totm nov 2023 SpaceX Discussion Thread

[IncongruousGoat]

13 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

IIRC they're going to build a crew tower next to the pad just like ULA. Easier to do when you're only occasionally using that pad for Dragon and FH. I would assume the TEL will function the same, the tower will just be there for crew access and (maybe eventually) for vertical integration of gov't payloads...

The tower is already there, since this is pad 39-A we're talking about. So they only need to add the crew gantry.

[Ultimate Steve]

15 hours ago, TheEpicSquared said:

 

*engage thought pricess*

Six stars... star... six-pointed star... Judaism... Israel... Spacecom... Amos... Amos-6......

Zuma is the replacement for Amos-6! 

It all makes sense now... 

This is the second attempt at the launch of Amos-6.

6/2 = 3.

And we know what three means.

No, it's not the illuminati.

There are three leaves on a clover, down from SpaceX's four leaf clover patches.

"Jeff" is four letters. "Who" is three letters. Put the two clovers together and you get 4 and 3. 4+3 = confirmed.

43 was a number I associated with a person.

Jeff Who and that person are working together to make me give up on my dreams (she sort of has done that already) of going to orbital space so they can hire me as a pilot of their New Shepard suborbital rocket.

But that would only make sense if they had a viable method of making sure Elon didn't own the suborbital launch market, especially with BFR suborbital flights.

*GASP*

Falocn Heavy is always 6 months away. BFR is always 6 years away. Zuma is 6 days away. AMOS 6 happened 12 months ago. 12 is 2*6.

JEFF WHO OWNS A TIME MACHINE!!!

And Zuma must be the codename for it!

Nobody at SpaceX knows what Zuma was as it was locked inside the payload bay of the third X-37 which is what SpaceX is actually launching.

Jeff conspired with Boeing and LockMart to launch the X-37 with Zuma inside to the interstellar asteroid (which is actually a monolith from 2001) in order to gather the power to prevent the universe by 6 billion years because that would not be norminal.

However a separatist movement infiltrated SpaceX and began developing reusable fairings. They implanted a defect in the Zuma fairings to prevent it from launching in time to reach the asteroid!

ELON = 4.

JEFF = 4.

ZUMA = 4.

AMOS = 4.

4 IS INFINITE. 5 is 4. 3 is 5 is 4. 9 is 4. 12 is 6 is 3 is 5 is 4 IS INFINITE.

JEFF IS ELON'S EVIL TWIN. Jeff had Zuma as a pet and Elon had Amos as a pet.

And Mike is the deranged triplet. MIKE = 4.

Mike the flat Earther who is launching himself on a steam rocket to prove the shape of the Earth.

But that's five fours! 5 =/= 4!

Which means that the Earth is not a sphere! It is 4.5 dimensions, because that's the average of 4 and 5. Length, Width, Depth, Nzetch, and Time.

Time is 0.5 dimensions, that is why it can be manipulated by Elon, Jeff, and Mike's time machines because it is broken and incomplete.

But

John Insprucker to the rescue!

JOHN = 4. NORMINAL = 8, but that doesn't matter.

And I said four was infinite.

And that's where Divergent comes in.

FOUR = 4.

7 4's. 7 episodes of Star Wars. Where the force (4's) will awaken.

7 is one more than 6, which is the number of infinity stones in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

The average is 6.5. 6.5-amos 6 = 0.5.

0.5 dimension = time.

TIME = four.

Don't you see? The time stone from the MCU was split into FOUR pieces, only one of which is actually still in the MCU.

The other three pieces are in the time machines. The one for Amos was recovered and used in ZUMA. The second belongs to Mike who seeks to prove a 4.5 dimensional Earth.

And the third piece?

Zuma is going to launch on December 15, 2017, the same day Star Wars: The Last Jedi comes out.

How do I know?

The last Time Stone fragment is in Luke Skywalker's lightsaber.

Which travelled in time to a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.

And on December 15, there will be 8 Star Wars films. The average is now 7 (8 movies and 6 stones). That means, now 7 minus Amos-6 is 1. ON DECEMBER 15, Time will become 1 instead of 0.5. The four fragments of the time stone will recombine and Jeff Who will launch Zuma as a latch ditch attempt to control time but it will be defeated by Han Solo who is definitely not dead flying a Millenium Falcon strapped to a Falcon 9 resulting in a RUD similar to Amos-6, but invisible so it will not impact cadence.

With time now 1 and not 0.5, it cannot be manipulated.

Which is why Falcon Heavy will not by 6 months away anymore, it is finally free to launch and usher in a new era of space exploration.

And Falcon Heavy has three cores.

HALF LIFE 3 CONFIRMED AS THE PAYLOAD FOR FALCON HEAVY FLIGHT ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

Wait, this is the KSP forum, not /r/spacexmasterrace...

[CatastrophicFailure]

I think someone had a liiiiiiitle too much turkey today...

[Ultimate Steve]

10 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

I think someone had a liiiiiiitle too much turkey today...

Nah, I just wrote that a liiiiiiittle too far past midnight.

[softweir]

Hey guys, this is getting oh so very far off topic! Perhaps let's get back to talking about SpaceX?

[StrandedonEarth]

Is this more on topic?

[DAL59]

 

On 11/24/2017 at 1:04 AM, Ultimate Steve said:

And Falcon Heavy has three cores.

HALF LIFE 3 CONFIRMED AS THE PAYLOAD FOR FALCON HEAVY FLIGHT ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If it has three cores, maybe it should be Portal 3 

More on topic, what do you think about Starlink?  Maybe Zuma's a Starlink test?

Edited November 26, 2017 by DAL59

[Ultimate Steve]

5 minutes ago, DAL59 said:

If it has three cores, maybe it should be Portal 3 

Imagine if Portal 3 and Half Life 3 were the same game.

6 minutes ago, DAL59 said:

More on topic, what do you think about Starlink?  Maybe Zuma's a Starlink test?

Unless they're lying, Zuma was built by a different company (either LockMart or Northrup Grumman), so probably not StarLink. The two StarLink demo sats are already scheduled for a flight a few months down the line. I think it could be a real moneymaker for SpaceX, though (unless someone gets their constellation into orbit first), especially in rural areas.

[DAL59]

Unlike Tesla and Spacex, which haven't eliminated their competitors, Starlink might decimate every wifi and cellular data company.

[CatastrophicFailure]

19 minutes ago, DAL59 said:

Unlike Tesla and Spacex, which haven't eliminated their competitors, Starlink might decimate every wifi and cellular data company.

OTOH, it might help break the big telcom’s monopoly on internet service. I’m looking forward to it, beyond finally being able to “contribute” to SpaceX, I’m in one of those areas with limited internet options; its either the big national cable provider (which is meh, and goes down any time a storm brings down lines), or the local phone company (which sucks in every way but reliability). I’d love a satellite connection that’s competitively priced, stupid-fast, and works as long as I have power (generator and eventually solar for emergencies, when I’ll really need internet too). 

If there’s two or three options just for that, that’ll be awesome!

[kerbiloid]

Starlink... I heard this somewhere before...
Yes! You can connect to Starlink right now.

(Founded in 2002, renamed to Starlink in 2007).

So, SpaceX is going to support Moscow internet provider?

[magnemoe]

4 hours ago, DAL59 said:

Unlike Tesla and Spacex, which haven't eliminated their competitors, Starlink might decimate every wifi and cellular data company.

No, starlink is limited as in it give an fixed bandwidth to an area independent on population, Yes this is simplified  I guess they can forcus on areas but this would still be an limited effect say 3x the bandwidth over us east cost over the Atlantic.
So it will rule all lower population areas but not work well in cities, still it cover half the population and its an part who is expensive to cower well using standard broadband systems. 
It will also be wifi only not cellphone. If they make an version 2.0 using BFR that one can easy change
 

 

[Nibb31]

8 hours ago, DAL59 said:

Unlike Tesla and Spacex, which haven't eliminated their competitors, Starlink might decimate every wifi and cellular data company.

And cell phone companies are going to sit there and die without reacting?

First of all, we have no idea what terminals "Starlink" is going to use. They certainly won't be cell-phone sized, because antenna size is dictated by physics and everything points to different frequencies bands being used. At best, these terminals will be set top boxes that will replace DSL and cable boxes, and upcoming 5G boxes. That's if they decide to go for the consumer market.

Secondly, aiming at consumers is a huge endeavour. There is no telecom corporation that is currently big enough to cater to a global consumer market. That simply requires enormous resources, with legal, fiscal, political, and cultural implications. You would need customer support services and marketing in every market dealing with hundreds of languages. You need to keep up with national regulations and authorities in every country, as well as deal with the competition. The investment is huge and the return on investment is far from guaranteed.

Third, traditional telecom corporations are huge, with a large customer base, hefty margins, established infrastructure, thousands of employees, and strong lobbying power. Before they die, they can afford to slash prices and to force regulations that will kill Starlink. If Starlink goes face to face against them, it will be a losing battle. They will be pushed into the same niche that satellite broadband has always been in: a relatively small market share that caters to remote locations, third world countries, and maybe cruise ships and airliners.

 

[kerbiloid]

Spoiler

Unless it will stay inveStarlink.

 

[magnemoe]

3 hours ago, Nibb31 said:

And cell phone companies are going to sit there and die without reacting?

First of all, we have no idea what terminals "Starlink" is going to use. They certainly won't be cell-phone sized, because antenna size is dictated by physics and everything points to different frequencies bands being used. At best, these terminals will be set top boxes that will replace DSL and cable boxes, and upcoming 5G boxes. That's if they decide to go for the consumer market.

Secondly, aiming at consumers is a huge endeavour. There is no telecom corporation that is currently big enough to cater to a global consumer market. That simply requires enormous resources, with legal, fiscal, political, and cultural implications. You would need customer support services and marketing in every market dealing with hundreds of languages. You need to keep up with national regulations and authorities in every country, as well as deal with the competition. The investment is huge and the return on investment is far from guaranteed.

Third, traditional telecom corporations are huge, with a large customer base, hefty margins, established infrastructure, thousands of employees, and strong lobbying power. Before they die, they can afford to slash prices and to force regulations that will kill Starlink. If Starlink goes face to face against them, it will be a losing battle. They will be pushed into the same niche that satellite broadband has always been in: a relatively small market share that caters to remote locations, third world countries, and maybe cruise ships and airliners.

 

It will not work with mobile phones, you will need an modem, like normal broadband. Mobile phones would require an different scale of satellites.
Broadband unlike cell phones is light regulated, main issue is frequencies to use, not sure about rules for satellites here. However this will not use parabolic antennas so no ideas about rules. 
Because of bandwidth limit of a satellite its not very suitable for cities, traditional telecom don't like rural areas as its expensive to provide, they still like towns a lot. 
Still the ISP marked is pretty flexible as it is

[DAL59]

9 hours ago, magnemoe said:

It will not work with mobile phones

Are you sure?  If it did, goodbye to all the cell towers.  

19 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Starlink... I heard this somewhere before...
Yes! You can connect to Starlink right now.

(Founded in 2002, renamed to Starlink in 2007).

So, SpaceX is going to support Moscow internet provider?

The alternative would be naming it Skynet...

Anyway, the BFR could launch a gigantic satellite that might be big enough for use with smartphones.  

[tater]

10 minutes ago, DAL59 said:

Are you sure?  If it did, goodbye to all the cell towers.  

The alternative would be naming it Skynet...

Anyway, the BFR could launch a gigantic satellite that might be big enough for use with smartphones.  

Communications are 2-way, you realize.

Broadcasting a powerful signal to many small antennas is one thing. Receiving weak signals from many small antennas is another.

[DAL59]

How large would a geostationary dish need to be to stream 4k video from an Earth cell phone?  

[magnemoe]

2 hours ago, DAL59 said:

How large would a geostationary dish need to be to stream 4k video from an Earth cell phone?  

Make it hd and LEO, for realism. Note that you could probably do some tricks with advanced antennas as in phased array but this will be hard on an phone as orientation might be bad and it can change all the time. 

[Nibb31]

6 hours ago, DAL59 said:

How large would a geostationary dish need to be to stream 4k video from an Earth cell phone?  

It would depend on the frequency band, the power, and the antenna on the cell phone. There is no way the signal from a modern cell phone could reach a 36000km orbit without frying your brain.

Signal power decreases with the square of distance. Higher frequencies provide more bandwidth but are shorter range and prone to atmospheric loss.

Edited November 27, 2017 by Nibb31

[sh1pman]

25 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

It would depend on the frequency band, the power, and the antenna on the cell phone. There is no way the signal from a modern cell phone could reach a 36000km orbit without frying your brain.

Signal power decreases with the square of distance. Higher frequencies provide more bandwidth but are shorter range and prone to atmospheric loss.

I think that average cell phone antenna will struggle even with LEO sats. Not to mention the battery usage. It will probably drain the battery in minutes, or melt the casing, whichever happens first.

[Nibb31]

3 minutes ago, sh1pman said:

I think that average cell phone antenna will struggle even with LEO sats. Not to mention the battery usage. It will probably drain the battery in minutes, or melt the casing, whichever happens first.

Of course, any new radio-technology requires new terminals to go with it. You need 4G phone for 4G, a 5G terminal for 5G, and you'll need a specific terminal for whatever "Starlink" is going to offer.

My hunch is that they won't be going after the consumer market. As I said, it would be a losing battle. If they are smart, they will try to partner with the telecom industry, either as a backhaul operator, or to use their established distribution and support channels. In exchange, the telecom industry will only accept that if it means more profit for them, so either they reduce their operating costs, or they keep the same margins.

[DAL59]

2 hours ago, sh1pman said:

3 hours ago, Nibb31 said:

It would depend on the frequency band, the power, and the antenna on the cell phone. There is no way the signal from a modern cell phone could reach a 36000km orbit without frying your brain.

Signal power decreases with the square of distance. Higher frequencies provide more bandwidth but are shorter range and prone to atmospheric loss.

I think that average cell phone antenna will struggle even with LEO sats.

Actually, we know phones could pick up satellites(GPS). Also, couldn't inferonometry between giant dishes in GEO help to pick up iphones better?  

[sh1pman]

21 minutes ago, DAL59 said:

Actually, we know phones could pick up satellites(GPS).

Ahem... Why do you need a high and powerful radio tower to broadcast a signal, but only a small antenna to receive it? Same with GPS. Your phone can receive a GPS signal, but in order to transmit anything back to satellite you're gonna need a much bigger antenna. Kinda like those on sat phones. 

 

[tater]

1 hour ago, DAL59 said:

Actually, we know phones could pick up satellites(GPS). Also, couldn't inferonometry between giant dishes in GEO help to pick up iphones better?  

Read my reply above again.

GPS is a relatively powerful radio broadcasting to a tiny antenna. There is no return signal from the phone.