Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
SpaceX Vehicles and Missions » SpaceX Starship Program . Normal Topic Hot Topic (More than 15 replies ...
SpaceX Vehicles and Missions » SpaceX Falcon Missions Section . Normal Topic Hot Topic (More than 15 ...
I didn't consider the SS exhaust impingement force on booster in my calculation. I just ran the numbers now the impingement force required for the booster acceleration to be <=0 is at least 350 tons. SS raptors are very much capable of that. But if SpaceX is planning to shut down booster engines after stage separation. this wont be an issue.
SpaceX would love to recover the second stage, which they had planned. But it sounds like they have given up on that. Transcript - Elon Musk at MIT's Aero/Astro Centennial (part 1 of 6) [What about the second stage?] The next generation vehicles after the Falcon architecture will be designed for full reusability.
The biggest difference is the nozzle.For optimal performance in vacuum, you want a much larger one. According to Spaceflight 101, the chamber pressure is the same, but the expansion ratio (throat area to end-of-nozzle area) is 7 times larger in the vacuum variant, which (if correct) implies about 2.7 times the nozzle diameter if the throat is unchanged.
It's the same reason SpaceX often does things differently: Krypton is a lot cheaper. The satellites are designed to control costs. For example, each will maneuver with Hall-effect thrusters—ion thrusters in which propellant is accelerated by an electric field.
SpaceX General Section . Normal Topic Hot Topic (More than 15 replies) Very Hot Topic (More than 25 replies)
SpaceX uses an Actor-Judge system to provide triple redundancy to its rockets and spacecraft. The Falcon 9 has 3 dual core x86 processors running an instance of linux on each core. The flight software is written in C/C++ and runs in the x86 environment. For each calculation/decision, the "flight string" compares the results from both cores.
The reasons CH 4 is a front runner for SpaceX's Raptor can probably be attributed to four factors: Methane does not coke (polymerize) at the operating temperatures of a rocket engine – it's coking point is roughly twice as high. This makes it easier to make an engine reusable and re-usability is a key SpaceX objective.
Incidentally, in the absence of much, much more evidence, suggestions that this is a live rat on a filming set at low altitude, and that SpaceX's launch videos are faked, are not credible to me. Commercial, profit-driven corporations appear to give SpaceX a great deal of money to put expensive things into orbit.