[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

File: 780 KB, 880x1092, patch.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9757930 No.9757930 [Reply] [Original]

Hello, and welcome to the 10th SpaceX launch of 2018!
-------
STREAM: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_0GgKfwCSk
Launch Date: Tuesday, May 22 @12:47 PM PDT / 19:47 UTC (instantaneous window)
Launch Site: SLC-4E @ Vandenberg, CA
Launch Vehicle: Falcon 9 Block 4; Flight 2: this core flew on the contentious ZUMA mission!
First Stage Landing?: No
Fairing Recovery?: YES; Mr Steven has left the port and will attempt a 'catch'
Press Kit: http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/iridium6presskit2018521.pdf
Payload:
>Top Bunk—GRACE-FO; separation at T+00:11:33
GRACE-FO (Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment Follow-On) is a scientific satellite pair which will detect the local gravity of the earth. It is a follow-on mission to an earlier gravity sensing mission, GRACE, which was active from 2002 to 2017. A large part of the project is supported by DLR, the German aerospace center.
Information: https://gracefo.jpl.nasa.gov
Pre-launch press conference about GRACE-FO (worth the watch): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYJt-6uHVcM
>Bottom Bunk—Five Iridium NEXT communication satellites; separation at T+01:05:48-01:12:28

This is the:
>55th F9 launch
>12th F9 core reflight

Stay up to date:
>https://twitter.com/IridiumBoss
>https://twitter.com/elonmusk
>https://twitter.com/SpaceX
>https://www.instagram.com/elonmusk/

>> No.9757935
File: 534 KB, 1536x2048, DdRWwuaW0AAOsxd.jpg-large.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9757935

Weather is currently looking great for launch. Unfortunately, we will not have a repeat of the UFO-F9 due to the time of day.

>> No.9757952
File: 72 KB, 580x828, DdvTGzHUwAIvJOm.jpg-large.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9757952

>> No.9757958

will they be streaming the fairing catch?

>> No.9757959

>Reusing Zuma booster

Absolute mad lad.

>> No.9757967
File: 336 KB, 1080x1080, bhLqh.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9757967

>>9757958
no, but expect an elon tweet soon thereafter.

>> No.9757983

$520,000,000 cost for GRACE-FO; 430mil from NASA and 90mil from Germany. Not cheap! TESS only cost 200mil.

>> No.9758004

>>9757983
Damn, it's more expensive than I thought, I guess that's the cost of all the fancy sensors and communication hardware they were talking about at the pre-launch conference.

>> No.9758024

>>9757983
where do those numbers come from?

>> No.9758037

>>9758024
pre launch conf in the OP

>> No.9758047

>>9757983
GRACE-FO is an absolutely crazy system, it's no surprise it costs an arm and a leg.

>> No.9758055

>>9758037
christ

>> No.9758072
File: 829 KB, 1658x852, Screen Shot 2018-05-21 at 4.34.49 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9758072

>>9758055
it's pretty great data though.
>the GRACE satellites [are able to] detect gravitational differences on the planet's surface with a precision equivalent to a change of 1 centimeter (0.4 inch) in water height across areas of about 340 kilometers (approximately 211 miles) in diameter.
It's legitimately insane how precise they are.

>> No.9758079
File: 1.01 MB, 1344x1498, Screen Shot 2018-05-21 at 4.38.21 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9758079

>>9758072
but the method for doing so is relatively simple.

>> No.9758086
File: 837 KB, 1500x844, 65_40_4aAirbus-GRACE_FO_spacecraft_2x.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9758086

>> No.9758093

>>9757959
>>Reusing Zuma booster
Fuck no landing then....

>> No.9758104
File: 3.67 MB, 5562x3329, 20_2aGRACE-all-monthly-maps-black.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9758104

Neat facts:

>Australia seesaws up and down by two or three millimeters each year because of changes to Earth's center of mass that are caused by the movement of water
>4,300-plus papers came out of the original GRACE mission
>The loss of ice mass in Antarctica and Greenland is causing the earth to wobble; the spin axis is drifting 17cm/year

>> No.9758224

>>9757967
Lame, why don't they stream it? They are usually great at this pr shit.

>> No.9758229

>>9758104
>17cm/year

oh shit nigga, aphelion point orbit outside habitable zone habbebing soon

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

>> No.9758237

>>9758224
they didn't stream the first couple 1st stage landings too. They probably have bigger engineering problems to worry about on Mr Steven other than setting up streaming hardware and a connection to ground

>> No.9758252

>>9758237
It's also the fact that Fairing reuse is something other companies COULD easily mimic, without major changes to their rockets.

>> No.9758261
File: 949 KB, 3556x2371, Mr-Steven-and-net-050718-Pauline-Acalin-1c.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9758261

>>9758252
takes a lot of effort though. F9 is unique in its early staging; other rockets generally deploy fairings further downrange. Plus, for similar recovery efforts you'd need to buy a boat, which means dealing with port regs, which means probably opening up a whole new bureaucratic office at your company. Then you need to spend a chunk of change at R&D and testing, you need to either ask nicely or force your customers to allow this new fairing design to fly with their birds. Most importantly, you need to justify all of this to your shareholders.

>> No.9758263
File: 819 KB, 3089x2059, PAZ-fairing-halve-at-Berth-240-1-Pauline-Acalin.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9758263

>>9758261
>>9758252
but if Elon's numbers are to be believed (fairing is 10% of the cost of the whole rocket) then it would be stupid to not at least crunch the numbers and see if it is worth it if you were a launch provider. The low flight rates of other launchers/their phasing out probably makes it not worth it for any of em at the moment tho

>> No.9758293

>ALL DAY TOMORROW ON @CNBC: @MorganLBrennan has an exclusive look at @SpaceX, including a sitdown with President & COO Gwynne Shotwell. Starting 810amET on @SquawkCNBC

https://twitter.com/jodigralnick/status/998692403241402368
should be some good factory footage and snibbets from Shotwell

>> No.9758525
File: 298 KB, 2047x1384, DdxHJMUVAAACWq8.jpg-large.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9758525

on the pad

>> No.9758632
File: 1.38 MB, 2047x2048, 41367796245_79d577c33c_k.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9758632

NASA pics just released. F9 is vert

>> No.9758635
File: 1.27 MB, 2048x2048, 42223181002_a564bf0853_k.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9758635

>> No.9758638
File: 765 KB, 2048x1420, 42223175502_5f6673bc05_k.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9758638

>> No.9758670

>>9758229
The wobble affects the planet's rotation about its axis, not its orbit around the sun.

>> No.9758686

>>9758086
all these women employees
no wonder space goes nowhere

>> No.9758689
File: 340 KB, 534x444, Screen Shot 2018-05-21 at 11.19.17 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9758689

>>9758686

>> No.9758739

>>9758689
>Woman (male)

>> No.9758744

>>9758739
woman (bald)

>> No.9758757

>>9758739
That's just how feminised European men are these days, it was an easy mistake by anon.

>> No.9758758

>>9757930
>First Stage Landing?: No
Why not try to recover everything? Even if it was already used, could still get more value out if landing is successful.

>> No.9758789

>>9758758
Because coral forms on the boosters and coral is good.

>> No.9758799

>>9758789
well, can't argue with that, sunken ships are hubs of underwater biodiversity

>> No.9758807

>>9758252
The cost saving is too small for the R&D cost and possible impact of perceived loss of reliability from the customers. The fairing is unusually high fraction of the spacex' rocket cost which isn't true for others.

>> No.9758882

>>9758072
>English batteries

wtf are they thinking?!?!

>> No.9759074

>>9758758
the recovery cost is a couple mil. Plus, with these 2nd flight B4 boosters they do useful destructive testing, seeing if their reentry models are accurate for weird flight profiles/testing the gridfins at their extreme

>> No.9759204
File: 9 KB, 200x331, lucassmoke.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759204

>>9758882

>> No.9759593

100 minutes to stream start. Get in here anons

>> No.9759608

No landing, nothing of interest, no deal...
C´mon Musk, give us BFS infos.

>> No.9759610

>>9759608
fairing capture is a big deal. You can track Mr Steven here: https://www.vesselfinder.com/?mmsi=338358000

>> No.9759677

Fueling has started

>> No.9759763
File: 26 KB, 405x366, 1499036647105.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759763

stream has started

>> No.9759765

stream just went live

>>9757930

>> No.9759770

>>9759765
same music as always. (at least it isn't Grimes now)

>> No.9759780

Coverage started, John Insprucker today.

>> No.9759781
File: 260 KB, 483x368, 1526843675001.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759781

heh no mention of 'zuma'

>> No.9759782

>fairing recovery footage
hell yeah

>> No.9759783

>>9757930
Was chat always disabled for SpaceX launch streams? never noticed before

>> No.9759785

Can I get a 'C'?
Can I get a 'G'?
Can I get an 'I'?

CGI!

>> No.9759786

>>9759783
Yes.

>> No.9759787

>>9759783
I think so

>> No.9759790

>>9759783
I want to say yes but I'm not sure.

>> No.9759794
File: 1.02 MB, 1282x404, we.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759794

>>9759783
Yes, because they don't want this to happen.

>> No.9759796
File: 317 KB, 747x1328, 2018-05-22 21.36.58.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759796

Show me your launch whiskey.

Mine: Lagavulin Distillers Edition 2017

>> No.9759798

>>9759785
Why not go there and watch it yourself?

>> No.9759801

>>9759794
omg im fucking ded

>> No.9759804
File: 2.04 MB, 1788x1066, Screen Shot 2018-05-22 at 20.41.32.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759804

>>9757930
uh what is this

>> No.9759805

>>9759796
Oort imperial stout from Ecliptic Brewing today

>> No.9759806

how do they catch the fairing? steer the boat just where the wind blows it? the fairing has no steering after separation right?

>> No.9759808
File: 43 KB, 800x600, Iridium_Super_Razor_Blade_06.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759808

Iridium 2 Electric Bogaloo

>> No.9759809

>>9759804
an ad for satellite communications

>> No.9759810 [DELETED] 

lmao, Iridium ad during SpaceX launch
aren't they competitors?

>> No.9759811
File: 1.10 MB, 1742x1142, Screen Shot 2018-05-22 at 20.41.57.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759811

Well guys pack it up it failed

>> No.9759813

>>9759798
It's not the launch that's CGI, it's when it gets in "space". It's so obvious.

>> No.9759820

>>9759806
gif too big for 4chan
i.redd it/lu0m9oh2uv501.gif

>> No.9759821
File: 103 KB, 1080x937, 338084bcc4ea296090ade36fc3594f59edead063f97ff015726cd8ae81ac4845_1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759821

>> No.9759823

>>9759813
Yes, so obvious that any layman can easily pick out the trickery. Looks like Elon isn't pulling a fast one on you today, friend.

>> No.9759825

>go

>> No.9759828

https://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1527018397083.webm

>> No.9759829

>>9759813
how is it obvious? what's there to stop the rocket if you're admitting to it launching? just look at a rocket engine test fire, that shit is real power.

>> No.9759832
File: 32 KB, 640x538, 1420531780917.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759832

no booster recovery this time

>> No.9759834

Do you even vape?

>> No.9759835

>>9759832
no booster recover, but fairing recovery attempt

>> No.9759836
File: 476 KB, 332x292, launch-cat.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759836

>> No.9759839

>clouds

>> No.9759842

>out of focus

>> No.9759841

someone give the cameraman some glasses

>> No.9759843

Can´t they focus their camera ?

>> No.9759845

>>9757930
wonder how many loonies in California will hide in their bunkers in fear of aliens after the launch

>> No.9759846

>>9759843
Can launch and land rocket like nobody else.
Can´t make a proper video out of Auto mode.

>> No.9759848
File: 870 KB, 1280x720, LIE.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759848

>>9759823
>>9759829

It's always the same shitty rocket animation. The rocket just falls into the ocean out of view while you believe it's picking up speed by orbiting around the earth.

>> No.9759851

How many non block 5 they have left? Landings when?

>> No.9759852

Did their videos get worse since the falcon heavy launch ?

>> No.9759853

>>9759829
>>9759823
dont engage with him. He does this in every thread, posting the same LIES!!!!-webms, and is either a grade-a loonie or one devoted troll.

>> No.9759854

>>9759848
Yes, so shitty that any layman can easily spot the trickery. Looks like old Elon's not pulling any fast ones on you this time, friend.

>> No.9759856

>>9759848
that's just ice, the meter at the bottom clearly says the second state has cut off and it's just coasting

>> No.9759857
File: 23 KB, 615x548, 1524503537882.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759857

>>9759848
wow wtf bro

>> No.9759859

>>9759853
I think it's the same no-life flattard that shitposts in all space related threads.

>> No.9759860
File: 134 KB, 889x500, 1526574149526.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759860

>>9759796
>>9759821
>>9759848

>> No.9759861

>>9759859
Could be, could be.

>> No.9759866

>That crowd noise

Guess they failed to catch the fairing.

>> No.9759872
File: 2.41 MB, 1280x720, spacex nrol76_1.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759872

i think webm related was still the best launch they've captured

>> No.9759873

That was a GRACE-FO deployment

>> No.9759875
File: 2.84 MB, 1280x720, spacex nrol76_2.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759875

>> No.9759876
File: 242 KB, 1920x1080, earth_is_a_half_pipe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759876

Uhh, guys, we've been had.
We always thought the earth was flat.
But it's actually a concave wall.

>> No.9759877

>>9759872
Definitely agree, I was blown away by the entire flip sequence.

>> No.9759879
File: 947 KB, 1440x808, Screenshot_2018-05-22-15-57-53~2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759879

Concave Earth confirmed. Sphere-tards BTFO

>> No.9759881

>>9759872
>>9759875
Yeah, probably this one was the best one.

>> No.9759882

>>9759866
more likely landing practice onto the ocean surface. The fairing takes longer to get down since it is "fluffy" and also comes down on a parasail.

>> No.9759883
File: 2.93 MB, 1280x720, spacex nrol76_3.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759883

>> No.9759884

>>9759872
>>9759875
>>9759883
NROL was rocket kino

>> No.9759885

>>9759872
fuck, that's awesome, made me look up the whole video stream and now I'm sad I missed it live

>> No.9759887

>>9759866
Why they never have a video camera on the fairing catcher?

>> No.9759888

The strongback burnt down.

>> No.9759889

>>9759884
NROL was great because they stuck with the first-stage all the way through.

>> No.9759893

>>9759887
They showed some drone footage of Mr Steven(fairing catcher boat) at the beginning of the stream, so hopefully they'll show it later.

>> No.9759894
File: 2.58 MB, 640x360, Musk Fiction.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759894

>>9759854
Elon admits it looks fake so....

>>9759856
Yes I know what it's supposed to be, it's just it looks fake as fuck and has the word lie in it.

>>9759860
That picture is cringe.

>> No.9759895
File: 35 KB, 489x470, grimesfags.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759895

the blurry and shaky camera views were just Grimes' artistic vision shining through

>> No.9759897

>>9759887
They seemingly do this time, but the fairing takes about 30 mins to reach the boat anyway so it definitely wasn't to do with it.

>> No.9759923
File: 24 KB, 229x343, 1488920227034.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9759923

>tfw the booster that launched Zuma and the ongoing mission is gone forever

>> No.9759928

>>9759923
sleep tight, boosty

>> No.9759943

>>9759866
https://mobile.twitter.com/RocketJoy/status/999019244896505856

It's been confirmed as the SpaceX crew saying goodbye to the 1st stage.

>> No.9759958

Yet another reused first stage doing its job as expected.
Arianespace/ULA on suicide watch. Muh new throwable launcher in 2020/2021.

>> No.9759971

>>9759895
I know this is a joke but with the soundtrack playing right now I'm starting to think it might be a possible scenario.

>tfw Grimes drops her new tracks on a space X livestream.

>> No.9759994

If the fairing recovery was a success, they probably would've said something about it by now.

>> No.9760004

>>9759994
I still think they ought to make each fairing half seaworthy, have them land and then pilot themselves back to shore or the recovery ship.

>> No.9760007

Can someone explain why Elon getting his freaky on with some strange poon is seen as somehow negative to SpaceX or whatever?

>> No.9760012

>>9759994
Yeah, this looks like a far fetched thing, and one they've tried enough that you just know it won't be reliable in the future.
Sucks for them, as I understand this is the bottleneck to them launching more stuff at the moment, even more than first stage availability.

>> No.9760016

First Iridium away!

>> No.9760028

And we're done. Good stuff. Hopefully we'll hear about fairing recovery soon.

>> No.9760032

>>9760028
just announced it: near miss again

>> No.9760033

Ah damn, no dice on fairings.

>> No.9760039

>>9760032
>>9760033
can someone walk me through the concept here?
fairing with parachute + boat with net + luck?

>> No.9760049

>>9760039
That's pretty much the extent of it to my understanding

>> No.9760062

>>9760039
Yes basically, the fairings are apparently very hard to control; the best ways around this control problem would to either build a specialised fairing purpose-built for recovery, or just get rid of the fairing entirely like the BFR.

>> No.9760393

>>9759763
Requesting the original meme.

>> No.9760438

>>9760062
It's not that its hard to control, its that the target is friggin tiny and they have only tried a couple of times

If they had started with helicopter/plane drop tests, they would be doing reuse already

Then again, its likely not an urgent issue.

>> No.9760442

>>9760438
yep. they've demonstrated that the fairings can come quite close to a target area; now it will just require some refining of the parasail/predicting where it will land

>> No.9760470

>>9759794
Are there really people who believe the ancient Egyptians were black or brown?
Despite all the linguistics? Despite all the genetics?

>> No.9760613

next launch is SES-12 on the 31st. It will also be a Vandy launch. F9 will consist of a B4 first stage that previously flew the X37-B

>> No.9761098
File: 1.12 MB, 1550x2048, 42290933051_901a881fbc_k.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9761098

flickr photos are up

>> No.9761122
File: 20 KB, 500x421, sad pepe in bed.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9761122

>>9760613
>no B5 launch until July

>> No.9761142

>>9761122
only two more B4 launches though, until every launch going forward is B5. That means basically zero non-landing missions! And, Vandy's landing pad will be operational soon, so if you're a CA anon you'll be able to see em land back on land & hear the triple sonic booms

>> No.9761201

>>9761122
Telstar 19V is supposed to fly in June, and that has to fly on a Block 5 because the only non-Block 5 core left at that point will be reserved for CRS-15.

>> No.9762672

these booster reuses are awfully regular now.

>> No.9763095

>>9762672
IT WILL NEVER WORK! ELON IS A CONMAN! FAKE NEWS!

>> No.9763102

>>9761122
feelsbadman

>> No.9763110

>>9763095
*downrates on Pravda*

>> No.9763685
File: 78 KB, 810x519, 0524_nws_tdb-l-fairing-052411.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9763685

fairing has been retrieved

>> No.9763689
File: 101 KB, 810x490, 0524_nws_tdb-l-mrsteven-052451.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9763689

both halves, too

>> No.9763968

>>9759958
Read a butthurt as fuck article on a German news site by some Arianespace employee.
>S-space X is only profitable because the government subsidises them with inflated prices of 100 million per flight
>W-we could launch Ariane 6 for 100 million
>T-The Americans are just trying to get our space program cancelled
>W-we need our own space program to stay independent
>I-It's all worth it anyway because we create jobs which pay taxes
>R-Reusability probably isn't worth it for us since we don't launch as often in the first place
That shit was comedy gold.
Arianespace is kind of pathetic. I mean I get it, they develop a decent-ish rocket and now get shat on because someone else developed something better. But instead of actually rising to the challenge or setting more ambitious goals now, all they do is deflect criticism.

>> No.9763980

>>9763689
Why bother with the baseball glove ship if you can just scoop those out of the water?

>> No.9763984

>>9763980
I was wondering this too, I thought a miss was a total loss but they just float?

>> No.9764008

>>9759958
Reuse is possible but not cost effective. The performance impact, development cost, infrastructure cost, and refurbishment cost ultimately pile up to defeat the purpose of rocket reusability. Reuse for reuse' sake is destined to failure. The technological and market realities simply do not allow it. Not now, and not in the foreseeable future.

>> No.9764214
File: 49 KB, 640x371, gallery1499967787screenshot20170713at13630pm1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9764214

>>9764008
You say that, yet SpaceX keeps winning contracts by offering rockets for less. I think I will trust their business analysis more than yours.

>> No.9764281

>>9764214
His next post will be

>But that's because they pay their employees less!

>> No.9764313

>>9764214
Geopolitics is responsible for the shift visible in the chart. Landing rockets has nothing to do with it.

>> No.9764364

>But muh reusability is not economical, and it can't be done, and we don't want to.
>OK, we'll do cheaper rockets by 2021.

>Proceed to lost all your market shares
>Need to publicly beg for moar government sponsored launches.
>But muh jobs and expertise!

>Shamelessly produce a Falcon 9 rip-off concept in desperation. 5 years too late.

Arianespace is still delusional about what's going on. The truth is they're basically dead.
Future will tell, I guess, but don't expect Ariane 6 to fly that often.

>> No.9764501

>>9763984
>>9763980
The fancy carbon composite skins get destroyed by the saltwater. Thus needing to catch them.

>> No.9765125

>>9764364
Arianespace doesn't build or launch rockets idiot

>> No.9765323
File: 841 KB, 3486x2324, Mr-Steven-double-fairing-recovery-Pauline-Acalin-2c.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9765323

>> No.9765451

>>9765323
How do they fish the fairings out of the water? Doesn't look like there's a crane on board.

>> No.9765468
File: 784 KB, 4000x2667, rF9f473.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9765468

>>9765451
perhaps a winch and some riggings connected to the arms? Or a small crane that we just don't see

>> No.9765549

>>9765451
>How do they fish the fairings out of the water?
Elon uses his prehensile dong.

>> No.9765582

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/999829462609883136
>Static fire test of Falcon 9 complete—targeting May 31 launch of SES-12 from Pad 40 in Florida.

wheee

>> No.9767073

>>9765582
hhng yes fly baby fly

>> No.9768091

>>9764281
But that's a well known fact.

>> No.9768118

>>9768091
source?

>> No.9769028

/MARS/ SOON
https://media.thinknum.com/articles/spacex/

>> No.9769849

Glad that things are coming apart for Elon's crapchute companies making empty promises

https://mises.org/wire/elon-musk-crony-capitalist

>SpaceX’s selling point has always been that it can sell cheaper rockets than those of his competitors, but a new report from the space industry’ inspector general found that SpaceX will soon have staggering 50% price increases “compared to its final CRS-1 mission price.”

Yeah why am I not surprised that just like Tesla this is a piece of shit company with vastly overinflated stock that's never going to turn a profit

>> No.9769857

Oh, and you would have to be a complete retard to actually imagine that spacex is profitable

see: this guy
>>9763968

>> No.9769896

>>9763980
>>9763984
>>9764501
Yeah, Musk said that there is equipment in there that all gets ruined from sea water. I didn't hear that the skin gets messed up.

>> No.9769902

>>9769849
>>SpaceX’s selling point has always been that it can sell cheaper rockets than those of his competitors, but a new report from the space industry’ inspector general found that SpaceX will soon have staggering 50% price increases “compared to its final CRS-1 mission price.”
And?
They're also offering a service no other provider can currently. Returning material and experiments from the space station.

>b-but they sold flights for cheaper in the first round!
They bid low, companies do this all the time in various sectors but the companies who constantly do it are the ones who get into financial trouble.
SpaceX wanted a good portion of the missions from CRS-1 because it was a proving ground for them, it helped them market the rocket to NASA and other companies for other missions. Now they're being more reasonable and NASA sees the value in the service.

>> No.9769920

>>9769902
plus, the NASA internal report showed the reasons why the price went up.

>Using current flight projections for CRS-2, SpaceX’s average price per kilogram increased by 50 percent compared to its final CRS-1 mission price. In comparison, Orbital ATK’s average per-kilogram pricing decreased by roughly 15 percent from its last CRS-1 mission. SpaceX officials said its increased prices are due to new CRS-2 contract terms that required a redesign of the spacecraft’s interior to increase the useable cargo volume by 30 percent, longer duration missions, accelerated cargo loading and unloading timeframes, and quicker access to time-critical research cargo after the Dragon 2 returns to Earth. They also indicated that their CRS-2 pricing reflected a better understanding of the costs involved after several years of experience with cargo resupply missions. Further, they said their proposed prices took into account the uncertainty at the time of providing fixed per-mission pricing without knowing whether NASA wanted them to fly the Dragon 1 or Dragon 2, which would require keeping open two production lines. Other factors, such as the new requirement for contractors to carry up to $100 million worth of insurance per flight and reduced discounts due to fewer missions flown contributed to SpaceX’s increased CRS-2 pricing.

so it's really nothing to 'worry' about.

>> No.9769923

>>9769902
>They're also offering a service no other provider can currently.
What service is that? I mean you wrote a sentence after that, but I refuse to believe that someone could be stupid enough to believe that this is "a service no other provider can currently" provide.

>SpaceX wanted a good portion of the missions from CRS-1 because it was a proving ground for them

>In recent months, policymakers have also discovered that SpaceX rockets are far less reliable than those of many of its competitors. This was outlined in reports from December 2017 and January 2018 , in which the Department of Defense Inspector General and NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Council described a list of security concerns they have with SpaceX – among them: 33 significant nonconformities.

>> No.9769925
File: 41 KB, 300x225, bagdad-bob[1].gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9769925

>>9769920
The price increases in our business whose primary selling point is being cheaper than the competition is nothing to be worried about.

>> No.9770028

>>9769923
>but I refuse to believe that someone could be stupid enough to believe that this is "a service no other provider can currently" provide.
Then maybe you should check the fucking capabilities of the other service craft you fucking retard.

>uuuh but the space plane can return more cargo than the dragon capsule can
And it hasn't even done an orbital test yet.

>> No.9770041

>>9769923
>>In recent months, policymakers have also discovered that SpaceX rockets are far less reliable than those of many of its competitors. This was outlined in reports from December 2017 and January 2018 , in which the Department of Defense Inspector General and NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Council described a list of security concerns they have with SpaceX – among them: 33 significant nonconformities.
I read the reports, relating to SpaceX specifically, and that is a gross overstatement.
I can only assume the writer was counting on people not reading the reports themselves.

>> No.9770048

>>9760470
There are a few ethnocentric retards who actually do believe that the ancient Egyptians were black, there are also some who believe that they were nordic

>> No.9770051

>>9764313
Post proofs pls

>> No.9770052

>>9770041
yep. the issues discovered were things like improper tooling calibration intervals and quick development methods which left some documentation off the table.

>> No.9770056

>>9764313
SpaceX getting up to launch rate is not geopolitics

>> No.9770066

>>9770052
And yes, some of these things could lead to accidents or loss of craft, one of the in particular relates to sourcing of parts (aka the CRS mission that exploded) but this is not like a "the Falcon 9 has 33 major problems with it while the Altas has 26 therefore the Falcon 9 is less reliable".
A lot of these things are documentation and paperwork issues, you've got to have a paper trail and a clear approval path for changes. And I think a lot of this comes down to the fact that the Falcon 9 is still in development.

>> No.9770116

>>9770066
>you've got to have a paper trail and a clear approval path for changes
For organizations obsessed with bureaucracy *

>> No.9770119

>>9770066
exactly. Elon has said that there are no two cores that are alike; every mission flies upgrades/sidegrades

>>9770116
there's a difference between bureaucracy and discovering during a core tear-down that you find parts that you didn't have listed as components of the core in the first place

>> No.9771392
File: 198 KB, 1456x3367, 1525897596419.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9771392

Who else waiting for the paradigm shift here?

>> No.9771491
File: 1.91 MB, 1908x1094, new line.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9771491

>>9771392
not if the chinks get there first

>> No.9771644

>>9771491
>chinese
>first

Laughable. Their only skill is copying for lower cost at lower quality. In this case, copying the by then obsolete Falcon.

>> No.9771658

>>9764313
geopolitics only accounts for a small part of that loss: no more Ukrainian rockets so no more Sea Launch Zenits, and no more Dnepr. But that only accounts for a couple rockets a year. SpaceX really did steal almost the entire cheap launch market from under Russia. (But it is true that landing has nothing to do with it. SpaceX is cheaper even with expendable boosters.)

>> No.9771673
File: 47 KB, 500x500, 1526465260298.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9771673

I'm very sceptical about the BFR. They will have to refill imultiple times in orbit to get 150 tons of payload to Mars. A single Mars mission requires them to launch a BFR with tanker to LEO, land the BFR and refuel, dock the tanker with the BFS, transfer fuel without complications, land the tanker on Earth, refill the tanker, mount the tanker on the BFR and repeat that process half a dozen times. That's insanely risky.

>> No.9771749

>>9771673
im sceptical as well, but then again, so i was with regards to landing a fucking rocket a few years back.
I want to believe it can happen though

>> No.9771792

>>9771673
The riskiest part to me seems to be the in orbit refuelling and that doesn't strike me as a technically insurmountable difficulty. I think the real proof will be in the pudding with Block 5. If they reach a price and reuse point they claim then there is no reason thay cannot be applied to rockets bigger than F9, bigger than BFR even. In fact the bigger you make the rocket, the more efficient it is.

If Block 5 works as claimed then the space age is is truly here and it's time to make some prudent job choices and investments before this massive boom hits, and it really fucking will at 9m for 150t to orbit.

>> No.9771798

>>9771673
Any meaningful manned mission to mars will require orbital assembly/refueling.