/sci/ - Science & Math

>they didn't show the third burn on the live stream

man I'm disappointed

>>9496011
>invents a car that can go all the way past Mars
I don't know why you're talking about SpaceX OP, but Tesla is rich.

>>9496028
He gets 4.9 billion a year subsidy from government. He's not rich.

>>9496031

Oh, you really believe what you are saying. I thought we were having a giggle together.

>>9496011
>Is SpaceX bankrupt?
Non-Sequitur of the Day, congratulations Anon.

>>9496011

It'll still give a view of Mars

I think they just let it burn until it ran out of fuel.
The final orbit was the result of how efficient the launch was, and the circularizing burn.

Reaching Mars orbit was the goal, they exceeded it greatly which shows the potential of the system.

>>9496056
How long is the camera even going to be running?

>tfw your rocket is too powerful

>>9496060

This.

>>9496064
In the press interview Elon said it would run for about 12 hours before the battery died. Some other anon said they're filming it in 5K but the stream is just shit quality.

>>9496064

Only about 3 more hours. It's well outside of broadcast range by now I imagine

>>9496070
>>9496072

Shame they didn't solar power it up and cut the def down so it could film the whole trip there.

>>9496017
what the fuck seriously? does the stream just cut out before the burn?
lame, they better upload that

>>9496060
they should've used that remaining fuel to try a insertion orbit on mars.

>>9496070

Is that enough to get it past the moon and to look back at us?

SLS must be starting to smell of old cheese to some members of congress right about now…

>>9496093
planetary protection society gave a hard no on orbiting mars, or even getting close to it. the roadster is not sterilized and a crash landing on mars would mean contamination

>>9496056
It wasn't going anywhere near Mars and now the orbit is way larger it still won't get anywhere near Mars.

>>9496093
To do that they would have had to plan a rendaevous in the first place, which they hadn't.

They weren't aiming for Mars but Mars orbit.

>>9496102
that's bad they should've sterilized it

>>9496102
>planetary protection society
who?

>>9496120
https://planetaryprotection.nasa.gov/
the "don't jizz on mars you stupid fucks" office

>>9496102
wouldn't it be sterilized during the journey by being exposed to solar radiation?

>>9496144
Extremophiles have been found living on the outside of the ISS in the past. As harsh as it is, exposure to open space, even for long periods, is not a 100% guaranteed kill for all forms of life.

>>9496144
bacteria and virus actually thrive on 0g, and considering some of them can enter in a hibernation mode instead of straight up dying... its not worth taking a chance

>>9496097
SLS smells like shit to NASA itself probably, but you gotta keep those shuttle contractors and factories open.

>>9496147
>>9496148
both of these, landers go through very careful sterilization procedures before launch for exactly this reason

but even then, there's a nonzero chance there's a hitchiker on one of the mars landers and is mars every moves into a more habitable situation, it might wake up and immediately outcompete native martian life. oops

Just wait until China lands on Mars (plan before 2020).

>>9496170
just no.

>>9496011
man this is some ksp shit

>>9496159
For this very reason Curiosity hasn't gone to investigate possible ice deposits because it might contaminate them.

>>9496097

Yes.

Falcon Heavy can do pretty much the same job but a lot cheaper.

BFR is game changing.

>>9496265
I can see now that Heavy was something they did because they had F9s and thought it would be easy enough, but aside from Musk's Mars colony plans I don't see BFR getting much use, not Heavy in the interum.

At least with Heavy they are taking what would be three F9s and modifying them to launch together, something they are already using. BFR will be BFR.

>>9496031
Wow that's a lot cheaper considering they actually have their Heavy lift rocket built
Nasa's so far projecting SLS to cost almost 40 billion, while the launches themselves will cost around 500 million, versus 90 million
I'd rather subsidies a company that works, versus pay a government organization that barely fumbles around building rockets to get into leo, and can't send it's own astronauts into orbit
(And NASA has a budget several times larger than SpaceX's subsidy)
fuck off

>>9496011
>>9496031
Get a life /pol/

>>9496310
And yet SLS won't die.

That abomination of left over Shuttle stock will launch in a couple years.

>>9496318
This image just makes me sad

>>9496310
SLS is going to be man rated that costs a lot more and unlike SpaceX NASA has a high realiability.

>>9496097
>spacex cancels all of their moon plans in favor of bfr which will take 15 years to build
SLS just got a shot of adrenaline.

>>9496300
>I don't see BFR getting much use
it will be the ultimate private space tourism rocket.

Expect the thing to take people around the moon in a few years.

Where is the tesla car actually going?
First it was going to orbit mars but now it's going to the astroid belt?

>>9496120
The PPS will disappear you, if you aren’t careful

>>9496567
yes

>>9496011
Because before all spaceflight American trajectories was solved by black women.

Lulz.

>>9496570
I want to go on a trip with them. I am bored.

>>9496011
This is the furthest SpaceX ever went right?
Pretty good for a first timer.

>>9496567
It was never going to orbit Mars.

The goal was to put it in a heliocentric orbit with the highest point at Mars orbit and the lowest point at Earth orbit.
They just ran the propellant dry in the 3rd burn.

>>9496070
It looks shit because it's CGI.

>>9496605
So they have no idea where it is going to end up?

>>9496610
goddammit, see OP's pic, that's where the Roadster is going, near Ceres.

They know that because they calculated it.

>>9496610
They can plot where it will be at any point in time in the future.
Don't worry.

>>9496093
S2 wouldn't last long enough to be able to work once it got to Mars. It only lasts a few hours before the battery runs out, and the fuel would boil off long before the insertion burn.

>>9496300
>but aside from Musk's Mars colony plans I don't see BFR getting much use,

BFR is designed to be so cheap a single flight will be cheaper than a Falcon 9 flight. It uses methane for high reusability (doesn't have the coking of kerosene) and it's fully re-usable from the first flight, no fairings jettisoned and the second stage can re-enter and land.

Reminder you cannot make rockets with multiple engines.

No sane engineer would ever suggest it and NASA would never attempt it.

The data clearly shows the design is dangerous.

>>9496119
Sterilized objects aren't allowed too on the basis the sterilization procedure might not have been 100% efficient.

>>9496077
there was a 6h wait before 3rd burn
"main reason for the six-hour coast is to demonstrate direct GEO insertion (for national security customers)"

>>9496684
But Musk did it?

>>9496707

Russia did it with the N1 and we know how that ended.

The focus should be on few large as possible engines, anything else is doomed to failure at great taxpayer's expense.

>>9496398
How many autistic social disasters do you think found a place in communities like /pol/ because they were the only ones that would tolerate being an unpleasant, annoying mess?

>>9496684
That must be why this one is still on the ground.

>>9496711
Yeah, but Russia also didn't test all the engines together because they had no test stand large enough.
Falcon is a proven design. Falcon Heavy just launched with 27 engines running concurrently.

More small engines is actually more efficient than a few larger engines and is part of the reason why the majority of rockets actually use multiple engines instead of one big engine (I kinda count the RS180 as two even though it's really just one engine with twin bells).

What we learned from Russia is not to try ambitious things without testing them, not that those ambitious things are inherently unmanageable.

>>9496031
Wow, the ultimate NEETbux

>>9496698
yeah but the starman in car stream was going for hours after launch

Pretty good in Kerbal Space Program terms

>>9496442
Sending a couple billionaires around the moon isn't a "moon plan". It would take 2 or 3 Falcon Heavies to just do what Apollo did. It's just not made for that kind of mission.
BFR, if built, would be the most versatile and cost-effective rocket ever. It would be foolish of SpaceX not to focus on it.

>>9497259
>Sending a couple billionaires around the moon isn't a "moon plan".
It's a lot more than we were doing for the last 50 years.

>It would take 2 or 3 Falcon Heavies to just do what Apollo did
Holy fuck you're retarded. It would take 10 BFR launches to do what Apollo did. FH is literally a better rocket for Moon missions than BFR.

>>9497271
>It would take 10 BFR launches to do what Apollo did
??
are you referring to all of apollo or just one launch? because the bfr could take the command module and LEM with decent room to spare

>>9497271
This is the kind of thing that's so frustrating. We're talking a big game about going to other planets and doing fuckall.

>>9497271
>FH is literally a better rocket for Moon missions than BFR.
Since when did FH have the capacity to do a full manned moon mission (that wouldn't be stranded) in one shot?

>>9498532
>what is launching in multiple parts?

safer, too. you distribute the risk.

>>9496011
The fuck is this low grade memery? It takes more than a day to get to Mars. Not to mention, Elon never intended to land the Falcon Heavy test payload on Mars. If what you posted was true (its not) it would mean Elon successfully achieved his goal in an amount of time previously deemed impossible.

>>9498553
>It takes more than a day to get to Mars

No shit, Sherlock

>>9498606
Did you look at OPs picture? I dont do twitter but either that image is fake or OP is ripping on Musk for a failure that hasn’t happened.

>>9498666
It is real, that is the projected trajectory Musk posted on Twitter: https://twitter.com/elonmusk

There's nothing wrong with it and OP is just being a troll or retard. Probably both.

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2018/02/elon-musk-s-spacex-car-mission-overshoots-mars-orbit.html
>mfw news outlets report the orbit as a failure instead of the success it was
Fucking fake news.

>>9496011
spacex is shit, cant even get the planet right.

next thing you know nasa comissions a mars base and they end up colonizing alpha centauri. what a bunch of amateurs

>>9498532
Moon missions could be done using 2 FHs (reusable) and 1 F9 (reusable.)

BFR would require 4-9 refueling flights in order to land on the moon and return with no additional hardware.

>>9496011
The point was less get to mars and more to show off what the upper stage can do. If it can put a car in the belt it can stick a spy sat in GEO.


>>9496017
I'm disappointed they didn't announce where it would be visible from. My brother was outside and caught it. If I had known ahead of time I could have seen it.

>>9496011
Apparently that orbital chart was a mistake and didn't take into account deceleration by Earth's gravity on exit, so the final orbit goes just beyond Mars' orbit.

Some autist (astronomer) worked it out.

CHINA BRING U ONION ROLLS MARS CHOW SIEU MI NONG GO

>>9496070
>send a fucking tesla car to space
>can't be arsed to send a bigger battery with the actual camera

>>9496310
this, fuck the jewSA, they waste money on shit

>>9496060
why not say that?

Russia and europe will team up. With Russian space tech and european money expect the usa btfo in 6-12 months completely.

>tfw born in time to explore the solar system
Fuck year.

>>9499916
>Man will walk around in other planets in your lifetime
I knew it would be worth the wait

>Taking back space for the Master Race
>No negros in my face, so women can put away the mace

>Gonna colonize mars riding in my electric car
>Moonman here to colonize all the stars

>>9496610
It's already been tracked, check the following web page, select "SpaceX Roadster" in the target body field:

https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/horizons.cgi

Watching the launch was the first time I've felt happy in months.

>>9500753
>nasa.gov

>>9496011
>fucks up
Lol no, he's just delivering it to the cloaked alien mother ship

>>9497271
Wut?
Saturn V was 135 tons to LEO
BFR is estimated at 150 tons to LEO, with the ability to land for refuel & reuse.
It would easily to a Lunar orbit and return on one trip.

>>9500928
As for a Lunar landing and return; it would be two BFR's.
Two launch, one being the lunar version with crew / cargo space, the other being a "buddy tanker". Once in earth orbit, the BFR tanker tops up the fuel on the lunar BFR, lunar BFR heads to the moon to do its shit, the buddy tanker keeps orbiting.
Lunar BFR returns to earth orbit, tops up fuel (if needed) from tanker BFR again, they then head on in to do their powered landings.

>>9496711
>>9496733
Russia also made RD-170 with 4 combustion chambers - two chamber derivate of which is still used on Atlas V

>>9500956

More like three BFR launches. The ISS weighs 450 tons in LEO. BFR is capable of 150 tons to LEO (current estimate). But FH with Block 3 and Block 4 side cores was far more efficient than they estimated, and next FH will be block 5 Merlin. Factor in that BFR will use Raptor which will take all knowledge from Block 5 FH/9 Merlins + ongoing development and the efficiency capability of Raptor will likely exceed initial guesstimates.

I wouldn't be surprised if BFR's payload to LEO is revised from 150 to 160 or 175 tons to LEO. But even at 3 BFR launches, you can essentially launch the ISS from the ground into orbit. That's a fuckton of mass. BFR's maiden flight is at least 3-4 years out. All that said, 3 BFR launches would be more than sufficient to get a significant Lunar and subsurface Lunar materials to mars.

>The mass of a 2m TBM varies depending on the ground that it will be boring through, the distance it needs to bore and the type of machine. A recent machine at 2.2m dia. that bored in Youngstown, OH for an 800 ft long tunnel weighed in at nearly 150,000 lb

Source: http://www.efunda.com/forum/show_message.cfm?start=&thread=9630&id=15976

>150,000lbs
>FH Payload to LEO (28.5°) 63,800 kg (140,700 lb)[1]
>140.7k lbs

BFR can do 150 tons, that's 2.133x the capability of the FH or 300000.637lbs. So in essence, BFR can launch either a 2 meter diameter Boring Machine with a fuckton of solar panels and tesla power walls and cabling or 2 2-M diameter Boring machines in 1 launch and nothing but power walls, solar panels and cabling in the other to the moon or 3 BFR launches one which contains the Boring Machine, the 2nd which contains pure power and delivery, and third which contains building materials for subsurface habitation.

This is how we get to the moon and establish a larger human presence. Tesla Motors provides the batteries and power containment. Solar City provides panels & cabling. Boring provides the machine, and SpaceX provides launch capcity.

>>9502487
like anyone actually gives a shit

>>9502487
NASA won't be bothering with FH when they've got the SLS nearly up and running.
SpaceX rockets cannot launch Orion to LEO let alone further.
SLS-Orion-DSG will the backbone of manned spaceflight in the next decades.