Relativity Space - Discussion Thread

[AudubonB]

Beginning this thread to discuss the firm these alumni from Blue Origin (Ellis) and SpaceX (Noone), after reading of them in today's (18 Oct) Bloomberg article: These Giant Printers Are Meant to Make Rockets

The first topic I'd like to throw out: Can anyone challenge or confirm their claim that the Space Shuttle had 2.5 million moving parts? That sounds.....challengeable.

 

[ccutrer]

I could be convinced of 2.5 million parts, with all the electronics (each resistor, capacitor, etc.), and counting individual heat shield tiles, etc. And the whole thing clearly moved...

But yeah, 2.5 million parts that move relative to the shuttle itself? Seems a bit exaggerated.

 

[e-FTW]

challengeable

I see what you did there.

 

[jkn]

Beginning this thread to discuss the firm these alumni from Blue Origin (Ellis) and SpaceX (Noone), after reading of them in today's (18 Oct) Bloomberg article: These Giant Printers Are Meant to Make Rockets

The first topic I'd like to throw out: Can anyone challenge or confirm their claim that the Space Shuttle had 2.5 million moving parts? That sounds.....challengeable.

If 'moving part' means: "Part is moving before it is welded, glued, screwed,... in place." Then I understand their numbers.

 

[ecarfan]

The first topic I'd like to throw out: Can anyone challenge or confirm their claim that the Space Shuttle had 2.5 million moving parts? That sounds.....challengeable.

Here is the relevant section from the article:
------------------
“The space shuttle had 2.5 million moving parts,” Ellis says. “We think SpaceX and Blue Origin have gotten that down to maybe 100,000 moving parts per rocket. We want to get to 1,000 moving parts, fewer than a car.”
-----------------

It appears to me that they consider a "moving part" a single, separate piece of the entire vehicle. Which in my opinion is not the generally accepted usage of the term. For example, when one refers to a "moving part" of a car, one means a piston, crankshaft component, drivetrain gear, etc. A part that is "moving" relative to the motion of the entire car. The windshield, chassis, dashboard, etc. are not "moving parts".

Maybe in the aerospace industry the term "moving part" is used differently than the way I use it. But if that is the case, the "moving" part of the phrase is redundant.

 

[ecarfan]

From the article, quote:
--------------
The boldest future application of Relativity’s machines could take place on Mars. Ellis says the company plans to refine its printers so they’re durable and adaptable enough to help create the buildings that make up a space colony. “If you think that type of future is inevitable, then we will need lightweight, intelligent, and automated manufacturing to build stuff on another planet,” he says. “Our long-term mission is to print the first rocket on Mars.” Top that, Elon.
--------------

The potential utility of large scale 3D printing on Mars for manufacturing stuff is enormous. And obviously Elon has already thought about it. So that closing statement is kind of silly. SpaceX has a lot of expertise in 3D printing right now and is using that expertise to accomplish amazing things.

 

[mongo]

Relativity Space will attempt the maiden launch of Terran 1 today at 1:00 pm (to 4:00) eastern.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1633268525820198923

 

[mongo]

T-0 now TBD

https://twitter.com/x/status/1633509805561184256

 

[mongo]

1:20 launch target

https://twitter.com/x/status/1633519831868743687

 

[mongo]

Now 2:40 eastern

 

[mongo]

Trying again today 1-4pm eastern

https://twitter.com/x/status/1633594730138181646

 

[Grendal]

 

[mongo]

Trying again at 4pm eastern.

 

[ecarfan]

After a few holds, the count got to T-0 and the engines had ignited but the vehicle never left the pad, there was a hold at T-0, apparently just before the clamps would have released. After awhile they reset the count and it again went down to T-0 but without engine ignition. By that time they had hit the end of the launch window. So no launch today.

 

[Electroman]

Even the water deluge seems to have been mis-timed? it started several seconds after the engine start (and after the shutdown). Do these guys know what they are doing?

 

[jabloomf1230]

Even the water deluge seems to have been mis-timed? it started several seconds after the engine start (and after the shutdown). Do these guys know what they are doing?

I swear, the small lettering near the bottom of first stage says, "Estes".

 

[MyJoule]

At least it didn't blow up, Yet

Seriously, space is hard- they got to t-0.05 and a launch commit criteria didn't pass so the hold downs didn't release, but the had all engines running, So they basically completed a static fire and got to exercise their team.

One thing that bothered me, was the fouled range after the weather hold. How did that happen so close to T0? Not that they would have launched but really having a boat enter the splash zone with such a short time to t0 is really bad on the part of someone.

I think they were setting the expectations appropriately yesterday- clearing the tower and making to through max Q would be considered a success. I hope they are able to recycle the system and give it another try soon.

I'm less of a believer that Mars is possible than Elon or these guys, but I think it's still cool to try to make this technology real.

 

[bxr140]

Even the water deluge seems to have been mis-timed? it started several seconds after the engine start (and after the shutdown).

I didn't see "started after the engines" (water flow should start before motor startup), but either way it makes sense for a deluge to keep going even after a late abort, for a couple reasons:

1. While acoustic damping is generally the primary reason for a deluge, the water does also help with preservation of equipment on the pad (and thus recycle time to the next launch).
2. If its a gravity fed system (I actually don't know at LC-16 but assume it is) then obviously its going to keep going until its dry.
3. For a supporting function like this you don't really need or even want an "off" command...or at least one that comes automatically/easily/quickly after abort. That's just one more thing to checkout and one more thing to otherwise go wrong.

Do these guys know what they are doing?

Yes. Got the lowdown from them on the aborts--pretty standard stuff that you'd expect from any early launch attempt. Conservative limits save rockets.

 

[Electroman]

I didn't see "started after the engines"

Go to 1:56:50 you will see the engines ignite at T-0:03 and shuts off at T-0:00. The water deluge starts a full 3 seconds after the engine shutoff.

 

[bxr140]

Go to 1:56:50 you will see the engines ignite at T-0:03 and shuts off at T-0:00. The water deluge starts a full 3 seconds after the engine shutoff.

Got it--yeah those high nozzles are very much for acoustics during liftoff. They're synchronized to start flowing after the vehicle/engines clear. Not super great to firehose rocket motors with water on the way up...