It bugs me to have to each time listen to the entire history and back story of Starship and SpaceX. Do you really get more income by loading each episode with reams of redundancy???? By this time even the kids in Bangalore know all this stuff. Wouldn't it be nice to simply cut to the chase??? -- Am I the only one asking for this?
It sure would be. This was one of my favorite channels but not so much anymore. Seems it's easier to just cut, paste and read from old scripts rather than try to create new content.
I think a bigger hot staging ring is also needed, with flame diverters, to reduce the amount of heat and flame hitting the grid fins which have picked up heat damage over the last few flights.
Yes - as I understand it, that’s already planned - although I suggested adding baffels to help shield the grid fins from rocket blast. As far as I know, that’s not yet part of the plan. But the bar-cage triangles for the hot-stage are.
@@peterclarke3020 Yes. I guess it will still be a "ring", even if it's more permanently attached & not jettisoned every flight (which is what I thought the plan was). The whole thing is made of rings welded together after all. So yes, bigger, better & integrated! ;-)
NASA is one of SpaceX's biggest customers & SpaceX is one of NASA's biggest contractors. NASA relies on SpaceX to get cargo & it's astronauts to the ISS (& Russian cosmonauts there too, as part of NASA's ride-share program with Roscosmos), in SpaceX built Dragon capsules atop SpaceX Falcon9 rockets. SpaceX has also used its Falcon9 & Falcon heavy rockets to launch probes for NASA includeing missions to; asteroid 16 Psyche, the PACE spacecraft (Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, ocean Ecosystem, in Sun Synchronous Earth orbit), Odysseus moon-lander, Europa Clipper (to study Jupiter's moon), Blue Ghost Mission 1& Hakuto-R Mission 2 (two moon-landers launched on the same rocket). (more to come) ;-)
They will all collapse the 4mm skin before they cart 10 or 14 or 17 loads of fuel to leo just to fuel a single moon rocket. But musk's CGI is cool, like Star Trek-
I will say that space refueling should be done at the nose tip other point like Mid-ship connection would create a failure point, and putting through the aft area well like hello that’s where the fire happens, and which eng would be sacrificed to preform this feature.
V3 is the final, unless augmented is the model that's needed at the moment but more testing is needed (w/V2) to refine their method (propellant transfer) and reduce the boil off while in space storage (The fuel depot). "Wow" As always Go SpaceX
Why is V3 the final style? I wonder why not if possible do V4-V6 if there’s still room to grow and improve the technology even more. Say like a design that would eventually have the ability to use nuclear power engines and with it getting built in space they could make it even bigger especially if it’s only meant for space transportation and never landing on earth.
@TheGalacticIndian Mr. Musk had that concept from the start. Bigger just does a better job at refueling but there are limitations. Or, another type of propellant with the tech that drive's it.
The fuel Is mostly needed for launch, once in space the fuel Is needed for orbit changes and, once you get to mars, a capture burn to enter mars orbit, more fuel allows you to bring more payload. The problem Is accelerating the payload, once you're moving there's no need to use fuel
Two purposes. 1,for propulsive landing 2, the numerous long burns necessary to escape earth's orbit Each have the extraordinary mass of a stainless steel spacecraft to contend with as well. You need more propellant to overcome the inertia of such a massive vehicle, even in low gravity and orbit, which is just freefall.
🚀 Yes, in outer space you are 'once in motion, always in motion' (until you run in to something big and solid) but the thing is, if you want to make any changes to that motion, be they minor adjustments or changes in the direction of motion of your spacecraft, you are going to have to apply energy, burn fuel, to cause that change since there is nothing out there to react with atmospheric control vanes like airplanes have.
The soil of the moon is 45% or more made of Oxygen. Producing the Oxigen for starship rockets can reduce the fuel runs required by bringing up only the methane portion. Mars has methane SpaceX is planning on harvesting. I am certain someone has thought of this before, but in case not, here it is.
Mars does not have Methane. But Mars does have Carbon Dioxide CO2 and Water Ice. Using those ingredients, it’s possible using the Sabatier process to make Methane fuel. SpaceX will need a source of power - likely using solar energy, to drive that. The reaction gives out heat, and releases oxygen as a waste product - which of course can also be used.
You are misstating the purpose of flaps on aircraft. Flaps are used to increase lift during low speed flight. So,they are used primarily when taking off and landing. Airplanes use ailerons and rudders to control their direction.
@@pavnazwisko9196 Yes, I understand how SpaceX uses the “flaps” on Starship, Super Heavy and Falcon boosters. I was correcting a statement about how aircraft use their flaps.
@pavnazwisko9196 Yeah, true, we have this subject yesterday. It was glued in my cerebellum. Kev said, grid fins are crucial function similarly to the flaps on an airplane "helping to control the vehicle's flight direction." This in reference to Starship booster 14 finding the grid fins were melted & worked during the HSR separation. I am learning fast ~😸
23-01-2025. Thank you for the information, regarding the key to Lunar and Mars refueling the rockets ,and the new footage, to achieve refuelling in space.l hope you can make a possible animation of the possibility s to the moon or mars mission.
Ok, if the manager in NASA initially projected testing to begin on March, yr 2025. Starship V3~do U copy❓️ Can U hear me❓️ kev 🌾✨️ did I said it correctly or my brain left the Spacecraft again 😹 Thank U, kev🌾✨️ ~ 😽 keep looking UP 🌟
@@colonbina1 okidokie, let's do it then. Hey, I'll be leaving for Asia minor this Sunday on earliest time. I may log on off and on depending on the Wi-Fi they got in Tainan, Taiwan, tgen to Oki, Japan and final, the Phil island. I'll be away till Feb 13. Business to finished, family stuff. C-yah still. Thank U, take care kev🌾🌟 ~ 😽 Note: I cannot believe these survival, revival of Nazi-achtung😹
These SpaceX images of Fuel Depot…..they have no engines….im assuming they’d launch on top of super heavy..like a starship…..so without engines…how would they get in to orbit???….yes its just a drawing
Soon the launch pad will need to be updated to handle the larger models. I am looking forward to the third stage designs. I love the idea of putting 60 satellites in orbit with one launch! This should make NASA look like Boy Scouts! Did SpaceX figure out how to smooth the surface of Aluminum Oxide? The course nature of aluminum oxide causes issues in a heat shield material.
Yes. A "heavy" version of the super-heavy Starship booster, could be a way of getting to the moon or Mars, if on-orbit fuel-transfer doesn't work out. I've even made a mock-up image of this with three super-heavy boosters under a Starship, like a much bigger version of Falcon-heavy. (too bad TH-cam comments can't include images)
Something is ringing a bell: space X is missing the big lead ahead that use to have over competitors... Those are great news for the space community ;)
да он себя то еле еле с бустером на орбиту выйти не может ково куда он в V-3 10 дозаправок до Луны! цель доставлять на любую твердую планету грузы садится на любую твердую планету.А еще взлетать от туда если дозаправят чем?Напомните мне на чем он летает?
Starship would lose 120 tons of fuel in just one day, in space just sitting in orbit waiting on the next fuel tank to be launched, by the time the next ship was ready to launch the next fuel tank, Starship would be empty already (3 days to empty). So why are they even thinking about this stupid idea? And if you're wondering, I looked at the boil off of Methane, and LOX, and not being insulated, and being in the sun 45 min per orbit and did all the calculations so you don't have too, but go ahead and check for yourselves.
I had noted early on that there was no chance the original launch mount would work and was ridiculed mercilessly. You may be on to something that, miraculously, has not been considered.
Here's Grok's take: The boil-off rate for a SpaceX Starship tanker in space during refueling operations is influenced by several factors including the type of insulation used, the duration in orbit, and the specific environmental conditions like exposure to sunlight. Here is a detailed analysis based on available information: Passive Insulation: SpaceX's Starship uses stainless steel tanks which inherently have some insulating properties. However, without active cooling or advanced insulation like Multi-Layer Insulation (MLI), the boil-off rate can be significant. Estimates suggest that without any special measures, the boil-off could be around 0.5% per day for cryogenic propellants like liquid methane (CH4) and liquid oxygen (LOX) in low Earth orbit (LEO) where the environment is relatively warm due to solar radiation and Earth's infrared emissions. Active Cooling and Insulation: To minimize boil-off, SpaceX might employ additional measures such as active cooling systems or enhanced insulation techniques. Discussions on platforms like Reddit and NASA forums indicate that with a combination of these approaches, boil-off could be reduced significantly. For instance, using vacuum-jacketed insulation or sunshades could bring down the rate to near zero or at least to a fraction of a percent per day, although this would come with a mass penalty due to the added equipment. Operational Strategy: SpaceX plans to conduct refueling operations relatively quickly to mitigate boil-off losses. According to various sources, the tanker might not wait long in orbit; the goal would be to launch tankers in quick succession (possibly within days or weeks) to refuel the target ship. This strategy minimizes the time the propellants spend in orbit, reducing the amount of boil-off. However, exact numbers on how many launches would be needed can vary, with estimates from NASA suggesting around 16 launches in short succession for a lunar mission, indicating that rapid refueling is necessary to keep boil-off manageable. Empirical Data and Testing: SpaceX has been and will continue to test these scenarios in real conditions. The company is working on in-orbit propellant transfer demonstrations, which will provide empirical data on boil-off rates under actual space conditions. This data will help in refining the insulation and cooling strategies for future missions. In summary, without specific advanced insulation or cooling, the boil-off could be around 0.5% per day in LEO. However, with SpaceX's planned technologies and operational strategies, this rate could be significantly reduced, potentially to less than 1% per day or even lower with active cooling and advanced insulation. The exact rate would depend on the specifics of the mission, including how long the tanker remains in orbit before refueling occurs.
Have you ever heard of vaccum insulation? As soon as you could put some sort of shade above the ship to prevent sunlight from coming through, there would be pracitally no boiloff at all. This may seem counterintuitive, but keep in mind, that on earth the atmosphere (Air particles) does most of the energy transport. In space there is no other net plus energy transport than the warming of the tank surface done by sunlight. Everything else is actually chilling (net minus energy transport). Add some sort of shade (could be a lightweigt canvas erected after reaching stable orbit) and there is only loss of warmth left.
@countryfucius well I used data as at 2024 with how this spacecraft is made now, not in 10 years time. Stainless steel is a bad insulation material and will heat up faster than aluminium 34 Min in low earth orbit increases its hull by 129 degrees then freezes again plugging this into a thermal calculator gives you a time for the fuel of 120 tons boil off
Apollo was already waling on the moon ,, with this many flights ,,, . spaceX have not reached orbit or recovered a working starship Just how long is this going to take them ........ or is it the wrong format, go back to the start & re think
Oversimplified view of what happened with Apollo, since the Mercury Program and Gemini Program were both testing phases for Apollo. So far achieving orbit hasn't been a goal of the Starship Program, since the re-usability is the primary goal of all the testing. It's obvious that at any moment orbit could have been achieved, but the re-entry systems were the goals. As soon as they believe it is time to catch the Starship in the same way they have caught the boosters, then it will be necessary to do at least a single orbit. Currently, each launch tests hundreds if not thousands of new sub-system designs. Any of which can result in a test failure of that sub-system, but not all failures result in the loss of the craft. It took NASA more than ten years to get to Apollo, and a few more to get to the moon. It has been almost two years since Starship Flight test 1 was launched. The format has gone through two complete iterations, and they are building up to a third.
@@thornblackwell5749You are oversimplifying what Mercury and Gemini did. We needed to develop the engineering, science, and mathematics of space flight.
Starship has stopped just short of orbit to avoid leaving debris in orbit. No one else has recovered and reused a booster. Apollo, was developed in a different time with different goals. It is notable that the last moon landing was over 50 years ago. The goal of Apollo was to beat the Soviets to the moon. Now we are trying to beat China back to the moon, establish a permanent base and use it as a learning experience to move on to Mars for the same things.
@@thornblackwell5749 "to catch the Starship in the same way they have caught the boosters, then it will be necessary to do at least a single orbit" Yes, probably. Unless they complete the launch/catch tower in Florida AND get approval from the FAA to over-fly Florida as they re-enter a Starship. (the former being obviously easier than the later) Though they will have to over-fly at least Texas, as the re-enter a Starship, to catch one at Starbase after a full orbit, so...
V2 has always been meant to test new hardware as a stepping stone to V3. WHY? WHY?? Do you have to keep repeating the same material over and OVER with each posting. WHY do you think you have to post multiple times a day?? WHY do you not post on all the new construction going on around Starbase??? It's certainly more interesting than your constant click bait and endless yammering on old themes, cut and paste old video material that is completely outdated. Take a day or two off, walk around Startbase with a camera. I think you'll be surprised at all that is happening right under your nose. If you keep going the was you are, I'm going to start a campaign to begin unsubscribing to this channel. You were one of my favorite channels, but now not so much.
The next thing gets hyped less and less when it underperforms come show time. The last flight wasn't a total loss. They did learn that performance was worse throughout the flight with the new configuration. V3 can't come soon enough, but no amount of watching will make it show up and save the day sooner.
It bugs me to have to each time listen to the entire history and back story of Starship and SpaceX. Do you really get more income by loading each episode with reams of redundancy???? By this time even the kids in Bangalore know all this stuff.
Wouldn't it be nice to simply cut to the chase??? -- Am I the only one asking for this?
It sure would be. This was one of my favorite channels but not so much anymore. Seems it's easier to just cut, paste and read from old scripts rather than try to create new content.
@@georgwrede7715 i hear ya. 😒
I think a bigger hot staging ring is also needed, with flame diverters, to reduce the amount of heat and flame hitting the grid fins which have picked up heat damage over the last few flights.
Yes - as I understand it, that’s already planned - although I suggested adding baffels to help shield the grid fins from rocket blast. As far as I know, that’s not yet part of the plan. But the bar-cage triangles for the hot-stage are.
@@peterclarke3020 Yes. I guess it will still be a "ring", even if it's more permanently attached & not jettisoned every flight (which is what I thought the plan was). The whole thing is made of rings welded together after all. So yes, bigger, better & integrated! ;-)
Most likely a more robust fire extinguisher system in the ab section. Might not hurt to go over the welds in that section as well.
❤brining for greatest leap
When does NASA have anything to do with SpaceX ?
SpaceX is literally inside NASA!!!
NASA is one of SpaceX's biggest customers & SpaceX is one of NASA's biggest contractors. NASA relies on SpaceX to get cargo & it's astronauts to the ISS (& Russian cosmonauts there too, as part of NASA's ride-share program with Roscosmos), in SpaceX built Dragon capsules atop SpaceX Falcon9 rockets. SpaceX has also used its Falcon9 & Falcon heavy rockets to launch probes for NASA includeing missions to; asteroid 16 Psyche, the PACE spacecraft (Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, ocean Ecosystem, in Sun Synchronous Earth orbit), Odysseus moon-lander, Europa Clipper (to study Jupiter's moon), Blue Ghost Mission 1& Hakuto-R Mission 2 (two moon-landers launched on the same rocket). (more to come) ;-)
@@alancoker1459 haha! Do your homework fan boy.
could they use falcon 9 for refueling an orbiting depot? will starship or falon 9 be more efficient per kg of fuel cargo?
They will all collapse the 4mm skin before they cart 10 or 14 or 17 loads of fuel to leo just to fuel a single moon rocket. But musk's CGI is cool, like Star Trek-
I’m betting V3 will be next yr.
V2 isn’t over
What make you believe this?
@
I just don’t believe they’re done with version two yet. Probably use it all year at least
2027 artemis 3 use HLS or SLS with lander and docking system ?
for emergency measures could they insert fuel pods into orbit with falcon 9?
How will this happen?
Beyond me why they are not pushing the "easy button" and just not using multiple launches of Falcon Heavy
I will say that space refueling should be done at the nose tip other point like Mid-ship connection would create a failure point, and putting through the aft area well like hello that’s where the fire happens, and which eng would be sacrificed to preform this feature.
Spacex is hiring, send your cv
I wonder if they will build reaction control wheels on any of these starships that plan on being in space long-term
No they won’t do that, instead they will use thrusters (RCS - Reaction Control System), but it would rarely need to be used.
V3 is the final, unless augmented is the model that's needed at the moment but more testing is needed (w/V2) to refine their method (propellant transfer) and reduce the boil off while in space storage (The fuel depot). "Wow" As always Go SpaceX
Let's not forget the OG ITS concept of 12m and 18m diameter starships🚀🚀
Why is V3 the final style? I wonder why not if possible do V4-V6 if there’s still room to grow and improve the technology even more. Say like a design that would eventually have the ability to use nuclear power engines and with it getting built in space they could make it even bigger especially if it’s only meant for space transportation and never landing on earth.
@TheGalacticIndian Mr. Musk had that concept from the start. Bigger just does a better job at refueling but there are limitations. Or, another type of propellant with the tech that drive's it.
@ Absolutely, 100%😍 Mars here we come🚀🚀
Why so much fuel ? I thought in outer space once in motion your always in motion like the voyager spacecraft or any spacecraft
The fuel Is mostly needed for launch, once in space the fuel Is needed for orbit changes and, once you get to mars, a capture burn to enter mars orbit, more fuel allows you to bring more payload.
The problem Is accelerating the payload, once you're moving there's no need to use fuel
N@TheItalianAvgeek that doesn't make sense or answer his question.
Two purposes.
1,for propulsive landing
2, the numerous long burns necessary to escape earth's orbit
Each have the extraordinary mass of a stainless steel spacecraft to contend with as well. You need more propellant to overcome the inertia of such a massive vehicle, even in low gravity and orbit, which is just freefall.
Space and orbit different animals.
🚀 Yes, in outer space you are 'once in motion, always in motion' (until you run in to something big and solid) but the thing is, if you want to make any changes to that motion, be they minor adjustments or changes in the direction of motion of your spacecraft, you are going to have to apply energy, burn fuel, to cause that change since there is nothing out there to react with atmospheric control vanes like airplanes have.
The soil of the moon is 45% or more made of Oxygen. Producing the Oxigen for starship rockets can reduce the fuel runs required by bringing up only the methane portion. Mars has methane SpaceX is planning on harvesting. I am certain someone has thought of this before, but in case not, here it is.
True, Elon has also mentioned this
Mars does not have Methane.
But Mars does have Carbon Dioxide CO2 and Water Ice.
Using those ingredients, it’s possible using the Sabatier process to make Methane fuel.
SpaceX will need a source of power - likely using solar energy, to drive that.
The reaction gives out heat, and releases oxygen as a waste product - which of course can also be used.
@@peterclarke3020 you made my point that we can get the fuel in off earth locations
Can we get a video explaining why not use an umbilical cord with a navigation drone at the connector for refueling a fuel depo?
I will find more about this, thanks your idea
You are misstating the purpose of flaps on aircraft. Flaps are used to increase lift during low speed flight. So,they are used primarily when taking off and landing. Airplanes use ailerons and rudders to control their direction.
Correct. However, flaps on starship are used to keep accurate angle when re-entering atmosphere and while decending on belly towards landing.
Thanks for your contribution 👍
@@pavnazwisko9196 Yes, I understand how SpaceX uses the “flaps” on Starship, Super Heavy and Falcon boosters. I was correcting a statement about how aircraft use their flaps.
@pavnazwisko9196
Yeah, true, we have this subject yesterday. It was glued in my cerebellum. Kev said, grid fins are crucial function similarly to the flaps on an airplane "helping to control the vehicle's flight direction." This in reference to Starship booster 14 finding the grid fins were melted & worked during the HSR separation.
I am learning fast
~😸
Oh of course, for some reason I missed that. Thank you guys for clarifying that. That make sense.
AWESOME\
More blabbering by a guy just guessing and rambling the same info over and over again.
😂😂😂😂😂
I rarely watch this channel as they drag videos out and rarely say something new
23-01-2025.
Thank you for the information, regarding the key to Lunar and Mars refueling the rockets ,and the new footage, to achieve refuelling in space.l hope you can make a possible animation of the possibility s to the moon or mars mission.
Yeah, I hope so
Starship to 6 vacuum engines! That's Mars and solar system talk. 👀👀👀
Are they going to put those new Symbols on the side of it?
Haven't you said more than half this stuff like a couple dozen times already?
Thank you Elon Musk for the internet for those affected by the STARLINK + T-Mobile fires. Merci Gracias Thank you very much.
Ok, if the manager in NASA initially projected testing to begin on March, yr 2025.
Starship V3~do U copy❓️
Can U hear me❓️
kev 🌾✨️ did I said it correctly or my brain left the Spacecraft again 😹
Thank U, kev🌾✨️
~ 😽 keep looking UP 🌟
March seems impossible
@@colonbina1 okidokie, let's do it then. Hey, I'll be leaving for Asia minor this Sunday on earliest time. I may log on off and on depending on the Wi-Fi they got in Tainan, Taiwan, tgen to Oki, Japan and final, the Phil island. I'll be away till Feb 13. Business to finished, family stuff. C-yah still. Thank U, take care kev🌾🌟
~ 😽
Note: I cannot believe these survival, revival of Nazi-achtung😹
I want to see epic nose art
NASA has nothing to do with the Starship program.
Your an idiot, they have a joint program for the Artemis 3 mission
Who do you think is funding them?
Not all of it@@flightsimdev
@ Only 4.8 billion of the 5.6 bill they spend.
1st stage booster launches 2nd booster fully load with fuel.
Repeat... Creating tank farm of multiple boosters
These SpaceX images of Fuel Depot…..they have no engines….im assuming they’d launch on top of super heavy..like a starship…..so without engines…how would they get in to orbit???….yes its just a drawing
and musk waved his arms around as he excitedly declared how easy it all is, so it will work.
@@jackprier7727 now I’m reassured..thank you. Lol
Wow looking forward to v3 and also the raptor 3 engines
I think Raptor 3 can be applied right in Starship V2
@ that would be awesome, kind of wondering how fast they can produce them which would be the hold up I think.
Soon the launch pad will need to be updated to handle the larger models. I am looking forward to the third stage designs. I love the idea of putting 60 satellites in orbit with one launch! This should make NASA look like Boy Scouts! Did SpaceX figure out how to smooth the surface of Aluminum Oxide? The course nature of aluminum oxide causes issues in a heat shield material.
Startships V(x) will have a battery that will be charged from sun. There is no other option. Fuel is not an option.
I warned Mr Musk to never put lizard decals on his ships again. Obviously aliens take offense. 😊😮😊
And with the FAA getting it's panties in a bunch with every failed launch it will be YEARS before this thing leaves for Mars.
I want to see Starship Heavy haha
Yes. A "heavy" version of the super-heavy Starship booster, could be a way of getting to the moon or Mars, if on-orbit fuel-transfer doesn't work out. I've even made a mock-up image of this with three super-heavy boosters under a Starship, like a much bigger version of Falcon-heavy. (too bad TH-cam comments can't include images)
Go V2 and get to V3.
Something is ringing a bell: space X is missing the big lead ahead that use to have over competitors... Those are great news for the space community ;)
Just run a hose from the ground into space.
⭐🙂👍
да он себя то еле еле с бустером на орбиту выйти не может ково куда он в V-3 10 дозаправок до Луны! цель доставлять на любую твердую планету грузы садится на любую твердую планету.А еще взлетать от туда если дозаправят чем?Напомните мне на чем он летает?
Starship would lose 120 tons of fuel in just one day, in space just sitting in orbit waiting on the next fuel tank to be launched, by the time the next ship was ready to launch the next fuel tank, Starship would be empty already (3 days to empty). So why are they even thinking about this stupid idea? And if you're wondering, I looked at the boil off of Methane, and LOX, and not being insulated, and being in the sun 45 min per orbit and did all the calculations so you don't have too, but go ahead and check for yourselves.
I had noted early on that there was no chance the original launch mount would work and was ridiculed mercilessly. You may be on to something that, miraculously, has not been considered.
Here's Grok's take:
The boil-off rate for a SpaceX Starship tanker in space during refueling operations is influenced by several factors including the type of insulation used, the duration in orbit, and the specific environmental conditions like exposure to sunlight. Here is a detailed analysis based on available information:
Passive Insulation: SpaceX's Starship uses stainless steel tanks which inherently have some insulating properties. However, without active cooling or advanced insulation like Multi-Layer Insulation (MLI), the boil-off rate can be significant. Estimates suggest that without any special measures, the boil-off could be around 0.5% per day for cryogenic propellants like liquid methane (CH4) and liquid oxygen (LOX) in low Earth orbit (LEO) where the environment is relatively warm due to solar radiation and Earth's infrared emissions.
Active Cooling and Insulation: To minimize boil-off, SpaceX might employ additional measures such as active cooling systems or enhanced insulation techniques. Discussions on platforms like Reddit and NASA forums indicate that with a combination of these approaches, boil-off could be reduced significantly. For instance, using vacuum-jacketed insulation or sunshades could bring down the rate to near zero or at least to a fraction of a percent per day, although this would come with a mass penalty due to the added equipment.
Operational Strategy: SpaceX plans to conduct refueling operations relatively quickly to mitigate boil-off losses. According to various sources, the tanker might not wait long in orbit; the goal would be to launch tankers in quick succession (possibly within days or weeks) to refuel the target ship. This strategy minimizes the time the propellants spend in orbit, reducing the amount of boil-off. However, exact numbers on how many launches would be needed can vary, with estimates from NASA suggesting around 16 launches in short succession for a lunar mission, indicating that rapid refueling is necessary to keep boil-off manageable.
Empirical Data and Testing: SpaceX has been and will continue to test these scenarios in real conditions. The company is working on in-orbit propellant transfer demonstrations, which will provide empirical data on boil-off rates under actual space conditions. This data will help in refining the insulation and cooling strategies for future missions.
In summary, without specific advanced insulation or cooling, the boil-off could be around 0.5% per day in LEO. However, with SpaceX's planned technologies and operational strategies, this rate could be significantly reduced, potentially to less than 1% per day or even lower with active cooling and advanced insulation. The exact rate would depend on the specifics of the mission, including how long the tanker remains in orbit before refueling occurs.
Have you ever heard of vaccum insulation? As soon as you could put some sort of shade above the ship to prevent sunlight from coming through, there would be pracitally no boiloff at all. This may seem counterintuitive, but keep in mind, that on earth the atmosphere (Air particles) does most of the energy transport. In space there is no other net plus energy transport than the warming of the tank surface done by sunlight. Everything else is actually chilling (net minus energy transport). Add some sort of shade (could be a lightweigt canvas erected after reaching stable orbit) and there is only loss of warmth left.
@countryfucius well I used data as at 2024 with how this spacecraft is made now, not in 10 years time. Stainless steel is a bad insulation material and will heat up faster than aluminium 34 Min in low earth orbit increases its hull by 129 degrees then freezes again plugging this into a thermal calculator gives you a time for the fuel of 120 tons boil off
beacuse apollo is easy...
Apollo was already waling on the moon ,, with this many flights ,,,
.
spaceX have not reached orbit or recovered a working starship
Just how long is this going to take them ........ or is it the wrong format, go back to the start & re think
Oversimplified view of what happened with Apollo, since the Mercury Program and Gemini Program were both testing phases for Apollo. So far achieving orbit hasn't been a goal of the Starship Program, since the re-usability is the primary goal of all the testing. It's obvious that at any moment orbit could have been achieved, but the re-entry systems were the goals. As soon as they believe it is time to catch the Starship in the same way they have caught the boosters, then it will be necessary to do at least a single orbit. Currently, each launch tests hundreds if not thousands of new sub-system designs. Any of which can result in a test failure of that sub-system, but not all failures result in the loss of the craft.
It took NASA more than ten years to get to Apollo, and a few more to get to the moon. It has been almost two years since Starship Flight test 1 was launched. The format has gone through two complete iterations, and they are building up to a third.
@@thornblackwell5749You are oversimplifying what Mercury and Gemini did. We needed to develop the engineering, science, and mathematics of space flight.
Starship has stopped just short of orbit to avoid leaving debris in orbit. No one else has recovered and reused a booster.
Apollo, was developed in a different time with different goals. It is notable that the last moon landing was over 50 years ago. The goal of Apollo was to beat the Soviets to the moon. Now we are trying to beat China back to the moon, establish a permanent base and use it as a learning experience to move on to Mars for the same things.
@@thornblackwell5749 "to catch the Starship in the same way they have caught the boosters, then it will be necessary to do at least a single orbit" Yes, probably. Unless they complete the launch/catch tower in Florida AND get approval from the FAA to over-fly Florida as they re-enter a Starship. (the former being obviously easier than the later) Though they will have to over-fly at least Texas, as the re-enter a Starship, to catch one at Starbase after a full orbit, so...
@@danjw1 Not an oversimplification, I just didn't want to do a full history report on previous projects to get to my point.
Rehash , waste of my time
Dude - do you ever check your audio editing? Your content is good, but you have re-records almost every time that you don't edit. It sours your brand.
I will improve this
Nothing new
V2 has always been meant to test new hardware as a stepping stone to V3. WHY? WHY?? Do you have to keep repeating the same material over and OVER with each posting. WHY do you think you have to post multiple times a day?? WHY do you not post on all the new construction going on around Starbase??? It's certainly more interesting than your constant click bait and endless yammering on old themes, cut and paste old video material that is completely outdated. Take a day or two off, walk around Startbase with a camera. I think you'll be surprised at all that is happening right under your nose.
If you keep going the was you are, I'm going to start a campaign to begin unsubscribing to this channel. You were one of my favorite channels, but now not so much.
The next thing gets hyped less and less when it underperforms come show time. The last flight wasn't a total loss. They did learn that performance was worse throughout the flight with the new configuration. V3 can't come soon enough, but no amount of watching will make it show up and save the day sooner.
Leave this kind of thing to people who actually have a clue of whats going on and stop guessing.
Elon is such a bs'er
Shotwell is going to have some heads on a pike at the end of V2s debacle
Falcon 9 says otherwise. 😂
What is the next rocket Elon is building - the V3 - and they will be raining down on London like their predecessors soon!
V2
Not 3
Its a cover up for failure
Bro you lame, you can't stop rumbling same things over and over again
Will Elon build a far right dictatorship on Mars?
Elon won't be in business anymore by the time humans land on Mars.
Well he sure was hell won't build any kind of left leaning 🐂💩 colony!
Something like that
Competitors?
Anything done without nuclear power is a total waste of time and money
agreed
Almost EVERY energy transaction on earth is powered using nuclear. Solar and Wind are stand-out examples
Why would you want to waste more time and money developing that instead of using the info already gathered?