DerekL1963

It's not. There's a reason why Pegasus is one of the most expensive launchers per kg. Mostly phasing because the "launch pad" can be at a precise spot at a precise time. (Why this is a major benefit is beyond me.) You can also launch to an arbitrary inclination w/o having to dogleg. Don't shoot the messenger, I'm just repeating what they've said over the years.

From the KSC twitter feed: And looking at the tide cycle and the storm surge reports, they probably dodged that bullet.

They're not chasing speed or altitude. They're chasing the theoretical benefit of not being tied to a range and of various orbital insertion parameters that come from not being tied to a fixed launch pad. Given that Pegasus has reached orbit a number of times from a L-1011, I don't see any reason to doubt it will do so from Stratolaunch.

It's just after 5AM EDT - and according to Weather Underground there's a 3 ft storm surge at Cape Canaveral, but it's currently low tide. High tides currently are running +3 from low tide... so it'll get higher for the next couple of hours until the eye passes the Cape. I can't get a good read on the wind...

Still plugging away on the workups for my Jool-5 challenge run. - Continuing the dress rehearsal, started to set up for the landing on Val when I discovered I was running short of the LF for the T/TV. Since I'd just designed an orbital tug, this was the perfect time to test it! Hyperedited in into Jool orbit with a Jumbo-64 (orange tank) on it's nose and sent it to dock with the mothership... Only to find it didn't have enough monoprop or torque, which was fixed with a quick trip to the VAB and then followed with a successful docking. Still need to update the design of my core vehicle though. LFO for the landers is looking good, mono a bit dicey. Only two moons to go! As always, more details in the thread linked in my sig. The orbital tug in refuelling mode.

Update 10/072016 - Pondered my orbital assembly process, tested a booster for the core. - Designed an orbital tug to support assembly and fueling in Kerbin orbit. It's big enough to ferry the core and the landers. The booster units and the T/TV will self ferry. The plan is to launch the core and landers with only oxidizer on board to save weight, and that way I also only have to design my refueling system around lifting fuel. - Continuing the dress rehearsal, started to set up for the landing on Val when I discovered I was running short of the LF for the T/TV. Since I'd just designed an orbital tug, this was the perfect time to test it! Hyperedited in into Jool orbit with a Jumbo-64 (orange tank) on it's nose and sent it to dock with the mothership... Only to find it didn't have enough monoprop or torque, which was fixed with a quick trip to the VAB and then followed with a successful docking. Still need to update the design of my core vehicle though. LFO for the landers is looking good, mono a bit dicey. - Only two moons to go! In some ways... the dress rehearsal and this incremental design procedure is a massive PITA. In others, it's lead to simpler and more straightforward designs. Slow and steady wins the race. The orbital tug in refueling mode.

0.o Why would SpaceX make an effort to recruit spacecraft experts for the colony - when those are exactly the kind of expert not needed by the colony? And it doesn't matter what kinds of skills or incentives offered - after any significant span of doing everything but spacecraft maintenance, they aren't going to be much good at the job. This isn't shade tree mechanic stuff, it's a collection of highly specialized skills and knowledge . Since nobody is talking about sending a disposable lander for each mission, I'm not at all sure what orifice you pulled that straw man from. Your scheme increases the number of (Earth) launches, cruise phases, Mars orbital insertions, landings, ascents, docking, cargo handling, fuel transfer, etc... It increases the overall complexity by a significant margin. That changes the risk equations, almost certainly for the worse, as sure as the sun is going to rise tomorrow. It's just as simple as that. There's more to engineering than just adding up the dollar signs. 0.o Yes, because we're the same people we were in the Age of Sail. We all grew up in cramped homes and cramped cities. or as peasants on the farm we wanted to get the heck away from, and... Oh. wait. We're not the same people. We don't have the same experiences or social backgrounds. The past is an empirical proof of what happened in the past. No more, no less.

"Low" is not nonexistent. And when you start talking hundreds or thousands of dockings - even low risks start to loom large. When you're planning a program, you have to consider such things. You can't simply handwave away real problems that don't cast your plan in a positive light. 0.o Progress M-34 caused serious damage. Not that what did or did not happen in the past is in any way relevant.

They're not saying it *will* loop, they're saying it *might* loop - though that's unlikely. Either way, it's so far in the future (Sun-Tues) that the models are unreliable.

The larger lander isn't used once - it's used multiple times over it's lifetime. You fail to mention the risk inherent in docking. (Despite having it pointed out to you previously.) Your lander could either significantly damage the ITS itself, or damage the ITS docking system such that any remaining people/cargo are stranded aboard.

It's a few hours old now, but what KSC/CCAFS could face: https://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/once-again-a-cat-4-storm-potentially-disastrous-matthew-rolls-toward- FL Space Coast (including Melbourne and the Kennedy Space Center) This is the most likely area to experience the highest winds from Matthew (see Figure 3 above) with Daytona Beach at high risk. The wind threat is especially serious at Cape Canaveral, which juts out into the Atlantic about 10-15 miles. If Matthew does make landfall along the Florida coast, this would be the most likely spot for it. Billions of dollars of facilities and equipment are at risk at Kennedy Space Center and nearby bases, which have never before experienced a major hurricane. Some of KSC’s older facilities were designed only to withstand Category 2 or 3 winds, while facilities built after Hurricane Andrew (1992) are designed to withstand Category 4 or 5 storms. Storm surge could reach 7 to 11 feet over the barrier islands of Volusia and Brevard counties. Matthew is likely to traverse the Space Coast during the overnight hours Thursday.

Simplicity has an efficiency all it's own... I suspect his engineers have done the necessary trade studies and arrived at the same conclusion.

First, it's not a strawman - it's a very real concern for real world equipment. In the real world, stuff breaks and wears out. And you've repeatedly massively downplayed the downsides (when you have haven't ignored them entirely), for example, not only have you not addressed maintenance at all, now you're trying to handwave away the concern. You're also handwaving away the greatly increased programmatic risk associated with increasing the number of launches (from Earth), and increased handling and operations (such as rendezvous and docking) out at Mars. All you've discussed is budgets - real world engineering about more than just saving money. No, I don't. And neither do you. The difference between our approaches is that I'm actually looking at other complex vehicles meant to last decades and/or operate in extreme environments (not just the Shuttle, but ships, and civilian and military aircraft) and making a few reasoned extrapolations. I'm looking at the logistics involved. You're simply assuming that it won't be a problem at all. 0.o Since the colony has precisely zero need of specialists in space technology - why would there be a collection there of the most knowledgeable people? And if they've spent their time working on colony engineering, their skills and knowledge about spacecraft engineering will be rusty, and they've probably never been spacecraft maintenance technicians to start with. (That's an important distinction few grasp because we're in the habit of misusing the term engineer - there's two specialties involved.) And there's more involved than just people - there's also all the required support equipment and spare parts. Precisely none of which makes any sense to duplicate [the terrestrial facilities] and send to Mars. Um, no. KSP abstracts most issues and doesn't even cover/address many more. Most importantly, it doesn't encourage the study of tradeoffs - it encourages "MOAR BOOSTERS AND MOAR STRUTS". (Mostly because it's a game first, and space simulator a distant second.) A prime example is how often LV-N's are used, even in career mode - because they're not all that expensive, and the KSP player doesn't have to deal with all the issues that real world engineers do. They just click on the LV-N in the VAB parts menu and drop it into place. There's no tradeoffs between fuels, it's all just LF. Etc... etc... And what Elon himself knows or does is irrelevant - he's the ideas guy, the bankroll, and the very public face. He isn't an engineer - he pays engineers to do all the heavy lifting while he faces the press with Powerpoints and pithy quips on Twitter. (Gwynne Shotwell and her staff does all the heavy lifting on day-to-day ops at SpaceX.) And he's had engineers working on this (as the quote a few pages back on cyclers showed) for a number of years now. We're almost certainly at the same place Apollo was once they settled on LOR - many details will change between now and then, but it's very doubtful the architecture will change materially.

http://www.snopes.com/2016/10/05/hurricane-matthew-loop-scenario-is-not-very-likely/ That's speculation from a limited number of people, widely spread on the 'net (and sadly picked up on and repeated by irresponsible major media out for sensation) and thus giving a false impression of being authoritative. It's possible but (so far as we know at the moment) not probable. Right now, it's just way too early to make reliable predictions beyond the next twenty four hours or so. https://www.wunderground.com/hurricane/atlantic/2016/Hurricane-Matthew Notice how the potential error in the storm's position grows as the time from the prediction increases. I'm hoping it stays on the current track and stays offshore - I've got friends and family all along the coast from Miami to the Outer Banks.

http://www.floridatoday.com/story/weather/hurricanes/2016/10/05/ksc-closing-1-pm-today-matthew-approaches/91602312/ KSC/CCAFS has gone to Hurricane Condition 1 - everything battened down and the base and facilities closed except for the rideout crew.

There's downsides as well as benefits. You can't only look at one side of the equation. Quoted for truth and because most people doing back-of-used-bar-napkin calculations leave servicing out of their equations. This isn't like changing the oil in your car, or dropping it off at the dealers in the morning and then after the magic happens off camera while you're at work, picking it up all shiny and new. They'll require corrective maintenance, anything from swapping out a card in the computer or the pilot's touchscreen all the way to swapping out an entire engine because a valve or other component failed. They'll also need regular test, inspection, and preventative maintenance - inspection of the seals on the hatches, swapping out limited life components, replacing engines which are about to exceed their operating lifetime, etc... If the vehicles are intended to operate for years, they'll need logistics support and regular maintenance. Until the infrastructure is in place (establishing which will be an enormous endeavor, even in LEO), the best place to put your maintenance depot is at 1G right here on terra firma.

Quiet night tonight... after a week of working on the Jool 5, it was time to take a night mostly off and watch some anime. Did manage some design and test work on my new mothership concept, which is so far working gangbusters. Details in the Mission Reports thread linked in my sig for those interested.

Update 10/05/2016 Quiet evening tonight, after a week of working on this a good part of each day and practically every evening it was time to take a light night and watch some anime. Still, I got a few things done. - Designed and tested a lifter for the part of the new mothership design I was most worried about launching, and tested it's ability to dock. - Tested the full mothership+boosters+landers+tug assembly on Kerbin orbit, both dynamically (how much torque to change attitude in a reasonable time, ability to fly stably during burns, doesn't wobble all over creation) and thermally (a simulated trans Jool insertion burn to ensure it doesn't blow up). After that, a quick jaunt to Minmus from LKO verified that it flew straight and normal. I'm pretty pleased, on orbit ready to depart for Jool it's 200-odd parts. No lag or framerate problems. All but a dozen or so parts are stock or modified stock (I.E. using Modular Fuel Tanks to make LF tanks from stock LFO tanks). The whole thing breaks down into six parts for on-orbit assembly. (It's going to take a metric buttload of fueling trips though.) At a hair over 4k m/s of d/V it's got performance to spare. - My VAB directory and subassemblies list was full of old and obsolete designs, half built designs, experimental designs, test fixtures, etc... So I cleaned both out of anything not pertinent to the current revision.

Has anyone recently told you you're insane?

Asparagus for me... The radials are dumped shortly after liftoff on Tylo, then the core does the other three. The refueling tug also serves as the return vessel.

Having been about as close to having BTDT as you can get without going into space (making patrols on an SSBN), you cannot even begin to imagine how much difference a good meal (especially if it contains fresh stuff) is for morale. (And we lived out of the freezer and cans, far better and more familiar than the freeze dried stuff, so this effect will likely be amplified on Mars.) Spending a few tens of tons early on towards this will unquestionably provide long term benefits.

Yesterday's activities posted this morning because once again I was so tired last night. - Tackled the next difficult moon, dropping deep into Jool's gravity well to land on Laythe. The margins are tight, but the run was successful. Two (the most difficult two) moons down, three to go. - Overall, the fuel situation is starting to look a little dicey. The rules allow one refuelling mission if you run out, but I'd like to save that for unexpected contingencies - planning on running out of fuel is against the spirit of the challenge. - I also found a booster design with performance to spare, so enlarging the mothership to increase the amount of fuel available *shouldn't* be a problem. (Famous last words.) Sorry for no pictures at this stage, but I'm saving the "cool" shots for the actual Jool 5 run.

Update 10/04/2016 Sorry for no pictures at this stage, but I'm saving the "cool" shots for the actual run. - Tackled the next difficult moon, dropping deep into Jool's gravity well to land on Laythe. After several rounds of F9, found a set of ascent settings in MJ that reached orbit without tumbling head-over-heels, it may not be the most optimal profile but it is 8% better than my best handflown trajectory. The T/TV sucked the Laythe lander dry of LFO and monoprop and after leaving the lander in orbit headed back to the mothership arriving with less than 150 m/s of d/V onboard. May have to 'borrow' some of the capacity of the transfer tanks to add a little margin. - Overall, the fuel situation is starting to look a little dicey, so I may have to increase the size of the mothership a bit. But, that's why I'm running the dress rehearsal, to find these things out. The rules allow one refuelling mission if you run out, but I'd like to save that for unexpected contingencies - planning on running out of fuel is against the spirit of the challenge. - I also found a booster design with performance to spare, so enlarging the mothership *shouldn't* be a problem. (Famous last words.)

I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to assume the type of person that would volunteer/pay to become a pioneer-colonist won't fit comfortably in the category of "many" (or "most") people.

Implications and assumptions are not facts. My trouble is that people are confusing not-facts with facts and treating not-facts as facts. (And then insisting that I am somehow in the wrong for pointing out the difference - two plus two does equal five if you assume things that aren't in the text!)