Toggle light / dark theme

The space between the planets in our solar system is filled with a wispy sea of charged particles that flow out from the Sun’s atmosphere. This particle population is augmented by cosmic rays — speedy protons and atomic nuclei accelerated in extreme environments across the universe — which ebb and flow against the 11-year solar activity cycle. This undulating particle background is punctuated by bursts of high-energy particles from the Sun, which can be unleashed suddenly in violent solar storms.

Spacecraft that venture out from the protection of Earth’s magnetic field must navigate this ocean of particles and weather solar storms. And if we someday wish to send astronauts to other planets, we’ll need to know how high-energy solar particles, which pose a risk to the health of astronauts and electronic systems alike, travel through the solar system.

In a new publication, a team led by Shuai Fu (Macau University of Science and Technology), Zheyi Ding (China University of Geosciences), and Yongjie Zhang (Chinese Academy of Sciences) studied the high-energy solar particles produced in an event in November 2020, when the Sun emitted a solar flare and a massive explosion of solar plasma called a coronal mass ejection.

Booster 7 and Ship 24 both conducted two spin prime tests, Ship 25 was welded in the High Bay, and the Chopsticks were raised.

Video and Pictures from Mary (@BocaChicaGal), Nic (@NicAnsuini), and the NSF Robots.
Edited by Patrick Colquhoun(@Patrick_Colqu).

All content copyright to NSF. Not to be used elsewhere without explicit permission from NSF.

Click “Join” for access to early fast turnaround clips, exclusive discord access with the NSF team, etc — to support the channel.

Rolling Updates and Discussion: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?board=72.

Articles: https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/?s=Starship.

Head to https://www.squarespace.com/marcushouse to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code MARCUSHOUSE

This week unlike the last has been super busy with launch activity. SpaceX Starship Updates and 20 Engine Static Fire for Booster, Atlas V, Electron, Falcon 9 and NS-22. We have multiple flyovers of both SpaceX’s Starbases in Texas and Florida, and wow are we seeing huge work done. Strap in, because there is a lot to cover today.

My mid-week video — Does NASA & SpaceX’s Plan with Artemis Make Sense?
https://youtu.be/bQWy27ucskw.

BPS.space / Joe Barnard — I Landed A Rocket Like SpaceX

Join the mailing list to be notified when I release a video.
https://marcushouse.space/email-list.

👕Like this shirt? Pick it up on any product you like here.

New video I released today.


The space launch system is very expensive, and may cost $4.1 billion per launch. And according to the current NASA plan it can only be launched once per year at best.

That’s not enough to sustain a Moon bases.

In this video we will explore a suggestion to launch additional Moon missions without relying on the Spaces Launch system and Orion, while using existing components or components that are already required by the Airtimes program.

#booktube #authortube #writingtube #SpaceX #NASA #moon.

The material of the future could make an imaginative concept of the past real.


Brief history of the space elevator

Like most time-honored revolutionary ideas for space exploration, the space elevator can be traced to Russian/Soviet rocket scientist Konstantin Tsiolkovsky (1857−1935). Considered to be the top contender for the title of the “Father of Rocketry” (the other two being Hermann Oberth and Robert Goddard), Tsiolokovsky is responsible for developing the “Rocket Equation” and the design from which most modern rockets are derived. In his more adventurous musings, he proposed how humanity could build rotating Pinwheel Stations in space and a space elevator.

This proposal was inspired by his visit to Paris in 1,895, where he witnessed the Eiffel Tower for the first time (construction had finished in 1889). From this encounter, Tsiolkovsky conceived of a structure that reached to geostationary orbit (GSO), or an altitude of 36,000 km (22,370 mi). However, Tsiolkovsky’s version of the idea called for a compression structure rather than a suspension one. He also noted that the idea was unrealistic since no known material was strong enough to support the weight of the standing structure.