Jump to content

SpaceX Discussion Thread


Skylon

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, YNM said:

Rubbish. If they really want they can just get yet another TDRS or something.

But do they ever get a mission to full-up in 4 years ? Or would they will to extend launch-waiting for a mission by some time, up to 4 years ? They didn't even know when will Falcon Heavy flies.

They were not thinking about a "real" NASA mission---anything expensive, that required planning. Think off the shelf stuff they could get together in a year. Cubesats of scientific value, etc. Not flagship missions, or even lesser, expensive missions. A few instruments on the payload adapter with a solar panel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DAL59 said:

Or have astronauts to begin with.  Remember, EM-2 will take place after SpaceX lands humans on Mars.

If they land humans on Mars before EM-2, I'll fly to LA, cut through the fence with some tools, and eat the F9 booster they have out front at SpaceX HQ.

The probability of this scenario is zero. Not low, not highly improbable, but zero. Seriously.

1 hour ago, DAL59 said:

Manned. 

Manned spaceflight is a stunt. It;s a cool stunt, and I love watching it, but it's a stunt.

The single most important thng flown by NASA so far (or humankind, frankly) is the Hubble Space Telescope.

Most space probes come even before the totality of the Apollo program in scientific importance.

Manned spaceflight is the least impressive thing NASA does---except to the masses of people who watch the kinds of TV shows I know exist, but cannot even name (since I don;t watch them).

Edited by tater
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, tater said:

If they land humans on Mars before EM-2, I'll fly to LA, cut through the fence with some tools, and eat the F9 booster they have out front at SpaceX HQ.

The probability of this scenario is zero. Not low, not highly improbable, but zero. Seriously.

You may wind up eating Falcon 9, Tater.

Congress might find a scrap of integrity and cancel EM-2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DAL59 said:

Who launched on Russian rockets...

... To a US-supported-paid-made-launched-maintained space station.

Cheer up !

12 minutes ago, tater said:

Think off the shelf stuff they could get together in a year. Cubesats of scientific value, etc. Not flagship missions, or even lesser, expensive missions. A few instruments on the payload adapter with a solar panel.

She wasn't there anymore (no-one to sound it again), we're not sure whether SpaceX kept it open after the offer declined, the funding is questioned (needs adapters as well), and did they definitely knew on Feb 6, 2017 that Falcon Heavy will launch off the pads a year again ?

Edited by YNM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@YNM, I'm talking cubesat level. NASA must have excess flight article hardware just lying around. Backups for things that flew, etc. Stick to a bus, attach to PFA, free science. If they had accepted years ago, then they'd have the cheap-o payload just lying around. Get interns to build the thing.

Just now, YNM said:

You might want a hammer instead.

I think it's chain link at Hawthorne. :D

I won;t have to, SpaceX will not land humans on Mars before the scheduled EM-2 flight, even if it slips.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@tater Well, they definitely didn't accepted it as a corporate entity.

She can be jealous but history's passed away already.

As I've said, NASA is not having missions out of mid-life crisis.

Edited by YNM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, YNM said:

As I've said, NASA is not having missions out of mid-life crisis.

It's not mid life crisis, it's the ability to be agile, and take advantage of opportunities.

Many LV now go to space with a lot of excess capacity. Test rockets, otherwise empty will also provide such opportunity. While no business would want to put a billion dollar comsat on a rocket that the CEO says will likely explode, they might well put a tiny testbed on if the cost were zero.

Moving forward, NASA should consider this for a few reasons:

1. Their partners in COTS and commercial crew would likely be happy to offer excess capacity, as they honestly owe NASA a lot.

2. There will be more opportunities possibly, and they should not waste them. CHEAP payloads that would not otherwise get to fly, ever, for example. Small form factors that can be bolted to anything. NG will fly a test at some point. That's a big fairing to waste. Whta's cheap and large to test? Ditto BFS.

Think stuff you can turn grad students and interns loose on, not even million dollar probes. Thousands. Off the shelf parts. Heck, use the offer for educational outreach. SpaceX offered NASA, not random universities or high schools. NASA could take submissions from universities, then say "deliver it in a year to these specs, and we'll stick a NASA sticker on it next to your university sticker, and bolt it to FH."

1 minute ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

You’ve already put quite a bit of planning into something you just said was absolutely not going to happen.  :wink:

Just had to check, because I did street view there before, and I thought it was chain link. It's a steel fence like my neighbors have around their pool. It's not even sharp on top. Has vines on it, so I thought it was chain link. It's much shorter than chain link usually is, too.

Edited by tater
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, tater said:

Think stuff you can turn grad students and interns loose on, not even million dollar probes.

I wonder whether such stuff can be launched alone (so going straight to the shipping company) or can be launched "via" NASA (like an interim package company of sorts), but I guess SpaceX wasn't loud enough in telling "send me your probes and we'll flung it to Mars, for free ! " then. I guess interests could be coming off persons, unis or schools instead - wasn't this forum had a crazy talk of sending 3U cubesat to Deimos ?

Although, we all saw where they coasted it in, would the cubesats survived the exposure ?

Edited by YNM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even just NASA-enabled edu projects to further younger kid interest in STEM. Look at the Tesla. It was a huge thing I think for public interest, simply because it was a "real" object that people have experience with, and even has a person doppelganger in it. People who were unaware that I showed were pretty interested in the car in space.

Interest never hurts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah...

I guess they didn't care back then (remember that those offer have to happen in 2009-2013, you know how early that is) and they can't care enough today (it's all "over" for govt agencies, waay too close, they're shutting down again now right ?).

Anyway, let's stop bickering on a rocket launch a few cubesat short.

 

I heard that FH is not going to be man-rated and the man is going to jump straight to BFR. I presume the lunar free-return trajectory tourist flight is going to be canceled ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

They can't land a stage right into a pipe on a trailer, can they?

Upd. Or into the entrance of SILO.

Thunderbirds or You Only Live Twice ?

I think if Musk has a "private BFR" it has to be Thunderbird 3.

Edited by YNM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

I suspect this is the heart of it. You can do risk mitigation by analysis or by testing. If testing is more expensive than analysis, then a company will try to do it by analysis. But if testing is relatively inexpensive and the company doesn't have decades of experience doing it by analysis, they may decide that it's cheaper to just do it by testing.

This add that they will be launching many falcon 9 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, it looks like they got confirmation of booster destruction, but immediately after a "but don't say anything!!"...and then you can kind of see them backpedal and try to hide their emotions.

As for the free ride on the Falcon, would have been a perfect opportunity to test that Cannae drive and put the whole thing to bed. Most of the arguments against doing just that seemed to be of the "putting it in space is too expensive" variety.

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...