- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: SpaceX Starship Full Stack Test Flight Thread | Cleared Tower, Thru MaxQ, then RUD
Posted on 4/21/23 at 9:42 am to GeauxxxTigers23
Posted on 4/21/23 at 9:42 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
NASA had like 8% of the entire county’s GDP to work with.
That seemed awfully high - so a little checking:
The NASA budget peaked at $5 billion in the mid 1960's. The 1967 GDP was $862 billion. So less than 0.6% of GDP. Still a lot of money though.
3
Posted on 4/21/23 at 9:43 am to MoarKilometers
quote:
Are they though? 21 years in existence, still only doing low earth orbit. In 15 years of existence nasa had been to the moon several times and launched a space station.
In addition to the other comments regarding the stupidity of the above, I guess you’ve missed the Falcon Heavy launches.
Posted on 4/21/23 at 9:45 am to pankReb
anyone know how far away that van was?
Posted on 4/21/23 at 9:46 am to MoarKilometers
quote:
Are they though? 21 years in existence, still only doing low earth orbit.
I mean they can put humans into space currently, the only other entity that can do that is the Russian Space program
Posted on 4/21/23 at 9:47 am to Tigris
quote:
The NASA budget peaked at $5 billion in the mid 1960's. The 1967 GDP was $862 billion. So less than 0.6% of GDP. Still a lot of money though.
Maybe it was 8% of the federal budget. I don’t know the exact numbers but it was really fricking high
Posted on 4/21/23 at 9:50 am to Tigris
quote:
The NASA budget peaked at $5 billion in the mid 1960's. The 1967 GDP was $862 billion. So less than 0.6% of GDP. Still a lot of money though.
According to Wiki, NASA exceeded 4% of the federal budget in 1965 and 1966, spending nearly $50 billion in 1966 in 2021 $’s. The comparison between NASA in the 60’s and SpaceX now was ludicrous.
Posted on 4/21/23 at 9:51 am to Tigris
quote:
The NASA budget peaked at $5 billion in the mid 1960's. The 1967 GDP was $862 billion. So less than 0.6% of GDP. Still a lot of money though.
He actually misspoke, as the proper comparison is to the Fed Budget
When NASA was all in on the moon
Current
Posted on 4/21/23 at 11:05 am to DarthRebel
Close-up view of the crater left at the bottom of the launch platform.
Posted on 4/21/23 at 11:09 am to Diseasefreeforall
quote:
Close-up view of the crater left at the bottom of the launch platform.
if you need it excavated quick... call SpaceX
we'll get you a hole dug in 15 seconds or less guar-on-teed
Posted on 4/21/23 at 11:36 am to rt3
They were fortunate to not have debris blowback destroy the Starship before leaving the pad.
Posted on 4/21/23 at 11:41 am to Diseasefreeforall
quote:
Close-up view of the crater left at the bottom of the launch platform.
For you civil engineers, could this have been predicted? For you aerospace engineers, do 33 rocket engines increase the number of possible failure points?
Posted on 4/21/23 at 12:05 pm to Wraytex
quote:
They were fortunate to not have debris blowback destroy the Starship before leaving the pad.
Yeah this seems like it was kind of a "let her rip" kind of launch.
I've heard they are replacing the stand with a newer design anyway so it was scheduled for demo. But that crater isn't going to be an easy fix.
I wonder if the blowback debris contributed to some of the raptor engines not firing?
Posted on 4/21/23 at 1:17 pm to Relax
Those pictures that were posted do not look good for the foundation under the OLM, also there was evidence that some of the tanks in the tank farm were leaking cryogenic fluid. That would require them to replace those tanks. So all the tanks will now need to be pressure tested and those damages will need replacing.
Depending on the damage to the slab under the OLM, that can take months to figure out how to repair and complete the work . I do hope that gives them a chance to run plumbing for the deluge system and add in a flame diverter to alleviate future problems like this one.
Depending on the damage to the slab under the OLM, that can take months to figure out how to repair and complete the work . I do hope that gives them a chance to run plumbing for the deluge system and add in a flame diverter to alleviate future problems like this one.
This post was edited on 4/21/23 at 1:19 pm
Posted on 4/21/23 at 1:19 pm to TigerV
I think it’s pretty likely that the pad is a 100% rebuild. That will take a while and will be pretty expensive. Obviously destroying the launch pad wasn’t part of the plan
Posted on 4/21/23 at 1:24 pm to cgrand
What destroyed the pad? They’ve test fired the motors before right?
Posted on 4/21/23 at 1:31 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
What destroyed the pad? They’ve test fired the motors before right?
yeah but maybe the static fire tests never got to 90% thrust for as long as liftoff took
Posted on 4/21/23 at 1:33 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
just guessing but the rocket looked like it spent much more time in liftoff than it was supposed to. And the fuel was dumping right off the bat
they fried it basically
they fried it basically
Posted on 4/21/23 at 2:06 pm to rt3
take this with the pinchiest of pinches of salt...
someone in the chat on the NASASpaceflight 24/7 Starbase cam on YouTube said 1 of the engineers told him the hydraulic power unit (HPU) and thrust vector controls (TVC) were fully operational up to the moment the flight termination system (FTS) was triggered
someone in the chat on the NASASpaceflight 24/7 Starbase cam on YouTube said 1 of the engineers told him the hydraulic power unit (HPU) and thrust vector controls (TVC) were fully operational up to the moment the flight termination system (FTS) was triggered
Posted on 4/21/23 at 2:11 pm to rt3
For us non rocket scientists, what does that mean?
Page 16 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News