It was INCREDIBLE to pick his brain for over 2 hours while walking around checking out Starship hardware! He even made some design decisions IN REAL TIME! Enjoy part 1 of 3!
Click to expand...


View: https://youtu.be/t705r8ICkRw


Join me as I take a tour of SpaceX's Starbase facility with Elon Musk as our tour guide! This is part 1 of 3, so stay tuned, there's a lot more coming!

If you need some notes on this video with key points, check out our article - https://everydayastronaut.com/starbase-tour-and-interview-with-elon-musk/

Need a rundown on Starship? I've got you covered with our "Complete Guide to Starship"
View: https://youtu.be/-8p2JDTd13k


00:00 - Intro
02:02 - Conversation Starts
06:18 - High Bay
28:23.- Grid Fin
33:55 - Raptor V2
39:53 - HLS
40:45 - Stage Separation / Hot Gas Thrusters
48:00 - HLS (again)
51:44 - Outro
Click to expand...
 
The Starbase Factory Tour with Elon Musk

Give us a unique inside of Elon Musk Mind
unlike typical CEO that decay slowly in His office chair or in Meetings or spent time in his Multi million dollar mansions

Musk goes into his factories and optimized their production and products or spent in time in his prefab Home of $50000.
Even as He explain stuff to Tim Dot, he think about them on how to use them in program
At end of video Musk explain the Hot gas thruster and get on idea to use the Hot gas inside the HLS as propellant for soft landing engines !
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom