Elon Musk gives an hour-twenty update on Starship. Claims confidence of an orbital launch sometime in 2022.
Elon Musk gives an hour-twenty update on Starship. Claims confidence of an orbital launch sometime in 2022.
The package of Shuttle II stuff (actually, “Shuttle Evolved”) arrived today and has been scanned and uploaded to Dropbox (some 350 megabytes). Enough funders came on board to drop the per-funder price to a mere $13. The artwork was particularly nice; it was scanned in at 600 dpi and provided both as-scanned, and with some process to de-age and brighten the art. The documents have been turned into PDFs, as well as providing the raw scans.
The collection of stuff was expensive, but crowdfunding it made it inexpensive for everyone. If you see anything on ebay or elsewhere that might benefit from such an approach, don’t hesitate to point it out.
Funders who have paid the $13 should have received a Dropbox notification about the uploads providing access to the files.
So a lot of “Shuttle II” stuff appeared on eBay for an exorbitant price. I’m becoming increasingly leery of plunking down excessive sums for this sort of thing… not only due to my own finances and the onrushing economic meltdown, but because doing so incentivizes sellers to slap even more exorbitant prices on things. But, I put this lot before my APR patrons/subscribers as a potential crowdfunding opportunity, and enough signed on that I went ahead and purchased the lot. It should arrive early next week.
As with all my APR crowdfunds, the cost of the item is split evenly among the funders; the more funders, the lower the price per person. Each funder will receive a complete set of high-rez (300 DPI, full color… higher rez if called for) scans of the items. Typically these crowdfunded items then get sent on to appropriate archive, library or museum, though this time I’m not quite sure where they should go.
If you would be interested in signing on, send me an email . There are currently enough funders that the per-funder price is ~$24 under $14; the more sign on, the lower it’ll get. If you have a price limit noticeably lower than $14, let me know in your email. This will remain open until the stuff arrives, presumably early next week. At that point it’ll be closed and the price set.
Additionally: the box shown below, loaded with blueprints/diagrams, is somewhere in the system headed my way. It was procured sight unseen; I have high hopes. This sort of thing is made possible by the APR Patrons/Monthly Historical Documents Program subscribers. If you want to help preserve aerospace history and get in on these goodies, please consider subscribing.
Fantastic Plastic has at last released for purchase the War Rocket model I CADded for them a few years ago:
The question, of course, is “what happens to flesh when you stick it behind a rocket engine?”
A new-ish rocket company… that already has $400 million in investment.
Their plan is to launch a *studio* to the ISS in 2024, and then separate it from the ISS to become a free-flying platform in 2028.
How serious are they? Dunno. Will it come to pass? Dunno. Is it frivolous, compared to the likes of space telescopes, missions to the Moon, Mars colonization? Definitely. Is it a good idea? If it is carried out honestly, with a proper budget and engineering rigor… you damn betcha it’s a good idea. This sort of thing should help spur not only direct improvements in space technologies such as life support, launch and the understanding of how regular folk do in microgravity, it should also help spur general interest in space. If the “studio” mechanically works well, it could lead to practical space hotels and other space-based commercial enterprises.
Assuming, of course, it’s not a disaster. Videos of Tom Cruise turning various shades of green and spewing nonstop for weeks on end might not be so great. But say what you will about Cruise, man’s a consummate pro when it comes to acting; wouldn’t surprise me if he could act right through space sickness and make it look like he’s having a blast.
The “holy grail” in this case is an SSTO spaceplane. It is to *not* incorporate airbreathing or wacky unproven technologies; instead, it is to use fairly conventional liquid propellant rocket engines in the tail of a cranked-delta spaceplane. To lob it off the ground, it will use a powered sled for a horizontal runway launch.
Ehh.
Same basic concept as the Sanger Silverbird of 1944 vintage, or the Boeing “Windjammer” and RASV concepts from the 70’s. If they can get the mass ratio to work… sure, it’s possible. They’re claiming a 48-hour turnaround. Uh-huh. I’ll believe it when I see it. I wish them the best, but I’ve seen far too many such press releases since the 90’s to get all excited.
A few patent applications that might be of interest:
“Earth to Orbit Transportation System”
“Rocket propulsion systems and associated methods”
The not terribly enlightening website is here:
https://www.radianaerospace.com/
Curiously, one of the names attached to both patent applications that might be of interest to readers of this blog is Gary Hudson, of the Phoenix SSTO, Air Launch and Roton fame. But he doesn’t seem to be listed on the website.
Not hyperbole. A serious question.
The Fish and Wildlife Service is trying to make it so that SpaceX can’t use their Boca Chica launch facility for a “Starbase.”
Not only are FAA’s hands tied on the EIS front, a full Section 4(f) Evaluation is a potential nightmare. This evaluation requires the identification of a suitable alternative that is both “Feasible and Prudent.” If this Feasible and Prudent alternative site will have a lower Section 4(f) impact, the FAA is prohibited from giving the Green Light to Starbase. At all. This is outside of NEPA as well. So if, for example, the Cape Canaveral LC 39 pad that SpaceX is developing is determined to be a feasible and prudent alternative, Starbase is dead. Dead Dead.
The “Sea Dragon” launch vehicle concept is reasonably well known: a giant “dumb” booster, using two pressurized stages built massively heavy using shipyard tolerances. it would be floated out to sea and fueled while in the water. Everything about it was meant to be simple. However, this was the *final* Sea Dragon design; earlier iterations had some different configuration details. Unfortunately, while the final design is well known (detailed diagrams of it are often shown, usually reproductions of the diagram I posted on my site way back in 2005), the evolution of the design from initial concepts is not well documented. And thus I have artwork depicting a rather different version that used a conical first stage tucked into a giant fixed conical nozzle of the second stage. It *appears* to be substantially more complex than the later version, possible pump fed with lighter structures. Sadly, art is all I have. If anyone has *anything* on this design – data, diagrams, descriptions, etc. – I’d love to see it.