Planetary protection beyond a 1000 years is just silly. Within that time frame all sorts of absurd things could happen to the solar system (like the retrograde comet which just barely missed Mars a year back).
Airspace usage still needs a license from the government that runs it.
Seriously though, I really hope we don't get a whole bunch of millionaire with time and money to burn doing whatever they want to our solar system.
I respect Musk a lot, and it's quite likely he has and will further advance space flight like no other; but that doesn't mean we should just let him do whatever pops up in his head.
Like, one of his ideas for the BFR is to use them for fast intercontinental travel. I haven't looked into it hard, and no idea how serious he was about it, but maybe not such a good idea considering our current disastrous climate situation?
IMO if the price is right you could absolutely sell 'launch not guaranteed' payload space on test flights like this.
right now satellites are pretty expensive because launch costs are expensive
you want to send something up better make it worth it, make it highly engineered to last for decades and do enough to get a return
something like a CubeSat is about 50k to build and ~50-100k to launch
but if it's like... 5k to launch? some team at a university can probably scrape that together on the hope, and then do they need a 50k satellite or will some DIY jankiness that lasts for a couple of weeks do? Like at that point I guess the most expensive part is the comms system
or, hell, even just selling it as deadweight space, launch your dog's ashes into space or at least explode them!
Aioua on
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Airspace usage still needs a license from the government that runs it.
Seriously though, I really hope we don't get a whole bunch of millionaire with time and money to burn doing whatever they want to our solar system.
I respect Musk a lot, and it's quite likely he has and will further advance space flight like no other; but that doesn't mean we should just let him do whatever pops up in his head.
Like, one of his ideas for the BFR is to use them for fast intercontinental travel. I haven't looked into it hard, and no idea how serious he was about it, but maybe not such a good idea considering our current disastrous climate situation?
He's also simultaneously advancing electric vehicle development which would be a huge boon to cutting down carbon emissions so I think that's a pretty fair trade and the big picture is impressive once you put it together: EVs to drastically cut down on emissions with deep space colonization and mining to begin offloading humanity from Earth to the stars and to keep the supply of rare minerals rolling. It's easy to look at just one piece and see all the bad that can come from it (e.g. constant BFR use pollution/EVs depleting rare mineral supplies) but taken as a whole it's pretty damn good stuff. Elon is very much a big picture futurist so it's important to take all the pieces together rather than to start nit picking one leg of the chair till it collapses.
You're not wrong about needing to be very careful with corporations leading the charge into space, though. That's how you end up with cyber-dystopias and Earth turning into a ghetto for those who couldn't afford to leave.
Airspace usage still needs a license from the government that runs it.
Seriously though, I really hope we don't get a whole bunch of millionaire with time and money to burn doing whatever they want to our solar system.
I respect Musk a lot, and it's quite likely he has and will further advance space flight like no other; but that doesn't mean we should just let him do whatever pops up in his head.
Like, one of his ideas for the BFR is to use them for fast intercontinental travel. I haven't looked into it hard, and no idea how serious he was about it, but maybe not such a good idea considering our current disastrous climate situation?
He's also simultaneously advancing electric vehicle development which would be a huge boon to cutting down carbon emissions so I think that's a pretty fair trade and the big picture is impressive once you put it together: EVs to drastically cut down on emissions with deep space colonization and mining to begin offloading humanity from Earth to the stars and to keep the supply of rare minerals rolling. It's easy to look at just one piece and see all the bad that can come from it (e.g. constant BFR use pollution/EVs depleting rare mineral supplies) but taken as a whole it's pretty damn good stuff. Elon is very much a big picture futurist so it's important to take all the pieces together rather than to start nit picking one leg of the chair till it collapses.
You're not wrong about needing to be very careful with corporations leading the charge into space, though. That's how you end up with cyber-dystopias and Earth turning into a ghetto for those who couldn't afford to leave.
Anyway, my point was originally regarding Planetary Protection, which I don't have an opinion on one way or another, just the principle I was interested in. Seems to have been answered quite decisive!
In the meantime they're not gonna talk about the Core at all, huh?
Taerak on
0
Options
MeeqeLord of the pants most fancySomeplace amazingRegistered Userregular
But we're already in a cyber-dystopia with large portions of humanity already in ghettos and currently no one gets to leave, a scenario where some rich people get to leave is still preferable to the status quo. And as costs come down more and more people would have the option. I want humanity to take to the stars, and it appears national governments are not going to be able to muster the will or resources. I'd like some regulation on what private space-farers are allowed to do, but its looking more and more likely that private enterprise is going to be the mechanism that enables us to live elsewhere, and to some extent that means putting up with the weirdness of the ultra-rich. I view it as sub-optimal (I would love to see NASA expanded 1000-fold as a first choice) but as the optimal options don't seem likely from a funding perspective I'll take what progress I can get from the private sector.
Anyway, my point was originally regarding Planetary Protection, which I don't have an opinion on one way or another, just the principle I was interested in. Seems to have been answered quite decisive!
In the meantime they're not gonna talk about the Core at all, huh?
I imagine they don't care at this point. The boosters returned to the space center, which was a new trick, and the core is a modified rocket that will be replaced with the next block anyway.
SpaceX doesn't have a history of lying about failures, but this time I can see them not wanting this test to become "about" the core when so much else went perfectly.
0
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
edited February 2018
Incidentally, the news conference about the launch is just about to start where we might learn more specifics about what happened to the core.
Edit: That particular stream died. Maybe there'll be a more official one showing up at some point.
SpaceX was much more open about things during the early landing attempts. But that ended when every other media outlet would run a story titled SPACEX FAILS, ANOTHER ROCKET EXPLODES with a link to the failed landing and no mention of them having successfully launched a payload. It just isn't worth it to be open in a world where ratings and clicks drive content.
About the Planetary Protection: it's very important for a lander that's meant to be brought to a planet surface as gently and intact as humanly possible; but in the vanishingly tiny chance that the Tesla ends up captured by Mars and falls to the surface, isn't it going to be pretty thoroughly sterilized by a completely uncontrolled, un-heat-shielded re-entry?
SpaceX was much more open about things during the early landing attempts. But that ended when every other media outlet would run a story titled SPACEX FAILS, ANOTHER ROCKET EXPLODES with a link to the failed landing and no mention of them having successfully launched a payload. It just isn't worth it to be open in a world where ratings and clicks drive content.
... They literally posted a blooper reel of their various crashes and screwups, set to music with snarky captions about failure, a few months ago.
SpaceX was much more open about things during the early landing attempts. But that ended when every other media outlet would run a story titled SPACEX FAILS, ANOTHER ROCKET EXPLODES with a link to the failed landing and no mention of them having successfully launched a payload. It just isn't worth it to be open in a world where ratings and clicks drive content.
... They literally posted a blooper reel of their various crashes and screwups, set to music with snarky captions about failure, a few months ago.
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
edited February 2018
From the news conference, Elon is saying the centre core didn't have enough propellant left to reignite for landing.
The sound's pretty bad so I'd doublecheck exactly what he said.
Edit: Specifically, the side engines on the centre core were able to relight, but there wasn't enough propellant for the centre engine to also relight, so it basically ran out of fuel for landing.
I couldn't tell for sure because the ABC press conference stream's sound quality is horrific - the cameras drowned out the first several minutes - but I think he said the centre core struck OCISLU at something around 480kph. Ow.
0
Options
Gennenalyse RuebenThe Prettiest Boy is Ridiculously PrettyRegistered Userregular
SpaceX was much more open about things during the early landing attempts. But that ended when every other media outlet would run a story titled SPACEX FAILS, ANOTHER ROCKET EXPLODES with a link to the failed landing and no mention of them having successfully launched a payload. It just isn't worth it to be open in a world where ratings and clicks drive content.
... They literally posted a blooper reel of their various crashes and screwups, set to music with snarky captions about failure, a few months ago.
While true, this was also long after any of those launches. Clickbait "SPACEX ROCKET EXPLODES" articles were all immediately after said launches. And I know it colored non-space enthusiast attitudes towards the company because some of my own family thought of SpaceX as "those people that keep crashing rockets".
0
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
I couldn't tell for sure because the ABC press conference stream's sound quality is horrific - the cameras drowned out the first several minutes - but I think he said the centre core struck OCISLU at something around 480kph. Ow.
SpaceX was much more open about things during the early landing attempts. But that ended when every other media outlet would run a story titled SPACEX FAILS, ANOTHER ROCKET EXPLODES with a link to the failed landing and no mention of them having successfully launched a payload. It just isn't worth it to be open in a world where ratings and clicks drive content.
... They literally posted a blooper reel of their various crashes and screwups, set to music with snarky captions about failure, a few months ago.
Some of those clips weren't made available to the public until the reels release, many of them were from the period of time they were more open. All of those crashes are old news and the video ends with their successes. They're still much more guarded about how they present themselves than they used to be.
Well, Elon called the center core "pretty much a complete redesign", so that it fulfilled its mission perfectly and "only" failed to land is a pretty rousing success. The telemetry and info will be invaluable
+6
Options
Gennenalyse RuebenThe Prettiest Boy is Ridiculously PrettyRegistered Userregular
Nah, the drone ship's hitbox was shoddily made. :P
That's the whole recording including a lengthy period of people just sitting around. It starts a little more than a third of the way through, when Musk enters. The sound issue sorts itself out in the first few minutes, so most of it is actually audible after that.
So the documentary for Command and Control is up on Netflix. It's about an oops involving an ICBM in Arkansas. ICBMs seem space adjacent. I mean the difference is payload and aim really.
I'll definitely allow it!
They generally spend a few seconds in space, anyway!
0
Options
BeNarwhalThe Work Left UnfinishedRegistered Userregular
And hello again, everyone!
So, confirmation that they did indeed fail to catch the center booster. Oh well, two out of three ain't bad! And the two they caught did it very prettily :P
Great first flight of a new launch vehicle, now hopefully the second stage will be able to reignite after its experimental coast phase!
They're refusing to expand the acronym, though everyone knows what they mean. Some people say Big Falcon Rocket instead.
I liked CBC's coverage a few months back where they pronounced it Big Falkin' Rocket and left it pretty clear what it really meant.
(Also, Starman's apparently doing some maneuvers right now, going from the reaction thrusters on the second stage, so they seem to be prepping for departure..)
Posts
No one is going to stop a colony over contaminating some rocks with e.coli
SpaceX needs FAA and NASA help to launch.
Organizations subservient to politicians. What administration is going to let NASA put the kibosh on that PR?
Does he own any real estate on the equator, that's how you'll know it's happening
Inquisitor77: Rius, you are Sisyphus and melee Wizard is your boulder
Tube: This must be what it felt like to be an Iraqi when Saddam was killed
Bookish Stickers - Mrs. Rius' Etsy shop with bumper stickers and vinyl decals.
Seriously though, I really hope we don't get a whole bunch of millionaire with time and money to burn doing whatever they want to our solar system.
I respect Musk a lot, and it's quite likely he has and will further advance space flight like no other; but that doesn't mean we should just let him do whatever pops up in his head.
Like, one of his ideas for the BFR is to use them for fast intercontinental travel. I haven't looked into it hard, and no idea how serious he was about it, but maybe not such a good idea considering our current disastrous climate situation?
right now satellites are pretty expensive because launch costs are expensive
you want to send something up better make it worth it, make it highly engineered to last for decades and do enough to get a return
something like a CubeSat is about 50k to build and ~50-100k to launch
but if it's like... 5k to launch? some team at a university can probably scrape that together on the hope, and then do they need a 50k satellite or will some DIY jankiness that lasts for a couple of weeks do? Like at that point I guess the most expensive part is the comms system
or, hell, even just selling it as deadweight space, launch your dog's ashes into space or at least explode them!
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
He's also simultaneously advancing electric vehicle development which would be a huge boon to cutting down carbon emissions so I think that's a pretty fair trade and the big picture is impressive once you put it together: EVs to drastically cut down on emissions with deep space colonization and mining to begin offloading humanity from Earth to the stars and to keep the supply of rare minerals rolling. It's easy to look at just one piece and see all the bad that can come from it (e.g. constant BFR use pollution/EVs depleting rare mineral supplies) but taken as a whole it's pretty damn good stuff. Elon is very much a big picture futurist so it's important to take all the pieces together rather than to start nit picking one leg of the chair till it collapses.
You're not wrong about needing to be very careful with corporations leading the charge into space, though. That's how you end up with cyber-dystopias and Earth turning into a ghetto for those who couldn't afford to leave.
But not every piece is crucial to the chair. I'm hardly nitpicking the plan to failure when I question whether we really need to travel faster between New York and London if the result is greater pollution? (Not sure if it would.. but as a hypothetical.)
In the meantime they're not gonna talk about the Core at all, huh?
I imagine they don't care at this point. The boosters returned to the space center, which was a new trick, and the core is a modified rocket that will be replaced with the next block anyway.
SpaceX doesn't have a history of lying about failures, but this time I can see them not wanting this test to become "about" the core when so much else went perfectly.
Edit: That particular stream died. Maybe there'll be a more official one showing up at some point.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
http://lexiconmegatherium.tumblr.com/
I was thinking more Vger/Tsla ?
When I first read "DON'T PANIC!" in bold, friendly letters, I literally shot the water I was drinking out of my mouth involuntarily
... They literally posted a blooper reel of their various crashes and screwups, set to music with snarky captions about failure, a few months ago.
"Most expensive fireworks in the world"
The sound's pretty bad so I'd doublecheck exactly what he said.
Edit: Specifically, the side engines on the centre core were able to relight, but there wasn't enough propellant for the centre engine to also relight, so it basically ran out of fuel for landing.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
While true, this was also long after any of those launches. Clickbait "SPACEX ROCKET EXPLODES" articles were all immediately after said launches. And I know it colored non-space enthusiast attitudes towards the company because some of my own family thought of SpaceX as "those people that keep crashing rockets".
Oh man. That.. might take a bit to repair.
Some of those clips weren't made available to the public until the reels release, many of them were from the period of time they were more open. All of those crashes are old news and the video ends with their successes. They're still much more guarded about how they present themselves than they used to be.
It hit the water and still took out two engines. Debris?
That was a pretty good press conference
I was expecting the questions to be half-fixated on the centre core, but they seem to have caught that up front.
(I was betting that core was the one that would pancake too, if one was going to.)
That's the whole recording including a lengthy period of people just sitting around. It starts a little more than a third of the way through, when Musk enters. The sound issue sorts itself out in the first few minutes, so most of it is actually audible after that.
I'll definitely allow it!
They generally spend a few seconds in space, anyway!
So, confirmation that they did indeed fail to catch the center booster. Oh well, two out of three ain't bad! And the two they caught did it very prettily :P
Great first flight of a new launch vehicle, now hopefully the second stage will be able to reignite after its experimental coast phase!
I liked CBC's coverage a few months back where they pronounced it Big Falkin' Rocket and left it pretty clear what it really meant.
(Also, Starman's apparently doing some maneuvers right now, going from the reaction thrusters on the second stage, so they seem to be prepping for departure..)