DutchSatellites
@DutchSatellites
Followers
921
Following
97
Media
421
Statuses
5,969
Not working for any space agency. Doing archival stuff & fixing things at @NRM_Ruimtevaart . Spaceflight history is my thing. Opinions are my own.
Nederland
Joined April 2019
Don't wanna be here?
Send us removal request.
Explore trending content on Musk Viewer
#Paris2024
• 1193629 Tweets
#OpeningCeremony
• 357141 Tweets
#ceremoniedouverture
• 307843 Tweets
Macron
• 166804 Tweets
Lady Gaga
• 149688 Tweets
Seine
• 139834 Tweets
The French
• 123909 Tweets
フランス
• 119511 Tweets
Aya Nakamura
• 119485 Tweets
Sena
• 115547 Tweets
França
• 88479 Tweets
#CeremoniaDeApertura
• 77342 Tweets
Snoop
• 75518 Tweets
Gojira
• 64057 Tweets
Garde Républicaine
• 56156 Tweets
Rio 2016
• 46727 Tweets
Minions
• 46195 Tweets
Celine Dion
• 30233 Tweets
Vive la France
• 27210 Tweets
Dolphins
• 24629 Tweets
María Antonieta
• 22200 Tweets
Assassin's Creed
• 18855 Tweets
Marie Antoinette
• 18651 Tweets
セーヌ川
• 17839 Tweets
ミニオン
• 15820 Tweets
Notre Dame
• 14764 Tweets
London 2012
• 13788 Tweets
Eurovision
• 11137 Tweets
Pinned Tweet
With Andrew having a slightly warped sense of esthetics, it is time to start a picture thread on the early Arianes. Still one of the best looking and most successful rocket series ever.
6
6
58
In current Artemis/SLS news: sources tell me that the engine controller on 1 of the 4 Core Stage main engines has inexplicably gone offline. Attempts to get it back online have failed & NASA is now looking into available options.
Also I am hearing that PSET is behind schedule.
28
36
607
The FAA is in the final stage of completing the launch license for Starship's Orbital Flight Test. SpaceX should have it in hand in under a fortnight.
29
45
506
Willis getting ratio'd by Manley.
Lesson to be learned from this: never compare SLS to a pizza. 👇
9
12
460
According to sources
@blueorigin
has made a hard promise to
@ulalaunch
to deliver 2 development BE-4 engines tp ULA no later than the end of November 2021. These 2 development engines are intended to support the first
#VulcanRocket
static fire at ULA's SLC-41.
1/2
9
19
262
More evidence that Musk flunked history classes or is deliberately misrepresenting history (aka trolling).
NATO was established in 1949. In response the Warsaw Pact was established in 1955. The Warsaw Pact was thus never the reason why NATO exists. 👇
@DavidSacks
True.
I always wondered why NATO continued to exist even though its nemesis and reason to exist, The Warsaw Pact, had dissolved.
4K
813
5K
5
27
236
Payload did not bother to report WHEN SpaceX filed the final mishap report to the FAA. Contrary to what you might think, it did not happen just a few days ago. It happened in early July this year. 👇
SpaceX has filed a final mishap investigation report to the FAA for its April 20 Starship integrated flight test, the FAA told Payload on Tuesday.
26
121
775
4
11
198
@jeff_foust
First logical question for Bezos & Blue: "Why did you not offer this the first time 'round?"
7
4
197
This is unconfirmed, repeat unconfirmed, but I have been told by a single industry source that it is the 'Gradatim Ferociter' gang that has gotten the nod to become the new owners of ULA.
8
19
199
ASDS news:
@SpaceX
is adding a 4th ASDS to its fleet. It is expected to be operational NLT early 2025.
3
20
183
This! Had
@SciGuySpace
not done the ArsTechnica article, Tory Bruno still would not be sharing details about the Centaur V STA accident.
Eric spilling the sent Tory into full PR damage control mode. 👇
I'm so confused by people who are praising Tory for his transparency in the the Centaur anomaly... When he's only talking about this because Eric brought the full scope of the anomaly to light?
3
1
74
4
7
156
Same sources say that the flight engines for first
#VulcanRocket
launch will be deliveries "later" and that
@ulalaunch
has "zero confidence" that the Vulcan flight engines will be ready this year. Availability of BE-4 is the redline on Vulcan's schedule.
2/2
4
12
155
Ian going completely off the tracks with this one. SpaceX did not pressure NASA, nor US Congress, to select Starship. It was a lack of willingness by US Congress, to properly fund HLS, in combination with a fair & open competition, that got Starship selected for HLS. 👇
@NickAstronomer
With that money we are contributing to the fact that SpaceX gets more and more empowered up to the point where SpaceX can put pressure on politics so they finance their plans (namely Starship) instead of the plans of Nasa with the Gateway and the Artemis program.
6
0
2
4
2
142
Looks like there will be another hitpiece by Bloomberg not too long from now. 👇
6
2
136
As expected multiple sources have reported over the past several weeks that
@SierraSpaceCo
Dream Chaser is no longer manifested on
@ulalaunch
Vulcan flight
#2
. Primary reason is yet another set of delays in getting Dream Chaser ready for flight.
12
17
126
Ian is being factually wrong here. Had he read the COTS final report he would have known that over 95%, of NASA's $396M COTS investment in SpaceX, went into development of only Dragon. SpaceX paid the vast majority of F9 development (more than 90%) out of its own pockets. 👇
@NickAstronomer
While in fact most of the technological advancements SpaceX did were payed by government money under a contract of Nasa namely the Falcon 9 and the Dragon capsule. Although the landing capability of first stages, the Falcon Heavy and Starlink were developed without.
2
0
4
4
3
117
Doing qualification structural load testing this close to the intended 1st launch is always a risk. While everyone was wondering where Tory's engines were, the real long pole in Vulcan development turned out to be Centaur V.
1/n 👇
Keeping you posted: During Qual testing of Centaur V structural article at MSFC, the hardware experienced an anomaly. This is is why we thoroughly & rigorously exercise every possible condition on the ground before flight. Investigation is underway. Vulcan will fly when complete.
105
180
2K
4
6
113
Things just got a lot more interesting. Sources told me that Artemis III is under review, possibly morphing into a Lunar Gateway test mission. Lunar landing attempt looks to be shifting to no earlier than Artemis IV.
@SciGuySpace
Got confirmation that 2024 for the Artemis lunar landing is definitively off the table. Both schedule and mission sequence are under review with the lunar landing moving at least two years further into the future.
3
3
42
7
12
109
Should I tell them that 501 & 517 were 100% failures?
And then there are the partial failures on 502, 510 & 5101...
At best 112 successes. Not 117 as ArianeGroup claims. 👇
117 successes. Relive past
#Ariane5
launches alongside us while waiting for the next chapter that is being written right now just a few miles from this legendary launch pad.
What was your favorite Ariane 5 launch?
#OneLastAriane5
@Arianespace
#ArianeGroup
#VA261
@esa
@CNES
38
159
933
2
8
110
Yet another uninformed opinion by Gene. With NASA waiting until 2021 to select a lunar lander contractor, there was no chance at all that a crewed landing attempt would happen before 2027/2028, at the very earliest. 👇
And we just lost the 2026 lunar landing...because of corporate hubris. I hope either the company or NASA has a "Plan B." in the works.
20
11
60
5
3
93
Gene is at it again. You do not select a lunar lander contractor in 2021 & then expect to land crew on the Moon just 5 years later. Even SpaceX cannot pull off such a unrealistic schedule. With any luck they might make 2028. But sticking to 2026 is just being dishonest.👇
Iterative design is fine when you have the time to play. However, in the case of Starship, it has an appointment to keep on the lunar south pole in 2026. As a US Taxpayer who is partially subsidizing this, I want this to work so we can keep this appointment. 6/
14
1
27
8
1
94
Remember that time when
@JeffBezos
tweeted 'Welcome to the club' when
@SpaceX
successfully landed a F9 booster for the 1st time?
Missile Defence Agency was like: 'HEY that is my line!'
Images credit: McDonnell Douglas Corporation
8
4
90
@SciGuySpace
The part that says Ruag is producing fairings for SpaceX is false.
It is correct that Ruag supplies very specific components for separation systems to SpaceX.
Other than that the story is one big pile of Bos taurus excrement.
3
1
85
@Mach7Matt
The best way to assure that 2 launches do not happen at the same time, is to plan for them to launch at the same time.
2
1
87
AlrightyDave missed the memo that after awarding SpaceX the Gateway logistics contract, NASA put the development on hold. To this day SpaceX has yet to reveive a 'Authorization To Proceed' from NASA. With no such permission, SpaceX is not cleared to spend money on DragonXL. 👇
@KenKirtland17
how about the vertical integration tower that they’ve taken 3 years so far to do nothing on? And dragon XL they’ve taken 1/3 of the time from announcement to Artemis IV to not even start development
10
0
5
5
4
81
The docking system hardware for the VAST space station is sourced from SpaceX actually. 👇
5
2
82
The legendary Chris Bergin taking a shot at the mother of all Spitter morons: ESG Hound. 👇
@terjeholden
@jeff_foust
@ESGhound
He might be busy writing up how Starship won't be launching for years.............oh wait.
4
5
169
5
0
75
Contrary to popular belief, solid stages of orbital rockets are neither 'simple' nor 'cheap'. 👇
Vega is literally three solid stages and a hypergolic fourth stage. It should be cheap and reliable. And yet:
1) It costs $37 million per flight
2) It fails every other launch
What the hell?
15
8
183
10
7
79
The 🤡 that is ESG Hound is acting as if it is impossible to amend the EIS.
Of note: the Environmental Impact Statements for other SpaceX launch sites are amended every few years, to keep up with latest booster improvements. Starbase will be no different.
👇
At 19.5 million pounds (or 86.7 MN), that is now 40% more powerful than what was modeled when determining environmental impacts at launch (up from ~20% higher a few weeks ago)
This guy loves giving up stuff that can be used in court against him almost as much as Trump
26
6
57
5
7
75
@SciGuySpace
That matches with what I was told this morning.
Close, but no cigar for me:
The FAA is in the final stage of completing the launch license for Starship's Orbital Flight Test. SpaceX should have it in hand in under a fortnight.
29
45
506
3
1
73
The IFT-2 NET launch date of 6 November 2023 is still holding.
5
1
72
Sigh...Ian is apparently convinced that SpaceX is capable of getting humans from Earth to LEO (& back), as well as from NRHO to the Lunar surface (& back), but not the bit in-between (from LEO to NRHO & back).
Full disclosure: that part in-between is actually the easiest part. 👇
@awdawd25523984
@kuringeru
@whateverfithere
@DutchSatellites
There is a huge difference in between being able to launch and uncrewed HLS that can transport humans from lunar orbit to the lunar surface and being able to launch humans from Earth.
2
0
1
4
1
73
This is ArianeGroup lying through their teeth. Vinci started development in 1998 as part of Ariane 5 ECB development. ECB was canceled in 2005, but Vinci development continued at a snails pace. What changed for Ariane 6 was replacing the extendable nozzle with a fixed nozzle. 👇
2
7
72
So, Blue Origin proposes to use a tug, a tanker, a lander. Requiring multiple launches in rapid succession. That sounds like 'immense complexity & heightened risk' to me.
#ironic
. 👇
Some details on
@blueorigin
HLS & cislunar transporter, provided by
@LMSpace
: the CT is comprised of a tug and a tanker, launching separately on New Glenn rockets and docking in LEO. Both CT and Blue Moon Mark-2 lander powered by three BE-7 engines. Cover story in next issue
3
60
243
2
2
71
I wonder if UCM would still act this way if he looked at the number of launches performed before flying people on top of a non-NASA-designed rocket:
- Redstone (Mercury): 62
- Atlas D (Mercury): 47
- Titan 2 (Gemini): 40
- Falcon 9 (Crew Dragon): 82
- Atlas 5 (Starliner): >97
👇
Shuttle, 1st full flight, with crew. Successful
Demo-2, 2nd orbital flight of crew dragon with crew. Successful
Orion & Artemis 2, 3rd orbital flight of Orion, 2nd of SLS
Average 🇺🇸 flights before crew to orbit is (math below): 1.85
So that’s not unusual. You just hate SLS 🤷♂️
13
4
154
6
3
68
@fakecarlsagan
The mind blowing part is that ESA & Arianespace did it to themselves. Like ULA they decided to end production of their legacy rocket before the new rocket had performed its 1st launch.
Strangely enough ESA did not make that mistake when they switched from Ariane 4 to Ariane 5.
5
1
67
Another journalist who has yet to learn that quoting ESGHound is bad for his credibility. 👇
the deluge system SpaceX is building at its Boca Chica Starship launch site comes with its own collection of environmental issues—what will the company do about all the water it is dumping into protected areas?
18
9
42
3
1
65
Once again Ian shows his total lack of understanding how the FFP contracts for COTS, CRS, CCP & HLS are structured. He fails to understand that none of those contracts buy hardware. They buy services instead. 👇
@kuringeru
@whateverfithere
@DutchSatellites
So whatever happened SpaceX currently gets a lot of money from Nasa to build their Starship launcher from a budget that was forseen to build a lunar lander.
5
0
0
4
2
65
Truthful ought to read up on Falcon 9 development history. Multiple stretches over its lifetime & massive engine performance increase.
Superheavy & Starship development will be no different.
👇
Starship stretch fans when they realize it's just another nonsense addition to Starship that will never happen
21
0
93
4
2
67
Blue Origin has come up with a new word to describe a mockup. They are calling it a 'demonstrator'. 👇
8
2
66
@jeff_foust
Dynetics clearly does not understand that 'up to two awards' translates into zero, one or two awards.
So, just a single contract awarded fits perfectly with the intent of the BAA.
0
3
62
Got word from Orion prime contractor Lockheed that SLS will only fly Orion and low mass co-manifested payloads. Block 1b cargo version is dead. Options to terminate EUS and 1b completely are under evaluation.
Described as fallout from losing EC launch.
@DavidWillisSLS
9
13
58
The plot thickens...
Just a few more months until the Russians admit that they screwed up their QC...again. 👇
Nelson says NASA and Roscosmos have ruled out a micrometeoroid impact as cause of Soyuz and Progress coolant leaks. Thinks Russians are on top of the investigation.
5
19
193
1
2
61
This person has apparently never heard of the Commercial Crew Program. 👇
Fun fact.
NASA has dumped over 100 billion into the International Space Station but has no way to get astronauts to it on its own.
Russia charges exorbitant fees to take US astronauts to the ISS.
WHAT A DISGRACE
52
9
46
4
0
61
He is not wrong. 👇
The US and China will be drowning in partially reusable launch systems while Europe is still tinkering with hoppers.
Still ahead of Russia's launch industry, so that's a win, I guess.
13
18
319
0
1
61
Derek carelessly overlooking that the single outlier for FH (USSF-67) is due to a 1-time investment in infrastructure. Specifically a VIF at KSC & extended fairing. Infrastructure that ULA already had for decades, courtesy of the now defunct ELC.
👇
@EndlessPlaid
Vulcan outperforms Falcon Heavy's recovery configuration in payload and cost, with FH averaging a cost of ~199 Million (M) per launch with NSSL missions ranging from 130M (USSF-44) to 317 M (USSF-67) while Vulcan averages 125.3M with a high price of 168.5M, and a low of 112.5M.
15
2
84
3
3
60
This is why ESA is so far behind the curve. The feasibility of a (partially) reusable launcher has already been proven by a certain US aerospace company. Despite this ESA finds it necessary to throw money at a study that will conclude the very thing I just stated.
#WasteOfMoney
👇
.
@ESA
has selected a SENER-led consortium to study the feasibility of the future European launch facility of reusable launchers. The consortium includes
@BeyondGravity_S
,
@CIRA_Scpa
,
@Dassault_OnAir
,
@ElecnorDeimos
,
@PangeaAerospace
,
@Thales_Alenia_S
Italia and
@vki_vonkarman
.
4
9
35
4
7
60
The entitlement attitude of 'spaceflight is for government agencies, not for private entities' is extremely tangible in this 1. 👇
@NickAstronomer
It‘s like: a bunch of very smart people around the world working in different space agencies come together formulate a plan within the ISECG how we as humanity push forward and then one guy comes and says: nah I have a better plan let‘s build Starship and colonize Mars!
3
0
4
1
1
60
@13ericralph31
Same vibe as when Blue Origin patented sea landings on a floating platform.
When SpaceX challenged it, the patent got thrown out due to prior art (the concept had been described years earlier by a Japanese gentleman in a white paper).
Blue's latest 'patent' will go the same way.
1
0
61
The BS 'prediction', that F9 would require 10 reuses to break even, came into existence in 2015. Courtesy of former ULA employee
@george_sowers
who posted a badly flawed Excel as 'proof' at NSF. Tory Bruno kept repeating that nonsense for many years since.
Recall that "Falcon 9 would need 10 reuses to make money" was used as a reductio ad absurdum argument against the program.
They now have 11 boosters that have flown that many times or more.
17
33
439
5
2
60
Spaceguy5 with the silly take again. FAA did not require SpaceX to apply long linear shaped charges. They approved the 'punch a hole & vent' method used by SpaceX. If there was corner-cutting (if any), then it was by FAA for not imposing sufficient FTS requirements. 👇
3
2
56
IMO Tory Bruno is fully justified in throwing Blue Origin under the bus at this point. 'BE-4 is the pacing item'. That says it all: Blue is having trouble ramping up BE-4 production. ULA takes the 'heat' from DoD, but BO is most responsible for causing the delays. 👇
@DougonIPComm
Already said it.
We are on track to support our missions. Infrastructure coming on line. BE4 pacing item. Deliveries started. CERT2 eng’s installed. 1 of 2 for next Vulcan in hand, second one finishing up ATP. But yes, ramping up to a 2 week tempo in next year will take hard work
3
8
137
5
4
58
Tom hitting the nail on the head (as usual).
The only entity responsible for the predicament that Arianespace is currently in, is Arianespace itself. In 2014 they dropped the ball & failed to pick it up ever since. 👇
1
0
57
@cybrtrkguy
@SawyerMerritt
@SpaceX
No. It would make the company extremely vulnerable to hedge funds & others who are only interested in a quick profit.
IPO would make the company extremely volatile, which is not in the interest of the long-term goals of SpaceX (stability required).
1
0
53
Gene is leaving out context again. SLS is entirely funded by taxpayer dollars, which warrants close US Congress scrutiny.
Superheavy & Starship are almost entirely funded privately. Only one variant of Starship (the HLS lander) is partly (~50%) funded with taxpayer dollars. 👇
So if you want to sit through this, I listened to some of the analysis, & thought it incredulous. Indeed data was collected, you know more now than you did before 20 April but Loss of vehicle, Loss of Mission. If this were NASA's SLS there would be Congressional Hearings today.
11
1
8
1
1
51
Oh please please please let this become reality. ArianeGroup needs a continent sized kick in the rear for 2 reasons:
1. Screwing up Ariane 6 development wrt financial viability & competitiveness
2. Not significantly investing in new vehicles out of their own pockets. 👇
''There is “no guarantee” France’s ArianeGroup will continue to be Europe’s rocket launch company of choice (...) The next generation of launch would be done “in a very different way,” he [
@AschbacherJosef
] said.''
0
2
32
2
4
54
@zynqdll
@RealLifeStarman
@elonmusk
There is already something really bad happening to the Earth. It is called 'humans'.
Humans are the only species capable of destroying Earth's biodiversity, without needing a asteroid impact. The damage we create now will long term equal that of the Chicxulub impact.
5
2
51
With launch of the MLM slowly creeping closer it might be a good time to start a thread about ERA (European Robotic Arm).
ERA began life in 1985 as the Service Manipulator System; a proposal for a robot arm for the Hermes mini shuttle.
Credit: Fokker Space Division
4
14
53
@ShurtugalTCG
@SciGuySpace
Russians & irony never were a good combination.
They are still not over how they - in the days of the Soviet Union - sold titanium cheaply to the USA only to find out decades later that the titanium was used to construct the SR-71, which was used to... spy on the Soviet Union.
0
0
49
The 🤡🤡🤡 are out in force today. This prime example is similar to ESG Hound who claimed that no Starship launch would take place before 2024. 👇
I feel confident in saying HLS Starship will not happen. What happens to Starship outside of that, I'm not sure.
26
4
28
1
2
47
For example: the Vulcan core stage structural qualification test articles were completed in 2019 & started testing that same year. It wrapped up in 2021.
But construction & testing of the Centaur V qualification test article was hit by the COVID-19 pandemic & tech trouble.
2/n
2
1
50
@Yrouel86
If ESGHound was anything as vicious towards to NASA, as he is towards SpaceX, he would be raising hell right now about NASA's incorrect SLS sound profiles & NASA's violation of the EIS.
But he is not doing that, because doing so does not fit his anti-Musk/anti-SpaceX agenda.
2
1
49
The very reason that this concept is for a NEA mission, instead of Lunar, is to not upset the SLS & Orion m6ffia. 👇
It's pretty wild that a bunch of NASA folks are proposing this! It justttt so happens that if you swap out "near-earth asteroid" for "the Moon" in this concept of operations, you end up with a complete replacement for SLS and Orion...
17
26
451
4
1
50
NASA did not perform 'hundreds' of missions with crew. The actual total is just 165:
- Mercury program: 6
- Gemini program: 10
- Apollo program: 11
- Skylab: 3
- STS: 135
Flights on Soyuz & CCP are not performed by NASA; they do not count. 👇
NASA has been doing human spaceflight since the 60s. Over 60 years. Hundreds of missions with crew.
SpaceX has been doing human spaceflight for 3 years, with 8 flights.
It’s like looking at the Space Shuttle’s first 8 missions and saying, look! This is safer than Apollo!
14
7
124
3
1
46
Originally, structural testing of Centaur V was planned to start in the 1st half of 2020. But for the reasons mentioned in the previous tweet, actual structural testing did not begin until autumn of 2022.
3/n
1
1
47
Some person tweeting out a story from SIX years ago. 👇
14
3
25
1
0
47
It does not happen very often, but this is one of those rare times that Kiwi is totally clueless. 👇
At a certain point your personal fear of potential government mismanagement is outweighed by the fact that civilian lives have been lost from Musk's mismanagement.
Most or all of at least Starlink/SpaceX should be taken from Musk. He's not going to do that willingly.
32
1
36
2
0
49
But the same events that delayed Centaur V structural testing also applied to cryogenic fluids testing. The planned tests did not happen until August 2022.
But contrary to structural qualification, the cryogenic fluids testing went off almost flawless.
5/5
0
1
46
Ian making a incorrect claim about the goals & results of the Inspiration4 mission & then being corrected by Mr Inspiration4 himself (Jared Isaacman) was not on my bingo card today. Yet here we are. 👇
@Ian_Benecken
@sting2063
@DutchSatellites
@inspiration4x
1. Inspiration4 cost considerably less than what we raised for St. Jude. I am pretty sure I would know.
2. In the end I personally donated more than the mission cost but now a few million more people know about St Jude and their important mission. I think that matters.
3. It
1
1
86
2
1
47
Yet another totally ignorant person who does not understand that working on HLS involves much more than just bending metal at Starbase.
SpaceX has been working full force on HLS since early 2021. 👇
Yo this is cool as hell, glad to see they're possibly actually working on HLS finally
5
0
6
5
1
45
Now there is a contradiction in terms: a 'telescope in good health' has gone into safe mode for the n-th time due to 'a ongoing gyroscope issue'.
Note: half of Hubble's 6 gyroscopes have failed already & the other half are showing signs of upcoming failure.
👇
NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope entered safe mode May 24 due to an ongoing gyroscope issue, temporarily suspending science operations.
Hubble’s instruments are stable, and the telescope is in good health:
44
295
2K
0
3
47
@DittmarML
@esa
@AschbacherJosef
It has nothing to do with leadership by Aschbacher, but with ESA leadership giving in to thinly veiled threats from U.S. officials. The threats were that ESA might lose Gateway work and/or Artemis flight opportunities if it continued cooperation with China on crewed spaceflight.
2
3
44
Yet another 🤡 overlooking the fact that the Starship launch was performed with the blessing of the official entity that is responsible for enforcing 'modern day standards of safety' (FAA). 👇
@Truthful_ast
SpaceX needs to operate under modern day standards of safety, not the 60s. Sure they can build a big cool looking rocket, that doesnt give them an excuse to be reckless with it and it being a new rocket is not an excuse to justify it.
2
0
2
1
1
42
The Centaur V structural test article that suffered a test failure recently, was not the only test article. A 2nd test article, for cryogenic fluids testing, was built & was supposed to start testing in the 1st half of 2020.
4/n
1
1
43
@BellikOzan
@SciGuySpace
Mike Gass was still running things at ULA back then. His failure at keeping SpaceX at bay resulted in Tory Bruno being brought in to replace Gass.
1
0
45
Ian is overlooking that Starship (the ship portion) IS the spacraft & the upper stage combined in 1 vehicle. The SN8 - SN15 high altitude test flights were risk reduction for entry & landing of the spacecraft. A spacecraft is more than just a pressure cabin & interior. 👇
@whateverfithere
@SpacerFC
@DutchSatellites
So? I did! A huge rocket engine test campaign where a lot blows up. Hardly can see how that has anything to do with spacecraft design.
1
0
0
5
1
43
Got confirmation that 2024 for the Artemis lunar landing is definitively off the table. Both schedule and mission sequence are under review with the lunar landing moving at least two years further into the future.
3
3
42
@SciGuySpace
Nelson actually admitting that it is a jobs program.
Miracles still exist apparently...
1
0
41
@Hexhawk_2
It would not be a hit piece if the news was reported in a neutral, unbiased fashion. However, Bloomberg is not known for reporting in a neutral & unbiased fashion.
3
0
44
Some 🤡 named Keegan demonstrated that he has never heard of the Delta line of rockets. 👇
4
1
42
China's unexpected Tianglong 3 flying static fire test threw a wrench in Jonathan's plans for a quiet Sunday. 👇
GCAT updated: GONGYI launch site added; TL3 launch family added; Tianglong 3 S1 single-stage variant added; 2024-A06 endoatmospheric launch cataloged
11
23
266
2
1
43
@Alexphysics13
Yeah...incredibly ironic that Blue Origin used the 'immensely complex & high risk' BS in a attempt to scuttle the HLS Option A award to SpaceX. Just 2 years later they need 'immensely complex & high risk' themselves to get their own HLS system going.
1
2
43
David being delusional. On average it cost $150M to turn a orbiter around for its next flight.
The reason for this massive price tag was that the orbiters required a huge amount of refurbishment between flights. 👇
1
1
42
@AndrewParsonson
@Arianespace
This effort is doomed to fail. Arianespace has lobbied hard for such legislation before. That effort went nowhere.
5
2
42
Gene here already was at the bottom of my list of credible sources. But now that he has teamed-up with the 🤡 that is ESGhound, he has fallen clear off my list.
So sad to see that ever more once-respectable people lose touch with reality. 👇
1
1
42
@TJ_Cooney
@KenKirtland17
@roscosmos
Not necessarily Roscosmos' fault. The SM computers that inadvertantly triggered thruster firings on MLM are supplied by ESA.
You might wanna knock it of with the premature conclusions until the exact cause of this event has been established.
2
1
37
@NASASpaceflight
@BocaChicaGal
Pressure bulkhead on this one. Probably earliest test of the Starship nosecone as a pressure vessel for (future) crew version.
2
0
40
@jeff_foust
Arianespace is in the process of fixing a fairing jettison issue, related to excessive shock/vibration in the payload area upon fairing sep.
1
0
37
Imagine having gone so far off the rails that you no longer understand the difference between a weapon system & a civilian satellite internet system. 👇
Jesus idk what precedent/mechanism there is for this but the US needs to take veto power or control over Starlink geofencing and network access rules in Ukraine. Hard to imagine the DoD would be like "lol ok" if, say, Raytheon geofenced Stingers to not work near frontlines
49
6
150
3
2
39
@TJ_Cooney
That is the same pathfinder they showed 8 months ago, albeit a bit more complete.
Not a whole lot of progress to be honest.
2
0
37
But I cannot do a picture thread about Ariane without starting with the failure that was the Europa rocket. It never reached orbit, but it did clear the way for the success that became Ariane.
So here is Europa on the pad at Woomera in Australia.
Credit for all images:
@esa
1
4
39
Context: Starlink competitors Viasat & Skylogic tried to deny Starlink the right to offer services in France. They failed. 👇
France's Conseil d'Etat upholds Starlink's victory, allowing it to continue operating and selling services in France, while ordering Viasat and Skylogic to pay damages... of €2,000 each.
0
5
45
0
4
37
@the__dude98
@SciGuySpace
The quiet part is acknowledging that Musk is not just some clown.
In the early 2000s many of Musks competitors viewed him with contempt. Particularly Russia and France have never publically acknowledged the many great achievements made by SpaceX.
1/2
1
0
37
D
@mn
! Blue Origin doing Elon-time like predictions (just as unrealistic btw) 👇
Blue Origin's John Couluris: "We’re expecting to land on the moon between 12 and 16 months from today" with the cargo variant of Blue Moon. So that would mean orbit for the first time with New Glenn in 2024, and a soft landing on the moon the following year.
22
51
474
2
1
37
1st (& so far only) 3-person EVA. 👇
On May 7, 1992 – Space Shuttle program: The Space Shuttle Endeavour is launched on its first mission, STS-49.
10
31
148
1
3
38
David misrepresenting things again, as usual. SLS had 2 valve problems. One involved a GSE-side vent valve that got stuck. The other involved a broken valve in the ICPS upper stage. Both valves failed & had to be repaired, unlike the Starship valve that simply froze shut. 👇
There was no pity for SLS at all when it had its sticky valve. Just sayin 🤷♂️
69
16
545
1
2
37
@smmmmss2
Superheavy boostback startup suffered a catastrophic failure resulting in the FTS being triggered.
3
0
37