Space X Megarocket

[Graeme]

The third orbital test flight of the 400-foot-tall Space X Megarocket could launch at around 8 am EDT 14th March.

https://www.space.com/spacex-starship-t ... ign=MANUAL

Graeme

[ChrisGreaves]

The third orbital test flight of the 400-foot-tall Space X Megarocket could launch at around 8 am EDT 14th March.

Thanks Graeme. I have set my alarm for Thursday at 7:30 a.m EDT, by adding 1 1/2 hours for NDT then subtracting 1/2 an hour for making a cup of coffee. I think that's right. I was Real Good at relative addressing in my Assembler days ...
Cheers, Chris

[Graeme]

Sorry Chris. 12:00 GMT.

Graeme

[ChrisGreaves]

Sorry Chris. 12:00 GMT.

No probs, Graeme!
I was awake at 1am, read until 2am, then turned OFF my alarm so I could sleep through - no point in rousing myself when i can watch a replay and lie to Graeme about how much I enjoyed watching it in real time - only to wake up anyway at 8:25, turn the coffee on too high to catch up, burn the coffee, boot up the machine, ...

At least the day can only get better.
For me
Cheers, Chris

10:15 a.m 35 minutes to go.
The two talking heads must be bored out of their minds- Are we to suppose that they have a small team of writers slipping précis (plural précis?) under their noses to give them launch-points for discussion? I think that even ***I*** would dry up after the first two hours ...
Cheers, Chris

[ChrisGreaves]

"Did they lose it?"

DidTheyLoseIt.png

An expensive day out, indeed!

DidTheyLoseIt2.png

Now I'm no Rocket Scientist, but I have a feeling that, with or without plasma, 26,75k KM/h at 83 KM altitude and no engines reported firing, it's a lost cause.
Cheers, Chris

[Graeme]

Yes! My understanding was that the first stage rocket engines (your first image) didn't fire up sufficiently to slow it down. But there was no intention to land this one on a target or even recover it. The Starship (your second image) was meant to land in the Indian Ocean also not to be recovered. The next test will probably land using the three smaller engines in the centre and be caught by the launch pad tower "chopsticks". We'll see!

Graeme

[ChrisGreaves]

Yes! My understanding was that the first stage rocket engines (your first image) didn't fire up sufficiently to slow it down. But there was no intention to land this one on a target or even recover it. The Starship (your second image) was meant to land in the Indian Ocean also not to be recovered. The next test will probably land using the three smaller engines in the centre and be caught by the launch pad tower "chopsticks". We'll see!

Agreed, agreed, and agreed. Although I thought the commentators said something along the lines that the 1st stage was supposed to slow down before hitting the water (and presumably becoming the world's deepest artificial reef).
I absolutely understand that the data is the important result of tests like this.
In some ways, that the Space X satellite boosters and farings are being recovered on a daily basis is a Good Thing. It shows that it can be done for selected objects, that is, there is a goal that can be attained. "We just have to do it from higher speeds/bigger masses".

There is a human-sideto all of this. I no longer watch the periodic Space X satellite launches. They just never crash in flames anymore, and this human at any rate likes to see failure; I don't know why. Oldies watched each launch in the 60s and 70s, and we were glued to news shows when The Shuttle blew up during launch. Why is that? We rubber-neck at auto collisions long after the blood and gore has been carted away in an ambulance.
Is this a "There but for the grace of God" moment, good to bring us back to reality?

Yesterday I was glued to the screen, because it is a New Series; but this is obviously ridiculous. I should have walked to the grocery store. It's all available on YouTube forever, and my watching it can not possibly influence what is going on 100Km above the far side of the Earth.
Cheers, Chris