23

While this seems lightly ill conceived, it actually makes sense. Super Heavy is going to be very large, as these things go. 70m tall, 9m wide, and while not very dense, still quite heavy. Not very easy to move around. The plan is to land close by to make moving it back to the launch pad easier. Original plan was notionally to land back on the launch ...


18

Why have two separate sites for launch and landing, instead of consolidating them at one site? The plan was to have one site for both launch and landing. The Challenger disaster resulted in a change of plans. Edwards AFB was one of the test locations of the Shuttle program. The test flights with the prototype Enterprise were performed here. But since ...


13

There are two possible answers to this, although you probably won't like either of them. Answer 1: They don't. Falcon 9 only lands on prepared landing sites and Starship doesn't exist yet. Answer 2: We don't know. Falcon 9 will never land on non-prepared landing sites and Starship iterates so fast that it is impossible to predict what it will look like in 4 ...


10

I am not aware of an optical telescope capable of showing proof from earth. Part of the reason is the flags are pretty small and it's a very long distance. However, you can see the flags or what is left of them and the landing sites using images from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO). The LRO was able to use it's camera to document all of the Apollo ...


9

TL, DR: Olivine is a specific type of mafic or ultra-mafic mineral that is specifically identified in some parts of the overall mafic floor of the crater. The olivine is seen in specific areas of which the indicated "olivine-bearing floor" is most prominent. Mafic: More than just olivine In mineralogical terms, "mafic" is a more ...


9

After carefully cross-referencing the landing ellipse picture with this topographic map provided by ESA, it looks like the cliffs in the center of the ellipse are about 50 meters tall, and no more than 100 meters.


8

Edwards already existed, so using that for landing saves you the cost of constructing something else. Moving the shuttle back to Florida after landing cost a lot of money and time. With sufficient flight rate, you recoup the cost of a closer landing facility. History of the Shuttle Landing Facility states Landing the orbiter at KSC’s Shuttle Landing ...


5

Falcon 9 likely could land on a somewhat uneven surface because its leg-base is rather wide and the legs contain one-time-use crush-able aluminum honeycomb impact absorbers. Still, this surface would need to be rather hard and flat to avoid being excavated by the landing engine's exhaust plume and the massive weight of F9 sinking it into the ground too much. ...


5

A first look at: Moon Landings on Moon Map shows: beside Apollo 12 and Surveyor 3 there is just one candiate: Apollo 11. Apollo 11 is near Surveyor 5 and Ranger 8. Have a quick google check for S5: Less than two years later the first crewed landing, Apollo 11, would land 25 km south-southwest of Surveyor 5. Source Wikipedia Surveyor 5 And for R8: This ...


4

Credit: NASA/JPL/University of Arizona/USGS Click on the image, and then again for a closer view. The image above is a part from HiRISE,Digital Terrain Models and shows a colored elevation map of the eastern part of the delta deposit. (Purple is -2679 m, brown is -2388 m, so a full-scale elevation difference of about 300 m.) I would say the shaded, south ...


4

Here they are, from the letter summarizing the results of the 2015 workshop: The ancient habitable environment column sounds like what you're looking for.


1

The reason why the landing pad is so close to the launchpad is for SpaceX to be able to launch rockets as frequently as possible. In the announcement of Starship and Superheavy, we see that SpaceX is planning to launch a rocket more than once in a day as they are planning to create an Interplanetary transport system. For this purpose, the landing pad has to ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible