Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 926 posts

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#361

Post by jacquesm »

blackrock wrote: post #258

Did they need to modify the Tesla to make it vacuum worthy? Like, remove any fluids, remove any parts that might explode in the hot or cold of space, deflate the tires, etc. Note: I'm more interested in a scientific answer, as opposed to casual conjectures. Preferably from an engineer knowledgeable of such things. And specifically, the materials sciences aspect of how materials will survive in a vacuum.

They have a bigass vacuum test chamber, you can bet they did their homework and every container that might end up pressurized had a hole in it to allow the leveling of the pressure. No point taking chances with something like this, it only has to look good, it doesn't have to drive.

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#362

Post by pavel_lishin »

electricslpnsld wrote: post #253
DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s like that at BlueOrigin too. I visited twice (they gave me a job offer but withdrew it after I got badmouthed by a reference, gah). They have an avionics software engineering room right next to where they assemble the engines.

> they gave me a job offer but withdrew it after I got badmouthed by a reference Why in the world would someone agree to be a reference and then bad mouth afterwards? Some folks...

If you know that the person asking you to be a reference is a bad engineer, and they're applying for someplace that builds critical systems - medical devices, say, or rockets - maybe you want to warn their potential employer that they're hiring a liability.

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#363

Post by dwb »

jacquesm wrote: post #335
PinguTS wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still don't understand this waste of ressources. Waste of ressources to build this Tesla Roadster. And then the waste to kick it into space. It is not that we are littering our earth itself. We now do it in space as well.

Think of it as performance art. Because if all you can think of is utility then all art should go as well. After all, it's all just a waste of resources. /s

Okay, in my opinion it's a waste of resources because if it is at all, it is very bad art. (It took no discernment or taste to do; it's an empty, ostentatious gesture. Precious little discernment or taste in the predictable Adams reference, too.) (Disclaimer: I like Douglas Adams.)

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#364

Post by singingboyo »

Diederich wrote: post #322
CydeWeys wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's unfortunate if so. You'd have thought there would have been plenty of extra fuel to obviate the need for a hard landing, given that the actual Roadster payload is a small fraction of the rocket's capability. This wasn't a mission where they were stretching fuel to make the landing, like they have with some of the marginal Falcon 9 launches in the past where the payload size was just at max for the vehicle.

I'm pretty sure that there was plenty of fuel margin. If it did come in too hot, there must have been some other reason. My first thought is that the extra 'stuff' on the outside of the center booster required to connect the outside boosters might have caused some problems during re-entry.

That or simply timing issues. The center core should be faster than F9 is when it's coming in for landing, so if the compensation for that wasn't worked out quite right (possibly due to extra weight in addition to the velocity difference) that'd pretty quickly get it coming in too hot.

After all, it's only a few second difference between 'nominal' and 'way too hot' with the suicide-burn style landings.

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#365

Post by gervase »

niftich wrote: post #100
pikchurn wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't find that surprising. The communication link back is presumably by satellite since it is in the middle of the ocean, and probably a directional antenna because of the high bandwidth. You have any good suggestions for having a reliable connection via directional antenna on a flimsy barge that a rocket is landing on in this middle of the choppy north Atlantic?

Tow a cable from the barge to a nearby ship, buoy, or platform on which the antenna sits, that's out of range of the vibrations and faces a different direction?

I believe they are required as part of FAA regulations to ensure that no manned craft are within 15 miles of the landing zone? Something like that, at least, which would complicate a tether-based approach.

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#366

Post by lmm »

blackrock wrote: post #258

Did they need to modify the Tesla to make it vacuum worthy? Like, remove any fluids, remove any parts that might explode in the hot or cold of space, deflate the tires, etc. Note: I'm more interested in a scientific answer, as opposed to casual conjectures. Preferably from an engineer knowledgeable of such things. And specifically, the materials sciences aspect of how materials will survive in a vacuum.

It's not like they're trying to keep it driveable? I would guess they'll have drained any fluids but I don't expect it to be fully operational after the van allen belts, for example.

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#367

Post by [deleted] »

gameswithgo wrote: post #340
ColanR wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They just happen to be younger, or women, or of color. Maybe parent was referring to their mannerisms, rather than their appearance. It's not fair to jump to the assumption that parent was showing a bias against any of those variations in the human species.

Even mannerisms may be a bias we should try to fight.

[deleted]

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#368

Post by shepardrtc »

electricslpnsld wrote: post #253
DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s like that at BlueOrigin too. I visited twice (they gave me a job offer but withdrew it after I got badmouthed by a reference, gah). They have an avionics software engineering room right next to where they assemble the engines.

> they gave me a job offer but withdrew it after I got badmouthed by a reference Why in the world would someone agree to be a reference and then bad mouth afterwards? Some folks...

Someone asked me to be a reference, I said no, they still put me as a reference anyway. I was not happy. Didn't badmouth him, but I also didn't say anything good about him. And when asked if I would hire him where I worked, I said no.

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#370

Post by paulddraper »

CydeWeys wrote: post #283
mabbo wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I love the live streams hosted by John Innsprucker. He doesn't look like a TV star, he looks like an engineer, a rocket scientist. He looks real. The other hosts are great, but if you told me they were hired actors or PR people I'd believe it.

You're showing your biases here. The other people on the livestream are also rocket scientists. They aren't PR people. They just happen to be younger, or women, or of color. So you might want to re-evaluate what you think a rocket scientist "looks like", because your notion is outdated. Sorry to call you out like this, but these kinds of prejudices about who is the "correct" kind of person for tech jobs are harmful a…

mabbo never said the others didn't look like engineers.

He said John doesn't look like an actor/PR person (which, I think you'll agree, have appearance job requirements).

> The other hosts are great, but if you told me they were hired actors or PR people I'd believe it.

Lots of people don't marry for money. And if someone marries a poor person, it pretty obvious they're not doing it for money. (Naturally, that doesn't mean they're the only one.)

Post reply on HN