Earlier quoted context omitted.
They've already got several private customers who have booked missions.
Do you have more information? (Who, what for)
SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit
361–370 of 839 posts
Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
I made my wife and kids sit and watch it with me. Oddly enough, I think the first time they landed the rocket booster felt more significant to me. SpaceX launches have made space flight ordinary in a way that is pretty remarkable.
In a way I think landing the boosters is harder, and certainly was more of a first-time thing when SpaceX did it. I was bummed that the cameras cut out for the booster landing on this mission.
Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit
#363Earlier quoted context omitted.
You just need to look further. You get access to rare materials that can be immensely valuable. Read https://www.amazon.com/Case-Space-Revolution-Spaceflight-Pos... Also with that short term outlook you wouldn’t have many things. The Internet was not initially commercial. It was designed to provide communications in the event of a nuclear attack. Yet here we are now and we have reaped immense benefits from that inves…
> You get access to rare materials that can be immensely valuable. Why would you want to send humans to get it? Space is really inhospitable for humans, but machines seem to like it just fine. Offshore oil and gas mining is rapidly being automated, and if they could, they would eliminate humans from the process altogether. Nobody wants to go out and live on a frozen windblown metal can full of industrial machinery, i…
Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit
#364I'm glad that the space age has been rekindled. I wish Europe would do something similar.
Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit
#365Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> into orbit in a spacecraft that was designed from the ground up to be a commercial venture. If we are talking pure commercial travel, it is a vehicle without a destination. The ISS is definitely not a commercial project. There are lots of reasons for the ISS to exist, and they have changed over time, but it has never been a money-making venture. While the dragons certainly do come in under budget, they are a more…
I’m not super well informed on this, but is there any reason for sending humans to space at this moment in time (or for the next 20 years for that matter). The only reason my layperson understanding can think of is mining minerals in space, but I fail to see why robots wouldn’t be able to adequately do the job. In fact wouldn’t sending humans make future space ventures even more costly and put people into unessisary…
1. Have a backup of our species in case something happens to Earth.
2. A great experiment in anthropology! It could help us rethink how we organize life on earth. As far as I see, a moonbase would be a "greenfield project" on land that doesn't belong to any nation, where they have to build everything from scratch. How will they organize? Will they need to work or will robots be doing everything for them? Will they be paid & will they have their own money? They will need to reject racism & nationalism to get their goals accomplished, for sure.
Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit
#367Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are two rows of physical buttons below the touch screens along with a large manual abort lever. The physical buttons are used for manual docking.
And it’s painted black against black backdrop when the decision to pull it happens in milliseconds level. :facepalm: This is what a Martin Baker ejection handle looks like: https://c8.alamy.com/comp/BJTDWG/martin-baker-ejection-seat-... With all due respect to all the engineers that work at SpaceX, the UI of the cockpit has regressed to the point of pure marketing. Same with the suit design, looks like an awful low b…
In an article[1] a month ago, Bob said "I don’t think I’m going too far out on a limb to say that the right answer for all flying is not to switch to a touchscreen, necessarily. But for the task that we have and to keep ourselves safe flying close to the ISS, the touchscreen is gonna provide us that capability just fine."
Doug explained "The difference is you’ve got to be very deliberate when you’re putting in input, relative to what you would do with a stick. Because you know, when you’re flying an airplane for example, if I push the stick forward it’s going to go down. I actually have to make a concerted effort to do that with the touchscreen, if that makes sense."
So it sounds like there's more cognitive overhead to use the touch interface for flying. I did think the touchscreen was perfect for the procedure checklists shown extensively in the middle console during today's flight.
In the on-board media event a few minutes ago, he pointed out "One thing that does get lost is there is an extensive button panel down below."
[1] https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/04/this-is-certainly-differen...
Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit
#368Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit
#369Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand it runs Chromium code and that the UI is written in Javascript. https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/9243/what-computer...
Wow, had I known that this whole thing would have been a lot more nerve wracking.
Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit
#370Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably not. They have been transferring workers from the programs where contracts are slow (commercial airlines) to those with more steady revenues (DoD contracts) to minimize layoffs. I haven't read up on the newest wave of Boeing layoffs yet.
Incorrect. The layoffs were primarily in the commercial division, and the defense is primarily untouched.