Alt accounts that are also me:

  • 1.45K Posts
  • 1.56K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 10th, 2023

help-circle











  • Starbase activities (2025-07-17):

    • Jul 16th cryo delivery tally. (ViX)
    • Jul 16th addendum: Additional video and photo of the new booster v3 forward dome in Starfactory, with thoughts from Killip. (ViX, Starship Gazer, Killip)
    • Launch site: Overnight, at Pad 1, the ship quick disconnect arm retracts, the chopsticks rise, and the ship quick disconnect arm extends. This could be in anticipation of lifting the ship static fire adapter onto the launch mount. (ViX, HardcoreElectr1)
    • The SpaceX LR11000 crane moves from Pad 2 to Pad 1. (ViX)
    • Modifications to the Pad 1 launch mount continue with the installation of more pipes. (ViX)
    • Current state of the ship static fire adapter. (Starship Gazer)
    • The hold-down arm adapters for the ship static fire adapter have been installed on the the Pad 1 launch mount, visible in the latest NSF flyover photos. (NSF)
    • Booster quick disconnect hood for Pad 2 arrives and is offloaded. (Golden, tobewobemusic 1, tobewobemusic 2, ViX, Fraser)
    • Massey’s: The crane which tipped over is dismantled. (ViX)



  • The main contributors to ozone depletion from rocket emissions are gaseous chlorine and soot particles. Chlorine catalytically destroys ozone molecules, while soot particles warm the middle atmosphere, accelerating ozone-depleting chemical reactions.

    While most rocket propellants emit soot, chlorine emissions primarily come from solid rocket motors. Currently, the only propulsion systems that have a negligible effect on the ozone layer are those which use cryogenic fuels such as liquid oxygen and hydrogen. However, due to the technological complexity of handling cryogenic fuels, only about 6% of rocket launches currently use this technology.

    I wonder how methalox engines perform when it comes to soot emissions, given that most modern rocket designs seem to be heading that way?










  • X-energy, a Maryland-based company, uses uranium to make so-called TRISO fuel — inside what’s known as “pebbles.”

    The Energy Department says it’s the most robust nuclear fuel on Earth because the particles cannot melt in a reactor.

    Uranium powder, in the form of triuranium octoxide, gets added to nitric acid, said Dan Brown, vice president of fuel development for TRISO-X. Then carbon and an organic solution are added. They have two glass containers set up — one wears a heated jacket, looking almost like a little sweater, that helps the uranium dissolve into the acid solution. The second cools the acid solution while the carbon source is added, which turns the mix near-black, he said.

    At another station, in a long clear tube, the cocktail solidifies into small black spheres with a jellybean-like consistency. Those black balls, about the size of poppyseeds, then travel through machines under temperatures as high as 1,800 degrees Celsius to get protective carbon coatings — like candy dipping — that make them look like very tiny BBs.

    X-energy uses graphite and other cohesive materials to bind 18,000 kernels together into a larger sphere. That gets coated in a final layer of graphite to seal the final pebble. In the end, it’s strong enough to withstand the weight of an SUV.

    The pebbles will eventually give up their energy in the high-temperature gas-cooled nuclear reactor X-energy is developing, with about 220,000 pebbles per reactor, like gumballs in a gumball machine. When they exit the bottom, if energy remains, the pebbles will return to the top for another pass. Each one could be used about six times. X-energy also plans to make fuel products for other advanced reactor designs.