SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the schedule-for-rapid-unscheduled-disassembly dept.
[20200420_144755 UTC: Update: According to this comment to the thread at NASASpaceflight, the RollLift (which would transport SN4 to the pad) has not finished being assembled. Looks like it will still be a while before testing commences. --martyb]
[20200420_162536 UTC: Corrected timelines and costs; see linked comment. --martyb]
NASASpaceflight has continuous updates of activities at the Boca Chica SpaceX site with many pics and videos, too. The last time I checked, SN4 (SpaceX's 4th Starship prototype: Serial Number 4) is nearing completion of construction and is soon to be transported to the testing platform. Historically, next would be pressurization tests, e.g. with liquid nitrogen, to see if the rocket can handle the temperatures and pressures. Prior testing failures have been... impressive. Should all go well with these tests, next up would be testing of SN4 with liquid methane and liquid oxygen. If successful, static fire tests with the rocket tethered and, ultimately, with a powered hop for a very limited duration and distance.
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has set a goal of building a new Starship rocket each week. SN4 has been under construction for less than a month. By comparison, the SLS (Space Launch System) has been under development for many years, has cost billions of dollars per year, and has never (not even once) been launched. (Please see this comment for clarification.)
Here are the dates and times of upcoming road and beach closures (and alternates) as announced by Cameron County, Texas coinciding with planned testing by SpaceX:
- April 20, 2020: 0800-0900 (Primary Date)
- April 23, 2020: 0900-1000 (Primary Date)
- April 26, 2020: 0900-1159 (Primary Date)
- April 27, 2020: 0900-1159 (Alternate Date)
- April 28, 2020: 0900-1159 (Alternate Date)
(All times are Central Daylight Time; add 5 hours to get the corresponding date/time in UTC .)
Previously:
(2020-04-18) SpaceX Offers NASA a Custom Moon Freighter
(2020-04-03) SpaceX Loses its Third Starship Prototype During a Cryogenic Test
(2020-04-03) SpaceX Almost Ready to Start Testing SN3 -- The Third Starship Prototype
(2020-04-01) SpaceX Releases a Payload User's Guide for its Starship Rocket
(2020-03-10) Another Starship Prototype Explodes, but SpaceX Isn't Stopping
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 20 2020, @06:25PM (6 children)
I think your correct is not really justified.
While Starship very much is in the spirit of the Mars Colonial Transport, it's not really the same entity in any way, shape, or form. Literally everything has changed about, except perhaps the basic idea of a reusable primary stage + in-orbit refueling. Calling the Starship the MCT, or at least a direct continuation of such is kind of akin to claiming that the SLS is a continuation of the Constellation Program [wikipedia.org]. And really that's probably more accurate than calling the Starship the MCT. The typical game congress has been playing is they start some project, pump hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer monies into it, and then cancel it when a new administration starts with some partisan gestures, and then start the entire process all over again.
The only reason we're in the current absurd scenario is because Trump upset this cycle by actually continuing the program and actively trying to create something that can get into space instead of just unloading endless taxpayer money to shareholders in the military industrial complex. See: Zumwalt, F-35, etc.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 20 2020, @10:46PM
The real problem is that SLS is a paper vehicle for transferring public funds to private interests - any real world hardware capable of doing anything is incidental to the purpose. Starship is a vehicle that will likely fly in space in the near future.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Tuesday April 21 2020, @09:23AM (4 children)
I agree with the sentiments regarding SpaceX vs Boeing completely. Clearly Boeing have failed where SLS is concerned.
However, SN4 is one tiny module of an ongoing programme; comparing the cost and timescale of building SN4 to the cost and timescale of an entire programme is completely unfair.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday April 21 2020, @03:02PM (3 children)
AFAIK the entire SLS program over the last decade has not produced a single launchable prototype. There was that December 2019 test that deliberately crushed a core stage tank, and Orion has been tested separately.
It doesn't look like SN4 is destined to do even a 20km flight, but the version that will should be built this year.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Tuesday April 21 2020, @03:32PM (2 children)
All interesting points. Nonetheless, comparing a single prototype to an entire programme is a bad comparison. SpaceX are doing a great job, but don't hide it or weasel it with wrong comparisons.
My car is so much cheaper than yours - my wing mirror only costs $200, whereas your car cost $10,000!
(Score: 2) by martyb on Wednesday April 22 2020, @12:01AM (1 child)
Please reread the GP post (in the spoiler), especially how much SLS has cost so far, vs the estimated ultimate cost of Starship and that it looks like it is coming in below the lower bound so far. From what I've seen of the "progress" with SLS vs what I've sen with Starship, I would expect to see a Starship in orbit before year's end, and would not be surprised to see it happen before September.
Don't get me wrong. I'm sure there are some smart and hard-working folk at NASA. Still I cannot shake the feeling that the whole purpose of SLS is to distribute money to states and that any orbital vehicle would be a side benefit.
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Wednesday April 22 2020, @12:04PM
Great - I think we agree!