Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

SpaceX

A forum for discussion of regional topics including oil depletion but also government, society, and the future.

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby asg70 » Mon 08 Jan 2018, 20:28:28

pstarr wrote:Asgy your attack on me (likely a stupid jpg) is misplaced. I am not real; I am Elon's nasty virtual doppelganger lol


Wasn't I in your ignore filter? Why are you reading my posts?

HALL OF SHAME:
-Short welched on a bet and should be shunned.
-Frequent-flyers should not cry crocodile-tears over climate-change.
asg70
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2834
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Tue 09 Jan 2018, 08:43:44

Report satellite lost ! True or just a ploy to keep the rest of it'd mission classified?
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/01/08/hig ... aunch.html
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9776
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby Cog » Tue 09 Jan 2018, 09:47:17

Not sure if you can truly lose a satellite since they are observable by amateur astronomers.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12706
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Tue 09 Jan 2018, 16:39:45

Cog wrote:Not sure if you can truly lose a satellite since they are observable by amateur astronomers.
Even if they are painted black?
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9776
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby Cog » Tue 09 Jan 2018, 19:41:02

vtsnowedin wrote:
Cog wrote:Not sure if you can truly lose a satellite since they are observable by amateur astronomers.
Even if they are painted black?


Occlusion of stars, by the passage of the satellite, would still happen black or not. I'm also surmising the Chinese and Russians have the ability to use radar the same way we do to keep track of objects in orbit. Unless there is some radar defeating stealth to this thing. Not saying this isn't some sort of secret mission, testing some new technology though.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12706
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Tue 09 Jan 2018, 20:30:26

Cog wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote:
Cog wrote:Not sure if you can truly lose a satellite since they are observable by amateur astronomers.
Even if they are painted black?


Occlusion of stars, by the passage of the satellite, would still happen black or not. I'm also surmising the Chinese and Russians have the ability to use radar the same way we do to keep track of objects in orbit. Unless there is some radar defeating stealth to this thing. Not saying this isn't some sort of secret mission, testing some new technology though.
Might be easier to just say it is gathering data for the climate change crowd and have it do it's real mission on the QT embedded in the data stream.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9776
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby Cog » Tue 09 Jan 2018, 22:08:00

On a related note the top-secret X37B, the unmanned mini-space plane, went back into orbit in September 2017. No one really knows what it does up there for the Air Force.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12706
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby Cog » Wed 10 Jan 2018, 06:12:45

Now put on your tin-foil hats. The Zuma launch was not a failure. The Zuma launch was a target for whatever weapon was put onboard the X37B space plane. The same space plane that was launched by SpaceX September 2017.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12706
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Wed 10 Jan 2018, 06:45:23

Cog wrote:Now put on your tin-foil hats. The Zuma launch was not a failure. The Zuma launch was a target for whatever weapon was put onboard the X37B space plane. The same space plane that was launched by SpaceX September 2017.

No tin foil needed for that to be plausible. Hope they didn't really use a high tech, high cost satellite when any hunk of junk would do. :roll:
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9776
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby Tanada » Wed 10 Jan 2018, 09:59:00

vtsnowedin wrote:
Cog wrote:Now put on your tin-foil hats. The Zuma launch was not a failure. The Zuma launch was a target for whatever weapon was put onboard the X37B space plane. The same space plane that was launched by SpaceX September 2017.

No tin foil needed for that to be plausible. Hope they didn't really use a high tech, high cost satellite when any hunk of junk would do. :roll:


LOL given you have no more idea what ZUMA was than I do for all we know it was a black plastic 55 gallon barrel filled with tap water! NASA did some pretty neat tests in the early 1960's exploding barrels of water at extreme sub orbital altitudes. The nice thing is they have a lot of mass but other than the container there is nothing left to run into after the explosion because the water turns to vapor.

Besides under your scenario they would target a dead satellite that at least four space agencies track on every orbit, the USAF missile command, the Russian ABM command, the Chinese space command and the European space surveillance authority. If someone did a test on a well established object everyone would know it, if someone shoots down an object that has not made even one complete orbit it is much more mystery than knowledge.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15509
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Wed 10 Jan 2018, 14:26:32

Tanada wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote:
Cog wrote:Now put on your tin-foil hats. The Zuma launch was not a failure. The Zuma launch was a target for whatever weapon was put onboard the X37B space plane. The same space plane that was launched by SpaceX September 2017.

No tin foil needed for that to be plausible. Hope they didn't really use a high tech, high cost satellite when any hunk of junk would do. :roll:


LOL given you have no more idea what ZUMA was than I do for all we know it was a black plastic 55 gallon barrel filled with tap water! NASA did some pretty neat tests in the early 1960's exploding barrels of water at extreme sub orbital altitudes. The nice thing is they have a lot of mass but other than the container there is nothing left to run into after the explosion because the water turns to vapor.

Besides under your scenario they would target a dead satellite that at least four space agencies track on every orbit, the USAF missile command, the Russian ABM command, the Chinese space command and the European space surveillance authority. If someone did a test on a well established object everyone would know it, if someone shoots down an object that has not made even one complete orbit it is much more mystery than knowledge.

One of the best Movie lines ever.
You didn't really think they spent $5000 on a toilet seat did you?
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9776
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby asg70 » Fri 23 Feb 2018, 11:27:45

SpaceX developments are moving too fast to bother posting in this thread, the Falcon Heavy followed by the PAZ launch with the start of their sat-internet endeavor and experimental fairing capture attempt.

Objectively speaking it's hard to classify SpaceX as anything other than a success, given its constant innovation and risk-taking. I read an article suggesting that, financially speaking, they would not be able to sustain more than one or two catastrophic failures, but it seems as though they are rapidly fine-tuning the entire F9 launch and landing regime in a way that is improving the odds.

The fate of Zuma is a nagging mystery, but if their success ratio holds it seems to bolster SpaceX side of the story that the failure was due to non-SpaceX parts.

Unless things turn for the worst suddenly then it sure seems like Falcon 9 and its descendants will go down as one of the most significant rockets of all time.

HALL OF SHAME:
-Short welched on a bet and should be shunned.
-Frequent-flyers should not cry crocodile-tears over climate-change.
asg70
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2834
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby Cog » Fri 23 Feb 2018, 12:20:30

SpaceX is doing incredibly well and is set to make billions more.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12706
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby dissident » Sat 24 Feb 2018, 09:48:50

Cog wrote:SpaceX is doing incredibly well and is set to make billions more.


Yeah, those government subsidies are really nice.

They even left Musk jerk his car customers around (cf. Tesla 3).
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5585
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby asg70 » Sat 24 Feb 2018, 10:49:14


HALL OF SHAME:
-Short welched on a bet and should be shunned.
-Frequent-flyers should not cry crocodile-tears over climate-change.
asg70
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2834
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: SpaceX

Unread postby asg70 » Tue 10 Apr 2018, 14:52:18

SpaceX not to blame for Zuma failure. Just in time for PStarr to resume his heckling.

HALL OF SHAME:
-Short welched on a bet and should be shunned.
-Frequent-flyers should not cry crocodile-tears over climate-change.
asg70
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2834
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: THE Laws of Thermodynamics Thread (merged)

Unread postby radon1 » Mon 26 Aug 2019, 17:30:51

The advantage of solid fueled rockets is a much greater safety and cheaper maintenance. The disadvantage is a significant loss in maneuverability and precision as the thrust cannot be managed actively.
radon1
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2044
Joined: Thu 27 Jun 2013, 05:09:44

Re: THE Laws of Thermodynamics Thread (merged)

Unread postby GHung » Mon 26 Aug 2019, 18:53:15

radon1 wrote:The advantage of solid fueled rockets is a much greater safety and cheaper maintenance. The disadvantage is a significant loss in maneuverability and precision as the thrust cannot be managed actively.


Experience with the Shuttle program showed that solid rocket booster reuseability was problematic and not cost effective. SpaceX has essentially changed the game for costs per Kg to orbit and is still making great progress. LOX and methane are cheap, plentiful, and SpaceX fuel costs are ridiculously low compared to other platforms. Turn-around time for their Block 5 Falcon 9 first stage is days to a couple of weeks. Blue Origin and others are following suit but find themselves playing catch up.
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2942
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

PreviousNext

Return to North America Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests