| Forum Index > General Forum |
Keep debates civil. | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
On December 22 2015 18:07 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Blue Origin already did it earlier this year. so umm, ya. With a way smaller rocket that didn't put a payload into orbit. It's not the same class. Still very impressive of course, but this is a bigger achievement imo. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
arbiter_md
Moldova1219 Posts
Anyway, amazing achievement by spaceX. | ||
|
Nilrem
United States3684 Posts
| ||
|
Flaccid
8929 Posts
On December 22 2015 18:07 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Blue Origin already did it earlier this year. so umm, ya. A decent run-down of why this is a very different beast: | ||
|
Rassy
Netherlands2308 Posts
Curious how often this rocket can be re-used and how much it costs to prepare it for the next launch. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada18050 Posts
the only 1986 shuttle flight blew into a million pieces. i don't think it got "re used" is the Falcon9 better than the 1981 Space Shuttle? the devil is in the details. if the Falcon9 costs as much as the shuttle did to make a return flight then Musk's accomplishment means very little. If ,on the other extreme, SpaceX can put the Falcon9 back up into space a few days later with as much maintenance as a 747 requires THEN this is a major accomplishment. the actual technical feat does not mean a lot. what means a lot is the maintenance costs of re-usability. Another technical milestone that is not completed is putting actual cargo into space the way the Shuttle did. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
At one point in the SpaceX webcast of the launch the moderator had to remind viewers looking at SpaceX employees whooping and hugging after the landing that the mission’s main objective, after all, was to deploy the Orbcomm fleet. But it is the second stage’s performance that will position SpaceX to conduct commercial operations the way it has long intended. SpaceX said the second stage engine performed the full re-ignition and burn sequence needed for geostationary satellites. Source | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada18050 Posts
there was lots of engineers celebrating during the Shuttle and Apollo Era.. and where are we after all that? | ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
also the space shuttle had some parts that were NOT fully reuseable (the big orange tank burned up) and some parts that had to be rescued to be reused (the solid boosters fell into the ocean and required considerable effort to be functional again) etc. Much higher cost. And in truth, we aren't comparing the same things. The shuttle wasn't a reuseable launch system, it was a reuseable orbiter. Most of the launch system was not reuseable or at least difficult and expensive to reuse. Falcon 9 is completely different in that it's an entirely reuseable launch system. What it launches is somewhat irrelevant (although the payload does have fairly specific parameters). | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada18050 Posts
any way you slice it its all about lowering costs. if it costs me $50,000 to rebuild a completely new entity that can stick heavy cargo into space then we have a winner. it does not matter how good or how bad it looks in a video, it does not matter how much of the thing gets re-used. its all about a low cost solution. | ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada18050 Posts
and also raw # of re-uses is another factor. how "re usable" was the shuttle?. 1 shuttle got what? 30 flights maximum. and didn't 2 out of 6 fail. if 50% of the Falcon9's fail to land properly are they "re usable"? if a Falcon9 can take off and land as reliably as a 747 we have a winner. if its just another 30 max re-use product that fails regularly then i'll borrow a famous american saying " its deja vu all over again " | ||
|
arbiter_md
Moldova1219 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada18050 Posts
On December 23 2015 04:19 arbiter_md wrote: Everything depends on the cost of refurbishment. ya, and that's exactly what i said in my previous posts about "re usability". also this is a PR exercise so that US tax payers who fund NASA will be happy with NASA giving money to SpaceX.. all the celebrating etc.. its just PR so taxpayers can feel good about NASA money going to SPaceX. the real accomplishment ( if there is one at all ) occurs when the CEO examines the cost spreadsheets and discovers its way less expensive to put stuff in space than it was say .. 10 years ago. this type of conclusion can't be arrived at after a proof-of-concept flight and landing. these videos are designed to grease the skids for an influx of taxpayer cash. | ||
|
HugoBallzak
700 Posts
On December 23 2015 04:27 JimmyJRaynor wrote: ya, and that's exactly what i said in my previous posts about "re usability". also this is a PR exercise so that US tax payers who fund NASA will be happy with NASA giving money to SpaceX.. all the celebrating etc.. its just PR so taxpayers can feel good about NASA money going to SPaceX. the real accomplishment ( if there is one at all ) occurs when the CEO examines the cost spreadsheets and discovers its way less expensive to put stuff in space than it was say .. 10 years ago. this type of conclusion can't be arrived at after a proof-of-concept flight and landing. these videos are designed to grease the skids for an influx of taxpayer cash. You literally repeated yourself twice on this page of the thread alone. We get it, you are not impressed. | ||
|
Faust852
Luxembourg4004 Posts
| ||
|
misirlou
Portugal3319 Posts
Comparing what SpaceX accomplished live for the world to see to BO's secret project is simple ignorance. The technical feat is orders of magnitude apart. You should also be happy if Nasa spends less money in their projects and funnel it to private companies (Spx, ULA, BO, SNC, BA) because they are clearly capable of spending that money better. All the money they got in the last 30 years didn't accomplish anything as ground breaking for spaceflight as Musk's little fortune did. Unless you're happy with SLS costs for what it actually does. Or maybe you think that money is better spent on the DoD. | ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
| ||
iHirO
United Kingdom1381 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
The PondCast
KCM Race Survival
WardiTV Invitational
Lambo vs Shameless
Rogue vs uThermal
Percival vs YoungYakov
TBD vs GgMaChine
OSC
OSC
ArT vs MindelVK
MiniZergUA vs TBD
Shameless vs TBD
Ultimate Battle
OSC
OSC
ByuN vs MaxPax
herO vs Krystianer
Percival vs Shameless
LetaleX vs YoungYakov
Nicoract vs Gerald
GgMaChine vs ArT
CranKy Ducklings
IPSL
TerrOr vs IJ_Terran
rasowy vs Hazorath
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
