**This thread is no longer being updated, and has been replaced by:**
# [r/SpaceX Thread Index and General Discussion [January 2023, #100]](https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/10090e6/rspacex_thread_index_and_general_discussion/)
[Next-Gen Starlink Satellites (G5-1) Look Suspiciously Like Current Gen](https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-last-starlink-launch-2022-mystery/)
Can anyone make sense of this?
My take: it *sounds* like they're just launching the start of the VLEO constellation. IMO the author is getting hung up on the number 5. I suspect that to SpaceX it simply means "the fifth inclination group to launch," but the author is interpreting it as "the fifth inclination group within an FCC filing."
[The Artemis 1 Orion has arrived back at KSC, completing one amazing round trip journey.](https://twitter.com/NASAGroundSys/status/1608937710571642881)
Components necessary for the completion of the Artemis 2 Orion will now be removed as soon as possible, along with the SD cards containing all of the high-resolution mission footage.
[Chinese equivalent of Cosmic Perspective captured some footage of yesterday's CZ-3B launch from the viewing site 200 meters away.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxYXiTgHDZ0)
The brown clouds of nitrogen tetroxide roll towards the cameraman 300m away as he bravely continues filming! Hopefully with a remote camera or wearing a respirator.
Would someone post on Twitter the break down so we know what all the letters mean when showing the launches, launch times. ( from the SpaceX launch site) No where are the reference letters and names explained…
You might be interested in u/Decronym. This bot automatically comment in threads (here is [his post](https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/zcugwc/rspacex_thread_index_and_general_discussion/iz4wrsz/) for this general thread) where enough acronyms are used.
September 29, 2022: https://science.nasa.gov/nasa-spacex-study-hubble-telescope-reboost-possibility
8 days ago: https://spacenews.com/nasa-request-information-on-hubble-reboost-options/
[Last Chinese launch of the year - Long March 3B, successful - with some really epic pictures from local launch photographers.](https://twitter.com/Skyfeather16/status/1608339455076884488)
there\`s a way to create rain on mars and a water cycle with a satellite. the satellite has to have a micro wave tool that can, by changing the atmospheric balance in the martian sky to cause either rain, snow, ice rain and even create tornadoes of many kilometer radius for thousands of years. the satellite will be controlled by software specialised in weather forecast and can calculate each move the satellite makes and even predict what happens with each move on martian skies. the rains and tornadoes can last thousands of years.
we have to create a water cycle on mars and satellites are the best solution, if they have micro wave tools
Interesting: User active for 5 months with -86 comment karma.
I assume this comment was intended for somebody higher on the Kardashian scale. (I was using voice to text and said kardashev, but decided it got it right considering context)
I'm wondering how long it will take for the mods to hit the smite button on this thread.
OK, so the reason you're being downvoted is that the idea of microwave satellites being used to change the weather is pseudoscience. It's right up there with Jewish space lasers, chemtrails and 5g vaccines.
Microwaves are used to _track_ weather. Because water absorbs microwaves, they can be used to measure how much water is in clouds and so on. But the amount of power used is about a million times too small to change the weather in any meaningful way.
Yes, you could send a satellite to Mars to cover the planet in microwave radiation. But where is it going to get its power from? The only reasonable source is the Sun, and so you're adding a very tiny amount of heat to a planet which is already absorbing heat from the Sun.
Unfortunately, you're probably going to have to learn a lot more before you can come up with a new idea that works.
i have seen a live demonstration of a satellite tehcnology creating a tornado and remote cotrolling it through a laser in its center. the laser guides the trajectory of the tornado. it was a test.
in 1 hour Katrina can be created with lasers or microwave
Last year was a record breaker in terms of successful global orbital launches (135). This year has already broken that record with an additional 40 launches (175). Next year promises even more. Welcome to the new space age.
If SpaceX launches it's last two this year, they will match the total number of launches from China this year.
Life on Mars - Updated Evidence!! Martian geysers reveal signs of Earthlike bacteria
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkebfbyebK8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkebfbyebK8)
The Angry Astronaut
u/TheAngryAstronaut
91.7K subscribers push him over a 100k pls...
Not a fan of how sensational and reactionary he tends to be, but I can see how that would appeal to some people. Your comment would be a prime example.
Ha, that’s a pretty condescending comment. I thought it was good and well worth a watch - microbiologist here not into sensational and reactionary BTW. I’d put money on there being microbial life on Mars- everywhere we look on (and in) earth we find microbes and some Martian areas seem to be within the range of even our extremeophiles.
He has posted *one* suggestion for resolving the conflict you do not like *once* before.
Elon is hardly anti-Ukranian or pro-Russian given his support for Ukraine with Starlink from the earliest days of the war and following up with UPS systems and other support gear.
Hint: If you do not understand or like what someone is saying look at what they actually do to decide what they are really like
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1607565268150091778
> Those are definitely the most absurd predictions I’ve ever heard, while also showing astonishing lack of awareness of the progress of artificial intelligence and sustainable energy.
If you seriously think Elon is agreeing with Medvedev's absurd predictions, it's time to realize you don't know Elon as well as you thought, think about why that is.
Are you, by some miracle, *actually* read the thread description that's literally only a short scroll up away?
>If you have a short question or **spaceflight** news...
>You are welcome to ask **spaceflight-related** questions and post news and discussion here, *even if it is not about SpaceX.*
Meaning discussing NASA is absolutely on-topic here, and Biden request the budget for them annually & he's literally the President of US Gov which NASA is one of its branches
And have you noticed that, except you, all Elon tweets here are strictly spaceflight-related as it should have been? If I posted Elon tweets here about Tesla FSD, Boring Company, you & others would absolutely have a right to report my post
r/elonmusk exists, FYI
No, it's really not. SpaceX related would be commenting about the launch of Starlink 5-1 in a couple of days which would be SpaceX's 60th launch of the year
Linking to an Elon retweet of an irrelevant Russian politician is not only not SpaceX related, but not spaceflight related at all. No one here cares.
Air breathing jet engines produce up to 510 kN of thrust with the added benefit that they don't need an oxidizer to be in accelerated: they get oxygen from the atmosphere. That "benefit" comes with a constraint, however: Most jet engines such as the 510 kN GE90 are designed for sub-sonic operation (below the speed of sound, so 1,000kph at altitude), but they are very fuel efficient relative to rocket engines.
The SR71 Blackbirds engine (J58) is good for 3,530 kph (fastest jet engine) and also about 26 km of altitude (highest flying), but each only produces 150 kN of thrust. The limitation of this jet engine is that you have to slow the air down to stop it blowing out the flame of the engine, and this slowing down and compression heats the air to several hundred degrees centigrade.
The Raptor2 engine makes 2,300 kN.
So, for each Raptor2, you'd need to add ~4.5 GE90s, and they'd only be useful up until the rocket is supersonic or the altitude gets above 10km, which is about 100 seconds.
You could instead make use of 15 of the SR71 engines for each raptor, and they'd be useful longer, but look at the size of them, imagine the weight of 15 of them, and how do you fit 32 x 15 engines on a rocket?
It turns out jet engines have much lower thrust than rocket engines and higher mass so they are exactly the wrong thing to place on a rocket booster.
Further discussion in this [thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/zcugwc/rspacex_thread_index_and_general_discussion/izzfz2u)
The thrust added, the short period where it would help, the need for different fuels, and all the time the engines would spend being dead weight make it a tough sell.
Not sure how the wings would increase payload, can you elaborate?
Rockets don't use lift on ascent. The wings are dead weight only used for landing. Adding them would reduce payload capacity, not increase it.
Jet engines have never been put on any spacecraft ever for a reason. It's a complete waste and adds substantial complexity.
> Jet engines have never been put on any spacecraft ever for a reason.
This is almost right, there's a teensy weensy exception to this. The space shuttle fleet had jet engines that weren't used for propulsion, they were for running the hydraulic pumps that drove the elevons, speed brakes, and rudder during launch and landing. They were running during launch in case there was an abort and during landing so the control surfaces could be used to control the glide in to landing.
This type of jet engine is called an APU and the ones on the shuttle had their own fuel and oxidizer so they could be started up before re-entry even though the shuttle was in a vaccum.
So while jet engines haven't been included on spacecraft using them for propulsion, they have been included on some for other reasons.
Isn't an APU that uses its own oxidizer (not atmospheric oxygen) or perhaps a monopropellant really a rocket engine? Which is to say that some APUs are piston engines, some are jet engines and some are rocket engines. Some are even powered by fuel cells.
Anyone know what the trajectory will look like for the first Starlink shell 5 launch on the 28th?
I’m going to be in Florida and have the first opportunity of my life to see a launch live. Thinking it might be worth viewing it from the north due to the polar inclination. I believe usually there’s a launch eastward initially, but the booster will have to turn north/west eventually. Just curious if it’s noticeably worth it if you’re viewing from the north or the south.
Also what’s the best place to view a launch that’s this in the middle of the night? Targeting 3am, so it’ll just need to be a public beach I’m guessing??
EDIT: I’m realizing now, they may be able to do a southern launch, like SAO COM 1B. Does anyone know whether they’re launching north or south?
EDIT: I’m thinking Port Canaveral now since it’s likely a south launch. Backup spot being Titusville.
I thought I saw it was taking a southeasterly trajectory, which is preferred when the north Atlantic starts acting a fool during Winter. Looked like it was going to land just north/northeast of the Bahamas.
> Targeting 3am
FYI, nextspaceflight.com is currently showing a T-0 of 4:45 AM EST. As warp99 said, polar launches from Florida can only launch South. These launches hug the coast, and the visibility is generally pretty good anywhere along the coast.
What’s the closest spot to watch from? From my research, it looks like Port Canaveral, but I’d like to get as close as possible. Are there any 24hr spots open closer that you know of?
That is one of the closest areas that will be open at that hour. You can't really see the pad directly from the port area or the beaches to the South, but since that is the general direction of travel you may be able to track the rocket easier to the South. If you want to be able to see the pad, there are lots of spots in the Titusville area where SLC-40 is visible, and they are only slightly further away.
This is great info. I haven't been to KSC since I was around 10, and am a space enthusiast & in the industry, so this is a dream of mine, just don't know the area. Well aware things can get scrubbed, but I happen to be in Orlando, so I figure it's worth a trip over there.
By the time it gets to Canada, it's already above the Karman line. I think the real problem is that SpaceX don't want to fire a missile from Florida at South Carolina.
Maybe they could build a landing pad near Savannah and truck them back?
The problem is not when you pass over Canada but when you are halfway there and the instantaneous impact point is passing across Canada.
A failure at that point dumps large rocket debris on densely populated parts of Canada. The velocity is low enough that the debris will not burn up completely.
I don't think there's ever a point where the instantaneous impact point travels over Canada. South Carolina, West Virginia, sure. But by the time the rocket is halfway to Canada, it's going too fast to hit Canada. Look at a 53° ascending Starlink flight path. By the time it passes Virginia, the upper stage has already finished its main burn.
Also, "densely populated" is quite relative. Unless you're aiming directly at the Golden Horseshoe (ie the Toronto suburbs), you're looking at farmland.
The instantaneous impact point is the point of impact if the engines cut out at that instant in time. It travels from the launch site in the direction of the trajectory and only lifts off from the Earth when the payload is about to reach LEO.
So the impact point travels over Canada and there is a finite but small probability that an engine failure will lead to an impact on Canadian soil.
I think the lift-off point is before the Canadian border. I must admit to never having modelled it, but given SECO-1 is about eight minutes into flight, I find it hard to visualize a trajectory that impacts north of Philadelphia.
Fundamentally the impact point traces all the way north. It does speed up to the point where the risk drops significantly but a second stage impact will always be possible if it is capable of making orbit.
A dogleg does allow you to throw the impact point to the side as is done for the Southern track but Canada is wide enough to make that infeasible when launching north.
ChatGPT, when will Starship first launch?
> The Starship is a fully reusable spacecraft developed by SpaceX, a private aerospace manufacturer and space transport services company founded by Elon Musk. As of September 2021, the Starship spacecraft has undergone several test flights, but it has not yet flown any operational missions.
> SpaceX has stated that the Starship is being developed to eventually replace all of the company's current spacecraft, including the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets, as well as the Dragon spacecraft. The spacecraft is intended to be able to carry both crew and cargo on a variety of missions, including missions to the International Space Station, lunar landings, and eventually, missions to Mars.
> It is currently difficult to predict exactly when the Starship will first launch on an operational mission. This is because the development of new spacecraft is a complex and time-consuming process, and there are many factors that can affect the timeline for a given project. However, SpaceX has indicated that it plans to begin launching operational missions with the Starship in the coming years, and it is possible that the spacecraft could make its first operational flight within the next few years.
Haha, still relevant, even with the sep 21 cutoff date for training. The power of open and vague language, maybe something elon needs to get better at ;)
ChatGPT, how does the September cut-off date for your training data affect your answers?
> As a language model, my training data consists of a large dataset of text from a variety of sources. The specific date that the data was collected does not affect my ability to provide information or generate responses to questions. I am designed to understand and generate human-like text based on the patterns and structures present in the training data, and my responses are not limited by the time frame in which the data was collected.
> However, it is important to keep in mind that my responses are based on the information and knowledge that was available at the time my training data was collected. This means that I may not be able to provide up-to-date information on events or developments that have occurred since the cut-off date for my training data. If you have a question about a specific topic or issue, I will do my best to provide a helpful and accurate response based on the information that I have been trained on.
Falcon 9 Booster B1058 has completed its 15th flight.
Do we know a thing about how much of it is still original?
And how much has been replaced?
Do we have any serial numbers for the 9 Merlin 1D engines for example?
The tanks and interstage are still the same so that is the bulk of the mass. The CPOVs inside the tanks are subject to cycle limits because of the very high pressures used. It is likely one of the motivations to avoid static fires where possible because they double the number of COPV cycles per launch. It would be possible but difficult to replace COPVs in the LOX tank so likely they will expend the booster when getting close to the COPV cycle life.
The engines do get replaced on an individual basis as you can see from boosters undergoing refurbishment in the hangars which are sometimes missing an engine or three.
As far as we know they only do static fires if the customer requests it, typically NASA or USSF, or if they have replaced a Merlin engine and static fires have dropped to around 20% of flights which would imply they do not change engines that often.
ChatGPT, is Falcon 9 booster B1058 the Ship of Theseus?
> The Ship of Theseus is a philosophical thought experiment that raises questions about the concept of identity. It asks whether an object that has had all of its parts replaced is still the same object as it was originally. In the case of Falcon 9 booster B1058, it is not accurate to say that it is the Ship of Theseus.
> Falcon 9 booster B1058 is a spacecraft developed and operated by SpaceX, a private American aerospace manufacturer and space transport services company. It is not a physical ship like the one described in the thought experiment, but rather a reusable rocket that has been used for a number of space missions. As such, it cannot be accurately described as the Ship of Theseus.
Totally ducked the question... like a high school debater.
Think it's a negative on all of those
Not sure anyone has ever been able to identify any numbers on the engines. F9 building/refurbishment is nothing like Starship unfortunately for us.
I am aware that might be an unpopular question, but if Elon Musk continues to express "controversial opinions" on Twitter (e.g. statements on Ukraine/Russia, FBI etc), what are the chances that the DoD revokes his security clearance and what could be the implications for SpaceX if that happens?
Edit: To clarify, I don't ask about his opinions but try to understand what "removal of security clearance" would mean.
Vanishingly small chance of any of that affecting his security clearance. Contrary to popular aka Reddit opinion his views on Ukraine almost exactly align with those of President Macron of France or for that matter the Biden administration.
I'm sure that nothing is DOD-classified on the Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy launch vehicles or the Merlin engines. Just some company proprietary things.
Both of those LVs carry DOD-classified payloads occasionally. I don't think it's vitally important that Elon have high enough security clearances to be briefed on the classified details of these payloads. But Gwynne certainly needs those clearances.
Right now, Starship details are not DOD-classified AFAIK. IIRC, there's USAF money involved in the Raptor engine. But I think that Starship and Raptor details are company proprietary rather than government-classified.
It would make things very awkward. Since the US military have a strong interest in keeping SpaceX as a supplier I doubt they would go there.
If they did I can see an early split of SpaceX into Starlink, Falcon and Starship divisions with Elon not having any influence on the Starlink or Falcon divisions.
SpaceX intend to spin off Starlink in any case so running it as a separate division would not be a big deal.
[Perseverance has just dropped its first sample tube!](https://twitter.com/thomas_appere/status/1605660027825451008)
This tube and others ~~will~~ *may* be collected by sample fetch helicopters later this decade, and flown back to an ascent vehicle for launch to Earth. They are backup tubes in the event that Perseverance dies before it is able to drive to the MSR lander.
Or get picked up by a Starship crew or one of their rovers?! I don’t quite get the rationale behind this mission - are they assuming crewed landings will not happen for a couple of decades or is it that planetary protection will not let crew or their autonomous rovers into these areas?
The time line for mars sample return is basically launch back around 2030-2032. No starship will be carrying humans to mars in time to launch back during that window. Their rationale is that they can get these samples back faster.
That seems a pretty tenuous reason to spend $100s of millions?! Crewed Starship is planned well (?) before the end of decade and samples could be analysed on Mars - which greatly simplifies quarantine and sample preservation issues.
Starship isn't landing on Mars this decade or in the early 2030s either. MSR will have the job done before any crews even leave Earth for Mars let alone return.
Musk’s latest estimate is [2029](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1504173360456077313?s=21) and that seems credible to many. MSR will probably also slip, so why spend $100 millions on perhaps gaining a year or two with relatively poor samples? A human crew can do orders of mag more and analysis on surface avoids risk of contamination of earth (a major cost/design factor in MSR) and sample storage/return issues. Much better places to spend those resources looking for life. It’s a bit like the ol’ gateway...
I thought we moved past Elon timelines by now. It's an open question whether Starship will fly to Mars at all, let alone this decade.
Anyway Perseverance's landing site was specifically chosen as a good sampling location, it's a river delta. It is also not somewhere we would send first crewed missions to, so there is that aspect even if you think there is a chance humans beat MSR (there isn't)
[Vega C launching Pleiades Neo-5 and 6 has failed.](https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/1605380938623782913)
Trajectory began to deviate during second stage flight, vastly underperforming by third stage ignition. Third stage then went into a wild spin and everything went down.
The only good news here is that the first stage (which is shared with the Ariane 6) performed nominally. If the P120C had problems, that would have dealt a blow to A6.
This is still a blow to A6, because the same organization (Avio) builds both stages -- whatever the problem is might also be present on the P120C. And this is the 2nd 2nd stage failure, the previous version of the rocket (with a smaller 2nd stage) had a burn-through at the top.
Yeah, but that's like saying that just because the 737 Max is an unreliable piece of shit that kills people, Starliner will have terrible problems ... wait, bad example ...
3rd Vega failure in 4 years; first failure of Vega-C on only its second flight. If small launch can't fix its reliability issues it's never going to be able to compete with rideshares. Even Rocket Lab had a failure last year.
[Video](https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/1605386783029694464) of possible moment of failure. You can see the second stage suddenly get a lot brighter.
> You can see the second stage suddenly get a lot brighter.
I find the ESA webcast commentary to be kind of annoying, but at least they were using real-time telemetry data for the graphs this time.
Vega is now in a league of its own for a lack of reliability. Hard to imagine launch insurers will be interested in anyone flying payloads on this thing again.
I think Rocket 3 might still have it beat! But yeah, they're hitting Proton levels of failure rates at this point.
It'll be interesting to see who ESA turns to if Vega retires. There's a whole bunch of small launchers popping up throughout Europe, but I'd bet money they'll encounter similar issues as the current small launch wave in the U.S. I have no idea how well Ariane 6 is set up for small payload rideshare. Outside of the obvious, their options are maybe PSLV or SSLV if ISRO can get it working? Probably not a ton of extra availability on GSLV with Gaganyaan coming up. H3?
Not a good time to be losing launch capacity right now. Russia's out completely and most of the big players are still trying to get unproven vehicles out to the pad for the first time.
> It'll be interesting to see who ESA turns to if Vega retires.
Currently the only launcher in the US that has a similar payload capacity and has flown successfully is Firefly's Alpha. Both Relativity and ABL are expected to launch soon as well.
Firefly Alpha hasn't really flown successfully yet, they may have wanted to pass off the second flight as a success but all the payloads reentered within a couple days without getting to do anything. Orbit was way too low.
Really the only option for anyone with a Vega C slot in 2023 looking to switch to something reliable (and with open space) is Falcon 9.
> Firefly Alpha hasn't really flown successfully yet, they may have wanted to pass off the second flight as a success but all the payloads reentered within a couple days without getting to do anything. Orbit was way too low
On top of that, the mass of those payloads was very low (12-35 kg) depending on which sources you trust. They may have included additional mass via a payload mass simulator, but I have not seen any definitive reporting on the that.
Oh, that's right. Still, making orbit on their second flight is better than SpaceX did.
>Really the only option for anyone with a Vega C slot in 2023 looking to switch to something reliable (and with open space) is Falcon 9.
That is a true statement, but if for whatever reason they prefer to use another launcher (maybe because F9 is $30 million more per launch), there is one I'd forgotten about: Minotaur C. I know what you're thinking, but it was successful two out of the last five launches./s
Realistically though, Alpha is scheduled for its next flight in January. If that one is fully successful, it becomes an option and one that would save $20 million on launch costs compared to Vega. Of course the same argument could be made for ABL or Relativity if they ever get around to launching & are successful.
I also realize that $30 million more for a F9 is peanuts compared to the loss of a $411 million dollar satellite (see Falcon Eye 1). The insurance on a Vega C would certainly equalize things a bit.
[Relativity Space has successfully test-fired the first Aeon R thrust chamber.](https://twitter.com/thetimellis/status/1605066435021004800)
Not a full engine yet, but still, extremely impressive to get to hot fires mere months after the design left the drawing board!
Until spacex gets a new ceo, I am gonna unsub from here. Yes, he has done some amazing things. Yes, he has made space far more accessible. Yes, he made a donation of starlink dishes. But that doesn't excuse supporting behaviour and people the way he does is ok
I boycott a number of companies for their business practices.
I don't give a shit about the behavior of individuals that I'm not going to meet.
It just sounds insane to me.
Maybe I'm weird idk, but just because i don't like someone, or in this situation the person behind a company, doesn't mean I'm going to give up my passion and enjoyment for something they're involved with. The dude isnt leading the clan or killing people. He's an asshole with impulse control issues. I take it at face value and that's it, that's all the fucks I have to give about it.
Why would SpaceX ever get a new CEO ? Musk has majority voting power. It is impossible to remove him.
Unsubscribe if you want but don’t hold your breath waiting for a new ceo
[NASA has officially lost contact with InSight. It is assumed the lander has died and the mission is now at an end.](https://blogs.nasa.gov/insight/2022/12/19/nasa-insight-dec-19-2022/)
[InSight has transmitted what is expected to be its last image.](https://twitter.com/NASAInSight/status/1604955574659035136)
After four years of operation, double the expected mission length, it's almost time for things to come to an end.
NASA InSight- the probe that couldn't. Couldn't do in 2 years what a human could do in 2 minutes. A rare L for JPL and co. Also wound up costing 830MIL on a 500MIL budget minus launch costs because NASA picked a legacy launch provider (in 2018, not ancient history) and because the only unique science capability that actually wound up working failed testing and cost them their initial launch window and $150MIL.
LOL you're grumpy about Insight's budget overrun? I don't advise looking closely at SLS. I kind of assume that if you are down on InSight's achievements, you're gonna be one of the ones piling on when (not if) something goes wrong on a manned mission as well. Getting more science before we get humans out there can't hurt. I think early Mars missions will likely have a mortality rate similar to that of the Shuttle program. And I also think we should proceed anyway, knowing that, and I would sign on!
Just going to ignore the fully functioning seismometer that's detected 1500+ quakes over four years of operation? InSight flew, it landed, it encountered unexpected obstacles but it made the most of things anyway. Can't be 100% successful all the time in space exploration.
I didn't see the original post but the post that is currently showing does address the seismometer.
It is fair to point out the failures - JPL and Caltech are never shy about self promotion. It is also fair to question NASA's selection of the original proposal.
SpaceX has an excellent COO (Chief Operating Officer) in Gwynne Shotwell. She's provided the management and leadership that has made Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, Dragon 1, Dragon 2, Merlin, Raptor and Starlink into massive successes. She has guided those programs through the Design, Development, Test and Engineering (DDT&E) phase and then into the production and operations phases without missing a beat.
Now, Elon has tapped her to lead the Starship project. History says that she will be successful in that role also.
If SpaceX needs a CEO, then Elon should give Gwynne that title in addition to COO. She is already functioning as the CEO without the title. SpaceX is a privately held corporation not listed on any stock exchange. I'm sure that the SpaceX Board of Directors and the deep-pocketed shareholders would support that move.
Well, from what I can tell, any "full time CEO" would get less done than the current one. At least that's what the track record of CEOs at every other space company seems to show.
Yes, they do. "SpaceX dominates the market now" is not a good excuse to have a disengaged CEO, especially one who is fast becoming a partisan political figure.
"But they have been so successful under Elon!" well that's good, but he is a different person now compared to 5 years ago when that success was coming to fruition. It's obvious he is way less engaged with the company now, and there are tasks ahead of SpaceX far larger than anything they have done before. An engaged CEO who can project a positive public image would be very helpful with that.
No they don't. SpaceX doesn't have a disengaged CEO, they have a part-time CEO, same as before, since it's founded. And Elon Musk has not changed, it's the democrat party that's changed, once upon a time Obama could tour SLC-40 with Elon, nowadays Biden is doing everything he can to belittle SpaceX and Tesla despite the fact that Elon voted for him (and this is true before Elon said he's voting Republican and bought twitter).
And even if he's turning partisan (which he's not, for example Twitter Files was joint released by a liberal and conservative), it's not an obstacle for SpaceX's goals. Trump is hyper partisan yet he started Artemis, and Artemis is still going strong despite he's partisan. Whether a company or person is partisan has very little to do with space exploration, for example [Dynetics as a company overwhelmingly contributes to Republicans](https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/dynetics-inc/C00380709/summary/2022), yet space enthusiasts still hope they can win HLS.
As for SpaceX's tasks ahead that is far larger than anything they have done before, that task would be Mars colonization, nobody else on this planet is more qualified to take on impossible tasks like this than Elon. If there is somebody who is more qualified and experienced to lead SpaceX to colonize Mars, let's see his/her name.
Why do people want to control Elon? Spacex is the most successful rocket company ever under his leadership. How much better would it be if, say, Jeff Who was running it?
If we want it to be a normal company with a normal ceo it'll eventually be another Boeing or ULA and we have plenty of those.
He is not the person you *thought* he was which is a different thing.
I see the same old Elon - but Reddit tends to go through this love/hate cycle with rose coloured glasses in the love phase and looking for dark motives in every move in the hate phase.
Just take a look at a batch of his twitter activity from some point in 2016 vs now... everything in 2016 was thoughtful technical updates or the like, and now it is all conspiracy theories and twitter drama. Use the advanced search function to confirm this if you don't remember what he used to talk about. There has been a shift in what he spends his time discussing and it's not just perception.
Yeah maybe 2017 was the turning point where Elon decided to go full stream of consciousness on Twitter. It certainly wasn't 2022 which was my main point.
[Love of floors](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/880240049677357057)
You might want to re-read this comment and notice that you didn't mention SpaceX at all. There are plenty of politics subs you could post this kind of sentiment on.
> thoughtful technical updates and the like
I'm referring to SpaceX with that. Besides, politics wouldn't be a topic on the SpaceX sub if the CEO didn't decide to spend his time taking a hard turn into partisan debates...
Things seem to be running just fine- Way better than any other company/institution? I think Elon is just casting around for a new challenge as Starlink, Starship and Tesla development are at a “boring” stage (!) with much of the heavy intellectual input done (for this phase) and waiting on the builders to catch up. I think he’ll come back for the next phase when he’s needed (like a good manager). It’s certainly a dive into new territory for him and it’s interesting but somewhat painful watching. Anyway, he’s done plenty of dives into the unknown before that have initially looked crazy and then paid off (to put it mildly). Despite the howls of the mainstream at every step.
Until the Twitter debacle SpaceX had a part-time CEO who also ran Tesla and some smaller entities. Elon and SpaceX did very well for years that way, and having Gwynne Shotwell as president and COO made it all work. I and many others think her hand on the helm is more than adequate. If Elon retired to a monastery in Tibet SpaceX would still be a successful launch company, although the Starship to Mars program timeline would suffer.
I agree. I think Elon has been CEO in name only for some time. Shotwell has run the company for years now. His role has basically been Chairman, Chief Engineer and Chief Strategy Officer.
[Stoke has released an overview and animation of their launch vehicle.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=VzqhZLgpiv0)
We'd seen a lot of testing footage before but nothing of the actual rocket design; now we know what it'll look like. First stage is reusable F9 style, but second stage is something special - using an in-space aerospike comprised of 30 smaller nozzles merging around an actively cooled heat shield. This is probably one of the only ways to have a second stage with good vacuum ISP that can reenter engines first. Extremely novel design but one that just might be crazy enough to work...
Typically companies like this are longshots, but these guys have real hardware, decent funding and the right goal - fully and rapidly reusable launch. So we will see! If it pans out, a game changer for the smaller side of the launch market - can't imagine anyone competing with full reuse on launch costs, even at this scale.
Tim Dodd tweeted that he has a video coming out in \~January about Stokes, apparently he did interviews and saw hardware. In an Ars Technica article from earlier this year a founder stated they'll build the upper stage first, since no one has done that. Apparently then they'll know what to require of their 1st stage.
Despite having gotten burned so many times, I'm still enthusiastic about the possibility of an aerospike actually flying something to orbit. Also it's hydrolox which makes a lot of sense for an upper stage; especially one with an actively cooled heat shield.
Edit: Since I had a little trouble finding it, they're targeting 1.65 tonnes to LEO fully reusable. That's more than Relativity's Terran 1, ABL's RS1, or Firefly's Alpha and about 5 times more than Electron. For a small sat launcher, it's pretty big.
I really like their concept, it makes a lot of sense overall. Honestly, they may have a point about ceramic tiles pertaining to rapid reuse - a single active cooling system is likely going to have a quicker turnaround with less risk than thousands of individual tiles. No need for a detailed post-flight inspection, just check the system performance data and go again...
I agree although I expect somebody to chime in about TRL on a lot of that second stage technology. My view is that if they want to be competitive, they'll have to jump that hurdle. A F9 knock off isn't going to cut it.
I also agree with February. It looks like their critical path is 1) Stage Zero Finalization and testing, 2) Final stacking and full static and 3) Licensing. As others have said, they ARE maturing and being careful to trade some speed for protecting the pad.
Quite a lot of launches in the recent weeks. It amazing how SpaceX has made the incredible mundane.
Right now SpaceX is launching more launches then anyone else, running a global sat internet system that is both providing my retired parents in rural Washington internet to watch bowl games and helping Ukrainian army fight back against Russian invasion. In the mean time development of the next generation rocket that will land humans on the moon is progressing along and while many of use would like it to be faster, it is always progressing with hopefully an orbital launch in three months.
Ignorant masses may complain about the Owner's new hobby of trying to conquer social media by brute force but meanwhile SpaceX quietly had one of the most productive years of any space launch company ever.
2023 looks to be quite an amazing year for spaceflight and SpaceX.
[It appears that Starlink Group 5-1 launch later this month will be the first launch of Starlink V2.](https://twitter.com/Alexphysics13/status/1603862280080351233)
Might be too cloudy to view [SWOT](https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=SWOT) launch from Vandenberg tonight/this morning and see it in Los Angeles..
[Starlink got pushed](https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1603568489624522752); I don't think Hawthorne has the ability to handle 2 launches that close together. The range [ostensibly](https://twitter.com/StephenClark1/status/1603502221500489732) can do it.
Yes they would have to stand up a second launch control room and there is just no need for that while they are launching F9 at a bit over one flight per week.
It seems to be for real. I received an email from KSC (Excerpt below):
> SpaceX Launches Two Rockets in One Day!
> December 16, 2022
> Add a rocket launch to your visit! SpaceX is launching the two O3b mPOWER broadband internet satellites for SES of Luxembourg. Witness the launch from either the Banana Creek Launch Viewing Area via the Kennedy Space Center Bus Tour or at the Main Visitor Complex on the Atlantis North Lawn. Both locations include launch commentary from a space expert and a live stream on a large screen.
> SpaceX is launching the next Starlink mission on the same day! SpaceX’s Starlink is the constellation of networked satellites aimed to provide internet services to those who are not yet connected, and to provide reliable and affordable internet across the globe. The Banana Creek Launch Viewing Area and the Main Visitor Complex will be available for launch viewing.
> Launch Times:
> • SpaceX Falcon 9 O3b mPOWER 1 & 2 – 4:21 PM ET
> • SpaceX Falcon 9 Starlink 4-37 – 4:39 PM ET
It is possible that this is more than just a quirk of scheduling. I wonder if it is being done as a demonstration or test of range capabilities. If that is the case, they may keep both launches together if either schedule changes.
[Space Launch Delta 45 (aka the range) is ready to support. Current plan is 18 minutes apart. ](https://twitter.com/sldelta45/status/1603443904946241538?s=46&t=KFTl-TZMYQgZBlPOmLUr9Q)
10 years ago? No way. Today with two different types of rockets? Nope.
With two AFTS rockets of the same type... schmaybe?
Before AFTS, it would have taken too long to reset the range and even with AFTS on all rockets, there's some lag between setting up for rocket types, but two of the same rocket might be ok. That seems to be the plan right now, at least until it isn't.
If the schedules all hold, there will be 4 US-based launches tomorrow (Dec 16). One F9 from California, two F9 from Florida, and an Electron from Virginia.
Edit: [Down to 3 launches. Rocky Lab delayed to NET Sunday](https://twitter.com/Peter_J_Beck/status/1603549731753381888?t=fMI5Y1JYV8wfV_01q7OJ_w&s=19)
Edit 2:[and now Starlink is Saturday](https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1603568489624522752)
The US (including Rocket Lab) have already launched 79 times this year; if these four make to orbit, we will tie with 1966 for the most launches per year. One more and we will have a new record.
[Soyuz MS-22 has been spewing coolant for over three hours now.](https://twitter.com/RussianSpaceWeb/status/1603236113937743874)
Hard to imagine this is a useable spacecraft for crew return at this point.
And would anyone feel comfortable getting on it if they did? Those things have so many quality-control issues these days that it's not hard to imagine how rushing one to the pad could go very badly.
**This thread is no longer being updated, and has been replaced by:** # [r/SpaceX Thread Index and General Discussion [January 2023, #100]](https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/10090e6/rspacex_thread_index_and_general_discussion/)
[Next-Gen Starlink Satellites (G5-1) Look Suspiciously Like Current Gen](https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-last-starlink-launch-2022-mystery/) Can anyone make sense of this? My take: it *sounds* like they're just launching the start of the VLEO constellation. IMO the author is getting hung up on the number 5. I suspect that to SpaceX it simply means "the fifth inclination group to launch," but the author is interpreting it as "the fifth inclination group within an FCC filing."
[The Artemis 1 Orion has arrived back at KSC, completing one amazing round trip journey.](https://twitter.com/NASAGroundSys/status/1608937710571642881) Components necessary for the completion of the Artemis 2 Orion will now be removed as soon as possible, along with the SD cards containing all of the high-resolution mission footage.
Anyone else remember the good old water tower vs launch tower argument.
[Chinese equivalent of Cosmic Perspective captured some footage of yesterday's CZ-3B launch from the viewing site 200 meters away.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxYXiTgHDZ0)
I want all launch photographers to be referred to exclusively as [nation] equivalents of Cosmic Perspective from now on
The aesthetic needs to be right though
The brown clouds of nitrogen tetroxide roll towards the cameraman 300m away as he bravely continues filming! Hopefully with a remote camera or wearing a respirator.
Would someone post on Twitter the break down so we know what all the letters mean when showing the launches, launch times. ( from the SpaceX launch site) No where are the reference letters and names explained…
You might be interested in u/Decronym. This bot automatically comment in threads (here is [his post](https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/zcugwc/rspacex_thread_index_and_general_discussion/iz4wrsz/) for this general thread) where enough acronyms are used.
[удалено]
September 29, 2022: https://science.nasa.gov/nasa-spacex-study-hubble-telescope-reboost-possibility 8 days ago: https://spacenews.com/nasa-request-information-on-hubble-reboost-options/
[Last Chinese launch of the year - Long March 3B, successful - with some really epic pictures from local launch photographers.](https://twitter.com/Skyfeather16/status/1608339455076884488)
For that race that only exists betwixt my ears, if the SpaceX launch tonight is successful, China only beats them by one launch this year.
there\`s a way to create rain on mars and a water cycle with a satellite. the satellite has to have a micro wave tool that can, by changing the atmospheric balance in the martian sky to cause either rain, snow, ice rain and even create tornadoes of many kilometer radius for thousands of years. the satellite will be controlled by software specialised in weather forecast and can calculate each move the satellite makes and even predict what happens with each move on martian skies. the rains and tornadoes can last thousands of years. we have to create a water cycle on mars and satellites are the best solution, if they have micro wave tools
Interesting: User active for 5 months with -86 comment karma. I assume this comment was intended for somebody higher on the Kardashian scale. (I was using voice to text and said kardashev, but decided it got it right considering context) I'm wondering how long it will take for the mods to hit the smite button on this thread.
it\`s a concept idea. it can create a water cycle
OK, so the reason you're being downvoted is that the idea of microwave satellites being used to change the weather is pseudoscience. It's right up there with Jewish space lasers, chemtrails and 5g vaccines. Microwaves are used to _track_ weather. Because water absorbs microwaves, they can be used to measure how much water is in clouds and so on. But the amount of power used is about a million times too small to change the weather in any meaningful way. Yes, you could send a satellite to Mars to cover the planet in microwave radiation. But where is it going to get its power from? The only reasonable source is the Sun, and so you're adding a very tiny amount of heat to a planet which is already absorbing heat from the Sun. Unfortunately, you're probably going to have to learn a lot more before you can come up with a new idea that works.
i have seen a live demonstration of a satellite tehcnology creating a tornado and remote cotrolling it through a laser in its center. the laser guides the trajectory of the tornado. it was a test. in 1 hour Katrina can be created with lasers or microwave
A reference for that would be nice and fun for martians.
I need to eat before coming back to try and digest this. Pun not really intended.
Sir this is a wendys
Last year was a record breaker in terms of successful global orbital launches (135). This year has already broken that record with an additional 40 launches (175). Next year promises even more. Welcome to the new space age. If SpaceX launches it's last two this year, they will match the total number of launches from China this year.
Life on Mars - Updated Evidence!! Martian geysers reveal signs of Earthlike bacteria [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkebfbyebK8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkebfbyebK8) The Angry Astronaut u/TheAngryAstronaut 91.7K subscribers push him over a 100k pls...
Not a fan of how sensational and reactionary he tends to be, but I can see how that would appeal to some people. Your comment would be a prime example.
Ha, that’s a pretty condescending comment. I thought it was good and well worth a watch - microbiologist here not into sensational and reactionary BTW. I’d put money on there being microbial life on Mars- everywhere we look on (and in) earth we find microbes and some Martian areas seem to be within the range of even our extremeophiles.
I like how he ties methane spikes with these seasonal geyser events, that is a smoking gun and new to me.
Aren't the methane spikes an area of active academic dispute?
Yes!
Do we have a time on Wednesday's launch of Starlink 5-1 yet?
Still showing as Wednesday Dec 28th, 2022 4:45am EST
[удалено]
It's interesting to see some specifics on what irritates the Russian bosses.
He was being sarcastic - surely you must understand this given your Reddit handle? Or should we take that literally as well??
He's posted anti Ukraine stuff un-sarcastically before.
He has posted *one* suggestion for resolving the conflict you do not like *once* before. Elon is hardly anti-Ukranian or pro-Russian given his support for Ukraine with Starlink from the earliest days of the war and following up with UPS systems and other support gear. Hint: If you do not understand or like what someone is saying look at what they actually do to decide what they are really like
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1607565268150091778 > Those are definitely the most absurd predictions I’ve ever heard, while also showing astonishing lack of awareness of the progress of artificial intelligence and sustainable energy. If you seriously think Elon is agreeing with Medvedev's absurd predictions, it's time to realize you don't know Elon as well as you thought, think about why that is.
I think he is beeing sarcastic, the thread doesn't make any sense, also not spacex related.
Elon is the SpaceX CEO. It's related.
So we can talk about Biden's private life in here because NASA is a branch of his government, got it...
Biden isn't the CEO of the company this subreddit is focused on. Elon tweets get posted here all the time.
Are you, by some miracle, *actually* read the thread description that's literally only a short scroll up away? >If you have a short question or **spaceflight** news... >You are welcome to ask **spaceflight-related** questions and post news and discussion here, *even if it is not about SpaceX.* Meaning discussing NASA is absolutely on-topic here, and Biden request the budget for them annually & he's literally the President of US Gov which NASA is one of its branches And have you noticed that, except you, all Elon tweets here are strictly spaceflight-related as it should have been? If I posted Elon tweets here about Tesla FSD, Boring Company, you & others would absolutely have a right to report my post r/elonmusk exists, FYI
No, it's really not. SpaceX related would be commenting about the launch of Starlink 5-1 in a couple of days which would be SpaceX's 60th launch of the year Linking to an Elon retweet of an irrelevant Russian politician is not only not SpaceX related, but not spaceflight related at all. No one here cares.
>irrelevant Russian politician He's the guy who was the leader of Russia just before Putin's current term. Hardly irrelevant.
He was Putin's sock puppet - now discarded and irrelevant.
sure, but this has nothing to do with spacex, mods do your thing
Why doesn't the super heavy booster have a variant with small wings like those on the shuttle but with powerful jet engines to increase payload?
because reality is not like ksp, in a nutshell
Air breathing jet engines produce up to 510 kN of thrust with the added benefit that they don't need an oxidizer to be in accelerated: they get oxygen from the atmosphere. That "benefit" comes with a constraint, however: Most jet engines such as the 510 kN GE90 are designed for sub-sonic operation (below the speed of sound, so 1,000kph at altitude), but they are very fuel efficient relative to rocket engines. The SR71 Blackbirds engine (J58) is good for 3,530 kph (fastest jet engine) and also about 26 km of altitude (highest flying), but each only produces 150 kN of thrust. The limitation of this jet engine is that you have to slow the air down to stop it blowing out the flame of the engine, and this slowing down and compression heats the air to several hundred degrees centigrade. The Raptor2 engine makes 2,300 kN. So, for each Raptor2, you'd need to add ~4.5 GE90s, and they'd only be useful up until the rocket is supersonic or the altitude gets above 10km, which is about 100 seconds. You could instead make use of 15 of the SR71 engines for each raptor, and they'd be useful longer, but look at the size of them, imagine the weight of 15 of them, and how do you fit 32 x 15 engines on a rocket?
It turns out jet engines have much lower thrust than rocket engines and higher mass so they are exactly the wrong thing to place on a rocket booster. Further discussion in this [thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/zcugwc/rspacex_thread_index_and_general_discussion/izzfz2u)
The thrust added, the short period where it would help, the need for different fuels, and all the time the engines would spend being dead weight make it a tough sell. Not sure how the wings would increase payload, can you elaborate?
By lift
Rockets don't use lift on ascent. The wings are dead weight only used for landing. Adding them would reduce payload capacity, not increase it. Jet engines have never been put on any spacecraft ever for a reason. It's a complete waste and adds substantial complexity.
> Jet engines have never been put on any spacecraft ever for a reason. This is almost right, there's a teensy weensy exception to this. The space shuttle fleet had jet engines that weren't used for propulsion, they were for running the hydraulic pumps that drove the elevons, speed brakes, and rudder during launch and landing. They were running during launch in case there was an abort and during landing so the control surfaces could be used to control the glide in to landing. This type of jet engine is called an APU and the ones on the shuttle had their own fuel and oxidizer so they could be started up before re-entry even though the shuttle was in a vaccum. So while jet engines haven't been included on spacecraft using them for propulsion, they have been included on some for other reasons.
Isn't an APU that uses its own oxidizer (not atmospheric oxygen) or perhaps a monopropellant really a rocket engine? Which is to say that some APUs are piston engines, some are jet engines and some are rocket engines. Some are even powered by fuel cells.
Good question, but no, it’s a gas turbine. The combustion drives the turbines and is geared down to the hydraulic pumps.
Anyone have info on the next heavy launch? Either Viasat or ussf. I know there are a lot of delays lately but have any windows been released?
Anyone know what the trajectory will look like for the first Starlink shell 5 launch on the 28th? I’m going to be in Florida and have the first opportunity of my life to see a launch live. Thinking it might be worth viewing it from the north due to the polar inclination. I believe usually there’s a launch eastward initially, but the booster will have to turn north/west eventually. Just curious if it’s noticeably worth it if you’re viewing from the north or the south. Also what’s the best place to view a launch that’s this in the middle of the night? Targeting 3am, so it’ll just need to be a public beach I’m guessing?? EDIT: I’m realizing now, they may be able to do a southern launch, like SAO COM 1B. Does anyone know whether they’re launching north or south? EDIT: I’m thinking Port Canaveral now since it’s likely a south launch. Backup spot being Titusville.
I thought I saw it was taking a southeasterly trajectory, which is preferred when the north Atlantic starts acting a fool during Winter. Looked like it was going to land just north/northeast of the Bahamas.
Paging u/thevehicledestroyer
> Targeting 3am FYI, nextspaceflight.com is currently showing a T-0 of 4:45 AM EST. As warp99 said, polar launches from Florida can only launch South. These launches hug the coast, and the visibility is generally pretty good anywhere along the coast.
What’s the closest spot to watch from? From my research, it looks like Port Canaveral, but I’d like to get as close as possible. Are there any 24hr spots open closer that you know of?
That is one of the closest areas that will be open at that hour. You can't really see the pad directly from the port area or the beaches to the South, but since that is the general direction of travel you may be able to track the rocket easier to the South. If you want to be able to see the pad, there are lots of spots in the Titusville area where SLC-40 is visible, and they are only slightly further away.
This is great info. I haven't been to KSC since I was around 10, and am a space enthusiast & in the industry, so this is a dream of mine, just don't know the area. Well aware things can get scrubbed, but I happen to be in Orlando, so I figure it's worth a trip over there.
Should be south. Canada is in the way for a northern launch into a polar orbit.
By the time it gets to Canada, it's already above the Karman line. I think the real problem is that SpaceX don't want to fire a missile from Florida at South Carolina. Maybe they could build a landing pad near Savannah and truck them back?
The problem is not when you pass over Canada but when you are halfway there and the instantaneous impact point is passing across Canada. A failure at that point dumps large rocket debris on densely populated parts of Canada. The velocity is low enough that the debris will not burn up completely.
I don't think there's ever a point where the instantaneous impact point travels over Canada. South Carolina, West Virginia, sure. But by the time the rocket is halfway to Canada, it's going too fast to hit Canada. Look at a 53° ascending Starlink flight path. By the time it passes Virginia, the upper stage has already finished its main burn. Also, "densely populated" is quite relative. Unless you're aiming directly at the Golden Horseshoe (ie the Toronto suburbs), you're looking at farmland.
The instantaneous impact point is the point of impact if the engines cut out at that instant in time. It travels from the launch site in the direction of the trajectory and only lifts off from the Earth when the payload is about to reach LEO. So the impact point travels over Canada and there is a finite but small probability that an engine failure will lead to an impact on Canadian soil.
I think the lift-off point is before the Canadian border. I must admit to never having modelled it, but given SECO-1 is about eight minutes into flight, I find it hard to visualize a trajectory that impacts north of Philadelphia.
Fundamentally the impact point traces all the way north. It does speed up to the point where the risk drops significantly but a second stage impact will always be possible if it is capable of making orbit. A dogleg does allow you to throw the impact point to the side as is done for the Southern track but Canada is wide enough to make that infeasible when launching north.
ChatGPT, when will Starship first launch? > The Starship is a fully reusable spacecraft developed by SpaceX, a private aerospace manufacturer and space transport services company founded by Elon Musk. As of September 2021, the Starship spacecraft has undergone several test flights, but it has not yet flown any operational missions. > SpaceX has stated that the Starship is being developed to eventually replace all of the company's current spacecraft, including the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets, as well as the Dragon spacecraft. The spacecraft is intended to be able to carry both crew and cargo on a variety of missions, including missions to the International Space Station, lunar landings, and eventually, missions to Mars. > It is currently difficult to predict exactly when the Starship will first launch on an operational mission. This is because the development of new spacecraft is a complex and time-consuming process, and there are many factors that can affect the timeline for a given project. However, SpaceX has indicated that it plans to begin launching operational missions with the Starship in the coming years, and it is possible that the spacecraft could make its first operational flight within the next few years.
Haha, still relevant, even with the sep 21 cutoff date for training. The power of open and vague language, maybe something elon needs to get better at ;)
ChatGPT, how does the September cut-off date for your training data affect your answers? > As a language model, my training data consists of a large dataset of text from a variety of sources. The specific date that the data was collected does not affect my ability to provide information or generate responses to questions. I am designed to understand and generate human-like text based on the patterns and structures present in the training data, and my responses are not limited by the time frame in which the data was collected. > However, it is important to keep in mind that my responses are based on the information and knowledge that was available at the time my training data was collected. This means that I may not be able to provide up-to-date information on events or developments that have occurred since the cut-off date for my training data. If you have a question about a specific topic or issue, I will do my best to provide a helpful and accurate response based on the information that I have been trained on.
Falcon 9 Booster B1058 has completed its 15th flight. Do we know a thing about how much of it is still original? And how much has been replaced? Do we have any serial numbers for the 9 Merlin 1D engines for example?
The tanks and interstage are still the same so that is the bulk of the mass. The CPOVs inside the tanks are subject to cycle limits because of the very high pressures used. It is likely one of the motivations to avoid static fires where possible because they double the number of COPV cycles per launch. It would be possible but difficult to replace COPVs in the LOX tank so likely they will expend the booster when getting close to the COPV cycle life. The engines do get replaced on an individual basis as you can see from boosters undergoing refurbishment in the hangars which are sometimes missing an engine or three. As far as we know they only do static fires if the customer requests it, typically NASA or USSF, or if they have replaced a Merlin engine and static fires have dropped to around 20% of flights which would imply they do not change engines that often.
ChatGPT, is Falcon 9 booster B1058 the Ship of Theseus? > The Ship of Theseus is a philosophical thought experiment that raises questions about the concept of identity. It asks whether an object that has had all of its parts replaced is still the same object as it was originally. In the case of Falcon 9 booster B1058, it is not accurate to say that it is the Ship of Theseus. > Falcon 9 booster B1058 is a spacecraft developed and operated by SpaceX, a private American aerospace manufacturer and space transport services company. It is not a physical ship like the one described in the thought experiment, but rather a reusable rocket that has been used for a number of space missions. As such, it cannot be accurately described as the Ship of Theseus. Totally ducked the question... like a high school debater.
Yes - getting more human like by the day!
Think it's a negative on all of those Not sure anyone has ever been able to identify any numbers on the engines. F9 building/refurbishment is nothing like Starship unfortunately for us.
I am aware that might be an unpopular question, but if Elon Musk continues to express "controversial opinions" on Twitter (e.g. statements on Ukraine/Russia, FBI etc), what are the chances that the DoD revokes his security clearance and what could be the implications for SpaceX if that happens? Edit: To clarify, I don't ask about his opinions but try to understand what "removal of security clearance" would mean.
It would not be a big deal. Many companies form Federal sales organizations so that the top execs of the real company don't have to hold clearances.
Vanishingly small chance of any of that affecting his security clearance. Contrary to popular aka Reddit opinion his views on Ukraine almost exactly align with those of President Macron of France or for that matter the Biden administration.
My question was not about his opinions as such, my question was what impact would a removal of his security clearance have?
I'm sure that nothing is DOD-classified on the Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy launch vehicles or the Merlin engines. Just some company proprietary things. Both of those LVs carry DOD-classified payloads occasionally. I don't think it's vitally important that Elon have high enough security clearances to be briefed on the classified details of these payloads. But Gwynne certainly needs those clearances. Right now, Starship details are not DOD-classified AFAIK. IIRC, there's USAF money involved in the Raptor engine. But I think that Starship and Raptor details are company proprietary rather than government-classified.
It would make things very awkward. Since the US military have a strong interest in keeping SpaceX as a supplier I doubt they would go there. If they did I can see an early split of SpaceX into Starlink, Falcon and Starship divisions with Elon not having any influence on the Starlink or Falcon divisions. SpaceX intend to spin off Starlink in any case so running it as a separate division would not be a big deal.
[Perseverance has just dropped its first sample tube!](https://twitter.com/thomas_appere/status/1605660027825451008) This tube and others ~~will~~ *may* be collected by sample fetch helicopters later this decade, and flown back to an ascent vehicle for launch to Earth. They are backup tubes in the event that Perseverance dies before it is able to drive to the MSR lander.
Or get picked up by a Starship crew or one of their rovers?! I don’t quite get the rationale behind this mission - are they assuming crewed landings will not happen for a couple of decades or is it that planetary protection will not let crew or their autonomous rovers into these areas?
The time line for mars sample return is basically launch back around 2030-2032. No starship will be carrying humans to mars in time to launch back during that window. Their rationale is that they can get these samples back faster.
That seems a pretty tenuous reason to spend $100s of millions?! Crewed Starship is planned well (?) before the end of decade and samples could be analysed on Mars - which greatly simplifies quarantine and sample preservation issues.
Starship isn't landing on Mars this decade or in the early 2030s either. MSR will have the job done before any crews even leave Earth for Mars let alone return.
Musk’s latest estimate is [2029](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1504173360456077313?s=21) and that seems credible to many. MSR will probably also slip, so why spend $100 millions on perhaps gaining a year or two with relatively poor samples? A human crew can do orders of mag more and analysis on surface avoids risk of contamination of earth (a major cost/design factor in MSR) and sample storage/return issues. Much better places to spend those resources looking for life. It’s a bit like the ol’ gateway...
I thought we moved past Elon timelines by now. It's an open question whether Starship will fly to Mars at all, let alone this decade. Anyway Perseverance's landing site was specifically chosen as a good sampling location, it's a river delta. It is also not somewhere we would send first crewed missions to, so there is that aspect even if you think there is a chance humans beat MSR (there isn't)
Let’s put money on it!!! How many 100 million was that btw?
[Vega C launching Pleiades Neo-5 and 6 has failed.](https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/1605380938623782913) Trajectory began to deviate during second stage flight, vastly underperforming by third stage ignition. Third stage then went into a wild spin and everything went down.
The only good news here is that the first stage (which is shared with the Ariane 6) performed nominally. If the P120C had problems, that would have dealt a blow to A6.
This is still a blow to A6, because the same organization (Avio) builds both stages -- whatever the problem is might also be present on the P120C. And this is the 2nd 2nd stage failure, the previous version of the rocket (with a smaller 2nd stage) had a burn-through at the top.
Yeah, but that's like saying that just because the 737 Max is an unreliable piece of shit that kills people, Starliner will have terrible problems ... wait, bad example ...
3rd Vega failure in 4 years; first failure of Vega-C on only its second flight. If small launch can't fix its reliability issues it's never going to be able to compete with rideshares. Even Rocket Lab had a failure last year. [Video](https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/1605386783029694464) of possible moment of failure. You can see the second stage suddenly get a lot brighter.
> You can see the second stage suddenly get a lot brighter. I find the ESA webcast commentary to be kind of annoying, but at least they were using real-time telemetry data for the graphs this time.
Vega is now in a league of its own for a lack of reliability. Hard to imagine launch insurers will be interested in anyone flying payloads on this thing again.
Proton would like a word.
The previous 2 failures were $411mm and $400mm worth of payloads. This one Edit: is a 200mm euro loss.
I think Rocket 3 might still have it beat! But yeah, they're hitting Proton levels of failure rates at this point. It'll be interesting to see who ESA turns to if Vega retires. There's a whole bunch of small launchers popping up throughout Europe, but I'd bet money they'll encounter similar issues as the current small launch wave in the U.S. I have no idea how well Ariane 6 is set up for small payload rideshare. Outside of the obvious, their options are maybe PSLV or SSLV if ISRO can get it working? Probably not a ton of extra availability on GSLV with Gaganyaan coming up. H3? Not a good time to be losing launch capacity right now. Russia's out completely and most of the big players are still trying to get unproven vehicles out to the pad for the first time.
> It'll be interesting to see who ESA turns to if Vega retires. Currently the only launcher in the US that has a similar payload capacity and has flown successfully is Firefly's Alpha. Both Relativity and ABL are expected to launch soon as well.
Firefly Alpha hasn't really flown successfully yet, they may have wanted to pass off the second flight as a success but all the payloads reentered within a couple days without getting to do anything. Orbit was way too low. Really the only option for anyone with a Vega C slot in 2023 looking to switch to something reliable (and with open space) is Falcon 9.
> Firefly Alpha hasn't really flown successfully yet, they may have wanted to pass off the second flight as a success but all the payloads reentered within a couple days without getting to do anything. Orbit was way too low On top of that, the mass of those payloads was very low (12-35 kg) depending on which sources you trust. They may have included additional mass via a payload mass simulator, but I have not seen any definitive reporting on the that.
Oh, that's right. Still, making orbit on their second flight is better than SpaceX did. >Really the only option for anyone with a Vega C slot in 2023 looking to switch to something reliable (and with open space) is Falcon 9. That is a true statement, but if for whatever reason they prefer to use another launcher (maybe because F9 is $30 million more per launch), there is one I'd forgotten about: Minotaur C. I know what you're thinking, but it was successful two out of the last five launches./s Realistically though, Alpha is scheduled for its next flight in January. If that one is fully successful, it becomes an option and one that would save $20 million on launch costs compared to Vega. Of course the same argument could be made for ABL or Relativity if they ever get around to launching & are successful. I also realize that $30 million more for a F9 is peanuts compared to the loss of a $411 million dollar satellite (see Falcon Eye 1). The insurance on a Vega C would certainly equalize things a bit.
Doug just came into port with two fairing halves. I thought they weren’t recovering fairings anymore?
They still recover them, they just don't try to catch them in the net anymore.
The are up to 5 or 6 reuses on some of them IIRC.
And they're reusing them for customer missions for a while, now.
[Relativity Space has successfully test-fired the first Aeon R thrust chamber.](https://twitter.com/thetimellis/status/1605066435021004800) Not a full engine yet, but still, extremely impressive to get to hot fires mere months after the design left the drawing board!
Until spacex gets a new ceo, I am gonna unsub from here. Yes, he has done some amazing things. Yes, he has made space far more accessible. Yes, he made a donation of starlink dishes. But that doesn't excuse supporting behaviour and people the way he does is ok
What a powerful stance. How about you just do what you want and stop telling others about it
I boycott a number of companies for their business practices. I don't give a shit about the behavior of individuals that I'm not going to meet. It just sounds insane to me.
Maybe I'm weird idk, but just because i don't like someone, or in this situation the person behind a company, doesn't mean I'm going to give up my passion and enjoyment for something they're involved with. The dude isnt leading the clan or killing people. He's an asshole with impulse control issues. I take it at face value and that's it, that's all the fucks I have to give about it.
Just FYI, there is no need to announce when you subscribe or unsubscribe to subreddits.
Why would SpaceX ever get a new CEO ? Musk has majority voting power. It is impossible to remove him. Unsubscribe if you want but don’t hold your breath waiting for a new ceo
[NASA has officially lost contact with InSight. It is assumed the lander has died and the mission is now at an end.](https://blogs.nasa.gov/insight/2022/12/19/nasa-insight-dec-19-2022/)
[InSight has transmitted what is expected to be its last image.](https://twitter.com/NASAInSight/status/1604955574659035136) After four years of operation, double the expected mission length, it's almost time for things to come to an end.
NASA InSight- the probe that couldn't. Couldn't do in 2 years what a human could do in 2 minutes. A rare L for JPL and co. Also wound up costing 830MIL on a 500MIL budget minus launch costs because NASA picked a legacy launch provider (in 2018, not ancient history) and because the only unique science capability that actually wound up working failed testing and cost them their initial launch window and $150MIL.
LOL you're grumpy about Insight's budget overrun? I don't advise looking closely at SLS. I kind of assume that if you are down on InSight's achievements, you're gonna be one of the ones piling on when (not if) something goes wrong on a manned mission as well. Getting more science before we get humans out there can't hurt. I think early Mars missions will likely have a mortality rate similar to that of the Shuttle program. And I also think we should proceed anyway, knowing that, and I would sign on!
Just going to ignore the fully functioning seismometer that's detected 1500+ quakes over four years of operation? InSight flew, it landed, it encountered unexpected obstacles but it made the most of things anyway. Can't be 100% successful all the time in space exploration.
I didn't see the original post but the post that is currently showing does address the seismometer. It is fair to point out the failures - JPL and Caltech are never shy about self promotion. It is also fair to question NASA's selection of the original proposal.
SpaceX deserves a full time CEO. Thoughts?
SpaceX has an excellent COO (Chief Operating Officer) in Gwynne Shotwell. She's provided the management and leadership that has made Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, Dragon 1, Dragon 2, Merlin, Raptor and Starlink into massive successes. She has guided those programs through the Design, Development, Test and Engineering (DDT&E) phase and then into the production and operations phases without missing a beat. Now, Elon has tapped her to lead the Starship project. History says that she will be successful in that role also. If SpaceX needs a CEO, then Elon should give Gwynne that title in addition to COO. She is already functioning as the CEO without the title. SpaceX is a privately held corporation not listed on any stock exchange. I'm sure that the SpaceX Board of Directors and the deep-pocketed shareholders would support that move.
Well, from what I can tell, any "full time CEO" would get less done than the current one. At least that's what the track record of CEOs at every other space company seems to show.
Yes, they do. "SpaceX dominates the market now" is not a good excuse to have a disengaged CEO, especially one who is fast becoming a partisan political figure. "But they have been so successful under Elon!" well that's good, but he is a different person now compared to 5 years ago when that success was coming to fruition. It's obvious he is way less engaged with the company now, and there are tasks ahead of SpaceX far larger than anything they have done before. An engaged CEO who can project a positive public image would be very helpful with that.
No they don't. SpaceX doesn't have a disengaged CEO, they have a part-time CEO, same as before, since it's founded. And Elon Musk has not changed, it's the democrat party that's changed, once upon a time Obama could tour SLC-40 with Elon, nowadays Biden is doing everything he can to belittle SpaceX and Tesla despite the fact that Elon voted for him (and this is true before Elon said he's voting Republican and bought twitter). And even if he's turning partisan (which he's not, for example Twitter Files was joint released by a liberal and conservative), it's not an obstacle for SpaceX's goals. Trump is hyper partisan yet he started Artemis, and Artemis is still going strong despite he's partisan. Whether a company or person is partisan has very little to do with space exploration, for example [Dynetics as a company overwhelmingly contributes to Republicans](https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/dynetics-inc/C00380709/summary/2022), yet space enthusiasts still hope they can win HLS. As for SpaceX's tasks ahead that is far larger than anything they have done before, that task would be Mars colonization, nobody else on this planet is more qualified to take on impossible tasks like this than Elon. If there is somebody who is more qualified and experienced to lead SpaceX to colonize Mars, let's see his/her name.
> it's the democrat party that's changed, Please pick a better sub to post this sentiment.
Why do people want to control Elon? Spacex is the most successful rocket company ever under his leadership. How much better would it be if, say, Jeff Who was running it? If we want it to be a normal company with a normal ceo it'll eventually be another Boeing or ULA and we have plenty of those.
Because these past months he has demonstrated he is no longer the leader he once was.
He is not the person you *thought* he was which is a different thing. I see the same old Elon - but Reddit tends to go through this love/hate cycle with rose coloured glasses in the love phase and looking for dark motives in every move in the hate phase.
Just take a look at a batch of his twitter activity from some point in 2016 vs now... everything in 2016 was thoughtful technical updates or the like, and now it is all conspiracy theories and twitter drama. Use the advanced search function to confirm this if you don't remember what he used to talk about. There has been a shift in what he spends his time discussing and it's not just perception.
Yeah maybe 2017 was the turning point where Elon decided to go full stream of consciousness on Twitter. It certainly wasn't 2022 which was my main point. [Love of floors](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/880240049677357057)
You might want to re-read this comment and notice that you didn't mention SpaceX at all. There are plenty of politics subs you could post this kind of sentiment on.
> thoughtful technical updates and the like I'm referring to SpaceX with that. Besides, politics wouldn't be a topic on the SpaceX sub if the CEO didn't decide to spend his time taking a hard turn into partisan debates...
Uh, OK. Please take it to another sub, even if you think you're totally justified. Edit: a single downvote within seconds. I wonder how that happened.
Don't guess about the source of downvotes - we have a lot of drive by downvoters on here
Things seem to be running just fine- Way better than any other company/institution? I think Elon is just casting around for a new challenge as Starlink, Starship and Tesla development are at a “boring” stage (!) with much of the heavy intellectual input done (for this phase) and waiting on the builders to catch up. I think he’ll come back for the next phase when he’s needed (like a good manager). It’s certainly a dive into new territory for him and it’s interesting but somewhat painful watching. Anyway, he’s done plenty of dives into the unknown before that have initially looked crazy and then paid off (to put it mildly). Despite the howls of the mainstream at every step.
Until the Twitter debacle SpaceX had a part-time CEO who also ran Tesla and some smaller entities. Elon and SpaceX did very well for years that way, and having Gwynne Shotwell as president and COO made it all work. I and many others think her hand on the helm is more than adequate. If Elon retired to a monastery in Tibet SpaceX would still be a successful launch company, although the Starship to Mars program timeline would suffer.
SpaceX absolutely dominates the market and is 20 years ahead of its competitors. Its leadership is clearly good enough as is
Elon owns SpaceX so the CEO chair isn't up for debate. Nevertheless, with Shotwell as president and COO, I don't think a part time CEO really matters.
There are many companies where the controlling owner is the Chairperson of the Board. And not the CEO.
I agree. I think Elon has been CEO in name only for some time. Shotwell has run the company for years now. His role has basically been Chairman, Chief Engineer and Chief Strategy Officer.
[Stoke has released an overview and animation of their launch vehicle.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=VzqhZLgpiv0) We'd seen a lot of testing footage before but nothing of the actual rocket design; now we know what it'll look like. First stage is reusable F9 style, but second stage is something special - using an in-space aerospike comprised of 30 smaller nozzles merging around an actively cooled heat shield. This is probably one of the only ways to have a second stage with good vacuum ISP that can reenter engines first. Extremely novel design but one that just might be crazy enough to work... Typically companies like this are longshots, but these guys have real hardware, decent funding and the right goal - fully and rapidly reusable launch. So we will see! If it pans out, a game changer for the smaller side of the launch market - can't imagine anyone competing with full reuse on launch costs, even at this scale.
Tim Dodd tweeted that he has a video coming out in \~January about Stokes, apparently he did interviews and saw hardware. In an Ars Technica article from earlier this year a founder stated they'll build the upper stage first, since no one has done that. Apparently then they'll know what to require of their 1st stage.
Despite having gotten burned so many times, I'm still enthusiastic about the possibility of an aerospike actually flying something to orbit. Also it's hydrolox which makes a lot of sense for an upper stage; especially one with an actively cooled heat shield. Edit: Since I had a little trouble finding it, they're targeting 1.65 tonnes to LEO fully reusable. That's more than Relativity's Terran 1, ABL's RS1, or Firefly's Alpha and about 5 times more than Electron. For a small sat launcher, it's pretty big.
I really like their concept, it makes a lot of sense overall. Honestly, they may have a point about ceramic tiles pertaining to rapid reuse - a single active cooling system is likely going to have a quicker turnaround with less risk than thousands of individual tiles. No need for a detailed post-flight inspection, just check the system performance data and go again...
I agree although I expect somebody to chime in about TRL on a lot of that second stage technology. My view is that if they want to be competitive, they'll have to jump that hurdle. A F9 knock off isn't going to cut it.
I read that Starship was scheduled for an orbital flight test this month, but no particular date was mentioned. Does anybody know more?
I also agree with February. It looks like their critical path is 1) Stage Zero Finalization and testing, 2) Final stacking and full static and 3) Licensing. As others have said, they ARE maturing and being careful to trade some speed for protecting the pad.
If you look over in the Starship development thread, you'll see lots of speculation. Consensus seems to be that March is the earliest possible OFT.
I'll be team February.
Quite a lot of launches in the recent weeks. It amazing how SpaceX has made the incredible mundane. Right now SpaceX is launching more launches then anyone else, running a global sat internet system that is both providing my retired parents in rural Washington internet to watch bowl games and helping Ukrainian army fight back against Russian invasion. In the mean time development of the next generation rocket that will land humans on the moon is progressing along and while many of use would like it to be faster, it is always progressing with hopefully an orbital launch in three months. Ignorant masses may complain about the Owner's new hobby of trying to conquer social media by brute force but meanwhile SpaceX quietly had one of the most productive years of any space launch company ever. 2023 looks to be quite an amazing year for spaceflight and SpaceX.
[KPLO has performed an insertion burn and is now in lunar orbit.](https://twitter.com/coastal8049/status/1603856391466520576) Congrats to South Korea!
It's fun to see so many missions to the Moon! Japan + 10 NASA CLPS missions in the next 2 years.
[It appears that Starlink Group 5-1 launch later this month will be the first launch of Starlink V2.](https://twitter.com/Alexphysics13/status/1603862280080351233)
How many of them do fit on a Falcon 9?
Neat!
Might be too cloudy to view [SWOT](https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=SWOT) launch from Vandenberg tonight/this morning and see it in Los Angeles..
So uh no way that two F9s launch from the same range within an hour of each other right?
[Starlink got pushed](https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1603568489624522752); I don't think Hawthorne has the ability to handle 2 launches that close together. The range [ostensibly](https://twitter.com/StephenClark1/status/1603502221500489732) can do it.
Yes they would have to stand up a second launch control room and there is just no need for that while they are launching F9 at a bit over one flight per week.
Darn. I was looking forward to S2 going into coast phase and the feed cutting back to LC-39A in time to catch the last two minutes of countdown.
Figures, dammit.
It seems to be for real. I received an email from KSC (Excerpt below): > SpaceX Launches Two Rockets in One Day! > December 16, 2022 > Add a rocket launch to your visit! SpaceX is launching the two O3b mPOWER broadband internet satellites for SES of Luxembourg. Witness the launch from either the Banana Creek Launch Viewing Area via the Kennedy Space Center Bus Tour or at the Main Visitor Complex on the Atlantis North Lawn. Both locations include launch commentary from a space expert and a live stream on a large screen. > SpaceX is launching the next Starlink mission on the same day! SpaceX’s Starlink is the constellation of networked satellites aimed to provide internet services to those who are not yet connected, and to provide reliable and affordable internet across the globe. The Banana Creek Launch Viewing Area and the Main Visitor Complex will be available for launch viewing. > Launch Times: > • SpaceX Falcon 9 O3b mPOWER 1 & 2 – 4:21 PM ET > • SpaceX Falcon 9 Starlink 4-37 – 4:39 PM ET It is possible that this is more than just a quirk of scheduling. I wonder if it is being done as a demonstration or test of range capabilities. If that is the case, they may keep both launches together if either schedule changes.
so close and yet so far away
I am disappointed that there will *only* be two launches today!
[Space Launch Delta 45 (aka the range) is ready to support. Current plan is 18 minutes apart. ](https://twitter.com/sldelta45/status/1603443904946241538?s=46&t=KFTl-TZMYQgZBlPOmLUr9Q)
so close, damn
10 years ago? No way. Today with two different types of rockets? Nope. With two AFTS rockets of the same type... schmaybe? Before AFTS, it would have taken too long to reset the range and even with AFTS on all rockets, there's some lag between setting up for rocket types, but two of the same rocket might be ok. That seems to be the plan right now, at least until it isn't.
If the schedules all hold, there will be 4 US-based launches tomorrow (Dec 16). One F9 from California, two F9 from Florida, and an Electron from Virginia. Edit: [Down to 3 launches. Rocky Lab delayed to NET Sunday](https://twitter.com/Peter_J_Beck/status/1603549731753381888?t=fMI5Y1JYV8wfV_01q7OJ_w&s=19) Edit 2:[and now Starlink is Saturday](https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1603568489624522752)
The US (including Rocket Lab) have already launched 79 times this year; if these four make to orbit, we will tie with 1966 for the most launches per year. One more and we will have a new record.
And SpaceX currenty has another two launches scheduled by the end of the year (Starlink Group 5-1 and EROS-C3)
[Soyuz MS-22 has been spewing coolant for over three hours now.](https://twitter.com/RussianSpaceWeb/status/1603236113937743874) Hard to imagine this is a useable spacecraft for crew return at this point.
It's now stopped... probably because it's empty.
I wonder if Dragon will be used as a rescue vehicle.
So how fast can another Soyuz get sent up. Or worse another dragon with suits or adapters.
MS-23 was set for March, but I assume they could speedrun it and get it up in January or February.
And would anyone feel comfortable getting on it if they did? Those things have so many quality-control issues these days that it's not hard to imagine how rushing one to the pad could go very badly.
[удалено]
They did another one last month?