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

SpaceX cleared for historic civilian launch next week

nypost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 127 posts

Re: SpaceX cleared for historic civilian launch next week

#61

Post by iso1631 »

tellersid wrote: post #52
mkl wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is pretty wild when you think about it - not so long ago (10 years maybe?) this sort of thing would have been unthinkable . 10 years ago many people thought it would happen well before 2021. The "first operational Dragon spacecraft was launched in December 2010" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX ) and commercial flights to the ISS were right around the corner (cargo first happened May 2012).

I remember going to Disney Epcot Center as a kid and it showed how we would be living on the ocean floor by the year 2000. That is what I consider wild. If you told me as a kid that I will go my whole life without owning a robot and that the main difference is we will replace a rotary phone with a hand held phone I would want my money back. I guess poor Christa McAuliffe has been totally forgot about also.

If you told my kids not only will they own a robot, their grandmother actually owns one, they wouldn't believe you. Just before they tripped over her roomba.

Re: SpaceX cleared for historic civilian launch next week

#62

Post by Galaxity »

ForHackernews wrote: post #39

> The soon-to-be-astronauts Maybe this is just me, but I think we need a new word for people who pay to take a ride on a spacecraft but have nothing to do with the operation or mission of that spacecraft. "Payload" seems rude, perhaps "passengers"? Whatever they are, they're not astronauts.

They have everything to do with the operation and mission of the spacecraft.

They will do as much as NASA astronauts do on dragon spacecraft.

I understand the point that the word astronaut is reserved for highly trained individuals working for NASA, but the rants about it I keep seeing online on various forums are just so mean spirited for some reason. Calling them payload, seriously?

Re: SpaceX cleared for historic civilian launch next week

#63

Post by iso1631 »

huhtenberg wrote: post #16
starfallg wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't Virgin Galactic's flight be the first for this then?

They didn't even hit 100km mark, leave alone making an orbit.

Not sure why you've been downvoted, but the world classes space at the Kármán line, 100km above Sea Level. Spaceship One reached this back in 2003, but Virgin Unity didn't.

Blue Origin's New Shepard did reach 100km though, so was a "space trip". It was sub orbital though, so more Freedom 7 than Vostok 1 (Freedom 7 reached a far higher apogee and speed than New Shepard)

SpaceX has the civilian equivalent of Vostok 1, albeit larger and far more advanced. It's an order of magnitude more impressive.

Re: SpaceX cleared for historic civilian launch next week

#64

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

lmilcin wrote: post #57
areoform wrote: post #45

We have crossed the rubicon. Hayley Arceneaux will become the first individual with a prosthesis to go to space. In the 60 year history of crewed spaceflight, we have never put a human with titanium bones in orbit. Nor, have we sent anyone up who has met any of the requirements to be otherwise classified as "disabled". Until now. It is the indicator of a profound tipping point. The very first astronauts were required…

Aren't you overhyping it a little bit? Crossing the Rubicon (Rubicon is a river)? Civilians were being already sent in 1986 (unsuccessfully...) and in 1990 (successfully). What's a difference between a civilian that has or has not a prosthesis? It is not like they are going to be doing some kind of superhuman feats. They could have sent a disabled person just as well in 1986 if they decided so. If I remember there we…

> Crossing the Rubicon (Rubicon is a river)?

"Today, the phrase crossing the Rubicon is a metaphor that means to pass a point of no return."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossing_the_Rubicon

Overhyped or not; that's a perfectly valid metaphor to use to phrase it.

I'd go with "milestone" which is less hype, but is also a metaphor, as no actual stone marking out a mile will be involved.

Re: SpaceX cleared for historic civilian launch next week

#66

Post by m3kw9 »

perlgeek wrote: post #37

Tying it to a donation of USD 100mm to charity is a very good PR move. It's much harder to be upset about private space being a billionaire's club when society stands to gain from the ride.

We should coin this move “Shutting them the F up money”

Re: SpaceX cleared for historic civilian launch next week

#67

Post by pc86 »

tellersid wrote: post #52
mkl wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is pretty wild when you think about it - not so long ago (10 years maybe?) this sort of thing would have been unthinkable . 10 years ago many people thought it would happen well before 2021. The "first operational Dragon spacecraft was launched in December 2010" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX ) and commercial flights to the ISS were right around the corner (cargo first happened May 2012).

I remember going to Disney Epcot Center as a kid and it showed how we would be living on the ocean floor by the year 2000. That is what I consider wild. If you told me as a kid that I will go my whole life without owning a robot and that the main difference is we will replace a rotary phone with a hand held phone I would want my money back. I guess poor Christa McAuliffe has been totally forgot about also.

> I guess poor Christa McAuliffe has been totally forgot about also.

Wasn't that a government flight aboard a government spacecraft that notably didn't make it to space? Not sure how that's related to a civilian flight aboard a civilian spacecraft.

Re: SpaceX cleared for historic civilian launch next week

#68

Post by leoedin »

xoa wrote: post #58
immmmmm wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

be it methane or RP1 you're subjected to the laws of thermodynamics. namely converting CO2 to any of those will require more energy than delivered by your rocket or car. also rocket engines are already some of the most efficient thermal engines available/possible, starship won't change that.

None of which has anything whatsoever to do with the issue of AGW though. For the purposes of warming the planet, direct energy usage and emission by humanity is irrelevant (utterly swamped by solar insolation for starters). What's driving it is our changing the net levels of greenhouse gases and in turn the amount of energy retained vs radiated into space. So what matters for dealing with climate disruption is makin…

Generating rocket fuels with renewables will only be carbon neutral when we have an excess of renewable energy. Until then, either the solar panels would be better used to replace fossil fuel generation on the grid, or the synthesised methane would be better used to replace a more necessary use of fossil methane.

It's hard to argue that a method of transport so incredibly energy inefficient will be a good thing until we're swimming in so much excess energy that we've got nothing better to do with it. Even with the massive improvements in renewables over the last few decades, we're a long, long way from that point.

Re: SpaceX cleared for historic civilian launch next week

#70

Post by Razengan »

detritus wrote: post #47
ForHackernews wrote: post #39

> The soon-to-be-astronauts Maybe this is just me, but I think we need a new word for people who pay to take a ride on a spacecraft but have nothing to do with the operation or mission of that spacecraft. "Payload" seems rude, perhaps "passengers"? Whatever they are, they're not astronauts.

The term itself will become meaningless if hundreds, thousands (millions..) of people start lofting into the heavens every year. Fundamentally, these guys have about as much control over their experience as your 'real' astronauts do.

But are all people on a cruise ship sailors?
Post reply on HN