Here's a to-scale graph of the launch:
Watch the SpaceX Falcon Heavy Rocket Launch Today
71–80 of 134 posts
Re: Watch the SpaceX Falcon Heavy Rocket Launch Today
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I remember clearly thinking the whole idea of landing the booster as being completely unrealistic, verging on not possible Please share why you thought it was not possible. Just curious.
Where to start‽ (These are my recollections, perhaps wrong of course): - The wafer thin margin of actual payload that the booster put up now being shared with landing fuel - Engine restart after launch - Re-entry forces on the engines - The fact (perhaps since addressed) that a single Merlin puts out more thrust at near minimum throttle than the dry mass of the booster itself. Think about that last one. If you start…
[deleted]
Re: Watch the SpaceX Falcon Heavy Rocket Launch Today
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the curious, it's Musk's midnight-cherry red Tesla roadster, with a dummy in a spacesuit in the drivers seat, David Bowie playing on the stereo, and a towel in the glove box along with a copy of hitchhikers guide to the galaxy and a sign that says Don't Panic.
Not only that, it's being set into orbit around the sun.
Yep, and not just for kicks, it's also to demonstrate they can launch a payload far enough to reach the orbit of Mars if required.
Re: Watch the SpaceX Falcon Heavy Rocket Launch Today
#74[deleted]
Re: Watch the SpaceX Falcon Heavy Rocket Launch Today
#75Oh man, I didn't realize this was going to go into a solar orbit! I thought it was just going to stay in LEO and then eventually burn up on re-entry.
It might still end up in LEO. SpaceX wants to demonstrate to interested parties that they can coast for 6 hours then do a second burn of the upper stage. That's important for some payloads to GEO. So they're going to put the Tesla in LEO then 6 hours later do an insertion burn into solar orbit. If something about the coast fails then you will end up with a Tesla in LEO.
Re: Watch the SpaceX Falcon Heavy Rocket Launch Today
#76Anyone know where to watch that isn't Youtube? Blocked at work :(
Re: Watch the SpaceX Falcon Heavy Rocket Launch Today
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think hyperloop pretty well fit the "full of shit" category and I can only consider it as a PR stunt...
For a "full of shit" idea it had a better technical document than most of the specifications I've seen in software industry; so no, I don't agree.
It is possible for a "technical document" to appear rigorous enough to untrained eye, but sadly, you can fool people, you cannot fool nature. Which is why "Hyperloop", which was not even an original idea, still remain in paper...
Re: Watch the SpaceX Falcon Heavy Rocket Launch Today
#78Falcon Heavy is just a toe in the door of super heavy launch. BFR will have 31 engines at liftoff compared to Falcon Heavy's 27. BFR will be about twice the thrust of Falcon Heavy, and most importantly BFR is not just a launch vehicle (which gives SpaceX a big edge in deploying megaconstellations of low-latency internet satellites), but the upper stage part will be a spacecraft capable of reentering the Earth's atmos…
It might be a "build it and they will come" thing, but what is the current market for super-heavy payloads?
By making the booster bigger, you have much more margin for making everything reusable. And once everything is reusable, marginal costs approach the cost of fuel rather than the cost of the rocket.
And of course, you can put more than one payload on a booster.
After all, we don't have a single 747 for each passenger, or for each package we fly.
Re: Watch the SpaceX Falcon Heavy Rocket Launch Today
#79Here's a to-scale graph of the launch: https://imgur.com/a/XvPXG
Ah amazing! I've been vaguely looking for exactly this since they started landing boosters and this is the first accurate one I've seen.
Re: Watch the SpaceX Falcon Heavy Rocket Launch Today
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
For a "full of shit" idea it had a better technical document than most of the specifications I've seen in software industry; so no, I don't agree.
It is possible for a "technical document" to appear rigorous enough to untrained eye, but sadly, you can fool people, you cannot fool nature. Which is why "Hyperloop", which was not even an original idea, still remain in paper...
So does the Mars trip. Until it won't.
AFAIR the paper was technologically sound to the first approximation; the objections were mostly economical (I'm ignoring people who missed that Hyperloop was not a vacuum tube design and went on ranting how infeasible it is).
Also, for a paper-only design, there seem to be plenty of activity involving people building actual hardware to test components.
Also2, from the first day it was known that Elon is not going to pursue Hyperloop himself any time soon; he threw an idea for others to pick up, and didn't promise anything. Judging him by not having built the Hyperloop by now is... insane.