News Changes to the SpaceX BFR rocket.

GLS

Well-known member
Orbiter Contributor
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,963
Reaction score
2,990
Points
188
Website
github.com
Lots of confidence that it will survive...
 

GLS

Well-known member
Orbiter Contributor
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,963
Reaction score
2,990
Points
188
Website
github.com
If there is no AOS soon again, its gone.
Not being at the correct attitude during initial entry means a higher thermal and aero load later on. Add the +/- tumbling vehicle, and it should result in a meteor shower.
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
37,668
Reaction score
2,391
Points
203
Location
Wolfsburg
Preferred Pronouns
Sire
Not being at the correct attitude during initial entry means a higher thermal and aero load later on. Add the +/- tumbling vehicle, and it should result in a meteor shower.

Yes, but if the aerodynamics control managed to stabilize it, it could have gone good. Soyuz also recovered some out of control situations.
 

GLS

Well-known member
Orbiter Contributor
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,963
Reaction score
2,990
Points
188
Website
github.com
Yes, but if the aerodynamics control managed to stabilize it, it could have gone good. Soyuz also recovered some out of control situations.
But the Soyuz can handle a balistic entry. This (and the Shuttle) are limited to a lifting entry.
 

diogom

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
1,375
Reaction score
418
Points
98
TDRS and Starlink cut out simultaneously, could indicate loss of Ship
 

GLS

Well-known member
Orbiter Contributor
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,963
Reaction score
2,990
Points
188
Website
github.com
TDRS and Starlink data lost at the same time = kaput confirmed?
 

Thunder Chicken

Fine Threads since 2008
Donator
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
4,432
Reaction score
3,338
Points
138
Location
Massachusetts
Does anyone know if a partial boost back burn was done with the booster, or did it do a deceleration burn at any time? I'm wondering if it had sufficient ullage to relight.
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
37,668
Reaction score
2,391
Points
203
Location
Wolfsburg
Preferred Pronouns
Sire
But the Soyuz can handle a balistic entry. This (and the Shuttle) are limited to a lifting entry.

That says nothing about the peak heating or accumulated heat load. A ballistic reentry for Soyuz will have the same peak heating as a gliding one, the shuttle is limited by dynamic pressure most of the reentry.

I can imagine that dynamic pressure was also killing SpaceShip this time.

EDIT: Just look at the video replay, how fast the velocity was dropping before signal was finally lost. The chaotic attitude indicator after the camera feed was lost also indicate that it broke up at about 75 km.
 

Thunder Chicken

Fine Threads since 2008
Donator
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
4,432
Reaction score
3,338
Points
138
Location
Massachusetts
Thanks for this, I was on my phone and couldn't watch live.

The aerodynamic control of the booster with the grid fins seemed marginal. I wonder if they were fighting a badly asymmetric group of firing and failing engines. Ullage just based on aerodynamic drag should have been fine. Something was not happy with the engine relights, which is surprising since they figured out the kick flip relight on the Starship.
 

diogom

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
1,375
Reaction score
418
Points
98

Confirmation they had issues with the attitude control, leading to skipping the engine burn. And likely what was seen during reentry too.
 

Thunder Chicken

Fine Threads since 2008
Donator
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
4,432
Reaction score
3,338
Points
138
Location
Massachusetts

Confirmation they had issues with the attitude control, leading to skipping the engine burn. And likely what was seen during reentry too.

SpaceX said:
Super Heavy successfully lit several engines for its first ever landing burn before the vehicle experienced a RUD (that’s SpaceX-speak for “rapid unscheduled disassembly”). The booster’s flight concluded at approximately 462 meters in altitude and just under seven minutes into the mission.

I think +/- 50 cm is an excessively tight tolerance for these sorts of engineering matters. 😄

Anyway, did the booster explode prior to impact, or just slam into the water at nearly sonic speeds? I mean, the entire stage is 73 meters long and it was moving at about 270 m/s. Did it make it all the way through the flight only to explode a second before its crash? That's strangely disappointing if it is true.
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
37,668
Reaction score
2,391
Points
203
Location
Wolfsburg
Preferred Pronouns
Sire
Anyway, did the booster explode prior to impact, or just slam into the water at nearly sonic speeds? I mean, the entire stage is 73 meters long and it was moving at about 270 m/s. Did it make it all the way through the flight only to explode a second before its crash? That's strangely disappointing if it is true.

Likely the engine compartment was simply trying to leave Planet Earth.
 
Top