SPACE - random thread about space stuff

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Sat May 30, 2020 3:51 pm

$iljanus wrote:Had to switch from the NASA YouTube channel due to a Trump propagandist fawning over his master. Don't know if he was the NASA administrator but it was a bit much

He is, and despite the bootlicking being strong, I like him overall. Bridenstine's done a great job keeping the gears turning.

$iljanus · Post by **$iljanus** » Sat May 30, 2020 4:01 pm

Zaxxon wrote:
$iljanus wrote:Had to switch from the NASA YouTube channel due to a Trump propagandist fawning over his master. Don't know if he was the NASA administrator but it was a bit much
He is, and despite the bootlicking being strong, I like him overall. Bridenstine's done a great job keeping the gears turning.

Best for him not to anger the Cheeto in Chief in order for the real work to get done.

Lassr · Post by **Lassr** » Sat May 30, 2020 4:08 pm

$iljanus wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 4:01 pm
Zaxxon wrote:
$iljanus wrote:Had to switch from the NASA YouTube channel due to a Trump propagandist fawning over his master. Don't know if he was the NASA administrator but it was a bit much
He is, and despite the bootlicking being strong, I like him overall. Bridenstine's done a great job keeping the gears turning.
Best for him not to anger the Cheeto in Chief in order for the real work to get done.

A lot of us at NASA were very leery when he came on board, he was anti-science, anti global warming senator but when he came on board and saw the studies and science at NASA he changed his tune and he's done a pretty good job.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sat May 30, 2020 4:13 pm

Zaxxon wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 3:51 pm
$iljanus wrote:Had to switch from the NASA YouTube channel due to a Trump propagandist fawning over his master. Don't know if he was the NASA administrator but it was a bit much
He is, and despite the bootlicking being strong, I like him overall. Bridenstine's done a great job keeping the gears turning.

Yes he has. When he was named for the job Democrats feared he'd be another partisan hack, but he rose to the occasion (despite working for the world's most fickle "boss") and is well-respected all around. Of course trump will try to cover himself in glory, and of course Bridenstine can only play along.

I was surprised that the launch wasn't scrubbed. Went downstairs and turned on my slow-ass TV and managed to find the right channel just 20 seconds before launch. I'm relieved that everything went perfectly -- America needs all the wins it can get these days -- but I couldn't work up the same excitement I felt when NASA achieved the same thing almost 60 years ago. We have Gemini technology again, yay! Yes, I know why it's more complicated than that...but when the commentator said "we'll all remember forever where we were on this historic occasion" he got an eyeroll from me.

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Sat May 30, 2020 4:15 pm

Remind me again how many times Gemini landed and relaunched.

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Sat May 30, 2020 4:25 pm

Again, the cost is the major advancement here, and it's absolutely unprecedented.

jztemple2 · Post by **jztemple2** » Sat May 30, 2020 4:30 pm

True, but then the Crew Dragon on Falcon could have never done the Galileo launch mission or the four Hubble servicing missions. Comparing payload weights doesn't even begin to explore all of the Shuttle's capabilities for EVA, retrieving satellites (and early on, launching them) plus being able to carry its own science lab.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Sat May 30, 2020 4:31 pm

I feel like if the money was no object and they'd kept the pace of the 60s going then we'd have a permanent moon base by now and maybe even routine trips to Mars. There would already be manufacturing on the moon and most likely Mars missions would start from the moon.

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Sat May 30, 2020 4:35 pm

jztemple2 wrote:True, but then the Crew Dragon on Falcon could have never done the Galileo orbital insertion mission or the four servicing missions. Comparing payload weights doesn't even begin to explore all of the Shuttle's capabilities for EVA, retrieving satellites (and early on, launching them) plus being able to carry its own science lab.

Indeed, and yet here we are. Everyone else is still 'competing' at huge cost/launch, meanwhile SpaceX has Falcon Heavy ready to go and Starship coming.

Not too far off from Tesla, where there's 'competition,' but not really.

jztemple2 · Post by **jztemple2** » Sat May 30, 2020 4:35 pm

The crew are taking their suits off... NO PEEKING!

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Sat May 30, 2020 4:36 pm

jztemple2 wrote:The crew are taking their suits off... NO PEEKING!

A little quick to be getting so cozy up there, eh?

jztemple2 · Post by **jztemple2** » Sat May 30, 2020 4:41 pm

Zaxxon wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 4:35 pm
jztemple2 wrote:True, but then the Crew Dragon on Falcon could have never done the Galileo orbital insertion mission or the four servicing missions. Comparing payload weights doesn't even begin to explore all of the Shuttle's capabilities for EVA, retrieving satellites (and early on, launching them) plus being able to carry its own science lab.
Indeed, and yet here we are. Everyone else is still 'competing' at huge cost/launch, meanwhile SpaceX has Falcon Heavy ready to go and Starship coming.

More like "Starship coming apart" (drum snap!)

Falcon is a pretty conservative design, not stuck in the past, but also not taking many risks. Starship on the other hand is really pushing the envelope for materials, engines, fuels, missions, etc. Time will tell whether Starship can succeed and more importantly, who is going to pay for it.

jztemple2 · Post by **jztemple2** » Sat May 30, 2020 4:43 pm

Zaxxon wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 4:36 pm
jztemple2 wrote:The crew are taking their suits off... NO PEEKING!
A little quick to be getting so cozy up there, eh?

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Sat May 30, 2020 4:43 pm

Again, how many other rocket designs are routinely landing and relaunching? How is this not a major advance? What other rocket now or at any time in the past has a payload capacity near F9 at similar cost?

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sat May 30, 2020 4:54 pm

Daehawk wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 4:31 pm I feel like if the money was no object and they'd kept the pace of the 60s going then we'd have a permanent moon base by now and maybe even routine trips to Mars. There would already be manufacturing on the moon and most likely Mars missions would start from the moon.

That was a space RACE, though.

Since then it's been more about communications satellites (and also some very very impressive space astronomy). Most of the gains are on the phones in our pockets, so we don't notice them as space technology.

Depending on the state of the world, Western space progress might get a jump-start when China finally lands someone on the moon.

jztemple2 · Post by **jztemple2** » Sat May 30, 2020 5:01 pm

Zaxxon wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 4:43 pm Again, how many other rocket designs are routinely landing and relaunching? How is this not a major advance? What other rocket now or at any time in the past has a payload capacity near F9 at similar cost?

If this is directed towards me, I'm not disagreeing that landing and relaunching the booster isn't a game changer for cost and efficiency and a major advancement. And yup, the payload capacity for the F9 is amazing at the cost they charge. My point is that Falcon doesn't add new capabilities, its appeal is providing a launch service at a much lower cost.

Now the Falcon Heavy does provide a way to lift an amazing payload weight. The problem is that there are few customers for it. Miniaturization has so reduced the size and mass of payloads that there are few customers that need so much lift capability. I believe that Musk himself has identified the Falcon Heavy as only a placeholder until Starship is operational.

jztemple2 · Post by **jztemple2** » Sat May 30, 2020 5:04 pm

Holman wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 4:54 pm Depending on the state of the world, Western space progress might get a jump-start when China finally lands someone on the moon.

God I hope not. There is no reason I can think of for the government to spend billions of tax dollars to go to the moon. SLS is a boondoggle to get votes. Now if private concerns want to go to the Moon or Mars, have at it.

$iljanus · Post by **$iljanus** » Sat May 30, 2020 5:45 pm

I keep tuning in to NASA TV for some in flight video but the Toddler is hogging the airtime.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sat May 30, 2020 5:52 pm

jztemple2 wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 5:01 pm
Zaxxon wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 4:43 pm Again, how many other rocket designs are routinely landing and relaunching? How is this not a major advance? What other rocket now or at any time in the past has a payload capacity near F9 at similar cost?
If this is directed towards me, I'm not disagreeing that landing and relaunching the booster isn't a game changer for cost and efficiency and a major advancement. And yup, the payload capacity for the F9 is amazing at the cost they charge. My point is that Falcon doesn't add new capabilities, its appeal is providing a launch service at a much lower cost.

Now the Falcon Heavy does provide a way to lift an amazing payload weight. The problem is that there are few customers for it. Miniaturization has so reduced the size and mass of payloads that there are few customers that need so much lift capability. I believe that Musk himself has identified the Falcon Heavy as only a placeholder until Starship is operational.

That's what I meant by comparing today's launch to Gemini. Sure, the tech has advanced impressively -- I scoffed when SpaceX announced that it was going to land and reuse boosters -- but putting two astronauts in LEO was a lot more exciting in 1965.

Don't get me wrong, I give props to SpaceX and don't doubt that it's going to usher in a new era of crewed spaceflight, and today was a beautiful milestone on the way to that future. Meanwhile, NASA is struggling to recreate the Saturn V, and while SLS will be an impressive machine, it's a dead end because it's so ruinously expensive ($2B per launch is a conservative estimate). I won't be surprised if Starship is operational before Artemis ever flies, and almost certainly before it flies twice.

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Sat May 30, 2020 5:52 pm

jztemple2 wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 5:01 pm
Zaxxon wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 4:43 pm Again, how many other rocket designs are routinely landing and relaunching? How is this not a major advance? What other rocket now or at any time in the past has a payload capacity near F9 at similar cost?
If this is directed towards me, I'm not disagreeing that landing and relaunching the booster isn't a game changer for cost and efficiency and a major advancement. And yup, the payload capacity for the F9 is amazing at the cost they charge. My point is that Falcon doesn't add new capabilities, its appeal is providing a launch service at a much lower cost.

Now the Falcon Heavy does provide a way to lift an amazing payload weight. The problem is that there are few customers for it. Miniaturization has so reduced the size and mass of payloads that there are few customers that need so much lift capability. I believe that Musk himself has identified the Falcon Heavy as only a placeholder until Starship is operational.

I think we're largely just talking around each other. You're using 'capability' to mean higher-than-anything-before payload, etc. In my mind, such a game-changing cost reduction is the new capability. SpaceX will take a customer on a rideshare mission for $1M. One million dollars! That dramatically opens the field to new ideas from companies that never would have had the faintest shot at access to space. You can have a whole Falcon 9 to yourself for $50M, or $62M if you insist it be new. That's not just a little cheaper than the alternatives--you can fly 3x on a F9 for < 1x on a competitor. The difference gets even bigger when you look at the FH vs its alternatives. And this is today, with a pretty clear trajectory for SpaceX to continue reducing costs while no competitors have any glimpse of such a trajectory.

Meanwhile, NASA is paying the equivalent of 3 F9 all-in launches for each single SLS rocket engine. Just for one of four single-use engines on an expendable SLS rocket that may or may not launch next year (after racking up billions in costs while not launching this year, last year, 2018, etc etc). It's literally insane.

Clearly you are far more knowledgeable about the world of spaceflight than I am--I'm just a dude nerding out on it and getting my info from the likes of Eric Berger at Ars. It's entirely possible that I'm missing something (or many somethings). But after growing up seeing US spaceflight capacity steadily decrease over the course of my lifetime, SpaceX is like a giant ray of light.

jztemple2 wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 5:04 pm SLS is a boondoggle to get votes. Now if private concerns want to go to the Moon or Mars, have at it.

We agree. Though I do think the gubment should be pushing to assist in getting to the moon/Mars, I fully agree that the bulk of the funds should come from commercial endeavors now that it's clearly possible.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Sat May 30, 2020 6:01 pm

I still cant afford it. I wonder if they have coupons.

raydude · Post by **raydude** » Sat May 30, 2020 7:15 pm

Speaking as someone who was initially very skeptical of SpaceX and thought it was just a rich man's dabbling, a la Virgin Galactic, I would say the men and women of SpaceX deserve all the kudos they get. I was still skeptical when they did their first successful booster landing, then started warming up to them when they did their first successful water landing. I was floored when they did their first double booster landing, and became a convert when they did automated docking with ISS.

Their willingness to come up with new ways of cost-cutting - auto-landing and re-using boosters- has also shaken up a stale and mostly monolithic launch business. And they seem to bounce back from their setbacks faster than any other rocket business. Truly those are some steely eyed missle men and women.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sat May 30, 2020 9:07 pm

raydude wrote: ↑Sat May 30, 2020 7:15 pm Their willingness to come up with new ways of cost-cutting - auto-landing and re-using boosters- has also shaken up a stale and mostly monolithic launch business.

The first time I read about that, I said "impossible!" The booster would have to carry enough extra fuel to maneuver and land, and how would it return to the launch site after going xxx miles downrange? The more fuel you carry, the more fuel you need to carry it...so adding enough extra would reduce your payload capacity.

Well, it turned out that I'm not a self-taught rocket scientist and Musk (apparently) is. If he can keep his personal foibles in check, he will change humanity's future. For the better.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Sat May 30, 2020 9:38 pm

He made a good start by tossing one Tesla into space

I keed ! I keed !

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Sat May 30, 2020 10:16 pm

Berger's recap is up.

As someone in the comments mentioned: while Endeavor is a great name, it'd have been pretty kick-ass to go with Trampoline 1.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Sat May 30, 2020 10:46 pm

I kinda like Slingshot.

jztemple2 · Post by **jztemple2** » Sat May 30, 2020 11:25 pm

Article with video from onboard Endeavour (the new name of the SpaceX Crew Dragon for Demo-2): Tour SpaceX's Crew Dragon spaceship in orbit with NASA's Demo-2 astronauts (video)

The NASA astronauts who launched on a SpaceX rocket Saturday (May 30) invited the world into their spacecraft with a unique, live tour around their Crew Dragon capsule.

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Sat May 30, 2020 11:27 pm

Zero-G indicator is cute.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Sun May 31, 2020 11:04 am

Saw a comment like...

All other space capsules - 1 million switches
Dragon - 3 iPads.

$iljanus · Post by **$iljanus** » Sun May 31, 2020 12:13 pm

We have NASA TV streaming on the big TV in the background. Mundane stuff but still very fascinating to me watching an astronaut going about his work preparing for the hatch opening.

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Sun May 31, 2020 1:35 pm

For Daehawk.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Sun May 31, 2020 2:06 pm

Lacks a certain Clippy. Does have a Bob though.

Am I alone with when they say Doug and Bob I think of Strange Brew in Space?

EDIT: After I posted this it seems Blues News posted about Bob and Doug taking off and they linked to a Strange Brew video. Lol.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sun May 31, 2020 4:05 pm

Daehawk wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 11:04 am Saw a comment like...

All other space capsules - 1 million switches
Dragon - 3 iPads.

What if they drop the capsule and crack all three screens?

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Sun May 31, 2020 4:25 pm

They try to up sale you on a newer model or you dont get to space as fast.

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Mon Jun 01, 2020 9:27 pm

What Doug and Bob think of their new ride.

Ignore the videos at the top. Scroll down to read the article.

Can watch this too.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Mon Jun 01, 2020 10:34 pm

Daehawk wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 11:04 am Saw a comment like...

All other space capsules - 1 million switches
Dragon - 3 iPads.

Yeah?
And 20 years from now it will be:

Stupid Dragon had 3 fucking iPads. While the SpaceWhore7 uses just 1 JaggoBit… fucking idiots.

So, whatis your point?
Progress? Or just that some stupid-dumbass thinks they reign supreme over the previous generation?

JSHAW · Post by **JSHAW** » Mon Jun 01, 2020 10:53 pm

Zaxxon wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 1:35 pm For Daehawk.

"Got 3 ipads and a microphone"

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Mon Jun 01, 2020 10:56 pm

Do Not Turn Off Your Orbital Vehicle While System Is Updating

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Tue Jun 02, 2020 1:28 pm

Cross posted from the YT videos thread

jztemple2 · Post by **jztemple2** » Tue Jun 02, 2020 2:35 pm

Daehawk wrote: ↑Tue Jun 02, 2020 1:28 pm Cross posted from the YT videos thread

I so need a Space Shuttle version of this