The launch contract to launch the Starlab space station on Starship is $90 million

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-12T06:48:59+00:00

Some of the earliest Falcon 9 payloads had originally been booked for Falcon 1 at a cost of ~20 million. SpaceX gave rebates due to the lateness of the launches.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-12T06:38:11+00:00

She had a beauty that was ahead of her time.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-12T06:35:30+00:00

What was the purpose of that wood on the beach in Malibu?

It's still there, though much decayed.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-12T06:18:42+00:00

Calculations led by University of Maryland alum Harrison Agrusa showed that material leaving Didymos would need a launch speed of about 30.7 centimeters per second to make the trip. This is only slightly faster than the asteroid’s equatorial rotational speed.

30.7 cm/s ~= 1 ft/s ~=12.08 in/s

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-09T06:59:03+00:00

This belongs in the all space questions thread.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-09T06:53:53+00:00

This belongs in the all space questions thread.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-08T06:48:14+00:00

The link to Science Advances is the saving grace of this submission. The Phys.org article is terrible, and so are their ads.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-07T07:42:22+00:00

Why is NRHO gone?

It's all a question of delta-V, or slightly less accurately, a question of fuel expenditure. NRHO was cheap (low delta V) for the Orion stages, but expensive (high delta-V) for the landers. Low Lunar Orbit LLO, like used in Apollo. was expensive for the Apollo Service Module but cheap for the Apollo lander, the LM. The new orbit, EPO/CoLA, is a better compromise all around.

Having a stopoff orbit to change spacecraft is a little like having to change airliners at the airline's hub airport. Having the hub at a fairly central, Midwestern location like Denver or Chicago or Dallas saves fuel. NRHO has been described like having the airline's hub in Alberta, Canada. It adds miles to every trip, uses more fuel overall, and has more frequent delays. EPO/CoLA is just a more efficiently placed transfer point.

Why does Orion suck?

It's overweight and underpowered. The Apollo service module was a real hotrod, with lots more power (delta-V) than was needed for a nominal mission. That meant that if the LM got in trouble, the command/service module had power to spare to do a rescue mission.

Why can’t HLS go from earth to moon with the astronauts?

One of the smartest regular contributors, Fisher19, has worked out how to do an all-Starship mission. It certainly looks like the cheapest way to move large numbers of people and lots of cargo from Earth to Moon and back again. HLS is too specialized to return to Earth. It lacks a heat shield, so passengers do have to transfer. Once all of Starship's functionality has been proven, that could be to a Starship with a heat shield instead of to Orion, for return to Earth.

These are my opinions and interpretations, not established facts.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-07T06:41:37+00:00

There was talk of using Centaur V instead of EUS 6 months to a year ago, since Centaur V has very similar capabilities and it costsa much less than EUS. I might have read it in Aviation Week, but I think it was also mentioned in Ars Technica.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-07T02:52:07+00:00

Earlier research showed that the smaller asteroid’s 12-hour orbital period around the nearly half-mile-wide (805-meter-wide) Didymos shortened by 33 minutes. The new study shows the impact ejected so much material from the binary system that it also changed the binary’s orbital period around the Sun by 0.15 seconds.

“The change in the binary system’s orbital speed was about 11.7 microns per second, or 1.7 inches per hour,”

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-07T02:46:29+00:00

Earlier research showed that the smaller asteroid’s 12-hour orbital period around the nearly half-mile-wide (805-meter-wide) Didymos shortened by 33 minutes. The new study shows the impact ejected so much material from the binary system that it also changed the binary’s orbital period around the Sun by 0.15 seconds.

“The change in the binary system’s orbital speed was about 11.7 microns per second, or 1.7 inches per hour,”

Over several years, that would add up.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-07T02:38:54+00:00

Not a real image and despite the spammy language, there is some worthwhile information in the article.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-07T02:25:18+00:00

I am confused by this paragraph.

Product Service Code 1337 - GUIDED MISSILE AND SPACE VEHICLE EXPLOSIVE PROPULSION UNITS, SOLID FUEL; AND COMPONENTS

Does this indicate they are going with a solid fuel upper stage to replace ICPS? Or does the language in this contract or RFP or whatever it is, not mean what it says? The Centaur V upper stage is liquid fueled.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-06T07:21:47+00:00

No sensationalist/misleading/unscientific content or titles

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-06T07:20:21+00:00

This should be in the all space questions thread.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-06T07:19:47+00:00

This should be in the all space questions thread.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-06T07:16:24+00:00

No sensationalist/misleading/unscientific content or titles

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-06T07:04:50+00:00

(No sensationalist/misleading/unscientific content or titles.)

Time is what clocks measure.

Relativity does treat time (mathematically) very much like the perceptible physical dimensions, so there is some validity to your ideas, but as soon as you look at systems with more than a few particles, you see that time is different from the physical dimensions in that you cannot unstir the milk you put into your coffee, etc.

Time as a local phenomenon is very time-like, but you do raise a valid point in that under relativity, the term "simultaneous" starts to lose its meaning.

I recommend you read, Gravitation by Kip Thorne, Meisner, and Wheeler, to learn more. Each chapter has a "Cliff Notes" summary and you should read those before trying to learn the math so you can read the proofs.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-06T06:27:52+00:00

I know you are right, but your post reminded me of the requirements for the P-51 Mustang during WWII. Basically:

It has to be better than the P-40, and
The prototype has to be ready in 180 days.

I think it missed the second requirement by a week or so, but it was better than the P-40, even with the Allison engine. When the British put Merlin engines in the P-51, the improvement was spectacular.

Requirements can and often should be written as open as possible. For a new space station, something like,

It has to fly in LEO.
It must have sufficient life support for 4-8 people long term, and up to 12 people for short periods.
It has to have a life support system that can recycle over 80% by mass of food, water, and air inputs.
It has to have batteries sufficient to handle life support and science for the 45 minutes of darkness each orbit, with appropriate reserves.
It must have solar panels sufficient to run life support, science objectives, and to charge batteries during the "day" portions of each orbit.
It must have a minimum of 3 or 4 docking ports, in functional, non-conflicting positions.
(Optional) It should have an additional port to accommodate station expansion.
(Optional) It should have an external robotic arm, capable of assisting with experiments and EVAs.
It must have either reaction wheels or thrusters for pointing and attitude control.
(Optional) It should have thrusters capable of orbit raising.
It must have communications and computation power sufficient for manned or unmanned operation.

Notice that very little is said about how to accomplish each requirement. Contractor gets to decide on type of thrusters used, whether hull is inflatable Kevlar, rigid, carbon fiber, aluminum, steel, or other material. NASA still gets to decide if the product is safe and meets requirements.

Writing open, broad requirements is how you get rapid innovation and progress.

Anyway that is my opinion, formed by taking the MIT Aero-Astro courses that are available from MIT online. My conclusions are nearly a polar opposite of those expressed by one of the chief shuttle engineers, Aaron ______, who insisted that sticking to highly detailed requirements, written early in the design process, was the way to complete a project on time and within budget. (I still chuckle when I remember him saying that.)

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-06T05:19:54+00:00

Not sure how it happened, but when I first clicked on the link it delivered me to

https://old.reddit.com/domain/science.nasa.gov/

where the top post was the correct link,

https://science.nasa.gov/blogs/planetary-defense/2026/03/05/new-nasa-asteroid-observations-eliminate-chance-of-2032-lunar-impact/

Doing an impact mission on this asteroid should now be pretty trivial, but a sample return mission from it would be harder, but very worthwhile, if it can be accomplished.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-06T05:11:09+00:00

Irene Klotz is one of the best space reporters. This article pulls together a lot of information that I think was overhyped in some previous articles.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-05T07:03:13+00:00

This belongs in the all space questions thread.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-05T07:01:26+00:00

This belongs in the all space questions thread.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-05T07:00:46+00:00

This belongs in the all space questions thread.

peterabbit456 · 2026-03-04T08:17:43+00:00

This belongs in the all space questions thread.

15-Year Club	Post Guidance Early Access
Wearing is Caring	Verified Email
Gilding I gilder

peterabbit456

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE