totm nov 2023 SpaceX Discussion Thread

[tater]

 

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

1 hour ago, Beccab said:

Probably a little less than an airline with a comparable amount of passengers

Disagree 

Entitled people gonna act entitled. 

[tater]

1 minute ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Disagree 

Entitled people gonna act entitled. 

Expressing your displeasure by saying you'll never fly this airline again is entirely reasonable, that's exactly how a person expresses such displeasure with a business—by not patronizing them in future.

Jerry Springer style conflict, OTOH... yeah, I don't see that as terribly likely.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

19 minutes ago, tater said:

Jerry Springer style conflict

Everest used to be a place where only the most experienced climbers would be found.  Then, people started making a profit by taking green people up there for the green in their pockets. 

Bad things happen to stupid people - and stupid people get other people in trouble. 

Space will be no different. 

[tater]

1 hour ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Everest used to be a place where only the most experienced climbers would be found.  Then, people started making a profit by taking green people up there for the green in their pockets. 

Bad things happen to stupid people - and stupid people get other people in trouble. 

Space will be no different. 

Gottagetthereitis is always gonna be a problem. In the case of people who shouldn’t be on Everest being on Everest, the thing is they are often not really rich enough. If you save for a once in a lifetime thing and they say, “dude, you need to go down, this isn’t happening for you this year” you’d feel a lot of internal pressure to summit anyway. If you could do it again next year, money/time is no issue? Sure, better luck next time.

If it gets to the point where there is “go” pressure on the provider I think it’s a problem.

[AHHans]

16 hours ago, tater said:

Gottagetthereitis is always gonna be a problem. In the case of people who shouldn’t be on Everest being on Everest, the thing is they are often not really rich enough. If you save for a once in a lifetime thing and they say, “dude, you need to go down, this isn’t happening for you this year” you’d feel a lot of internal pressure to summit anyway. If you could do it again next year, money/time is no issue? Sure, better luck next time.

I think you are right, which may be good luck for the space tourism industry: once you are in the Everest base-camp the cost for the organizer has already occurred. They cannot just take another tourist up to the summit, so they are unlikely to refund any of the payment. If they organize well then this go/no-go point for space tourism will be much later. I don't see a major reason why they shouldn't be able to swap out passengers a few hours before they close the hatch on the capsule.

[cubinator]

3 hours ago, AHHans said:

I think you are right, which may be good luck for the space tourism industry: once you are in the Everest base-camp the cost for the organizer has already occurred. They cannot just take another tourist up to the summit, so they are unlikely to refund any of the payment. If they organize well then this go/no-go point for space tourism will be much later. I don't see a major reason why they shouldn't be able to swap out passengers a few hours before they close the hatch on the capsule.

Standby tickets to Mars sounds way, WAY worse than on airlines.

[magnemoe]

7 minutes ago, cubinator said:

Standby tickets to Mars sounds way, WAY worse than on airlines.

Don't think its very relevant for mars but might be relevant for shorter tourist trips, and if you don't get your seat you get to watch the launch  

This get me thinking if the inspiration 4 flight had ended with an abort would they get an second flight for that they paid? 
How does this work for commercial crew launches and the Soyuz launch who ended up having to abort? 
Yes if an satellite launch end in an launch fail 

[cubinator]

3 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

Don't think its very relevant for mars but might be relevant for shorter tourist trips, and if you don't get your seat you get to watch the launch  

I suppose so. But by the time that's relevant maybe most people will just be getting sick of the noise, all novelty lost.

[tater]

36 minutes ago, cubinator said:

Standby tickets to Mars sounds way, WAY worse than on airlines.

And when you get there you have to eat your fellow passengers to survive.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

1 hour ago, tater said:

And when you get there you have to eat your fellow passengers to survive.

If they televise it, ala "Hunger Games" it will pay for itself in the first season.

[tater]

 

 

[magnemoe]

1 hour ago, tater said:

 

 

Feel like that the center of the claw is wrong,  I would want the SH to fly into the claw while at the same time an fail would not hit the pad or tower, say it comes from left in the image not bottom left. 
Now the vector of booster velocity is pretty much vertical this would work. 

[tater]

Hires version of the vid posted earlier:

 

Wonder if BO will change their ad copy claiming the largest windows to have flown in space?

I suppose they can claim the largest window area of any capsule (sum of windows).

[tater]

 

[Beccab]

Also, closure has just been cancelled

[AtomicTech]

14 hours ago, tater said:

Hires version of the vid posted earlier:

 

Wonder if BO will change their ad copy claiming the largest windows to have flown in space?

I suppose they can claim the largest window area of any capsule (sum of windows).

[Beccab]

B4 needs to be removed before the chopsticks are installed due to concerns of the possibility of the chopsticks hitting the booster during the lift

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

I'm a little torn watching SX's progress these last few months since SN-15s landing. 

On the one hand SX has proven the ability to to vertically land heavy class rockets - but on the other, BFR has never flown. 

My conservative side suggests they'd be better off testing its flight characteristics and their ability to to control the rocket in a landing situation with either a wet landing or another pad landing - despite the certainty that it will be a crash at the end. 

Yet everything I see suggests they're full speed ahead on the 'catch a rocket' plan. 

So while they have demonstrated the ability to do amazing things - they're set up to try two firsts at the same time. 

I worry about the prudence of this - because if BFR goes sideways during the final moments - there's a lot of expensive stuff nearby that is at risk. 

Wonder what the bookies are saying about the odds of success in the first BFR flight and catch scenario... 

[Deddly]

18 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Yet everything I see suggests they're full speed ahead on the 'catch a rocket' plan. 

Did they cancel the almost-orbit-dump-in-the-sea plans? I thought they were just developing the catching system for future use, but you seem to be saying they're planning on using it for SN20?

[Beccab]

2 minutes ago, Deddly said:

Did they cancel the almost-orbit-dump-in-the-sea plans? I thought they were just developing the catching system for future use, but you seem to be saying they're planning on using it for SN20?

That's the plan, B5 or B6 are currently scheduled to be the first ones to be caught. They are definitely mounting the chopsticks/mechazilla/catching arms before S20 launch though

[tater]

27 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

I'm a little torn watching SX's progress these last few months since SN-15s landing. 

On the one hand SX has proven the ability to to vertically land heavy class rockets - but on the other, BFR has never flown. 

My conservative side suggests they'd be better off testing its flight characteristics and their ability to to control the rocket in a landing situation with either a wet landing or another pad landing - despite the certainty that it will be a crash at the end. 

Yet everything I see suggests they're full speed ahead on the 'catch a rocket' plan. 

So while they have demonstrated the ability to do amazing things - they're set up to try two firsts at the same time. 

I worry about the prudence of this - because if BFR goes sideways during the final moments - there's a lot of expensive stuff nearby that is at risk. 

Wonder what the bookies are saying about the odds of success in the first BFR flight and catch scenario... 

They are building the pad infrastructure while they wait for permission to fly. They are not planning on catching B4, nor could they likely even hope for permission to do so.

They need to first demonstrate a pinpoint landing at sea, and they need to validate their landing software such that they are confident in the accuracy required. If B4 is outside of required accuracy by some amount, they likely try water again until they are confident they won't wreck their ground equipment.

[tater]

 

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

1 hour ago, tater said:

 

They need to first demonstrate a pinpoint landing at sea, and they need to validate their landing software such that they are confident in the accuracy required. If B4 is outside of required accuracy by some amount, they likely try water again until they are confident they won't wreck their ground equipment

That seems the prudent course. 

 

Color me relieved. 

So is the Environmental Review the current holdup or something else contributing?  (because to me it looks like they're only waiting for the tower work) 

[tater]

23 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

So is the Environmental Review the current holdup or something else contributing?  (because to me it looks like they're only waiting for the tower work) 

They are waiting on the FAA at this point I think, but also the GSE obviously needs to be in place to tank up the whole stack (with whatever reserves are required for launch recycles, etc).

If they actually are at a point to try a catch with the next booster... that would be pretty amazing progress, I think B4/SN20 would need to have the B4 part go flawlessly, and even then, I'd think they'd need to convince the FAA it was OK.