Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

techcrunch.com

661–670 of 926 posts

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#661
post #14

Anybody saw the 'Don't panic' thing on the Tesla? Made me chuckle, they sure have a sense of humor.

I absolutely love that Musk is putting a car into Mars orbit. Assuming mankind doesn't have an extinction event (or dark ages event), it is extremely likely we'll populate the solar system over the next millenia. In 200 years, Martian children can look up in the sky and know that one of the quickly moving visible satellites is a hilarious, old-Earth car. Depending on how accessible orbit is from planets over the next…

It'll become a touristic attraction.

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may not make headlines, but the knowledge we have gained about long-duration human health in space from ISS is utterly beyond price. For all its problems, that alone makes ISS worth it.

> the knowledge we have gained about long-duration human health in space from ISS is utterly beyond price The knowledge was valuable, but not priceless. The same data could have been gathered, many times over, with long-duration multi-member orbital missions. We could have probably gotten an interplanetary flight in, too. The staggering cost of the ISS crowded out a lot of good science.

There is no way we could have achieved a similar volume of data without ISS. With ISS we get six astronaut-years of data every single year, and it’s got at least another decade in it, barring political stupidity.

The argument could be made that we could have made do with less data, perhaps. But we could not have gathered this volume even once without ISS, let alone “many times”.

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#663

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the closure - I've been refreshing twitter all morning. I've seen the much-touted $90M price-tag for the FH launch, but does that take into account loss of the core or boosters?

SpaceX has been keeping their launch prices pretty consistent, even when they couldn't know how many F9 stages they would actually recover. I think they've factored in testing losses into the price.

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that advertised prices are still far above what they could achieve after flying for a while and paying down some of their R&D debt (and if/when the market becomes even a little bit competitive).

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#665

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

You made an incorrect assumption based on bad logic. The parent didn't say they didn't look like rocket scientists, he/she said that they could pass as PR people, regardless of whether or not they were rocket scientists. Let me phrase it a different and rude (sorry) way. "You know they're including real engineers because there is at least one person in the spotlight that would never be employed by a PR firm."

[deleted]

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#666

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the cameras were just on opposite sides so the different pads looked to be on the same side, no?

Nah, the two feeds were identical including a portion of the other booster’s rocket plume in the top left. The two pads are different colours, both feeds showed the rocket landing on the lighter pad. Hopefully we will get a corrected version for the official movie!

It seems they fixed it. Here is the corrected version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCc16uozHVE

The live (uncorrected) version for comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8wxV-lUsZg

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some time both streams looked like they were the same. That synchronization!

They were the same. Don't know if they did this intentionally. I actually watched them for two minutes for that, and was 99% sure they're the same image, just translated a bit. The final confirmation came near the end, when the other booster entered the view, and you could see for sure, both rectangles streamed from the same camera.

It seems they fixed it. Here is the corrected version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCc16uozHVE

The live (uncorrected) version for comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8wxV-lUsZg

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#668

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may not make headlines, but the knowledge we have gained about long-duration human health in space from ISS is utterly beyond price. For all its problems, that alone makes ISS worth it.

I was not aware of this, do you have a link to any of that info?

Here’s an article summarizing the findings of the most headline-grabbing medical study of the ISS program, the Twins Study in which Scott Kelly spent a year in space while his brother Mark remained on Earth; both were subjected to exhaustive testing, and the article briefly covers each investigation. One that I found particularly interesting: Scott’s telomeres grew significantly longer while he was in space!

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-twins-study-investigators-...

Most astronauts spend six months on the station, and obviously most of them don’t have a twin, but they all add data to our knowledge of how space affects humans. We have learned a lot about how to counter muscle atrophy, and we have a better understanding of how the eyes and bones are degraded by prolonged weightlessness.

NASA loves to talk about ways that space research has improved life on earth (just google it, they’ll shout it at you), but even if you could find a way to do all that other research without a crewed space station, you can’t accumulate six astronaut-years of human medical data in space every single year for decades on end unless you’ve got a place in space to put a bunch of humans for a really long time, over and over again.

To me, that is what makes ISS a human treasure. Someday we will build a more cost-effective replacement on the basis of the lessons we’ve learned, but for now it’s the best we’ve got, and it’s quite good.

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should also welcome pointing about the stupidity in assuming things always boil down to race/gender/sexual orientation. It should be obvious that aesthetic stereotypes go far beyond race and gender. Here's 2 very stereotypically different white guys: http://ricerfiles.gizmore.org/images/20160629/28030-human-ha... and this: https://i1.adis.ws/i/Superdry_com/NS_MP_Hoodies_hb_right?qlt... But to some people, they onl…

Yeah, calling comments (or commenters) stupid is always welcome. Oh, wait, no it's not; please look to your own issues.

Seems to me like you’re focusing on the word stupid which is actually fair in this context

Re: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy successfully launches

#670
post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the closure - I've been refreshing twitter all morning. I've seen the much-touted $90M price-tag for the FH launch, but does that take into account loss of the core or boosters?

I think he said in the press conference that they weren't planning to reuse the core or boosters. (But then mentioned later they wanted some of the parts? IDK)

Even if they're not reusing any of it (this time), it's still very useful to examine and analyze how well it's held up.

Perhaps some piece of metal is showing more fatigue than they'd like to see, or a wire had damage to the insulation from a vibration. I'm sure that's the sort of thing they'll be looking at.

Post reply on HN