https://newstronaut.com/first-spacex-crew-launched-into-orbit/ This was insane! I'm excited for the next mission which is to go to the moon. Our planet looks awesome.
Absolutely incredible - no doubt. I just hope this doesn't all end up significantly reducing our progress in science.
Did anyone besides me notice the dark blue compared to surrounding sky above rocket as it went up. It must have been a sun filter on camera.
I doubt we even know the opportunity that is opening up due to cheap, reusable launch capability. What will be the impact of offering fast internet to every place on Earth? Today, we don't even have the US covered - and at a time when this feature is so important to so much of what is necessary for modern government and industry. For years now the ISS has been a platform for space based manufacturing and repair, with that being a significant part of what ISS astronauts do. Moving that capability along with the ability to cheaply launch components and materials, space based manufacture can solve issues such as those causing the James Webb telescope to be on hold - grounded by the requirements of fitting a complete object inside one rocket fairing and designing it to survive the rigors of launch - the first few minutes of a lifetime where neither of those reuirements are of any importance. We can also be assembling spacecraft in space - where they will spend their lives. Building spacecraft such that they can face the rigors of boosting them out of our gravity well is of substantially less interest once there is cheaper launch capacity and the ability to move our space based construction to include objects other than just the ISS. What are the new limits? What is the new possibility? Where is moonmen on that list?
Brain malfunctions from half G and blindness. Along with radiation risk, and muscular degeneration. Heat and Cold, and the vacuum of space. No black hole dangers imminent. Give me that earth life.
Amen. The entire universe seems uniquely designed to kill us in a surprisingly large number of ways - except on this one little planet where we're able to have our needs and desires so available. Hunkering down in a lava tube somewhere in the solar system? What's that?
The ignition system for moving these small satellites around is a important event as I am sure it will be modified as a replacement in a big way of rocket fuel. Just one of many possibilities out there, as long as the investors don't run out, or too many projects aren't commenced at once. Musk has an encyclopedia of knowledge in a small space.
I am curious as to how they found a metal that resists the latest high heat our rocket motors are creating. Just recently watching a crash course on U.S. Rocketry. Is that a word?? No matter... Was this pulled out of Musk's hat or was it more paypal money spent to do what the U.S. Government never could have accomplished on it's on. I know people are suffering out there, but it leaves us to wonder what happens if resources are not put into the scientific feats that promise so much for a real future for all of earth.
I especially like that last paragraph - amen. However, the NASA budget is not actually very large and NASA does provide benefits including study of weather/climate, providing information for agriculture, education, etc. Let's remember that NASA does what congress tells it to do. So, they keep getting whipsawed with every administration, too often making some shiney idea of the moment the drop dead requirement - go to the moon, no go to mars, no focus on Earth so we better understand agriculture/warming/weather, no go to Pluto, no go in search of asteroids that might kill us, etc., etc. There was serious debate that rather than build craft that can deliver humans to the ISS we should just let the ISS die. That has serious affects on what launch capability NASA creates. If you want to go to Mars WITH humans and ASAP, it has serious affects on what kind of rocket you build. What NASA, Musk and Boeing have won't do that. So, these changing directions actually kill hugely expensive technology efforts mid project. Don't forget that NASA put people on the moon a LONG time ago, and NASA has always included private corporations in meeting its missions. Right now, congress has told NASA that they have to send humans to the moon. Yet the NASA budget is nowhere near capable of doing that - even if it guts all science objectives. (Remember that going to the moon is NOT a science objective.) That NASA budget is how Musk gets paid for much of what he does. Remember that we have beeing paying Russia $80M per seat for rides to the ISS. That wasn't because NASA couldn't build the capacity to do that - it's because congress didn't give them the budget and direction to do the job. Now, NASA can pay Musk - as well as continuing to fund a significant portion of his work on rocket technology. Also, remember that Musk has business plans for his current space technology that will undoubtedly turn a stupendous profit in the private sector. His idea is to make fast internet service available to everyone on Earth today - when not even America can do that for US citizens. Doing that from space is really the only rational direction for that, as stringing cable around the entire world is not particularly rational. Again, we can't even do that for American citizens.
How much more is Musk being paid to use this same technology for the Space Force? We can now afford multiple manned military space stations for satellite maintenance and space based weapons for national defense and for defense against rogue asteroids.
As of now, Musk/NASA owns BY FAR the cheapest way to deliver stuff to space. That leaves us with a lot to think about. Musk plans to use this for launching more than 1500 communications satellites to cover ALL of Earth with fast internet access - something we today can't even provide to all our own citizens! That's HUGE - it can be a game changer to add the entire excluded world to the world economy that is based on education, innovation, information, communication, etc. - the center of the new economy that is emerging right now. That has the power to change where America might possibly still look for competitive economic advantage with other nations (as our advantage in manufacturing continues to dwindle). It also leads to a strengthening requirement for cooperation. Today's space treaties regarding assets in space are in serious need of updating, as well. Today, anyting we might build on the moon or asteroids could legally be inhabited by humans from any country the minute we aren't actually in residence! That's an obvious one, but there are a good number of issues. Today, there are orbits that are gaining lethal space junk at an alarming rate. Space flights have to go through that - or even try to survive in it, depending on the mission. The best approaches may actually include rental of orbits or maybe something like how we manage broadcast spectrum with the benefit being that those who have acquired orbits will be economically motivated to keep their space clean and to assure that their usless space junk doesn't linger in orbits - thus continuing to cost money. Anyway, the lowering of the cost of lifting mass to orbit is just plain gigantic in terms of economically viable opportunity. This is just the outset - and, I doubt we understand how far reaching this will be.
It looks like as far as new satellites go they are putting them at a higher tier orbit. Not sure haven't put enough together to understand future plans. I know they are lighter and will burn up easier if they lose orbit, and use the particle igniters to move them around ? Now the older lower orbit debris is piling up, and what happens to it who knows.
Part of the problem is that firstly consecutive government's have cut NASA's budget since the days of the space race. Secondly every new administration keeps moving the goal posts on what NASA mission priorities should be. First its the moon, then mars, then a new space station, then the moon again etc etc. This is a huge problem because space missions have something like a 20 year planning cycle while the US government runs on a 4 year political cycle. NASA could do a lot better of the US Congress and Senate would just for once reach a compromise (that magic word) on just what the hell they wanted NASA to do and then just let them do it without changing their minds every four years ) Musk has made great strides because he can decide what his key priorities are, come up with a 'plan' for achieving them and then stick to it without someone else coming along ordering him to change direction at regular intervals. As far as rockets go standard techniques include pumping cryogenic (cold) fuel or oxidant around the combustion chamber cooling it in the process before it is pumped in for combustion. With single use rockets they often don't bother and design the chamber to ablate - taking excess heat away with it as it does. Your not going to use the rocket again so it doesn't matter if the reaction chamber has just about burnt through by the time the fuel load is expended.
They are looking at using some of the rockets multiple times. Just not sure that is going to fair so well. Not sure if they are going with hydrogen or methane on short distance to space station and, different fuels for moon or Mars. We have the technology. Some fuels weigh a little more, but have a better impulse. It is definitely a specialized field.
