191–200 of 260 posts
Why is it such a big deal this time? Don't the Russians fly to ISS all the time?
It's a capability NASA lost and is not close to achieving, it's a feel good story for USA, it's a really nice thing to improve competition in crewed launch space allowing NASA to go further with bigger missions (Moon and Mars).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In direct investments perhaps yes, but like all things it is bit more complicated, it can be cheaper in each generation, you can leverage existing talent and their experience from before . In theory a new entrant could achieve similar feats with lesser money . For example rocket lab is doing pretty well for their size with some real innovation based out of New Zealand! Extremely likely part of their staff would come…
> For example rocket lab is doing pretty well for their size with some real innovation based out of New Zealand! Rocket Lab isn't out of New Zealand, that's a popular underdog myth at this point. They're an American company, funded overwhelmingly by big US venture capital, that built their current technology primarily in the US. The initial low scale efforts for Rocket Lab originated out of New Zealand, with sounding…
Why is it such a big deal this time? Don't the Russians fly to ISS all the time?
Few reasons, it's been 9 years since the last crewed spacecraft took off from American soil. Second reason is this is the first time the spacecraft has been built and run by a commercial company (spacex)
Why is it such a big deal this time? Don't the Russians fly to ISS all the time?
Yes, it seems they do - I assume that the fact all other countries relied on Russia for the last decade to ferry astronauts and cosmonauts to ISS doesn't fit with the narrative of them being the sworn enemy of the West?
SpaceX runs basically as a giant R&D program that also happens to accomplish useful things as byproducts of its approach (with the miracle of insurance to cover costs if things get explody). Every flight is data for incremental improvement. If you think of all SpaceX has ever done was try to get to this point, with somewhere around 80 flights on the Falcon 9, but for a variety of mission buyers (NASA, USAF, Commercia…
And think of the fact that all of this is nothing compared to what a fully-deployed StarLink will do, and what weekly or daily launch capabilities would mean for the U.S. armed forces. The number of satellites to shoot down in a war is going up, and the rate at which they can be replaced is also going up. Moreover, the cost of sending up new interesting military sats is going way down, which means we'll see greatly upgraded capabilities in many areas. Civilian science too will be benefiting greatly.
SpaceX's commercial and non-commercial competition is hobbled by subsidies. Ahhh, what a great demonstration that subsidies are dangerous to business. Otherwise, if they really wanted to, the competition is not that far behind SpaceX, and could catch up, and pretty quickly if they want to, but in the meantime, SpaceX continues to innovate and get ahead.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Incredibly impressive, but you have to take into account both more modern technology, as well as the fact that they were able to build off the shoulders of giants. It is still amazing of course, but I doubt they could've done the same thing during the era of the mercury program, so not really apples to apples comparison.
Guidance systems are vastly less expensive now, and can take advantage of things like MEMs, fiber laser gyros, and GPS (and, of course, modern computing power). The tanks on Falcon are welded using Friction Stir Welding, which was invented in the early 1990s. The landing algorithm for the first stage uses convex optimization algorithms based on interior point methods, which were not available in the 1960s. However, s…
SpaceX runs basically as a giant R&D program that also happens to accomplish useful things as byproducts of its approach (with the miracle of insurance to cover costs if things get explody). Every flight is data for incremental improvement. If you think of all SpaceX has ever done was try to get to this point, with somewhere around 80 flights on the Falcon 9, but for a variety of mission buyers (NASA, USAF, Commercia…
SpaceX is the most amazing demonstration of can-do spirit coupled with simple and good ideas. Elon Musk is the epitome of the can-do, unafraid, business man, but combined with great engineering chops and vision. And think of the fact that all of this is nothing compared to what a fully-deployed StarLink will do, and what weekly or daily launch capabilities would mean for the U.S. armed forces. The number of satellite…
I think that’s a prerequisite to start a rocket company.
SpaceX runs basically as a giant R&D program that also happens to accomplish useful things as byproducts of its approach (with the miracle of insurance to cover costs if things get explody). Every flight is data for incremental improvement. If you think of all SpaceX has ever done was try to get to this point, with somewhere around 80 flights on the Falcon 9, but for a variety of mission buyers (NASA, USAF, Commercia…
SpaceX is the most amazing demonstration of can-do spirit coupled with simple and good ideas. Elon Musk is the epitome of the can-do, unafraid, business man, but combined with great engineering chops and vision. And think of the fact that all of this is nothing compared to what a fully-deployed StarLink will do, and what weekly or daily launch capabilities would mean for the U.S. armed forces. The number of satellite…
There is nothing wrong with fear, it's healthy to have a realistic view of things.
It doesn't take any courage to do something you aren't afraid of.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had not heard of Friction Stir Welding previously. Video that demonstrates the technique is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNbQH8XBgxQ
Smarter Every Day has a very interesting video[1] inside the factory of United Launch Alliance in which, among a lot of other things, shows the friction stir welding used in their Atlas Rocket[2]: [1] https://youtu.be/o0fG_lnVhHw [2] https://youtu.be/o0fG_lnVhHw?t=1933
That said, I think that everyone anticipating a dramatic reduction in orbital cost needs to temper their enthusiasm a bit. UAL was expensive, as many other have previously noted, because it was a political jobs program. The existence of UAL gave the necessary cover for Musk & Co to envision radically more efficient designs.
However, that was then. As SpaceX continues to succeed, it will be harder to justify continued funding of UAL at the previous levels. Costs will be cut. People will cheer. And then, a well-meaning congressperson or two (with their eye on re-election) will introduce a rider onto the next funding bill: "Yes we want these great launch capabilities, but at least $1B must be spent within the state of Alabama" (or whatever).
This will work for a little while, but then more members of congress will jump on the gravy train. In order for SpaceX to maintain their launch contracts they will need to perform more and more work in distributed places. This will result in reduced organizational efficiency and increased launch cost.
The big opportunity here is commercial launch. If SpaceX can grow their civilian and international order book enough, they become less beholden to the US Govt and can push back on make-work contract requirements. But if not... I await their inevitable induction into UAL v2.