Space Sunday: SLS roars, LauncherOne flies and a mole dies

The Green Run hot fire test: the four RS-25D engines on the SLS-1 core stage running close to full power in the Stennis test stand, January 16th, 2021. Credit: NASA
Saturday, January 16th saw NASA attempt the Green Run Hot Fire Test of the first Space Launch System (SLS) core stage.

For those who might be unaware of it, the SLS is NASA’s next-generation heavy-lift rocket designed to undertake a range of missions, with the primary focus being the US Artemis programme to return humans to the Moon. Once operational it will be the most powerful launch vehicle commissioned by NASA.

The Hot Fire test formed the final phase of the Green Run test programme, a series of tests vital to clearing the core stage of the rocket ready for it maiden – and only – flight, planned for the end of 2021. The “Green Run” title refers to the fact the test would be the first time all of the components and systems of a core stage would be operated in unison, just as they would in the lead-up to and launch of an SLS rocket.

As such, the Green Run actually comprises a sequence of tests numbered 1 through 8 – each designed to test different aspects of the core stage, gradually bringing everything together as a unified whole and culminating in the hot fire test.

The Green Run test sequence for the first SLS core stage. Credit: NASA

All of the test sequences have been carried out at the historic B-2 Test Stand at NASA’s Stennis Space Centre, Mississippi, and while some issues were encountered along the way, both technical and due to the weather, so  eating into the “reserve time”  available for getting the first SLS vehicle assembled and onto the launch pad, by Saturday January 16th, all of them – including critical fuel loading and unloading (700,000 gallons of liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen) test – have been completed and signed-off, allowing the hot fire test to go ahead.

Planned for a 8-minute duration – this being the total time the core stage would be expected to operate its engines during a launch – the test commenced at 22:27 GMT, after some last minute minor technical delays put the count-down on a lengthy hold. Ignition saw the four RS-25D engines ignite milliseconds apart from one another in the sequence 1,3,4 and 2, quickly building up to a combined thrust of just under 726,000 kg – somewhat less than the maximum thrust of 900,000 kg they will reach in an actual launch, but sufficient for the purposes of the test.

Ahead of the test, thousands of gallons of water pour through the flame pit beneath the test stand – water is used as suppression system to absorb the sound from the engines, preventing it from being reflected back onto the vehicle, where sound concussions might damage it. Credit: NASA

The long duration of the test had been intended to allow a comprehensive test of things like engine throttling down / up and gimballing (swinging) the motors in a manner that would provide steering in a flight. However, 67.7 seconds into the test something  – at the time of writing, NASA has yet to specify what – triggered the core stage’s automated safety systems, initiating a rapid and safe shut-down of the engines.

The RS-25 is one of the most powerful and advanced rocket engines in the world. Originally built for the shuttle, it is finding new life with SLS – a total of 16 former shuttle variants of the motor will be used to power the first four SLS launches. The four motors for this first core stage already have a distinguished flight career between them, having previously be used on a Hubble Space Telescope servicing missions, the mission that saw John Glenn return to space (STS-95 in 1998), and on the final space shuttle flight, STS-135 featuring the shuttle orbiter vehicle Atlantis (thus offering a direct link between the last flight of the Space Transportation System and the first launch of the Space Launch System). In addition, between them the four engines made six flights to the International Space Station prior to the end of the shuttle programme in 2011.

Four clean burns: the four RS-25D engines under thrust. Credit: NASA

Once those first 16 motors have been used, SLS will be powered by a new generation of RS-25 motor, built using the very latest technologies including components created using 3D printing which we decrease the complexity of the engines.

Despite the hot fire test lasting less than 68 seconds, managers and engineers monitoring the test were confident that they had gathered sufficient data to classify the run as a success, although it is not yet clear if a further test will be required, or whether the core stage can be dismounted from the test stand – originally built to test the core stage of NASA’s Saturn V rocket – and shipped to Kennedy Space Centre for integration with the rest of the vehicle.

All four RS-25 engines ignited successfully, but the test was stopped early after about a minute. At this point, the test was fully automated. During the firing, the onboard software acted appropriately and initiated a safe shut-down of the engines. During the test, the propellant tanks were pressurised, and this data will be valuable as the team plans the path forward.
In [the] coming days, engineers will continue to analyse data and will inspect the core stage and its four RS-25 engines to determine the next steps.

– NASA statement following the test

Future core stages won’t go through a similar Green Run; these tests were only required for the first core stage to confirm its design and gather vital data on its behaviour during its required operations. Instead, they will generally be fabricated at NASA’s Michoud Assembly Facility, New Orleans and then shipped directly to Kennedy Space Centre for vehicle integration with the rest of their launch elements in the famous cube-like Vehicle Assembly Building, used for the “stacking” of every Saturn  rocket (both the 1B and V) and every shuttle system.

Once integrated with its upper stage, solid rocket boosters and payload, the stage will participate in the Artemis 1 mission to send an uncrewed Orion vehicle to, around, and back from, the Moon at the end of 2021.

Continue reading “Space Sunday: SLS roars, LauncherOne flies and a mole dies”

Space Sunday: starships, dishes and microbes

A stunning image of Starship SN9 standing on the Boca Chica launch platform framed by a low Sun. Credit: Mary “BocaChicaGal”

In December 2020, and following the not-quite-successful flight of Starship prototype SN8, SpaceX suffered what might have been a further setback in their flight test plans for the Starship vehicle, when prototype SN9 toppled sideways whilst in the stacking facility at the company’s Boca Chica, Texas, construction and flight test centre (see: Space Sunday: the flight of SN8 and a round-up).

However, the vehicle was quickly righted and following examination, work commenced on repairing / replacing the damaged elements (notably one of the forward aerodynamic surfaces). This work proceeded at a surprising pace; so much so that on December 22nd, 2020, it was delivered to he Starship launch platform.

Since then work has continued at the same rapid pace, such that within the two weeks since its arrival on the stand, SN9 has completed the majority of its pre-flight checks that took around 2 months to complete for SN8. These included initial fuel tank pressurisation tests using inert liquid nitrogen (to test the tanks and structure for leaks), partial and fuel test fuelling operations, vent system tests, testing of the reaction Control system (RCS) thrusters that help maintain the vehicle’s orientation in the atmosphere and will provide manoeuvring capabilities in space, and even a full static fire test of the vehicle’s three Raptor engines, which took place on January 6th.

SN9 static fire engine test. Credit: Mary “BocaChicaGal”

Two tests were skipped in the process – but this is seen as not so much because the company is trying to make up for any “lost time”, but rather the result of growing confidence in the process of taking a prototype vehicle from fabrication to test flight. However, while the engine firing was successful, it was somewhat shorter than those for SN8 – the Raptors fired for less than 2 seconds – so it is not clear whether or not an issue was encountered, forcing a premature shut-down.  If this is the case, then it might be that further static fire tests may be announced ahead of any flight; if the brief firing was intentional, then it is possible a flight test could come within the next week or so.

As it is, the exact date of any actual flight test for SN9  – which will seek to repeat the 12.5 km altitude reached by SN8, but hopefully follow it with a successful landing – hasn’t been confirmed. However, to avoid a repeat of the SN8 crash, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk confirmed that the Methane header tank – a smaller tank designed to feed fuel to the Raptor motors during the landing sequence  – for SN9 and at least some of the prototypes that follow it will be “pressed” with helium (this is, helium will be forced into the tank in order to force the methane out and to the engines) in order to avoid any pressurisation issues. However, it is not clear if this will be the permanent solution to the problem, or an interim update to allow test flights to continue whilst SpaceX develop a more permanent solution to the problem.

A diagram showing Starship and Super Heavy prototype development. On the left, SN9 is complete, and awaiting its flight. SN10 is awaiting Raptor motor installation and the attachment of its aft flaps, and SN11 has yet to have its upper sections installed and is awaiting its tail flaps and motors. All of the major hull elements of SN12 have been fabricated but have yet to be assembled. The diagram also show the assembly of SN15, which is will in advance of SN13 and SN14, while to the right is the status (as of January 9th) of the first Super Heavy prototype. Credit Brendan Lewis

At the same time as pre-flight tests have been continuing with Starship SN9, work has been continuing with a number of further prototypes. SN10 very close to completion, with just engines and aft aerodynamic flaps to be mounted, and SN11 will be receiving its upper sections in the coming week. Further down the chain, SN15 is also progressing, as is SN16. These will likely be the first two prototypes fully fitted with the thermal protection system used to safeguard the vehicle’s hull during atmospheric entry. This doesn’t necessarily mean either will make an orbital flight – SpaceX will doubtless want to text how the entire thermal system holds up under atmospheric flight prior to committing to an orbital attempt.

However, work currently appears to be on hold for vehicles SN13 and SN14, and SN12 has yet to be stacked. Whether these vehicles will be completed remains to be seen: Musk has previously indicated that the SN15 vehicle and beyond will include “significant upgrades” compared to earlier vehicles, so it is possible SpaceX may opt to skip from SN11 to SN15 in the flight test programme.

An image demonstrating the relative size of SpaceX vehicles and the shuttle. Left: the Crew Dragon – capable of flying up to 7 into LEO; right: a starship vehicle with a shuttle orbiter alongside. The orbiter could carry up to 7 into LEO with up to 28 tonnes of cargo. Starship can carry up to 100 people + cargo or up to 100 tonnes (cargo variant) to LEO. A Tesla 4×4 and human are included for scale. Credit: Dale Rutherford

Puerto Rico Governor  Supports Rebuilding Arecibo

The outgoing governor of Puerto Rico, Wanda Vázquez Garced, signed an executive order on December 28th, 2020 backing the rebuilding of the 305-m diameter Arecibo radio telescope that collapsed in November 2020 (see:  Space Sunday: returns and a collapse).

The order states that US $8 million is to be “assigned and allocated” for removing the debris of the collapsed telescope and “remedial environmental” work be completed at the site. It further states that the Puerto Rico government wishes to see the development of a telescope with a larger effective aperture,  wider field of view and a more powerful radar transmitter to replace the original, thus providing the nucleus of “a world class science and education facility”.

Arecibo as it was: visible is the main dish with the central receiving platform suspended over it via the three towers. Credit: NASA

However, things are not as clear cut as this. For one thing, the construction of a new telescope is liable to cost more than ten times the funding stated in the order. It’s also not clear where the $8 million will come from; the order only suggests it could be provided through “state, federal and private sources (including public-private partnerships and state-federal partnerships)”.

More particularly, Arecibo is not under the funding auspices of the Puerto Rican government, but rather that of the National Science Foundation (NSF), which it turn is funded directly by the US government. Thus far, the NSF has not committed to any rebuilding / replacement at the site, nor have any funds been allocated by Congress in the 2021 federal budget – although the NSF has been directed to prepare a study / report on the telescope’s collapse, the clean-up operation and to determine whether a replacement / comparable facility should be established at the sit, together with the associated costs for doing so.

After the fall: the telescope after the collapse of the receiving platform (the wreckage of which can be see to the right of the disk. Also clearly visible is the scar where the collapsing platform and cables tore through the disk. Credit: NASA
NSF has a very well-defined process for funding and constructing large-scale infrastructure, including telescopes. It’s a multi-year process that involves congressional appropriations and the assessment and needs of the scientific community. So, it’s very early for us to comment on the replacement.

– Ralph Gaume, director of NSF’s Division of Astronomical Sciences

Continue reading “Space Sunday: starships, dishes and microbes”

Space Sunday: previewing missions in 2021

The uncrewed NASA Artemis-1 mission, featuring the first flight of the Block 1 Space Launch System (SLS) carrying an Orion MPCV at the start of a 26-day mission to and around the Moon, should occur towards the end of 2021. Credit: NASA

Despite the pandemic, 2020 proved to be a busy year for space activities, with a range of significant launches of both government-led / overseen missions and private sector launches. However, as busy and as challenging as it was, 2020 potential pales somewhat in comparison to what we should / will hopefully see in 2021. So, as with last year, I thought I’d kick-off Space Sunday in 2021 with a look ahead to some of the year’s  space missions.

Mars

2021 will see three new arrivals orbiting and landing on Mars.

The first to arrive will be the United Arab Emirates’ Hope spacecraft. Launched on July 20th, 2020 from Tanegashima Space Centre in Japan atop a H-IIA rocket, the mission comprises an orbiter vehicle designed to study the Martian atmosphere and climate.

Built entirely in the UAE, the mission marks the first attempt to operate an interplanetary mission by any West Asian, Arab or Muslim-majority country. It carries a range of science systems provided by the Mohammed bin Rashid Space Centre (MBRSC) and the University of Colorado Boulder with support from Arizona State University (ASU), and the University of California, Berkeley. Hope is due to arrive in an initial orbit around Mars on February 9th, 2021.

The UAE Hope orbiter Credit: Mohammed bin Rashid Space Centre via the New York Times

China’s Tianwan-1 (“Questions to  Heaven”) mission will be the next to arrive in Mars orbit. The precise date has yet to be confirmed, but orbital insertion should happen between the 11th and 24th February, 2021. It is an incredibly ambitious mission,  comprising a total of 13 science instruments and experiments, split between two distinct mission elements.

The first of these is the orbiter vehicle, which will commence operations almost immediately. It is tasked with producing Martian surface maps, characterising the Martian atmosphere – notably its ionosphere, measuring the Martian magnetic field, examining the composition of the Martian subsurface via radar, and imaging the surface of Mars in high-resolution. As a part of the latter work, the orbiter will carry out extensive surveys of the proposed landing zones for the second part of the mission: a lander / rover.

These will deploy some time around April  23rd. The rover’s mission is to examine the Martian sub-surface to a depth of around 100 metres using ground-penetrating radar and study of Martian weather systems. In particular, both elements of Tianwen-1 will aim to find evidence of current or past life on Mars.

The third mission that will arrive at the Red Planet will be the NASA Mars 2020 mission, comprising the rover Perseverance and the robot helicopter Ingenuity. Unlike the other two missions, Mars 2020 won’t spend any time in orbit: instead, it will proceed directly to atmospheric entry and delivering its payload to the surface on February 18th, 2021.

The primary goal of Perseverance will be to seek signs of habitable conditions on Mars in the ancient past, and will also search for evidence — or biosignatures — of past microbial life and water. As with Curiosity, the rover is powered by a nuclear “battery”, capable of keeping the rover operating for some 14 years. Based on the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) Curiosity rover, it will be delivered to the surface of Mars in the same manner – using a “skycrane” system.

NASA Mars 2020 Perseverance rover and Ingenuity helicopter. Credit: NASA via the New York Times

Ingenuity, the helicopter will arrive on Mars attached to the underside of the rover. Some time in the first few months after arrival, the rover will deposit it on the surface, and it will then complete around 5 flights over a 30-day period. Fully automated, and lasting up to 3 minutes apiece, these flights will each carry Ingenuity up to 10 metres altitude and a distance of up to 600 metres. The primary aim of the mission is to test the ability of an automated aerial vehicle to support ground operations on Mars, in this case, helping to map the best driving route for the rover as it explores Jezero Crater.

The Moon

While America’s Project Artemis is unlikely to achieve its original goal of returning humans to the surface of the Moon by 2024, the coming years should see a number of significant lunar missions take place in the run-up to an eventual human return to our natural satellite.

In April, NASA will launch  CAPSTONE, the Cis-lunar Autonomous Positioning System Technology Experiment via a commercial electron rocket. A cubesat mission, CAPSTONE is intended to test and verify the calculated orbital stability planned for the Lunar Gateway space station.

In July a privately-funded mission in support of Artemis will deliver 14 NASA- funded science missions and 14 private-sector missions to the surface of the Moon, including a trio of rovers – one from the USA, one from Japan, and a novel mini walking robot from the UK called Asagumo. Originally a contender for the lunar X-Prize, the Peregrine mission has been expanded by NASA to test technologies that may be used in support of Artemis. It will be the first operational flight of United Launch Alliance’s Vulcan rocket.

On October 11th (or thereabouts) the Intuitive Machines 1 (IM-1) mission will  similarly deliver a NASA science payload to the surface of the Moon on the company’s NOVA-C lander.

An artist’s impression of the 3m tall NOVA-C lander on the surface of the Moon. Credit: Intuitive Machines

Launched via a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket, the mission will target a relatively flat area near Vallis Schröteri in the Oceanus Procellarum (Ocean of Storms), where it will operate the package of 5 science systems on behalf of NASA. Overall, NOVA-C is designed to be a highly flexible lander system standing up to 3 metres tall and capable of delivering a wide range of small payloads to the Moon.

The end of the year should also see the first launch of NASA’s massive Space Launch System (SLS) rocket, intended to be the core workhorse for the Artemis programme, as well as offering a potential heavy launch vehicle NASA’s deep space aspirations.

The Artemis-1 mission, currently slated for November 2021, will be the first launch of a the Block 1 variant of the launcher. It will send an uncrewed Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) to the Moon in a 26-day mission that will include 6 days in which the Orion capsule and its service vehicle will be in a retrograde orbit around the Moon, followed by a return to Earth and splashdown. If successful, the mission will pave the wave for a crewed mission around the Moon in 2023.

October will see Russia make a return to with the launch of the Luna 25 (formerly Luna-Glob) lander combination on October 1st, 2021. Directly to land in the Boguslavsky Crater near the lunar south pole, the mission will characterise the nature of the crater floor, including the presences of any sub-surface water ice, and will attempt to obtain samples for on-board analysis.  The mission was renamed “Luna 25” to mark it as a direct continuance of the old Soviet Luna missions, the last of which – Luna 24 – took place in 1976.

India also intends to expand on its lunar presence in 2021 with the launch of its Chandrayaan 3 mission. A proof-of-concept mission, it is designed to deliver a lander and rover directly to the surface of the Moon (no orbiter vehicle will be used), and is a follow-on to India’s Chandrayaan 2, which successfully placed an orbiter of that name about the Moon (which is still operating), but saw a failure with its Vikram lander and Pragyan rover, lost when a software error resulted in them crashing into the Moon, rather than landing on it.

Continue reading “Space Sunday: previewing missions in 2021”

Space Sunday: conjunctions, radio signals and budgets

Jupiter (bottom and brighter) and Saturn as seen between the sails of the post windmill at Brill, Buckinghamshire, UK. Credit: Jim Dyson / Getty Images

Monday, December 21st, the winter solstice, saw Jupiter and Saturn reach their closest point of mutual approach to one another when viewed in our evening skies, in what is referred to as a great conjunction.

I covered the event in some detail in my previous Space Sunday report, noting that 2020 would see the two planets appear to come with 6 arc minutes of one another as they lay low over the south-western horizon in last light following sunset.

Caught via a camera with telephoto lens is Jupiter (l) with the Galilean moons also visible (from top left: Calisto, Io, Europa, and furtherest out, lower right, Ganymede). Saturn, to the right, appears as a distinct oval due to its ring system not being sufficiently resolved by the camera lens. Credit: Peter Jay / Getty Images.

Unfortunately, British weather being what it tends to be, I didn’t get to see things on the night thanks to cloud and rain.  To add insult to injury, the skies were clear just 40 km away, allowing friends to witness the event on the night, while the rain and cloud continued here most of the rest of the week, preventing me from getting a further look at the two planets as they dropped ever closer to the horizon. Ho hum.

Not of this Earth: Jupiter and Saturn with rings visible, as seen on December 21st from lunar orbit in an image captured by NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. Credit: NASA

Fortunately, however, many around the world did have clear skies and captured the event using cameras equipped with telephoto lenses or attached to telescopes. I’ve included a handful of my favourites shots here.

The event was also captured on film by Jason De Freitas, who captured the space between Jupiter and Saturn being neatly “cut” by the passage of the International Space Station.

ET Probably Isn’t Radioing Us

A radio signal detected in a part of the sky that neatly aligns with our closest stellar neighbour,  Proxima Centauri, is unlikely to be of extra-terrestrial origin.

The radio burst was detected in  April-May 2019 by the Parkes Radio Telescope in  Australia, one of two radio telescopes used by the Breakthrough Listen project, which since 2015 has been listening to the one million closest stars to our own in an attempt to pick up artificial radio signals that might indicate extraterrestrial intelligence.

The primary 64-metre radio telescope dish of the Parke observatory, New South Wales. Credit: John Sarkissian

At the time the signal was detected, the telescope was engaged in radio observations of Proxima Cantauri, some 4.2 light years away, and a star known to have two planets orbiting it, one of which – Proxima b – is a rocky world about 1.7 times the size of Earth that sits within the star’s  habitable zone.

Parkes wasn’t listening for radio signals at the time they were picked up, but was engaged in radio observations of flare activity from the star. However, when detected, the signal was immediately intriguing due to its relatively narrow frequency – 982.002Mhz – which ruled out it being caused by known natural phenomena. In order to verify it, the Breakthrough Listen team received permission to “nod” the telescope dish.

This is a common technique used to verify radio signals that involves deliberately swinging the receiving dish away from a signal for a period of time, and then back towards it in order to see if it can be re-acquired (indicating it is not an artefact of the telescope itself), and to measure whether the signal has moved relative to the dish (which would indicate the source is likely in Earth’s orbit). In this case, the signal was reacquired, with measurements suggesting it could be emanating from Proxima b.

When news of the signal, and the on-going analysis to try to determine it’s likely point of origin / cause, was anonymously leaked recently, it was picked up by a number of media outlets and caused something of a stir. However, before ET Hunters get too excited, there are a number of additional facts to consider.

Firstly, it is devoid of any modulation – and so is likely devoid of any meaningful data, were it indeed to by an extra-terrestrial, which makes sending it a little pointless. Secondly, it was entirely transient; following the period of initial detection in April / May 2019, it was “lost”, and has never been re-acquired. Were it a deliberate signal, it would not be unreasonable to expect it to remain fairly constant in terms of detection, either by Parkes or (preferably) other centres around the world.

But the biggest counts against it being ET “‘phoning home” (or at least us), lies with the fact that the signal came from the general direction of Proxima Centauri. As our nearest, and oft-observed stellar neighbour, the star has been under observation for decades, and nary a once have we received anything amounting to an peep out of it that might suggest aliens are playing with radio systems there.

More particularly, however, is the fact that Proxima Centauri is a red dwarf star. As I’ve noted numerous times in these pages, these  M-class stars are prone to exceptionally violent solar flare. Given the close proximity of Proxima b to its star, these flares would likely, at a minimum, be bathed in hard radiation, and at worse, completely rip away the planet’s atmosphere within a period of around 100-200 million years. Therefore, it is highly unlikely the planet really is the point of origin for the signal.

An artist’s impression of Proxima b with Proxima Centauri low on the horizon. The double star above and to the right of it is Alpha Centauri A and B. Credit: ESO

instead, the most likely explanations for the signal are that it might either be something like the carrier wave from a long-forgotten piece of orbital debris of human manufacture or – mostly likely – actually originated on Earth, with conditions in the upper atmosphere serving to “bounce” it into the Parkes Telescope sphere of detection.

The Breakthrough Listen team and their partners certainly lean towards the latter as an explanation, although as noted,  they are still analysing the data gathered on the signal.

This is not a natural phenomenon—I haven’t seen the data, but if it passed BL’s tests then it’s too narrowband to be natural. It’s definitely caused by technology. But it’s almost certainly our own technology.

– Jason Wright, Professor of Astronomy and Astrophysics at Penn State University

Continue reading “Space Sunday: conjunctions, radio signals and budgets”

Space Sunday: Conjunctions, China & the Sun as a telescope

Jupiter and Saturn Great Conjunction” – Jupiter (the brighter object) and Saturn, imaged by astronomer Tom Wildoner on December 8th, 2020. Credit: Tom Wildoner

For those who have not already seen it, the next two weeks present an opportunity to witness a unique event – a very close conjunction between Jupiter and Saturn.

“Conjunction” is the term astronomers used to describe two astronomical objects or spacecraft having either the same right ascension or the same ecliptic longitude, and thus when seen from Earth, appear to be close together.

With the planets, such events are not especially rare – in fact as they and the Earth circle the Sun, conjunctions between Jupiter and Saturn tend to occur once every 20 years. However, most of these only see Jupiter and Saturn close to around one degree of one another, or about one-fifth the diameter of the Moon as seen from Earth. But sometimes they appear to get much closer, creating what is referred to as a “great conjunction”. This year, the two planets will appear to be just 6 arc minutes apart as seen from Earth on December 21st, 2020; so “close” (remembering that their respective orbits around the Sun will still be separated by 883 million km), they will almost, but not quite, appear as a single point of light when seen with the naked eye.

The great conjunction between Jupiter and Saturn,, tracked from October through to December 21st. Credit: Pete Lawrence

These “great conjunctions” occur, on average, once every 300-400 years, although such is the nature of orbital mechanics, they can actually occasionally occur more frequently, or have longer time gaps between them. As it is, the last time Jupiter and Saturn appeared as close as the will be between December 20th and 22nd was in 1623, not long after Galileo had observed both planets – although he was unable to witness the event, as the rising Sun would have rendered them invisible in its glare.

What is most rare is a close conjunction that occurs in our night time sky. I think it’s fair to say that such an event typically may occur just once in any one person’s lifetime, and I think ‘once in my lifetime’ is a pretty good test of whether something merits being labelled as rare or special.

Astronomer David Weintraub

However, the two planets can appear to be much closer. In 1226, and in the skies over the Mongol Empire, when the planets appear to be just 2 arc minutes apart.

Jupiter (again, the brighter object) and Saturn, seen in the sky over the Shenandoah National Park, Virginia, on December 13th, 2020. Credit: Bill Ingalls/NASA

Tracing these great conjunctions back in time reveals that Jupiter and Saturn may well have played a role in the legend of the Star of Bethlehem. In 7 B.C. not one, but three great conjunctions occurred, with the two planets again being within 2 arc minutes of one another as seen from Earth.

The first occurred in May of that year, when Jupiter and Saturn appeared as a morning star over the middle east. As  the Magi were practitioners of (among other things) astronomy and astrology – both at that time pretty much joined at the hip – such an event may well have caused them to start out on their long journey towards Judea, the second conjunction, in September of the year, encouraging them to continue. The third conjunction occurred in December, 7 B.C., the time at which they were said to have met with Herod the Great.

Using Stellarium, open-source astronomy software, it is possible to reproduce how the great conjunctions of the 6th century B.C. might have looked to the Magi, as a wondrous new star, causing them to set out for Judea. Credit: Stellarium

This year’s conjunction will be not long after sunset, with the two planets located low over the south-west horizon. With a reasonable telescope or good pair of binoculars, you’ll have an ideal opportunity to see both planets and their major moons in the same field of view.  Should you do so, you’ll be looking at over 90% of the planetary mass of the entire solar system.

Beyond the 21st, the two planets will gradually move “apart” as noted, until by the 25th December, they’ll be separated in the night sky by roughly the diameter of a full Moon, and will continue to draw apart relative to Earth as they pass below the horizon.

How to see the “great conjunction” of Jupiter an Saturn

And if you miss this close conjunction between the two, the next will be along in a relatively (and unusually) short period, occurring on March 15th 2080. The next time they’ll be as apparently close as they were in 7 B.C. will be on Christmas Day, 2874.

Continue reading “Space Sunday: Conjunctions, China & the Sun as a telescope”

Space Sunday: the flight of SN8 and a round-up

Starship prototype SN8 drops horizontally towards the ground after a flight to 12.5 km altitude, its stability maintained by the fore-and-aft wing flaps. Credit: SpaceX

On Wednesday, December 9th, SpaceX Starship prototype SN8 finally took to the skies in what was to be a very mixed ascent to around 12.5 km altitude and return to Earth.

The much anticipated flight of the prototype vehicle, weighing approximately 672 tonnes with its partial fuel load, was far more successful than SpaceX had anticipated, even if the vehicle was lost in what SpaceX euphemistically calls a “rapid unplanned disassembly” or RUD.

The first attempt at a launch of the 50m tall vehicle was made on Tuesday, December 8th; but this was scrubbed after a pre-flight engine issue caused an automatic shut-down on all three Raptor motors. The second launch attempt, in the morning of Wednesday, December 9th, was aborted just 2 minutes and 6 seconds before engine ignition when a light aircraft strayed into the no-fly zone around the SpaceX facilities in Boca Chica, Texas.

The moment of ignition caught by ground cameras (l) and camera on the hull of the vehicle (top r), and in the engine bay (bottom r). Credit: SpaceX

However, at 16:00 CST (22:00 GMT) that day, the countdown resumed, and at 16:45:26 p.m. CST (22:45:56 GMT), the three Raptor engines on the vehicle ignited and ran up to around 80% thrust, lifting prototype SN8 into the air.

The entire flight was live streamed by SpaceX, with the initial ascent proceeding as anticipated. At 1 minute and 40 seconds into the flight, one of the Raptor engines shut down and gimballed itself away from the remaining two operating motors. 94 second later, a second of the Raptors did the same. At the time, some pundits commenting on the flight speculated the shut-down indicated something was amiss.

The first of the Raptor engines shuts down – a planned part of the flight – as SN8 burns through its partial fuel load, so as to reduce its thrust-to-weight ratio. SpaceX

In actual fact, both engine shut-downs were planned. As the vehicle was flying with around 1/2 its normal fuel load, and getting lighter at the rate of 2.2 tonnes every second, the engines were shut down to reduce SN8’s thrust-to-weight ratio, naturally reducing its rate of ascent.

Even so, SN8 continued upwards under the thrust of the one remaining Raptor – Number 42, the latest and most modern Raptor engine evolution, with the vehicle’s reaction control system (RCS) firing thrusters around its hull in order to stay upright, until it reached a point where it was effectively hovering.

The moment of tip-over: SN8’s Raptor 42, assisted by the vehicle’s RCS thrusters, starts to tip the vehicle over into an horizontal orientation. Credit: SpaceX

What happened next was one of the two most incredible sights witnessed in the testing of a space vehicle: as SN8 started to drop vertically backwards, Raptor 42 gimballed to direct its thrust at an angle, working with the RCS system to tip the entire vehicle over until it was falling more-or-less horizontally. At this point, the fore and aft flaps came into their own, working in tandem to hold the vehicle steady, much like a skydiver uses their arms and legs to maintain stability.

This skydive / bellyflop (as some unkindly refer to it) is how a Starship will make a return from orbit. Dropping into the atmosphere with the fore and aft flaps folded back against the hull to minimise their exposure to the fictional heat of atmospheric  entry, an operational starship will be protected by heat shield tiles along its underside, after which the flaps fold out, acting as air brakes to slow the vehicle’s velocity as well as keeping it stable.

SN8 in its skydive mode (l) with exterior cameras (r) showing the forward (top) and aft (bottom) flaps in action. Credit: SpaceX

Dropping back through the atmosphere for almost two minutes, SN8 then completed the second most incredible sight seen in the testing of a spacecraft when, six minutes after launch, two of the Raptor motors re-ignited, using fuel from two small “header” tanks. These, coupled with the vehicle’s RCS tipped SN8 back to an upright position just 200 metres above ground.

The idea had been for the vehicle to then descend tail-first over the landing pad, deploy its landing feet and touch-down. However, it was at this point things went wrong. With just tens of metres to go, one of the two operating engines shut down. For several seconds, the remaining engine fought to maintain vehicle stability, its exhaust plume turning bright green. Seconds later, its landing legs having failed to deploy, SN8 slammed into the landing pad and exploded in the RUD SpaceX thought might occur at some point in the flight.

The unusual green exhaust plume of the single remaining Raptor motor is clearly visible as SN8 almost overshoots the landing pad, and the failed deployment of the landing legs is visible in the image of vehicle. Three second later, the vehicle hit the landing pad and exploded. Credit: SpaceX

Initial analysis of data from the flight suggests that the header tanks suffered a pressurisation issue that prevented them pushing sufficient fuel into the two Raptor engines, causing one to shut down completely. The green plume from the second motor is thought to be one of two things: either that a) as the motor was so starved of fuel, it started consuming itself, material inside its turbopumps turning the exhaust green; or that b) as one engine shut-down unexpectedly, the second started gimballing wildly to try an maintain the vehicle’s orientation, and in doing so, smashed its engine bell into the other motor, exposing its copper cooling circuits, which caught fire and turned the exhaust plume green.

Continue reading “Space Sunday: the flight of SN8 and a round-up”