Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: eagl on May 21, 2012, 10:28:12 PM
-
The SpaceX launch attempt tonight is a big deal. It's the first demonstration by a private company of a capability that could directly lead to private/commercial manned spaceflight. The mission plan is to qualify the spacex system to orbit, rendezvous with the ISS, and then eventually dock. After transferring payload, the module will return to a soft landing on Earth. At least, that's the plan. The whole flight plan has numerous test points and failures at almost any of them would mean no ISS docking attempt. Nobody wants a repeat of the Russian docking collision mishap... If it all works, it's a very short (relatively) step to both routine 2-way cargo missions to the ISS, and routine manned missions to either the ISS or another private/commercial orbital facility. The inflatable habitat modules developed by another company were already proven in orbit, and are on the shelf waiting for the manned launch capability.
The launch is planned for 3am eastern time very early Tues morning. Watch here: http://www.spacex.com/webcast/
The stakes are pretty big. The US has no manned spaceflight capability, period. We could, in an emergency, develop it "overnight" using off the shelf components (with arguably better proven reliability than most WWII aircraft) that are not "man rated" by NASA standards. This would be good enough in a pinch, but it isn't a long term solution so right now we got nothing. But if spaceX has a fully successful mission we are leaping years ahead on the timeline of returning to our status as a spacefaring nation.
Even if it doesn't fully work, they'll still check off test points so even a spectacular failure would still be a "win" from a design-test-fly perspective. Heck, even the aborted launch a few days ago was a huge win for their program because it validated a whole bunch of software and abort procedures.
-
Commercial research and development, and hard definitive costs are the future of ALL spaceflight.
-
if my last day of school wasn't tomorrow I would stay up to see this
-
if my last day of school wasn't tomorrow I would stay up to see this
dude if its the last day why would you even be doing anything? I remember my "last days" of the school year in highschool. people would smoke pot in classrooms, fight,and flash mob. YOLO i guess.
give yourself a treat and stay up champ.
-
Fifty minutes until webcast starts. I'm in, thanks for the reminder Eagl.
-
Yes! Liftoff!
I hope the rest of the mission goes well. It cheers me to see American ingenuity and know how can still put it down when it chooses too. This is such a huge deal for future space flight, a private sector successful launch. Someday I bet a private company will build a single stage to orbit (SSTO) air/spacecraft that will be able to do what the shuttle did as well as much that it couldn't.
Good day for Aerospace in America and the rest of the world.
I remember watching the Challenger liftoff over 20 years ago when I was home skipping school with a faked fever. Today, I'm watching this rocket/vehicle in space on my handheld Blackberry Playbook outdoors in the middle of know where. Star Trek becomes closer to reality every day - I can see outer space from a rocket on a screen in my hand, and none of it was built by the government. I get really depressed reading about the way the world is going some days, but when things like this happen, I have to think that we are capable of so much that it blows my mind.
T+10 minutes, separation and the Falcon 9 is in orbit. T+12 minutes solar rays have deployed! Perfect mission so far, you can hear lots of cheering in the background, tumultuous yelling and cheering, makes me very happy for everyone involved.
-
That was awesome! I'm always amazed by the sheer power of those engines, love watching em!
-
awesome. god bless America!! :aok
-
Still no video. :headscratch:
-
http://www.youtube.com/user/nasatelevision/
Try that for the launch vid.
Note around 10 minutes, the difference between spacex and nasa... nasa had these super durable expensive custom consoles in mission control, with built in screens, etc etc. All very professional, durable, built to last, etc. SpaceX has "kids" (30-somethings) wearing t-shirts and jeans sitting at moveable workstation tables looking at general purpose triple-monitor setups with what in one spot looks like a mission status projected onto a clear space on the wall. The whole workspace could be reconfigured or partitioned for different or multiple missions in less than an hour, and it probably cost a mere fraction (a tenth is my estimate) of what it cost NASA to set up their original mission control facility with hardware that was obsolete within a year and difficult/expensive to modify for future missions.
That's the mark of a commercial/private program, set up from the start to respond to change and not spending excess money on frills, especially operations tech that will either be obsolete within a year, or which will need to be re-purposed quickly without costing the program a lot of money.
They sure looked like a startup company sitting at those tables but it gave me hope that they'll still be around launching rockets for a long time.
-
http://www.youtube.com/user/nasatelevision/
Try that for the launch vid.
Note around 10 minutes, the difference between spacex and nasa... nasa had these super durable expensive custom consoles in mission control, with built in screens, etc etc. All very professional, durable, built to last, etc. SpaceX has "kids" (30-somethings) wearing t-shirts and jeans sitting at moveable workstation tables looking at general purpose triple-monitor setups with what in one spot looks like a mission status projected onto a clear space on the wall. The whole workspace could be reconfigured or partitioned for different or multiple missions in less than an hour, and it probably cost a mere fraction (a tenth is my estimate) of what it cost NASA to set up their original mission control facility with hardware that was obsolete within a year and difficult/expensive to modify for future missions.
That's the mark of a commercial/private program, set up from the start to respond to change and not spending excess money on frills, especially operations tech that will either be obsolete within a year, or which will need to be re-purposed quickly without costing the program a lot of money.
They sure looked like a startup company sitting at those tables but it gave me hope that they'll still be around launching rockets for a long time.
Computers were much different back then. Tubes and all took up large rooms. Your phone has more processing power by far than what we used to send the men to the moon.
-
Computers were much different back then. Tubes and all took up large rooms. Your phone has more processing power by far than what we used to send the men to the moon.
Yea. But the consoles they built were industrial age durable, and in hindsight probably cost more to make than necessary. Waaay overbuilt and they had to rebuild them almost every mission anyhow, due to tech improvements and mission requirements changes. I like the collapsable workshop table better for a commercial startup. Hopefully they can avoid the temptation to overbuild and grow little empires within the company. Those tables can be pushed around by a couple guys who will be running the next mission, but custom "permanent" workstations and durable consoles would require a full-time staff to maintain, and that's how infrastructure costs explode and support empires that bring in zero revenue (yet somehow end up telling everyone else what they can and can't do) are born.
-
Back then the computer was a lot more exoensive that today. Individuals did not have computers. They were not portable at all.
With the cost of a computer you would not want to be moving it.
-
Back then the computer was a lot more exoensive that today. Individuals did not have computers. They were not portable at all.
With the cost of a computer you would not want to be moving it.
I doubt the computers were in the consoles. You can quibble about it all you want but the consoles were waaaaay overbuilt for their purpose and were so customized they were probably very expensive to move/modify for each mission. They simply didn't use them enough to justify making them that expensive. Again you can argue about all you want but it was a very expensive approach to an operational requirement, and the solution was expensive and difficult to maintain and modify for new requirements. One more reason why NASA has struggled with money for such a long time. Who wants to fire the guys who are absolutely critical to maintaining and upgrading consoles designed decades ago but which are so durable they don't want to throw out and replace with something that looks (and is) cheaper?
-
Computers were much different back then. Tubes and all took up large rooms. Your phone has more processing power by far than what we used to send the men to the moon.
My grandfather after the war was a private trucker/mover and was one of a coupel dozen contracted to move the first UNIVAC computer from the east coast to make it out here to the west coast. Just moving a single computer with less computing power than a circa 1990 pocket calculator, from A to B, employed more manpower, money and logistics than people would imagine (definetley at least enough to to move a mans family across the country and start his own private warehouse).
-
http://www.youtube.com/user/nasatelevision/
Try that for the launch vid.
Note around 10 minutes, the difference between spacex and nasa... nasa had these super durable expensive custom consoles in mission control, with built in screens, etc etc. All very professional, durable, built to last, etc. SpaceX has "kids" (30-somethings) wearing t-shirts and jeans sitting at moveable workstation tables looking at general purpose triple-monitor setups with what in one spot looks like a mission status projected onto a clear space on the wall. The whole workspace could be reconfigured or partitioned for different or multiple missions in less than an hour, and it probably cost a mere fraction (a tenth is my estimate) of what it cost NASA to set up their original mission control facility with hardware that was obsolete within a year and difficult/expensive to modify for future missions.
That's the mark of a commercial/private program, set up from the start to respond to change and not spending excess money on frills, especially operations tech that will either be obsolete within a year, or which will need to be re-purposed quickly without costing the program a lot of money.
They sure looked like a startup company sitting at those tables but it gave me hope that they'll still be around launching rockets for a long time.
Thanks for the link.
Tax payer money at the time was bountiful and people held the belief that NASA was doing the right thing. I agree, but, had things been handled a bit more frugally, I think less people would have been against the expenditures.
I hope the private sector can accomplish as much or more and not cheapen it at the cost of human life. That is a tough line to walk and I wouldn't want to be the one to walk it.
:salute
-
Calling this a private venture is a bit ridiculous. It's still using technology pioneered and designed by taxpayer funds to complete a mission payed for by taxpayer funds.
Unless NASA was there to pay for this it would never have happened. Unless NASA was there to pave the way it would have never happened.
Save a few rich maniacs who will waste all of their money setting up a space program, we'll never see any truly private venture (one that's not just state-outsourced programs) far into the future. No one is going to pay trillions of dollars, hoping to make anything back, on something with little to no chance for return.
-
No one is going to pay trillions of dollars, hoping to make anything back, on something with little to no chance for return.
Motherland, they said the same thing about transatlantic crossing with aircraft, and if you go back further, with sailpowered ships.
Never say never... it may not be in our lifetime, but it will happen (if we don't annihilate ourselves first).
-
Motherland, they said the same thing about transatlantic crossing with aircraft, and if you go back further, with sailpowered ships.
Never say never... it may not be in our lifetime, but it will happen (if we don't annihilate ourselves first).
I've no doubt that eventually we'll be in space, and that there will eventually be found legitimate reasons and great benefits of us being there and exploring it more fully. I think NASA's a great program.
But I think it's ridiculous to think that private investors will be the way to get there, considering that we've already spent trillions of dollars on it with not a whole lot to show for it, other than to say we've done it, which doesn't exactly help the bottom line at all for a private investor, so there's no point in it unless he's just in it for the fame, and, let's face it, even these guys have limited funds and they're extremely few and far between.
I have no doubt that private space travel and exploitation will be there eventually, but it will be long after state programs have created the technology and infrastructure necessary to make it profitable and worthwhile. We're still far from that point.
-
I doubt the computers were in the consoles. You can quibble about it all you want but the consoles were waaaaay overbuilt for their purpose and were so customized they were probably very expensive to move/modify for each mission. They simply didn't use them enough to justify making them that expensive. Again you can argue about all you want but it was a very expensive approach to an operational requirement, and the solution was expensive and difficult to maintain and modify for new requirements. One more reason why NASA has struggled with money for such a long time. Who wants to fire the guys who are absolutely critical to maintaining and upgrading consoles designed decades ago but which are so durable they don't want to throw out and replace with something that looks (and is) cheaper?
They were not in the consoles, tons of wiring were. Don't forget the huge tube for the monitor.
-
the bulk of rocket launches at this point are already funded by the private sector and are profitable commercial ventures. the ISS and manned flights attract all the attention because spacewalks make great footage, so its easy to forget how all those 1000s of satellites got up there.