• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Space Exploration / Space Flight: Manned

China and India are both talking about maned flight to the Moon
I think the US is just trying to cover the bases by getting there first.
 
... we find out towards the end that STARK actually stands for Star Ark, a ship that's been built for billionaires by billionaires so they can escape Earth after destroying it through greed. The book's actually a lot funnier than I'm making it sound.
I remember the book well; published when his fame as an 'alternative' and edgy comic started to wane. I preferred Gridlock.

Thing is, until science and technology makes extra-atmospheric flight less hard on the body then actual spaceflight will be for the few. Not those who can afford it but those who are physically fit enough to survive the rigours. I'd jump at the chance to fly in space, to the moon or Mars, but I'm grounded enough to know that I'm so old, even getting into shape would take too long let alone afford the ticket-price.
At the moment, the actual physicality of spaceflight acts as a gatekeeper. Perhaps privately financed technology will make it easier on the body ... but only so the likes of Musk and Branson will experience it; what's the point of being in an elite if anyone can enjoy the same perks?
 
To Musk, it counts as a win.
"Well, it was the largest and took to the skies so ..."
 
Meh.... this was only a prototype, and 'Rapid Prototyping' means that the ones that follow (of which there are many) will be redesigned to avoid the likelihood of a repeat of the less-than-ideal outcome experienced by this version that went up today.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if we see SpaceX skip the next 3 or 4 iterations that are already assembled or part-assembled, in favour of jumping ahead to the next version which is able to be fully constructed without the unsuitable components.

I expect to see some disassembly being carried out in the shipyards at Boca Chica.
 
Meh.... this was only a prototype, and 'Rapid Prototyping' means that the ones that follow (of which there are many) will be redesigned to avoid the likelihood of a repeat of the less-than-ideal outcome experienced by this version that went up today.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if we see SpaceX skip the next 3 or 4 iterations that are already assembled or part-assembled, in favour of jumping ahead to the next version which is able to be fully constructed without the unsuitable components.

I expect to see some disassembly being carried out in the shipyards at Boca Chica.
I wouldn't be putting my name down for its first manned mission...
 
I noticed that Elon Musk call this test a success.

Musk said it was a great learning experience for the team.
 
I didn't think it was going to go it seemed to sit there with the engines at full power
for ages before lifting off and in some of the shots it looked like 5 or 6 engines
weren't lit, I think they destroyed it when it became obvious it was in trouble.
But if you can get something the same height as Blackpool tower with near
4500 tones of fuel onboard to go straight up and brake the sound barrier
it's hardly a fail.


:cheer:
 
Last edited:
A fair bit of debris lying about and it did not do the car a lot of good don't
know how many of those camera's survived.

1682021332771.jpeg
 
I thought once the dust had settled and we could see the whole site again, that the launch tower would be gone!
 
  • Like
Reactions: RaM
I've a lot of time with the "even failure progresses science" narrative. It's very true - we can learn from mistakes and make things better.
When it comes to the commercial sector, however, the pressure is applied by investors who hear the concept of errors leaning to success and point out that they're not doing it for the good of humanity but for their profits.
They have to be appeased and, learning through error isn't conducive at stockholders meetings.
Bottom line with any application of the capitalist system is ... what do I get out of it?

P.S. I feel vindicated by my May 28th, 3:03 pm GMT - Musk has said exactly what I predicted. Do I get a prize or summat?
 
Video showing the launch and later damage to the launch site,
they may get a fresh booster and ship ready in a few weeks
but it may take longer to sort out the pad.

 
Not entirely unexpected, but disappointing nonetheless.
From BBC News

Artemis: Nasa delays crewed return to the Moon's surface​

US space agency astronauts won't get to walk on the Moon again until September 2026 at the earliest.
It represents a slip of a year in the previously targeted date for the return of humans to the lunar surface that was last achieved in 1972.
Nasa says the delay to what's known as its Artemis III mission will enable further technology development.
Fundamentally, the agency still doesn't have a craft to put astronauts on the Moon or spacesuits they can wear.
Announcing the delay, agency administrator Bill Nelson said safety drove all timing considerations. "We won't fly until we're ready," he told reporters.
 
There's a reentry expected today. Nowt like a good fireworks display.
 
Not entirely unexpected, but disappointing nonetheless.
From BBC News

Artemis: Nasa delays crewed return to the Moon's surface​

US space agency astronauts won't get to walk on the Moon again until September 2026 at the earliest.
It represents a slip of a year in the previously targeted date for the return of humans to the lunar surface that was last achieved in 1972.
Nasa says the delay to what's known as its Artemis III mission will enable further technology development.
Fundamentally, the agency still doesn't have a craft to put astronauts on the Moon or spacesuits they can wear.
Announcing the delay, agency administrator Bill Nelson said safety drove all timing considerations. "We won't fly until we're ready," he told reporters.
Rather odd reasons though. "Further technology development" The technology existed in 1969, that could be an excuse for never going. Safety driving everything is laudable but the venture is inherently risky. Apollo's casualties were on ground based tests. It will probably come down to the oft re hashed remarks possibly originally by John Glenn.

" I guess the question I'm asked the most often is "When you were sitting in that capsule listening to the count-down, how did you feel?" Well, the answer to that one is easy. I felt exactly how you would feel if you were getting ready to launch and knew you were sitting on top of two million parts -- all built by the lowest bidder on a government contract.”

However it didn't stop him or all the others from going. I wonder whether this latest delay is because India, China, Russia, Iran, Mordor, etc. don't seem to be about to beat the US to it.
 
By 'further technology development', they mean 'find a way of doing it on the cheap'.
NASA can't get the funding it did during the Cold War, so contracting the whole project out.
Private firms are happy to be paid to begin the exploitation ... but want to minimise the bite out of profits.
 
They were brave men, on one launch one noticed the other remove his hand from
the switch that in case of problems fired the escape tower engines and hopefully
blasted them to safety, he asked later why he had removed his hand, the answer
was there was so much vibration that he was worried he may press the switch by
accident and he was more frightened of doing that than dying.
 
Back
Top