DAL59 Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 (edited) Page 500! 5 minutes ago, tater said: No money at all is being used to develop crew landers for Mars or the Moon. So you can't really say @Kerbal7 that NASA will get to Mars anytime soon if they are spending $0 on lander development. You can have doubts about SpaceX, but they are at least putting money towards Mars capable crafts. Edited November 29, 2018 by DAL59 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 30 minutes ago, DAL59 said: Page 500! So you can't really say @Kerbal7 that NASA will get to Mars anytime soon if they are spending $0 on lander development. You can have doubts about SpaceX, but they are at least putting money towards Mars capable crafts. They're working on BFR. Mars capable is another issue entirely, the short term use for it is Starlink launches. I'll buy Mars landing when I see it, there are many issues that are no where near operational TRLs for SpaceX Mars missions (ISRU, for example, since their vehicle design requires that capability). I fully expect BFR to fly. Mars? LOL, get back to me after it goes to the Moon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAL59 Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 Just now, tater said: LOL, get back to me after it goes to the Moon. Sadly, NASA isn't spending any money on landing on the moon, despite last week's announcement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barzon Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 10 minutes ago, tater said: Mars capable is another issue entirely But atleast they are trying to make it Mars capable. Because like @DAL59 said, NASA is not spending any money on actual crew vehicles with a possible chance of them going to Mars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrandedonEarth Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 My biggest question for manned BFR is where do they plan on getting the ECLSS from? Building their own from scratch or using NASA’s design for the unit developed for the ISS? For that matter, where did they get the unit for Crew Dragon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 11 minutes ago, Barzon Kerman said: But atleast they are trying to make it Mars capable. Because like @DAL59 said, NASA is not spending any money on actual crew vehicles with a possible chance of them going to Mars. They're trying to make a reusable LV right now. Mars is another use case they have, but they need to get to orbit first (and back, and reuse it). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 33 minutes ago, DAL59 said: Sadly, NASA isn't spending any money on landing on the moon, despite last week's announcement. They just announced a spate of future contractors to do just that. If all you want to land is a Kerbal. And no bringing him back. But Kerbals are used to that, after all. He can wait for the BFR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceception Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 30 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said: My biggest question for manned BFR is where do they plan on getting the ECLSS from? Building their own from scratch or using NASA’s design for the unit developed for the ISS? For that matter, where did they get the unit for Crew Dragon? Yeah, that's a question I posted a while back as well. There should be a SpaceX AMA where this gets answered by Elon Musk and the engineers. Maybe even Gwynne Shotwell can get in on it. Because they can't give them a bunch of MREs and air scrubbers and call it a day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 22 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said: They just announced a spate of future contractors to do just that. If all you want to land is a Kerbal. And no bringing him back. But Kerbals are used to that, after all. He can wait for the BFR. With the exception of LockMart (and perhaps Masten, given their XEUS proposal), we're talking about little landers, not crew. Still, it's something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 40 minutes ago, tater said: With the exception of LockMart (and perhaps Masten, given their XEUS proposal), we're talking about little landers, not crew. Still, it's something. Moon Express can land 150kg on the Moon. A Kerbal is 94kg. Moon Express could land a Kerbal on the Moon. neither item actually exists except in renders, but point stands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerbal7 Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 2 hours ago, tater said: No money at all is being used to develop crew landers for Mars or the Moon. Nov.29,2018 NASA Announces New Partnerships for Commercial Lunar Payload Delivery Services. SpaceX is not on the list of companies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 4 minutes ago, Kerbal7 said: Nov.29,2018 NASA Announces New Partnerships for Commercial Lunar Payload Delivery Services. SpaceX is not on the list of companies. This is peanuts, and for tiny landers, not crew, nothing even close to the size of the LEM. SLS/Orion is for crew. NASA has zero budget for a crew lander, there's not even money available on the distant horizon (maybe after ISS is dead, so look for funding to start in what, 2029?). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 The only lander (aside from Falcon 9, stage 1) that SpaceX is actively working on is 9m in diameter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Sierra Nevada all threw in bids for this, BTW. Presumably NASA is looking to broaden the field of commercial outfits that can possibly provide this service, but there is also politics going on here (it's the government, there's always politics). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatGuyWithALongUsername Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 53 minutes ago, Kerbal7 said: SpaceX is not on the list of companies. This statement is completely meaningless for 4 completely different reasons: SpaceX doesn't need money from NASA- they are, by all appearances, already profitable. For exra money, they're deeloping a satellite internet constellation, and they have recently acquired a $250M loan. ELoon probably hass some more money to put in later anyway. Except for Lockheed Martin, all of the companies they've announced partnerships with are smaller, less established companies. NASA is already indirectly funding SpaceX's ambitions through the commercial cargo/crew programs. These are all small unmanned landers, not 9-meter crewed interplanetary... things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted November 29, 2018 Share Posted November 29, 2018 12 minutes ago, tater said: SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Sierra Nevada all threw in bids for this, BTW. Presumably NASA is looking to broaden the field of commercial outfits that can possibly provide this service, but there is also politics going on here (it's the government, there's always politics). SpaceX already has enough government money from CRS and Commercial Crew. It also doesn’t really fit their roadmap, with BFS eventually replacing everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted November 30, 2018 Share Posted November 30, 2018 1 hour ago, sh1pman said: SpaceX already has enough government money from CRS and Commercial Crew. It also doesn’t really fit their roadmap, with BFS eventually replacing everything. They did put in a bid, apparently. Unsure what for, it might have been more ambitious than this round is for. They already have COTS and CCDev money, so... Blue Origin is more surprising, because NS is basically a lunar lander if you think about it. Hydrolox engine, etc. Make a different form factor and it's good to go. They might assume that Bezos will simply build it anyway (and too gradatim, sadly). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted November 30, 2018 Share Posted November 30, 2018 9 minutes ago, tater said: They did put in a bid, apparently. Unsure what for, it might have been more ambitious than this round is for. They already have COTS and CCDev money, so... No idea what they’d do with the money. Build BFR faster? Do some R&D on in situ prop production from water ice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted November 30, 2018 Share Posted November 30, 2018 Yeah, no idea. They have enough on their plate, anyway. A small lander would be a distraction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted November 30, 2018 Share Posted November 30, 2018 A reality check for people. It's possible to believe multiple things at once, and it's also possible to believe that some things can happen for a given system, and others might not happen. I think that reuse is a good idea, and is the only way in the long term to reduce cost to space, and have any hope of creating any sort of infrastructure there. I think BFR is a good idea. Bigger is better with rockets, and I think it can likely operate cheaper than expendables that are a fraction the size (this is true of any large, operationally reusable spacecraft). I also think that P2P is very unlikely, and that colonial trips to Mars are insane. I think exploring Mars with people is reasonable, but I don't think that that is super likely any time soon, either. The choice is not: drink the SpaceX Koolaid 100%, or hate SpaceX 100%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted November 30, 2018 Share Posted November 30, 2018 (edited) I don't hate SpaceX at least because its projects are KSP steroids. But I have a strong feeling of another Excalibur Almaz and Mars One. (Btw the first one was owning a tested hardware.) Edited November 30, 2018 by kerbiloid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted November 30, 2018 Share Posted November 30, 2018 42 minutes ago, kerbiloid said: But I have a strong feeling of another Excalibur Almaz and Mars One. I don't see this at all. I know little of the first one, but Mars One is a scam. They have no hardware, they don't even have a good plan. SpaceX is a going concern. They went from nothing to being a, perhaps the major commercial launch player. If you are talking merely about Mars... that's really not a thing for a long time, honestly. The first single flight (no crew) is going to cost a fortune, just on the expended vehicle (maybe one that is already paid for via multiple flights?). I could see it offset with experiments (paid for by government programs). The nice thing there is that given the mass/volume available, they can spam it with cheap, clunky experiments, they all don't need to be New Horizons level "everything is perfect" things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted November 30, 2018 Share Posted November 30, 2018 (edited) I mostly mean any of their manned flights beyond LEO. Edited November 30, 2018 by kerbiloid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted November 30, 2018 Share Posted November 30, 2018 3 hours ago, tater said: The choice is not: drink the SpaceX Koolaid 100%, or hate SpaceX 100%. Me: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSK Posted November 30, 2018 Share Posted November 30, 2018 3 hours ago, tater said: The choice is not: drink the SpaceX Koolaid 100%, or hate SpaceX 100%. Replace ‘SpaceX’ by ‘something’ and this should come as a friendly warning on every piece of consumer electronics capable of running a web browser. The internet would be a much nicer place for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.