Posted on 02/10/2018 8:49:17 AM PST by Voption
"Capitalism in space: SpaceX has highlighted the last image from its Tesla car, heading out to the asteroid belt after being lofted into space by its Falcon Heavy rocket... .....this also highlights that a private American company was able to send a payload beyond Earth orbit, and it took them only seven years of development and no government funds. ....[an almost perfect test] according to Musk, the reason the [1st stage] core hit the water so fast is because some engines did not fire as intended. [SpaceX] engineers believed only one of three engines fired during a final burn designed to slow the rocket’s descent, before touchdown. The stage only missed the boat by about the length of a football field, but the force of its water impact was enough to “take out” two engines on the nearby drone ship, and spray it with debris...."
(Excerpt) Read more at audioboom.com ...
The operation was a success; the patient died.
Reusable stages was examined in the 60s by NASA. It was technically feasible. However, the cost of putting payload into orbit was so high that the cost of extra fuel, which means reduced payload weight, was deemed to expensive and unnecessary.
Advancements in precision machining and design and computer controls may have made that cost-effective. It IS is neat technical achievement, but it is not earth shattering.
What he has done is akin to the Japanese taking automobile designs in the 60s-70s and producing efficient cars in the late 70s and early 80s. Time will tell if he can actually achieve technical leadership.
SpaceX dominates the commercial launch market and now has a $12 billion backlog.
True. But, one must remember that the Rocket was only carrying a TEST payload (the car) which was a small percentage of it's total load carrying capacity.
I am having an argument about this type of stuff in my city right now.
Giving a tax exemption to a business DOES NOT add to the value of the business.
In our city, due to the GRT structure, businesses generate revenue directly to the city. If a business is looking to relocate to your city or another, and your city wants to charge it $250,000 in "infrastructure fees" and the other city won't, where do you think they will go, all else being equal?
If giving a business tax credits generates long term income for the city that far outstrips the credits given, why wouldn't you do it?
I can’t disagree with anything you have said. But our exploratory space program has become a morass. Blame it on feckless, craven politicians. I’m fine with that. But, somebody at some point had to shake the thing up. Elon Musk did.
I work at Marshall Space Flight Center. Contractor, not Civil Service.
I spent 13 years at Motorola working in the commercial electronic arena. I have seen both sides of the coin.
Right now, the folks at NASA are busting their rear ends on the new SLS program.
The Bush Administration and the Obama Administration nearly doomed NASA. Less than zero leadership and direction during Obama’s reign.
Unbelievably, the US Senate (who are pretty much useless) provided the leadership and direction to get the SLS program going. To their credit, they recognized the incalculable wealth of experience and knowledge that was wasting away in the NASA centers doing “Muslim Outreach” and other claptrap.
We now have a mission and we are moving forward at a great pace.
So is President Trump. They both went to Wharton, too.
And his biggest successes have been getting hundreds of millions of dollars from the Federal Government for his “private, commercial” projects.
Musk put himself through college by renting a large house with his roomate and throwing parties every weekend and charging a cover. Musk started his first company called Zip2 and made $22 million off the sale. He initially slept on the floor of his office in a beanbag chair. He was putting in long hours put all of his money into the company.
Next he started an online bank called X.com. It became Paypal and he made over $200 million from the sale.
Next he started SpaceX and invested heavily in Tesla. Everything he has is invested in those two companies. He doesn't take a salary just like President Trump. The subsidies claimed by the LATimes make up less 6% of their market capital. SpaceX dominates the commercial launch market. Tesla is number one in customer satisfaction among car companies. Both companies are fueled by Musk's grand vision, accomplishments and the extreme enthusiasm of his employees and customers.
It gets a little tiring to see people moan about subsidies for the ten thousandth time on FR, when it's clear they don't know the whole story.
It was the first full-on test.... lighten up!
:)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BFR_(rocket)
Musk is breaking through the barrier that has existed for 60 years: the $10,000+ a pound to put something in orbit.
That will be as revolutionary as the microprocessor.
I was skeptical too until about a year ago when Falcon 9 became really reliable.
And NASA throwing money at their contractors has been much of the problem.
Do yo want me to tell you the story on how one of his rockets blew up?
They had a contractor (no, SpaceX doesn’t do all of it’s hardware manufacturing) supply braces on internal LOX tank. SpaceX, being the ultra smart people they are, decided they didn’t need to test all of the struts supplied by the contractor, just a really, really, really small sample. You see, that would cut into their profits AND schedule.
Strut(s) failed and punctured LOX tank.
BOOM!
Space flight is terribly unforgiving.... and expensive. Don’t let Musk tell you otherwise
Other than that, I guess it was a success.
Maybe if this was the 10th FH launch your sarcasm might be justified. But Musk said he figured it was only a 50-50 shot that it would even get off the pad. That’s also the reason NASA required a LOT more insurance on the pad facilities for this launch.
I’m old enough to remember NASA’s first launches blowing up on the pad, so getting 27 engines to light off and work perfectly all the way up, and then 2 boosters return to the Cape is really doing something.
Having one out of three boosters malfunction does NOT indicate a ‘system failure’. It was the same system that landed the other two boosters perfectly.
As far as the guidance problem, why should SpaceX be exempt. How many NASA vehicles have gone off course, missed the planet, crashed into the planet, or just plain disappeared. And NASA’s been doing this for decades.
Based on everything, the FH launch was a rousing success.
Things that make you go hmmmm
Musk isn’t stupid, nor technically illiterate. Nor is he transparent and honest. He would have the public believe that SpaceX designed and launched all those rockets as a private company without government assistance. Never mind the billions of government dollars he has received over the years.
NASA spent 30 years ignoring rocketry. From 1975 - 2005, the Shuttle program and the Space Station ate up the NASA budget.
The lessons learned from the Space Station will be implemented for decades in the future.
To learn to live and work in space for long periods of time, you have to live and work in space for long periods of time. There is no substitute for experience.
It was always intended for the second stage to “burn dry” , use up all propellants
Wasn’t a failure - do to the light payload had lot more
oomph that normal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_CRS-7
That would be CRS-7 and SpaceX’s only inflight loss.
An enviable record, and they’re cheaper than anyone else now.
Ask NASA about their subcontractors and Apollo 13, Apollo 1, Challenger, Columbia...
SpaceX designed and launched all those rockets as a private company without government assistance. Never mind the billions of government dollars he has received over the years.
Beyond the US government paying him to launch payloads, what ‘billions of government dollars’ has SpaceX received?
t was the first full-on test.... lighten up!
Second test of Saturn V was partial failure - premature shutdown of 2nd stage engine, do to wiring problem adjacent
engine also shutdown
3rd stage engine failed to restart on command
Also rocket experience severe vibrations (POGO) which could have injured crew and damage components
Von Braum able to fix all these problems = in December launched Apollo 8 to moon
ALL of the NASA technical information on rocket design and performance is available to Elon Musk, so I would expect his failure rate to be diminished with research.
What I called a “system failure” you may describe as a “stage failure” or even a “glitch”. Whatever you call it, the plan was for a landing and re-use of the stage. That didn’t happen. That is a failure, no matter how you slice it.
To be successful, he has to figure out exactly what failed, why it failed, how it failed, mitigate the failure through design change, or quality assurance if it was workmanship, and do ANOTHER launch to insure it will work in the future.
“Oh, everything is great and we are ready to move forward” is not the correct response.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.