| General > General Technical Chat |
| Starship 12.5km launch |
| << < (4/13) > >> |
| S. Petrukhin:
By the way, pay attention: the rocket turns around the center due to two steering engines at the edges. For some reason, SpaseX decided to rotate one engine around the nose, which I think is unwise. But I can be wrong, probably a fairly powerful main engine on the nose did not fit. And I also have an idea that rockets don't fly backwards, that the problems started earlier, when the skin fires were visible. And then it fell with the engine turned off very hot. And the red, then the green color of the flame, I think, from the fact that something melted and burned there. Besides, if I'm not mistaken, Ilon understands Russian a little, probably he watched one wonderful Soviet movie "KIN-DZA-DZA" with such a device "Pepelats", but did not understand that this is a comedy... |
| Vovk_Z:
--- Quote from: S. Petrukhin on December 12, 2020, 06:21:10 am ---Please, explain what makes SpaceX so happy? With modern tools, they try to repeat what was done many years ago with primitive tools. Yes, well done, it's good that there is work for engineers, but this is the invention of the wheel. I bought a tube from an old soviet scope and want to make it a three-beam high-voltage low-freq scope with isolated inputs - will you be happy for me? :) --- End quote --- Many years ago the whole Soviet Union (or the USA), a very large country (almost the whole continent) worked together to make a rocket. It cost too much for the Soviet people. Now it is done by a quite small private company. P.S. And jealousy is a bad thing. :) |
| S. Petrukhin:
I recommend watching a funny сomedy with a great philosophy (have subtitles). |
| S. Petrukhin:
--- Quote from: Vovk_Z on December 12, 2020, 07:32:37 am --- --- Quote from: S. Petrukhin on December 12, 2020, 06:21:10 am ---Please, explain what makes SpaceX so happy? With modern tools, they try to repeat what was done many years ago with primitive tools. Yes, well done, it's good that there is work for engineers, but this is the invention of the wheel. I bought a tube from an old soviet scope and want to make it a three-beam high-voltage low-freq scope with isolated inputs - will you be happy for me? :) --- End quote --- Many years ago the whole Soviet Union (or the USA), a very large country (almost the whole continent) worked together to make a rocket. It cost too much for the Soviet people. Now it is done by a quite small private company. P.S. And jealousy is a bad thing. :) --- End quote --- But this private company is located in a country that has long mastered space. Do you think this private company doesn't have the technology and expertise? After all, NASA is very seriously involved, obviously investing a lot of money. Where do you see jealousy? I am glad that he has a lot of money and spends it on the development of technology, that engineers have a good job. But somehow the result reminds me Arduino... And I still can't understand why american missiles need russian engines. Where did the american ones go? |
| S. Petrukhin:
--- Quote from: BravoV on December 12, 2020, 07:27:48 am --- --- Quote from: S. Petrukhin on December 12, 2020, 07:16:56 am ---In the video, the rocket is fired vertically because it is universal and very fast - you do not need to slowly turn around before launching, it can turn itself instantly. In addition, the main engine starts after the rocket is ejected by an ejecting projectile so that it does not blow anyone away on the ground. This has long been used in the missiles of many countries. --- End quote --- Cmiiw, I thought these kind launch style is to ensure the missile attitude is low, hence low radar footprint, either while cruising to the target or protecting the launch location. :-// Traditional missile like ICBM or common ones, launched vertically, and do not need to turn horizontally so fast right ? --- Quote from: S. Petrukhin on December 12, 2020, 07:16:56 am ---And vertical jet landing has been used many times by NASA to land on the Moon. Soviet lunar rovers also had a vertical landing. This is a common thing, and all space countries already have these technologies. --- End quote --- Moon has no atmosphere (hence no side wind) and much lower gravity, so these alone are not a major factors on the difficulty/complexity ? --- End quote --- Yes, agree. This rocket is flying low. But I was talking about a more convenient start. Intercontinental missiles have a different task - they rather need to escape up into orbit, where they can no longer be caught. But in any case, it is always more profitable to turn around the center than around the edge. Landing on the Moon is just less energy-intensive, algorithmically it differs from landing on Earth only in coefficients. And, if you remember, the Moon landings were performed manually by humans with very limited fuel resources. The American guys did it successfully several times (I don't remember how many - 9?). Almost visually! Are modern positioning and computing tools afraid of the wind? :) So go ask Armstrong how to do it. He trained on the Earth and did it like everyone else. :) |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |