Jump to content

SpaceX Discussion Thread


Skylon

Recommended Posts

Just now, Kerbal7 said:

How can you disagree? The United States and Soviet Union could have put a car into orbit in 1961. Seventy years ago. It's easy to put a car into orbit.

Could they recover the boosters though?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kerbal7 said:

How can you disagree? The United States and Soviet Union could have put a car into orbit in 1961. Seventy years ago. It's easy to put a car into orbit.

But they couldn't have put a Tesla in orbit. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kerbal7 said:

How can you disagree? The United States and Soviet Union could have put a car into orbit in 1961. Seventy years ago. It's easy to put a car into orbit.

OK, first, I was born in 1962... and I'm only 55, not 70!!!  :mad:

Second, I already said I'm not going to argue... please don't try to draw me into one.

Edited by Just Jim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SupperRobin6394 said:

Rip the center core, I guess?

 

Outside of whatever happened to the core, the launch was awesome.

Don't reckon I'll be able to sleep until I know...

It's either gonna be fine and just a tech glitch, or it tipped/drifted (like when it ran out of hydraulic fuel) on landing, I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kerbal7 said:

How can you disagree? The United States and Soviet Union could have put a car into orbit in 1961. Seventy years ago. It's easy to put a car into orbit.

The argument was that it's prohibitively expensive to go to Mars ourselves. The argument here is that it's prohibitively expensive to frivolously send a car to space. They could, but didn't, because nobody would pay for it. We could, but we don't, because it's too expensive to just do that. Except that we did.

Going to Mars is an engineering problem, just like putting a car in space is. It's just a matter of getting someone to pony up the cash.

Edited by Camacha
Link to comment
Share on other sites

YYYYYYEEEEEEEE HHHAAAAAAWWWW!!!

 

Here's what I posted on FB before the launch:

 

the Falcon Heavy needs to do one of two things to make me happy.

1. Either launch beautifully and succeed, making me pass out in the process, or

2. Blow up in a fiery inferno in the most badass way possible.

#godspeedfalconheavy
#pleasedontblowup

 

 

AND IT DID NUMBER ONE!!! WOOO HOO!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Camacha said:

The argument was that it's prohibitively expensive to go to Mars ourselves. The argument here is that it's prohibitively expensive to frivolously send a car to space. We could, but we don't, because it's too expensive to just do that. Except that we did.

Going to Mars is an engineering problem, just like putting a car in space is. It's just a matter of getting someone to pony up the cash.

And i doubt that cash will be made by selling Niche Cars. Solar Panels maybe, but i wouldn't be too sure.

Edited by Canopus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

Odd that they didn’t come back to stream that part..l

Popping a cold one live on air, whilst thoroughly deserved, would probably get them some bad press. :) 

Getting (more) goosebumps at that 'attempt final burn for Mars'!

Oh - and apparently (depends how much you trust Reddit), there was a slight overthrust on the core and it missed the barge. Only by 20 feet though. Good news on both counts I reckon - intact barge and something that sounds eminently fixable for next time!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Camacha said:

Be careful not to take my quote out of context. I just pointed to the fact the public is paying for Musk's other projects, so stating he isn't rich enough to go to Mars and that the taxpayer won't pay to make it happen doesn't seem to be accurate. Musk seems to be very good at getting funds for his projects.

I'm not criticizing it, which people seem to think.

Gotcha, that was not at all clear (that you were discussing his total wealth relative to his claimed task at hand).

That said, I think that BFR is a game changer if they get it working, which is something that they tend to do. Full reuse is the solution to so many issues. BFR is the logical next vehicle, too, just as a replacement for F9 in  a world that will soon have NG, and whatever Bezo also comes up with---and he's legitimately, insanely rich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, apart from the essential modifications to the Tesla (adding a copy of the guide and a towel) what other modifications were made to it. Obviously some mounting points added, but what I'm getting at is, if you got the car back on the ground (an in an atmo), how much would it take to get it running again? Just fuel it up, or did they do other things that would make that harder ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Camacha said:

Going to Mars is an engineering problem, just like putting a car in space is. It's just a matter of getting someone to pony up the cash.

It's also a will problem. The need to persevere over a long time in the face of challenges and setbacks is something better suited to a nongovernmental entity in the current political climate.

Mr. Musk has shown a great deal of will in this arena.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not about the car and the starman mkay guys, its about Falcon Heavy. The Tesla was just a little funny unnecessary gizmo. Everyone knows that the SU or US could've done the same thing in the 60s. And i hope everyone knows neither the SU or US could have succesfully landed 2 reused boosters in the 60s, because that's bassicly what its all about.

Edited by NSEP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Canopus said:

And i doubt that cash will be made by selling Novelty Cars. Solar Panels maybe, but i wouldn't be too sure.

You're still missing the point. We have a guy insisting we go to Mars, and with a proven ability to fund his projects with personal and public money. Nobody is claiming he's going to pay for a trip to Mars with the Tesla profits. That was never the intended approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...