SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit • Hacker News Board

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#601

Post by adrianN » Sun, May 31, 2020, 5:20 AM UTC

mumblemumble wrote: post #558

wongarsu wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the ISS you can produce higher quality optical fiber than on earth [1]. A demonstration fabrication unit is already on the ISS, and NASA has recently published prices for using the ISS for commercial tasks such as this. I suspect many other manufacturing methods can also benefit from zero gravity, and as launch costs drop more of these will be explored. 1: https://upward.issnationallab.org/the-race-to-manufacture-…

It's interesting to think about that from the other side, too. Just delivering the raw materials to the manufacturing facility would cost ~$3000/kg (assuming rock bottom SpaceX prices). Based on some loose googling, I think that 1kg of raw material would yield only something on the order of 100m of cable. It looks like a typical 100m fiber optic patch cable retails for about $60. So, there's clearly a lot of value to…

Orbital manufacturing makes very little sense if you source material on Earth. You need to get your raw material from the Moon or a captured asteroid.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#602

Post by jeffdavis » Sun, May 31, 2020, 5:22 AM UTC

Chathamization wrote: post #510

Rebelgecko wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know much about the intricacies of asteroid mining, but human beings are very capable entities. As great as machines like the Mars rovers are, there's no comparison. A human astronaut could probably accomplish as much in a week as a Mars rover can in a year. When I was reading the daily diaries of one of the rover drivers, it was incredible how much effort and thought went into the most trivial activities. A…

> A human astronaut could probably accomplish as much in a week as a Mars rover can in a year. The estimates I've seen for a human mission to Mars are about 100-500 times the budget for Curiosity. So even if astronauts could accomplish things 52X faster (and I'm skeptical they would), it still wouldn't be as cost efficient. And that's even before you factor in the fact that the Mars Rover is going to be doing work on…

People who feel passionately about something impractical can get pretty creative trying to justify their passion. The creativity is the output here -- not the stated goal.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#603

Post by adrianN » Sun, May 31, 2020, 5:22 AM UTC

kenneth wrote: post #594

Chathamization wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A human astronaut could probably accomplish as much in a week as a Mars rover can in a year. The estimates I've seen for a human mission to Mars are about 100-500 times the budget for Curiosity. So even if astronauts could accomplish things 52X faster (and I'm skeptical they would), it still wouldn't be as cost efficient. And that's even before you factor in the fact that the Mars Rover is going to be doing work on…

We (well, Europeans) explored the earth when it looked quite similar to space exploration today. Year-long journeys with very little chance of survival, and no idea what was waiting on the other side. We ended up making some amazing discoveries (the new worlds) that turned out to be of vast economical benefits. Who says space exploration can't be similar. (Yes, there is a lot of controversy over colonialism that I wo…

The good thing about space is that you don't have to worry about the native people.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#604

Post by adrianN » Sun, May 31, 2020, 5:27 AM UTC

mikepurvis wrote: post #508

bouncycastle wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Building a moon-base or mars-base would be an interesting experiment for humans. 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?…

There are plenty of inhospitable places here on earth where you could set up your anthropology experiment— deep under the ocean, for example, heck there was even a series of videogames made about this exact scenario. :)

Deep under the ocean is a lot more difficult than Mars.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#605

Post by nojvek » Sun, May 31, 2020, 5:28 AM UTC

It blows my mind how SpaceX stared a decade ago and is making history, pushing the edge and making science fiction come true.

And here I am fighting webpack to not take minutes to compile a bunch of js files.

Everytime I watch SpaceX rockets fly, I ask myself “Am I wasting my life? Is what I am doing even worth it?”

I hope we start a huge manufacture economy here that rivals the software economy. We’ve gotta move from being mass consumers to sustainable and ultra-efficient consumers.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#606

Post by BobbyJo » Sun, May 31, 2020, 5:28 AM UTC

Chathamization wrote: post #510

Rebelgecko wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know much about the intricacies of asteroid mining, but human beings are very capable entities. As great as machines like the Mars rovers are, there's no comparison. A human astronaut could probably accomplish as much in a week as a Mars rover can in a year. When I was reading the daily diaries of one of the rover drivers, it was incredible how much effort and thought went into the most trivial activities. A…

> A human astronaut could probably accomplish as much in a week as a Mars rover can in a year. The estimates I've seen for a human mission to Mars are about 100-500 times the budget for Curiosity. So even if astronauts could accomplish things 52X faster (and I'm skeptical they would), it still wouldn't be as cost efficient. And that's even before you factor in the fact that the Mars Rover is going to be doing work on…

Humans are capable of doing things machines aren't. If you want some of those things done on Mars, there isn't much of a choice.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#607

Post by rtkwe » Sun, May 31, 2020, 5:29 AM UTC

avmich wrote: post #20

sephamorr wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RCS engines are practically always hypergolic since you need to be able to pulse on and off very easily/quickly, and propellents need to be storable (non-cryo). If you look at the choices remaining, they're all various levels of extremely toxic.

Buran had non-toxic components for RCS. Kliper was planned with non-toxic RCS. Soyuz spacecraft at least has non-toxic components for capsule RCS, so when the capsule lands, it doesn't need to be approached in a chemical protection suit. It's not a question of choices - there are choices. I suspect it's a question which is considered less important so far, so SpaceX didn't pay that much attention to it, considering t…

From a quick search their main RCS is still a dimethylhydrazine which is quite toxic. They're just on the engine part of the craft instead of on the capsule so it doesn't come down to Earth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KTDU-80#Pneumatic_Pressurizati...

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/soyuz-ms-kdu.html

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#608

Post by unnouinceput » Sun, May 31, 2020, 6:06 AM UTC

nojvek wrote: post #605

It blows my mind how SpaceX stared a decade ago and is making history, pushing the edge and making science fiction come true. And here I am fighting webpack to not take minutes to compile a bunch of js files. Everytime I watch SpaceX rockets fly, I ask myself “Am I wasting my life? Is what I am doing even worth it?” I hope we start a huge manufacture economy here that rivals the software economy. We’ve gotta move fro…

mass consumers is not opposite to ultra-efficient consumers. I would even argue they complement each other in a good civilization

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#609

Post by _emacsomancer_ » Sun, May 31, 2020, 6:09 AM UTC

adrianN wrote: post #603

kenneth wrote: post #594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We (well, Europeans) explored the earth when it looked quite similar to space exploration today. Year-long journeys with very little chance of survival, and no idea what was waiting on the other side. We ended up making some amazing discoveries (the new worlds) that turned out to be of vast economical benefits. Who says space exploration can't be similar. (Yes, there is a lot of controversy over colonialism that I wo…

The good thing about space is that you don't have to worry about the native people.

Well...until you do...

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#610

Post by sargun » Sun, May 31, 2020, 6:16 AM UTC

mumblemumble wrote: post #558

wongarsu wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the ISS you can produce higher quality optical fiber than on earth [1]. A demonstration fabrication unit is already on the ISS, and NASA has recently published prices for using the ISS for commercial tasks such as this. I suspect many other manufacturing methods can also benefit from zero gravity, and as launch costs drop more of these will be explored. 1: https://upward.issnationallab.org/the-race-to-manufacture-…

It's interesting to think about that from the other side, too. Just delivering the raw materials to the manufacturing facility would cost ~$3000/kg (assuming rock bottom SpaceX prices). Based on some loose googling, I think that 1kg of raw material would yield only something on the order of 100m of cable. It looks like a typical 100m fiber optic patch cable retails for about $60. So, there's clearly a lot of value to…

So, no idea the cost of O-O amplification or O-E-O these days, but it's expensive. You have to run power (usually there's power with the optics), and the bigger problem is real estate (At least in urban areas). 100x lower signal loss would do away with most of these.

For example, the MAREA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAREA) undersea cable is 6,600 km long. Current optical fiber requires repeaters every ~100km. If it's to be believed, ZBLAN could get rid of these repeaters all together.

The cable's design is _much_ more complicated because of the requirement to have electricity and repeaters.