Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Space Science Technology

SpaceX's Starhopper Moves Closer To Its First Flight (theverge.com) 69

SpaceX is planning to launch test flights of its Starhopper test vehicle to a height of up to 16,400 feet. "The short tests, which will take place out of SpaceX's launch site in Boca Chica, Texas, will send the rocket to just under 1,640 feet (500 meters) high for its low-altitude flights and up to 16,400 feet (5,000 meters) high for its high-altitude flights," reports The Verge, citing a modified application filed with the FCC. The heights match those that the company indicated in a similar filing last year. From the report: The Starhopper is a very basic version of Starship, the massive passenger rocket that SpaceX wants to build to send people to the Moon and Mars. In order to prepare for the first Starship's flight to space, SpaceX has been tinkering with the test Starhopper in Boca Chica. The vehicle boasts a similar structure to the final rocket, though it's slightly smaller in size. Starhopper's most important task is to test out the new, powerful Raptor engines that SpaceX has developed for the future deep-space rocket.

SpaceX fired up a Raptor engine on the bottom of the Starhopper for the first time in April. It only lifted a few inches since the vehicle was tethered to the ground. But now, SpaceX plans to perform what are known as "hop" tests with the vehicle (hence the nickname Starhopper), which will send the rocket to a low altitude above the Earth. The company will then attempt to touch the Starhopper back down on the ground with the vehicle's three landing legs. The idea is to test out the landing capabilities the rocket's going to use to touch down on Earth and other worlds. SpaceX performed similar tests with a vehicle known as Grasshopper back in 2012 and 2013 to try out the landing technique its Falcon 9 rockets now use.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

SpaceX's Starhopper Moves Closer To Its First Flight

Comments Filter:
  • More Info (Score:5, Informative)

    by mentil ( 1748130 ) on Wednesday May 22, 2019 @05:49AM (#58634976)

    These hops are scheduled to resume on May 28th (going by notices of the nearby beach's closure), and will start with a single Raptor engine produced by SpaceX. Later hops will use three engines. Apparently, the first batch will be 10 engines; the first one was 'overclocked' until destroyed, and the second did the first hops and is of unknown status.

    In addition to Starhopper, there are also two orbital hoppers in production. These probably won't actually go into orbit, but will simulate the stresses of orbital reentry, testing the stainless steel skin, heating tiles, and transpirational cooling systems, all of which are novel for rockets AFAIK. The first orbital hopper is in production in Boca Chica, Texas, where Starhopper is; while the other isn't as far along but is being built in Cocoa, Florida. The first orbital hopper is expected to be completed early next month (and photos showing progress seem to back this up) while its testing should start late June; the other prototype is maybe 2 weeks behind.

    Source: r/spacex

  • by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Wednesday May 22, 2019 @05:56AM (#58634986)
    Starhopper must cross the rice paper [youtube.com] without tearing it ...
  • The trend now is toward smaller, lighter payloads, and the current "heavy" launchers like D-4H are struggling to find customers.

    Building a "super-heavy" is a very cool endeavor and I hope they succeed with that just due to how awesome it will be, but I can't see it doing anything but losing money. There's no way you're going to find enough super-rich to pay for joyrides to recover the R&D, and there aren't commercial payloads that need that sort of lift. There aren't going to be either, because nobody

    • by AJWM ( 19027 )

      Nobody wants to launch on D-4H because it's as expensive as hell, several times what a Falcon costs. The goal for Starship is to launch in the price range of a Falcon-9, and then bring that cost even lower (because the only thing expended will be fuel).

      As far as payloads, SpaceX alone has thousands of Starlink satellites to launch. A cluster of 60 maxes out a Falcon-9, so Starship will reduce the cost for those.

      Starship will succeed if all it does is launch Starlink satellites, because SpaceX is going to m

  • by Dunbal ( 464142 ) * on Wednesday May 22, 2019 @07:10AM (#58635120)

    with the vehicle's three landing legs.

    What do they plan to do with the other landing leg then? Apparently people at the Verge can't count. The vehicle depicted in the tweeted photograph they linked clearly has four landing legs not three.

    • Re:So (Score:4, Informative)

      by mentil ( 1748130 ) on Wednesday May 22, 2019 @07:39AM (#58635200)

      The final Starship will have three legs, as shown on the photo at the top of their article. Starhopper does have four legs, though, which are different from what the final legs/fins will look like -- probably since the landings are expected to be harder.

    • Re: So (Score:4, Funny)

      by Type44Q ( 1233630 ) on Wednesday May 22, 2019 @08:17AM (#58635348)
      Perhaps that "third leg" isn't a leg... anyone spot any "hydraulics?"
    • There's only three legs. The photo clearly shows three legs, as do all other photos of it.

      In the orbital version, two legs are integrated into the fin-flaps (which are primarily drag surfaces, unlike conventional fins or the Falcon 9's grid fins) and the third into a fixed vertical fin (largely to keep it out of the way, aerodynamically speaking). Four legs would require the "top" two to articulate as well.

  • Quote: “. . .which will send the rocket to a low altitude above the Earth.”

    As opposed to that *other* kind of altitude — you know, the kind that's not above the Earth.

    • Relax; the author's just showing off what they've learned.
    • by lgw ( 121541 )

      As opposed to that *other* kind of altitude â" you know, the kind that's not above the Earth.

      To be fair, new rockets go to the kind of altitude that's not above the Earth with some frequency. Unplanned lithobraking is a fun kind of rapid unscheduled disassembly.

  • The article mentions landing tests, but as far as a I can recall all of the landings (tests and otherwise) have been conducted landing on solid surfaces. Does anyone know if SpaceX has tested or plans to test out the ability to land on generic, "stable looking" open terrain? I can't imagine the intent is to construct large concrete pads on the moon or Mars prior to landing one of these rockets and one landing leg hitting a soft spot would make for a pretty crappy day off world.
    • Re:Landing Question (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Immerman ( 2627577 ) on Wednesday May 22, 2019 @09:18AM (#58635690)

      It's a little premature for that I think... but I would presume they will do so eventually.

      It's notable though that landing on the moon might actually be the better place to test - 1/6th gravity means things start going wrong at 1/6th speed, with 1/6th the forces for maneuvering rockets to overcome. Which means a lot more time to fire the main rockets back up, get off the ground, and then try again in a new spot. The ability to hover might also come in handy.

      Obviously you wouldn't want people on board until you got things working reliably. But it might be worth including a landing-pad building robot in the early payloads. Even if you can land in the dust, a landing pad is preferable.

  • Am I the only one that remembers the McDonnell-Douglas DC-X back in the mid '90s? This looks remarkably similar.
    • by AJWM ( 19027 )

      Yes, you're the only one. What is this DC-X you're talking about?

      Kidding. I was there at White Sands for the first public flight. Freaking amazing seeing a rocket launch, climb out, ... and then just stop, hanging in the air exactly the same way, as Douglas Adams would put it, that bricks don't. Translated sideways and then landed.

      A bunch of the DC-X folks later went to work for Blue Origin where New Shepherd does something similar (but higher). As TFA mentions, SpaceX's own Grasshopper also did that in th

  • Sorry, couldn't resist. Let the ritual mod-bombing commence.

  • Calling something that only goes to the moon or even Mars "Starship" is something of an overstatement or exaggeration of what the thing actually is, at least IMO.

    I see no point in giving such a moniker to a vessel that is not at least capable of travel at significant fractions of light speed, and literally designed for the express purpose of going to other stars.

  • But now, SpaceX plans to perform what are known as "hop" tests with the vehicle (hence the nickname Starhopper),

    It's already called a pogo plane. Reed Richards has one.

  • I have to say that SpaceX seems to be the most aggressive in moving forward in space. They seem to be able to keep the costs down than the others as well as looking more forward!

    I have to hand it to them. I hope they can and are willing to keep it up!!!

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (10) Sorry, but that's too useful.

Working...