Starship 150m Hop | FerrariChat

Starship 150m Hop

Discussion in 'Aviation Chat' started by spicedriver, Aug 5, 2020.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. spicedriver

    spicedriver F1 Rookie

    Feb 1, 2011
    3,859
  2. C50

    C50 Formula 3

    Aug 19, 2016
    1,729
    808
    Leg deployment so satisfying.
     
  3. Tcar

    Tcar F1 Rookie

    Tom Corbett, Space Cadet landed like that....
     
  4. jcurry

    jcurry Two Time F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 16, 2012
    21,534
    In the past
    Full Name:
    Jim
    Compared to SpaceX returning boosters to launch site this is rather mundane. Even without SpaceX it is mundane since McDonnel Douglas did this back in the 90's, re DC-X or Delta Clipper.
     
    Jaguar36 likes this.
  5. tazandjan

    tazandjan Three Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Jul 19, 2008
    38,051
    Clarksville, Tennessee
    Full Name:
    Terry H Phillips
    DC-XA tried to land with only 3 struts extended. Did not turn out too well.
     
  6. jcurry

    jcurry Two Time F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 16, 2012
    21,534
    In the past
    Full Name:
    Jim
    SpaceX has 4. Blue Orgin has 4. Likely have same result if one failed to deploy.

    SpaceX has had a couple landings that did not turn out too well also, although not due to malfunctioning struts. The norm for every rocket program, i.e. a failure or two.

    GD-Convair competed against Douglas for this program back in the late 80's. Their design had a unique engine arrangement with the vehicle structure serving as an external expansion nozzle for multiple engines (more than 4 IIRC). Would have been neat to see both programs funded.
     
  7. TheMayor

    TheMayor Nine Time F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Feb 11, 2008
    98,699
    Vegas baby
    Oh that's nothing....

     
  8. Tcar

    Tcar F1 Rookie

    Are you saying they should have 5 legs (or more) to be safe in case one does not deploy?
     
  9. spicedriver

    spicedriver F1 Rookie

    Feb 1, 2011
    3,859
    No, this is a working prototype. When stacked, this rocket will be bigger than Saturn V and SLS Block 2. SpaceX is planning for a Mars cargo launch in 2022, and a manned launch in 2024. Huge steps if successful.
     
  10. jcurry

    jcurry Two Time F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 16, 2012
    21,534
    In the past
    Full Name:
    Jim
    Ask Taz. He’s the one who made the remark of losing one out of four.
     
  11. u2fast

    u2fast Karting

    Mar 22, 2009
    245
    bellaire
    Full Name:
    barry r


    cgi

    although model jets can hover and do most evrything in this video, this one is cgi
     
  12. tazandjan

    tazandjan Three Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Jul 19, 2008
    38,051
    Clarksville, Tennessee
    Full Name:
    Terry H Phillips
    No, I just think if you hook up three legs before lunch, you should hook up the last one after lunch. That is what actually happened. Did not help that the team just learned they had lost X-33 to L-M's really bad concept. They likely would have flown in 1999 whereas L-M's $1.3B white elephant never flew.
     
  13. spicedriver

    spicedriver F1 Rookie

    Feb 1, 2011
    3,859
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe NASA pulled the plug on the X-33, because Lockheed Martin wanted to use metal fuel tanks in place of the composite tanks, which were failing. Other than that, the project was over 90% complete. Seems a bit short sighted. Northrop Grumman was successful in developing composite tanks only a few years after the X-33 was cancelled.
     
  14. tazandjan

    tazandjan Three Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Jul 19, 2008
    38,051
    Clarksville, Tennessee
    Full Name:
    Terry H Phillips
    X-33 was never going to work. Too many technology issues. Their full scale version ended up with wings instead of a basic lifting body and still had problems. Weight growth on X-33 kept shortening range until it was going to be difficult to do a downrange landing. The linear aerospike engines were another area where nobody actually knew if they would work.

    Fuel tank leakage was just one of their problems. The technology for linerless cryogenic propellant tanks was not advanced enough to pull off the shapes X-33 needed. NASA picked L-M's design because it had the most new technology, but unfortunately it had so much new technology they could not pull it off. After working with L-M on the X-33 and HTV-2, I really lost faith in their abilities. Now they are the prime for most of the hypersonic weapon programs and I hope they do better this time.
     
    Boomhauer likes this.

Share This Page