Space Exploration megathread

[DaFace]

Since a number of cool things are happening in space exploration these days, we'll widen the scope of this thread a smidge. Conversation about all things space exploration are welcome, whether it be from NASA, SpaceX, ULA, Blue Origin, or anyone else. Chances are most of the discussion will still be about SpaceX since they love to make things public and fun, but nothing's off limits. I'll eventually get around to modifying the OP to include resources for other companies too, but in the meantime, feel free to post any cool stuff you run across.

Lists of Upcoming Missions

Spoiler!

General lists:
https://nextspaceflight.com/
http://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/

SpaceX specific list:
https://spacexnow.com/upcoming.php

How to Watch a Live Launch

Spoiler!

SpaceX:
https://www.youtube.com/user/spacexchannel

ULA:
https://www.youtube.com/user/UnitedLaunchAlliance

RocketLab:
https://www.youtube.com/user/RocketLabNZ

NASATV will also cover some launches (primarily ISS resupply missions):
https://www.youtube.com/user/NASAtelevision

Where to Learn More

Spoiler!

Some cool pics...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex/
https://www.instagram.com/spacex/?hl=en

Twitter feed is usually interesing...

https://twitter.com/SpaceX
https://twitter.com/elonmusk

The SpaceX sub is a great source of info...

https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex
https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/wiki/index

And for a more forum-style discussion board...

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php#c17

And there are plenty of YouTube channels with great content...

• Joe Scott - Lost of "future" discussion. Some about rockets and space. Much that goes beyond.
• Scott Manley - Super smart dude (engineer) who reviews a lot of major events in space exploration.
• Frazer Cain (Universe Today) - Podcast-style videos that go in-depth into space topics.
• Tim Dodd (Everyday Astronaut) - A "random dude" who got really into space (particularly SpaceX). He's a great resource for simple explanations of this stuff, as well as live hosting launches.
• USLaunchReport - Lost of videos of the more mundane stuff (e.g., booster recovery operations). Not a ton of commentary.
• NASASpaceFlight - Live hosting of most launches including a ton of video of Starlink operations.

Glossary

Spoiler!

Space discussions tend to get a little bogged down in jargon, so here's a list of terms you might encounter. (Others, please let me know of others that should be added.)

• ASDS - Autonomous Spaceport Droneship - The "barges" that they sometimes land rockets on.
• Dragon - The cone-shaped capsule that sits at the top of the rocket for ISS-bound launches that holds the cargo (or, in the future, humans).
• F9 - Falcon 9, the name of the rocket itself.
• FH - Falcon Heavy, the three-booster version.
• GTO - Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit, a type of orbit that will eventually result in the satellite orbiting the earth as it turns so that it seems to be in the same spot from the ground (such as DirecTV or Dish satellites). These types of launches are particularly challenging because they require a lot of power to get them into the right orbit, leaving very little fuel left for landing.
• HIF - Horizontal Integration Facility - the building near the launch pad where they put all of the pieces of the rocket together before rolling it out to the pad.
• ISS - The International Space Station
• JRTI - Just Read The Instructions, the name of the "barge" that they land on for west-coast launches.
• LEO - Low Earth Orbit, a fairly low orbit shared by many satellites and ISS. These launches usually require less power to achieve the proper orbit, so the first stage can often be landed back on land rather than on a drone ship.
• LZ1 - Landing Zone 1, basically a big open slab of concrete at Cape Canaveral where the first stage will attempt to land (for some launches).
• NET - No Earlier Than, basically the date they're hoping to launch, but rocket launches have a tendency of getting delayed.
• OCISLY - Of Course I Still Love You, the name of the "barge" that they land on for east-coast launches.
• RTLS - Return to Landing Site, a mission where the first stage comes back and lands at LZ1.
• Starship - SpaceX's next-generation rocket (and spacecraft) that will hopefully one day take us to Mars. Starship is the "second stage" that will carry cargo or people, but also refers to the whole system. (It's confusing, but think of it like the Space Shuttle, which was both the shuttle itself and the entire launch system.)
• Super Heavy - The giant booster that will carry Starship to space.

[Easy 6]

Shouldn't this pretty much sink Boeing?

Between this and the litany of commercial liner disasters, things should be looking very grim for them

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by Easy 6

Shouldn't this pretty much sink Boeing?

Between this and the litany of commercial liner disasters, things should be looking very grim for them

It certainly doesn't look great for Starliner, but it's tough to say what will happen. They'll almost certainly have to re-certify it, which will involve more lengthy delays. They're also on a fixed-price contract with NASA, so it's not out of the question that they would either ask for more money or back out of the contract, neither of which is great for what NASA wants.

More broadly, I doubt it'll have a huge impact on Boeing's bottom line in the short-term. They have annual revenues of around $80 billion, so Starliner makes up a relatively tiny piece of the pie. There's no question that their brand has taken a huge hit, though.

[El Lobo Gordo]

Originally Posted by DaFace

More broadly, I doubt it'll have a huge impact on Boeing's bottom line in the short-term. They have annual revenues of around $80 billion, so Starliner makes up a relatively tiny piece of the pie. There's no question that their brand has taken a huge hit, though.

When you have revenues of $80 billion, you don't get cancer on Jan 1 and die Dec 31 of the same year. When you have $80 billion in annual revenues you are so big that if you are cancerous and terminal, it just might take 8-10 years for death to come.

Boeing's problem is they have gotten so big and stodgy they confuse the symbols of good performance with actual good performance. They think they did well because a line on a financial statement looks pretty good. The executives pat themselves on the ass because they saved a buck here. The fact they couldn't produce a functional space craft....well thats just a blip they'll figure out in the next quarter.

[Hydrae]

Originally Posted by El Lobo Gordo

When you have revenues of $80 billion, you don't get cancer on Jan 1 and die Dec 31 of the same year. When you have $80 billion in annual revenues you are so big that if you are cancerous and terminal, it just might take 8-10 years for death to come.

Boeing's problem is they have gotten so big and stodgy they confuse the symbols of good performance with actual good performance. They think they did well because a line on a financial statement looks pretty good. The executives pat themselves on the ass because they saved a buck here. The fact they couldn't produce a functional space craft....well thats just a blip they'll figure out in the next quarter.

We'll have to see what changes the new CEO puts in place and whether he can right the ship.

[El Lobo Gordo]

Originally Posted by Hydrae

We'll have to see what changes the new CEO puts in place and whether he can right the ship.

You expect a new CEO to come in and change the culture of the organization to one that can bring success. That used to be what CEO's did. Not any more. A modern CEO is there for sales...sales....sales. If you are American Airlines and you're going to buy a billion dollars worth of jets, do you want to be schmoozed by some VP? No, you want the CEO of Boeing kissing your ass.

This is especially true in old stodgy corporations where it is the board that has the mental defect of confusing symbols of good performance with actual good performance. Get them to sign on the bottom line and that is good performance. Doesn't matter if your planes crash and your spacecraft are junk....that's just an unfortunate that will be figured out later.

[GeorgeZimZam]

Originally Posted by GeorgeZimZam

Raptor engine upgrade:

Raptor 3, SN1 pic.twitter.com/gV1NemIyXU

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 3, 2024

They have done an excellent job making the assembly simpler and more producible. So, there is no need to exaggerate this by showing a partially assembled engine without controllers, fluid management, or TVC systems, then comparing it to fully assembled engines that do.

— Tory Bruno (@torybruno) August 3, 2024

[DaFace]

Wow. You don't often see Gwynne getting spicy.

[Donger]

Yeesh...

NASA gave another non-update to the media on its crewed Boeing CST-100 Starliner mission. The agency still doesn’t know when astronauts Sunita Williams and Butch Wilmore will come home from the International Space Station, and it doesn’t have a firm date for when it will make a decision on the matter. However, NASA did let slip a development that could potentially crank up a massive source of embarrassment for Boeing.

Last week, NASA said that if it can’t send its crew home on the Starliner, it might have to send them back on a SpaceX Dragon vessel — in February! — and if that happens, the photos of the crew walking on Earth could feature Boeing’s arch-rival’s space suits instead of the get-ups they launched with.

“From a suit standpoint, they’re really not interchangeable,” said Joel Montalbano, the deputy associate administrator of NASA’s Space Operations Mission Directorate. “You can’t have a Boeing suit in a SpaceX [vehicle], or a SpaceX suit in a Boeing vehicle. So that would not be the plan.” Boeing representatives were not present on the call.

Speculation continues to mount that the Starliner mission is already a failure — there are fears the ship might not even be able to undock from the International Space Station without its crew — but NASA has not conceded that point yet. For weeks, it has been testing and reviewing data about its thrusters to assess the vulnerabilities created by helium leaks. The gas is used to control the thrusters, and though NASA has said there is plenty of helium on board to get them home, it has yet to commit to a return mission.

[ThrobProng]

Hopefully NASA will avoid Boeing like the plague going forward.

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by ThrobProng

Hopefully NASA will avoid Boeing like the plague going forward.

The issue is that, despite all of Boeing's issues, NASA still REALLY wants to have redundancy. SpaceX had an issue with their second stage on a Starlink launch a month or so ago, and those kinds of issues usually ground the entire fleet until they figure out what happened.

Thankfully, that issue was really obvious, so it only took a couple of weeks to get them flying again, but it's not out of the question an incident could ground SpaceX for months.

NASA doesn't want to have to rely on the Russians to get people to/from ISS, so they would really prefer to have two options for U.S.-based rides. That means continuing to work to get Boeing certified even as frustrating as the process has been.

[Shiver Me Timbers]

Originally Posted by DaFace

.......................NASA doesn't want to have to rely on the Russians to get people to/from ISS, so they would really prefer to have two options for U.S.-based rides. That means continuing to work to get Boeing certified even as frustrating as the process has been.

I'm pretty sure if it was up to Butch and Sunita they would ride home with the Russians. Making them stay up there until Feb for "pride" is a bit of a big ask. My concern would the Russians arresting them for spying upon arrival.

[LagunaSWana]

Originally Posted by Donger

Just an orbital class rocket coming home to land. No biggie:

Tracking footage of Falcon 9’s first stage booster landing and sonic boom pic.twitter.com/HNohw3oCCp

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) August 5, 2024

[LagunaSWana]

Originally Posted by Shiver Me Timbers

I'm pretty sure if it was up to Butch and Sunita they would ride home with the Russians. Making them stay up there until Feb for "pride" is a bit of a big ask. My concern would the Russians arresting them for spying upon arrival.

If they have to stay there until February, are they going to start growing potatoes to keep from starving?

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by LagunaSWana

If they have to stay there until February, are they going to start growing potatoes to keep from starving?

Supplies really aren't an issue. They keep the place very well-stocked, and they can adjust what they send up on resupply missions if needed.