Space and Science BS Thread

Anyone else excited for November 1st when the self imposed SpaceX/NASA moratorium on HLS development passes?

Will Nelson still support Starship HLS?
What kind of beans is he going to throw at a second HLS project?

I hope it’s gonna be full steam ahead

 

I doubt we'll see much. I got the impression from the SpaceX tour video that they are not focusing much on anything other than getting starship in the air, and then landing it. Until they they can do that, they're looking at most everything else as a distraction and drain on resources.

That said, well probably get a demonstration moon landing before any other HLS participants do anything significant.

 

Thinking about how Elon sent his roadster into orbit makes me think he might do something similar as a moon landing test. I wonder what besides tires would need to be modified for a Tesla truck to drive on the moon. A couple of solar panels and a high powered receiver/transmitter and now Tesla could be making drones...

 

Ooo. An electric Tesla Truck being lowered to the lunar surface from an HLS Starship! That would be a sight to see!

They just need to ensure it’s clean room clean.

 

It's something we actually might see. And the next day Boeing's stock would plummet.

 

Not gonna work unless space suits get much less bulky. Maybe poly urethane derped dyneema skin suits with heated/cooled nanotubes. Passive insulation alone makes for too much bulk.

 

I got to see SLS up close today for the first time since it's been fully stacked and the pictures don't do it justice. It is so massive. I can't wait for that launch.

 

What a relief….
https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1454287702451392519?s=21

Love how engineers think. Here’s how Endeavor waste management concern was “closed out”.
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1454296832683745281?s=21

 

https://twitter.com/commercial_crew/status/1454324795030507523?s=21

 

https://twitter.com/spacedotcom/status/1454422491917598722?s=21

 

I didn't say anything about putting people in it. We're talking about his first landing on the moon demonstration/test. There is a good chance it will just end in a new crater on the moon. I can guarantee there won't be people on that rocket Tesla's are capable of self driving though, and while it may not have all the sensors for science, they could easily add a bunch of 4k cameras to it and generate a bunch of hype.

That said, cybertruck is a 4 door truck. They could easily remove the front seats and do something better for astronauts if they wanted to make it driveable. Worse case scenario make it a convertible if they were really determined to make it an astronaut vehicle, but since there isn't a need to mass produce moon trucks, they'd probably build a new vehicle specific built for that task.

 

FIFY

 

The likelihood that no one would ever use the Tesla made that a pure advertising gimmick. People will go to the moon and in all likelihood will need some form of buggy so if you’re going to the trouble and expense of shipping something up there it makes way more sense to maximize the utility. I agree that given the specialized nature it would be better to start new than start with a cyber truck and pull off everything it doesn’t need. For the sake of advertising it could share the battery sled platform and have enough of a lightweight body panel for a generous ego satisfying logo. Speaking of which, will there ever be orbital billboards?

 

Originally Elon didnt intend to create a rocket company. He wanted to launch a greenhouse to Mars to spark interest in space. Normally rockets would launch a block of concrete, but again, Elon wants an exciting spacefaring civilization, not just profits, so we got a Tesla in space on a disposable rocket that was going there anyways that would have otherwise been empty resource wise. The same applies to the Moon. The likelihood of the first couple of rockets exploding is too much to risk with billion dollar drones. Knowing that, they're not likely to land the first couple anywhere they are going to use for a colony because the next rockets that come in could kick up fragments of previous attempts. But launch a cyber truck covered with gopros, land it on the moon in a remote location, drive it around, load it back on the rocket, and bring it back... That would demonstrate all of their claims with Starship and HLS, with very little risk to any valuable cargo, but HUGE payoffs in advertising and excitement. And it'd be huge advertising for Spacex, a company that is trying to recruit some of the brightest most capable minds. Though that isn't really that hard for them considering their competition is trying to sue their way to space...

 

I’d argue it has more value staying there. I refer the mantra “start as you mean to go on”. Waste no trips. Waste no fuel. Waste no cargo. Leo is already hazardous with old crap, no point but in sending anything up there that has no viable purpose only to drop it where it can’t be used by those who follow. It needn't be at ground zero for future missions but should be within a short distance or it just becomes junk littering another planetoid, a habit we need to break.

 

Look at what we're expecting with Starship's next flight. It's going to crash into the ocean. There is little doubt that they will attempt to land their first rocket on the moon, just like they intend to go on, but it's still has a very real chance of blowing up anyways. That's just reality. More Starships have blown up on landing attempts than have landed, and thats on solid flat concrete literally built to be landed on, not an uneven surface. A proper, successful demonstration will have them RETURNING the rocket from the surface of the Moon. That is afterall the intended purpose of HLS, and unlike all the other HLS bids, their's is the only one that will produce no waste if successful. But failure is always an option, especially on prototypes. And you're not really wasting much of a trip when the next trip is literally just refueling the rocket. And if successful, they could even reload the cybertruck and bring it back. The actual usefulness of a cybertruck on the moon is debatable, it could maybe be used as a remote control wheelbarrow, but it likely would not last that long.

As for junk littering another planetoid, it's just not really an issue. We're not going to be shipping our waste to the moon, and most things that do get shipped to space will not have a lot of waste associated with them, because it costs money to get it there and has to be dealt with. As for LEO, I thought most satellites being made today were designed to burn up in the atmosphere at the end of their lifespan? Either way, I just dont see littering the moon with junk as becoming a habit, let alone one that's going to need to be broken anytime soon.

 

Assume failure but plan for success. Best case it lands and you can use it, otherwise write it off. But don’t look that gift horse in the mouth, you might get lucky, the risk/reward is totally one sided. It’s not necessary that every idea succeeds but it is necessary that every idea allows for it.

 

GEOMAGNETIC STORM UPDATE: We're still waiting for the CME. Right now minor geomagnetic unrest is happening at Arctic latitudes. This is due to a crack that opened in Earth's magnetic field--a phenomenon unrelated to the incoming CME. So far the much-anticipated storm has not yet begun. Subscribers to our Space Weather Alert Service will receive a text message when the CME strikes.

https://spaceweather.com/

 

And they do, thats why they put a Tesla in the first FH instead of a block of concrete. Planned for it's success and put a 100k sportscar in it. The problem though is putting Billion dollar payloads on a prototype. If it crashes, it will either be a complete loss, or an insurance claim that will raise the cost of insurance in the future, because those assholes don't care why it blew up, only that it did. Then there is the PR. If a prototype crashes, it can be explained away. If a prototype carrying valuable supplies crashes, it will be used as anti PR by competitors and media. In the end we'll be lucky if we get anything. Every other rocket is tested with blocks of concrete. We got lucky with Starman, because Elon is just cool like that.

 

Not sure what the point is here, first it was a cyber truck and now it’s concrete blocks. Neither has any value up there and is a very expensive waste of a trip. If the rocket is going then send something useful but cheap one of your own companies can knock out along for the ride. Sending concrete blocks to the moon has no upside and no marketing value. If he’s willing to do starman then why not the cyber man in the moon? A stripped chassis buggy, even a prototype, would only cost billions if Boeing or Bezos were building it and NASA were funding it. It won’t need turn signals or intermittent wipers although some of the things Tesla is more known for like self driving and radar might come in handy.