Timeline for Could SpaceX ever make a Heavy version of Starship Super Heavy
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 19 at 23:30 | comment | added | Steve Pemberton | Apparently what was going to make Falcon Heavy more efficient was cross-feeding, but apparently that turned out to be more complicated than it was worth for the expected gains. So they just went with independent cores which itself turned out to be enough of a handful. | |
| Apr 18 at 17:03 | comment | added | Dan Mašek | @Mark Maybe 45% of kerb weight, but I'd bet very close to 100% of its maximum cargo capacity. | |
| Apr 18 at 16:18 | comment | added | Dragongeek | @MSalters ...this car specifics debate isn't really the point of my example, but no. Assume the F150 gets 18 mpg base, and you load it with 460 gallons of fuel. Assuming a reduction of efficiency of 1% per 100lbs extra load, this would result in a final value of about 13mpg and those 460 gallons of fuel would mass north of 2700 lbs. This is above the max carrying capacity of an F150, so no, you can't just slap a large fuel tank onto a F150 specifically | |
| Apr 18 at 16:03 | comment | added | Christopher James Huff | @MSalters not without using a significant fraction of its cargo capacity and severely impacting safety, you can't. And that truck's nearly twice the mass of the car Mark referenced. | |
| Apr 18 at 12:49 | comment | added | MSalters | @ChristopherJamesHuff: Mark's point stands. You can easily slap an 1100 pounds gas tank in the back of an F150 - you don't need to design a whole new car for it. That is remarkably relevant here, Starship Tanker is also a bet that you can reuse an existing design. | |
| Apr 18 at 12:35 | comment | added | Christopher James Huff | @Mark now redesign your car to incorporate about a cubic meter of fuel tank to hold that gasoline without compromising its other functions. The example might be a little exaggerated, but only a little. | |
| Apr 17 at 22:29 | comment | added | Mark | Your car example doesn't work out too well. Assuming a 30% loss of fuel economy from being heavily loaded, my car could go from New York to Los Angeles and back on about 1100 pounds of gasoline, amounting to a 45% increase over its empty weight. | |
| Apr 17 at 19:26 | comment | added | Dan Is Fiddling By Firelight | Your first sentence is about a week out of date. At his most recent talk, Elon revealed plans to stretch Superheavy slightly, and Starship significantly. arstechnica.com/space/2024/04/… | |
| Apr 17 at 9:43 | history | answered | Dragongeek | CC BY-SA 4.0 |