User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:17:00 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You did not take that picture (in Obama's voice). If you took that, SpaceX would surely like it. It appears that if you knew where to look you would have seen the re-entry burn. Did you see it? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Wow - is that a multi-exposure of the launch in the background, and the landing in the foreground? You did not take that picture (in Obama's voice). If you took that, SpaceX would surely like it. It appears that if you knew where to look you would have seen the re-entry burn. Did you see it? Nor did I take this one.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:18:36 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes, it is no moon landing. That was a great achievement, but I think that the possibilities that this unlocks are going to be more revolutionary than the moon landings. 45 years on and what have the moon landings really done to change how we approach space (and I am literally talking about the moon landings, not the Apollo program). For the last 58 years we have generally been putting stuff into space in the same way with the vast, vast majority of the spacecraft being lost/destroyed/expended during the mission. Shuttle was too damn expensive to be feasible. This will change that. Space flight has humbled every organization that has ever attempted it...often tragically. Musk has a vision, he also has an ego...let's hope he has some damn good engineers that can cash that check. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:19:49 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: the possibilities that this unlocks are going to be more revolutionary than the moon landings Nothing will be more revolutionary than the moon landings until we put a man on Mars. The moon landings remain the pinnacle of human achievement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:20:54 AM EDT
[#4]
History was made with this one. It makes me proud to be an American. Go SpaceX!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:25:11 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nothing will be more revolutionary than the moon landings until we put a man on Mars. The moon landings remain the pinnacle of human achievement. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: the possibilities that this unlocks are going to be more revolutionary than the moon landings Nothing will be more revolutionary than the moon landings until we put a man on Mars. The moon landings remain the pinnacle of human achievement. So...what did the moon landings change about how we conduct space travel? Describe the differences between a Gemini mission and a trip to the ISS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:26:12 AM EDT
[#6]
Link to twitter video from SpaceX personnel at the landing site.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/679145544673923072   |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:27:53 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Link to twitter video from SpaceX personnel at the landing site. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/679145544673923072 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWzNZC_UkAEDgBv.jpg:large What is it, 10' from the X? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:29:43 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Link to twitter video from SpaceX personnel at the landing site. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/679145544673923072 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWzNZC_UkAEDgBv.jpg:large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWzMPm2U8AAca4k.jpg:large Looks like a bulls eye landing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:30:20 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What is it, 10' from the X? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Link to twitter video from SpaceX personnel at the landing site. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/679145544673923072 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWzNZC_UkAEDgBv.jpg:large What is it, 10' from the X? seems about right another long exposure image  I think the ground level right one is the launch and left is landing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:35:12 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nothing will be more revolutionary than the moon landings until we put a man on Mars. The moon landings remain the pinnacle of human achievement. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
the possibilities that this unlocks are going to be more revolutionary than the moon landings Nothing will be more revolutionary than the moon landings until we put a man on Mars. The moon landings remain the pinnacle of human achievement. I don't know. That space crane Rube Goldberg mission to Mars was pretty damn impressive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:35:14 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So...what did the moon landings change about how we conduct space travel? Describe the differences between a Gemini mission and a trip to the ISS. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: the possibilities that this unlocks are going to be more revolutionary than the moon landings Nothing will be more revolutionary than the moon landings until we put a man on Mars. The moon landings remain the pinnacle of human achievement. So...what did the moon landings change about how we conduct space travel? Describe the differences between a Gemini mission and a trip to the ISS. The difference between a Gemini mission and a space X mission is that the first stage lands back on the pad? Ok. Yea! I guess? Where Saturn v first stages a single use item? I know the Shuttle SRB and main fuel tanks where reused. As was the rest of the vehicle...and that fucker was designed in the 70s...I guess I'm failing to grasp the revolutionary aspects of this. It's fuckin neat as shit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:35:52 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
seems about right another long exposure image https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWzKCB3UAAAy2NC.jpg:large I think the ground level right one is the launch and left is landing. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Link to twitter video from SpaceX personnel at the landing site. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/679145544673923072 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWzNZC_UkAEDgBv.jpg:large What is it, 10' from the X? seems about right another long exposure image https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWzKCB3UAAAy2NC.jpg:large I think the ground level right one is the launch and left is landing. That makes sense. The more inland location of the one on the left may give it away as the landing site but the launch used nine engines versus less (three?) for landing. The one on the right is brighter which is consistent with the use of more engines. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:44:27 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What is it, 10' from the X? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Link to twitter video from SpaceX personnel at the landing site. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/679145544673923072 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWzNZC_UkAEDgBv.jpg:large What is it, 10' from the X? 3 meters is about the best GPS acuracy I hae seen outside of DGPS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:46:28 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We don't use pure O2 atmosphere anymore. The difference between a Gemini mission and a space X mission is that the first stage lands back on the pad? Ok. Yea! I guess? Where Saturn v first stages a single use item? I know the Shuttle SRB and main fuel tanks where reused. As was the rest of the vehicle...and that fucker was designed in the 70s...I guess I'm failing to grasp the revolutionary aspects of this. It's fuckin neat as shit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the possibilities that this unlocks are going to be more revolutionary than the moon landings Nothing will be more revolutionary than the moon landings until we put a man on Mars. The moon landings remain the pinnacle of human achievement. So...what did the moon landings change about how we conduct space travel? Describe the differences between a Gemini mission and a trip to the ISS. The difference between a Gemini mission and a space X mission is that the first stage lands back on the pad? Ok. Yea! I guess? Where Saturn v first stages a single use item? I know the Shuttle SRB and main fuel tanks where reused. As was the rest of the vehicle...and that fucker was designed in the 70s...I guess I'm failing to grasp the revolutionary aspects of this. It's fuckin neat as shit. The shuttles' main tanks were not reusable. They broke up/burned up before they landed in the Indian Ocean. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:50:46 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We don't use pure O2 atmosphere anymore. The difference between a Gemini mission and a space X mission is that the first stage lands back on the pad? Ok. Yea! I guess? Where Saturn v first stages a single use item? I know the Shuttle SRB and main fuel tanks where reused. As was the rest of the vehicle...and that fucker was designed in the 70s...I guess I'm failing to grasp the revolutionary aspects of this. It's fuckin neat as shit. We're talking about an order of magnitude of cost savings. All of the Saturn V, minus the capsule, was single use. Shuttle main fuel tanks were single use. SRBs were "multiuse". Shuttle was over a billion dollars per flight. Falcon 9 is $60 million and will only go lower once they are reusable (granted, shuttle had about double capacity to LEO). Falcon Heavy will double the shuttle capacity for $90 million. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:51:41 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Where Saturn v first stages a single use item? I know the Shuttle SRB and main fuel tanks where reused. As was the rest of the vehicle...and that fucker was designed in the 70s...I guess I'm failing to grasp the revolutionary aspects of this. It's fuckin neat as shit. Saturn V first stage was most likely splashed into the ocean. At least one of the engines was found and is being refurbed for display. Shuttle main tanks also were discarded into the ocean. I think they were used about eight minutes versus a little over two minutes for the SRBs. I think that some folks in England have seen re-entry of the main tank or venting after separation from the Shuttle. It would take a little research to verify that aspect. This is new to have the first stage returned to be reused. I am very impressed that they got the first stage from a suborbital trajectory, stopped the forward motion, got it on a ballistic trajectory in the opposite direction and safely landed it mere feet from the center of the landing zone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:52:04 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The shuttles' main tanks were not reusable. They broke up/burned up before they landed in the Indian Ocean. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: the possibilities that this unlocks are going to be more revolutionary than the moon landings Nothing will be more revolutionary than the moon landings until we put a man on Mars. The moon landings remain the pinnacle of human achievement. So...what did the moon landings change about how we conduct space travel? Describe the differences between a Gemini mission and a trip to the ISS. The difference between a Gemini mission and a space X mission is that the first stage lands back on the pad? Ok. Yea! I guess? Where Saturn v first stages a single use item? I know the Shuttle SRB and main fuel tanks where reused. As was the rest of the vehicle...and that fucker was designed in the 70s...I guess I'm failing to grasp the revolutionary aspects of this. It's fuckin neat as shit. The shuttles' main tanks were not reusable. They broke up/burned up before they landed in the Indian Ocean. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:52:31 AM EDT
[#18]
That is some cool shit!
I am being recruited by SpaceX for a job. Guess I should take it a little more seriously. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:55:22 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That is some cool shit! I am being recruited by SpaceX for a job. Guess I should take it a little more seriously. What do you do? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:56:54 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The shuttles' main tanks were not reusable. They broke up/burned up before they landed in the Indian Ocean. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
the possibilities that this unlocks are going to be more revolutionary than the moon landings Nothing will be more revolutionary than the moon landings until we put a man on Mars. The moon landings remain the pinnacle of human achievement. So...what did the moon landings change about how we conduct space travel? Describe the differences between a Gemini mission and a trip to the ISS. The difference between a Gemini mission and a space X mission is that the first stage lands back on the pad? Ok. Yea! I guess? Where Saturn v first stages a single use item? I know the Shuttle SRB and main fuel tanks where reused. As was the rest of the vehicle...and that fucker was designed in the 70s...I guess I'm failing to grasp the revolutionary aspects of this. It's fuckin neat as shit. The shuttles' main tanks were not reusable. They broke up/burned up before they landed in the Indian Ocean. And SRB's weren't really reusable so much as reloadable like a cartridge casing. Supposedly, it wasn't worth the cost savings. The Falcon 1st stage has much more advanced health monitoring than the Shuttle did, it will be far quicker to turn around in time, perhaps as short as a day eventually. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:56:54 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What do you do? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
That is some cool shit! I am being recruited by SpaceX for a job. Guess I should take it a little more seriously. What do you do? Protection of the avionics from electromagnetic effects and lightning, |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 12:59:59 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We're talking about an order of magnitude of cost savings. All of the Saturn V, minus the capsule, was single use. Shuttle main fuel tanks were single use. SRBs were "multiuse". Shuttle was over a billion dollars per flight. Falcon 9 is $60 million and will only go lower once they are reusable (granted, shuttle had about double capacity to LEO). Falcon Heavy will double the shuttle capacity for $90 million. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
We don't use pure O2 atmosphere anymore. The difference between a Gemini mission and a space X mission is that the first stage lands back on the pad? Ok. Yea! I guess? Where Saturn v first stages a single use item? I know the Shuttle SRB and main fuel tanks where reused. As was the rest of the vehicle...and that fucker was designed in the 70s...I guess I'm failing to grasp the revolutionary aspects of this. It's fuckin neat as shit. We're talking about an order of magnitude of cost savings. All of the Saturn V, minus the capsule, was single use. Shuttle main fuel tanks were single use. SRBs were "multiuse". Shuttle was over a billion dollars per flight. Falcon 9 is $60 million and will only go lower once they are reusable (granted, shuttle had about double capacity to LEO). Falcon Heavy will double the shuttle capacity for $90 million. You're forgetting that the shuttle also carried 7 fucking people 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:00:00 AM EDT
[#23]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:01:40 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We're talking about an order of magnitude of cost savings. All of the Saturn V, minus the capsule, was single use. Shuttle main fuel tanks were single use. SRBs were "multiuse". Shuttle was over a billion dollars per flight. Falcon 9 is $60 million and will only go lower once they are reusable (granted, shuttle had about double capacity to LEO). Falcon Heavy will double the shuttle capacity for $90 million. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: We don't use pure O2 atmosphere anymore. The difference between a Gemini mission and a space X mission is that the first stage lands back on the pad? Ok. Yea! I guess? Where Saturn v first stages a single use item? I know the Shuttle SRB and main fuel tanks where reused. As was the rest of the vehicle...and that fucker was designed in the 70s...I guess I'm failing to grasp the revolutionary aspects of this. It's fuckin neat as shit. We're talking about an order of magnitude of cost savings. All of the Saturn V, minus the capsule, was single use. Shuttle main fuel tanks were single use. SRBs were "multiuse". Shuttle was over a billion dollars per flight. Falcon 9 is $60 million and will only go lower once they are reusable (granted, shuttle had about double capacity to LEO). Falcon Heavy will double the shuttle capacity for $90 million. I'll bet money that hubble wasn't the first or last really capable camera that the shuttle put in orbit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:02:37 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You're forgetting that the shuttle also carried 7 fucking people Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: We don't use pure O2 atmosphere anymore. The difference between a Gemini mission and a space X mission is that the first stage lands back on the pad? Ok. Yea! I guess? Where Saturn v first stages a single use item? I know the Shuttle SRB and main fuel tanks where reused. As was the rest of the vehicle...and that fucker was designed in the 70s...I guess I'm failing to grasp the revolutionary aspects of this. It's fuckin neat as shit. We're talking about an order of magnitude of cost savings. All of the Saturn V, minus the capsule, was single use. Shuttle main fuel tanks were single use. SRBs were "multiuse". Shuttle was over a billion dollars per flight. Falcon 9 is $60 million and will only go lower once they are reusable (granted, shuttle had about double capacity to LEO). Falcon Heavy will double the shuttle capacity for $90 million. You're forgetting that the shuttle also carried 7 fucking people Sweet. http://www.spacex.com/dragon |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:03:31 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're forgetting that the shuttle also carried 7 fucking people
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
We don't use pure O2 atmosphere anymore. The difference between a Gemini mission and a space X mission is that the first stage lands back on the pad? Ok. Yea! I guess? Where Saturn v first stages a single use item? I know the Shuttle SRB and main fuel tanks where reused. As was the rest of the vehicle...and that fucker was designed in the 70s...I guess I'm failing to grasp the revolutionary aspects of this. It's fuckin neat as shit. We're talking about an order of magnitude of cost savings. All of the Saturn V, minus the capsule, was single use. Shuttle main fuel tanks were single use. SRBs were "multiuse". Shuttle was over a billion dollars per flight. Falcon 9 is $60 million and will only go lower once they are reusable (granted, shuttle had about double capacity to LEO). Falcon Heavy will double the shuttle capacity for $90 million. You're forgetting that the shuttle also carried 7 fucking people
So will the Crew Dragon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:05:53 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
High res video of landing from helicopter. https://youtu.be/ZCBE8ocOkAQ  https://youtu.be/ZCBE8ocOkAQThat is amazing! |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:07:20 AM EDT
[#28]
Don't be fooled by the tax expenditures going into this - it's defense research, through and through.
High visibility testing going on in other elements of our business is purely driven by what is seen by .gov as the next proxy war - a war in space, against communications. The ability to neutralize and protect comms satellites is being driven very high on the priority scale. Really neat stuff. Lots of dev money coming to the private sector for what is truly Reagans Star Wars come to fruition. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:07:37 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So will the Crew Dragon. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
We don't use pure O2 atmosphere anymore. The difference between a Gemini mission and a space X mission is that the first stage lands back on the pad? Ok. Yea! I guess? Where Saturn v first stages a single use item? I know the Shuttle SRB and main fuel tanks where reused. As was the rest of the vehicle...and that fucker was designed in the 70s...I guess I'm failing to grasp the revolutionary aspects of this. It's fuckin neat as shit. We're talking about an order of magnitude of cost savings. All of the Saturn V, minus the capsule, was single use. Shuttle main fuel tanks were single use. SRBs were "multiuse". Shuttle was over a billion dollars per flight. Falcon 9 is $60 million and will only go lower once they are reusable (granted, shuttle had about double capacity to LEO). Falcon Heavy will double the shuttle capacity for $90 million. You're forgetting that the shuttle also carried 7 fucking people
So will the Crew Dragon. And it will be able to abort. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:07:38 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You're forgetting that the shuttle also carried 7 fucking people Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: We don't use pure O2 atmosphere anymore. The difference between a Gemini mission and a space X mission is that the first stage lands back on the pad? Ok. Yea! I guess? Where Saturn v first stages a single use item? I know the Shuttle SRB and main fuel tanks where reused. As was the rest of the vehicle...and that fucker was designed in the 70s...I guess I'm failing to grasp the revolutionary aspects of this. It's fuckin neat as shit. We're talking about an order of magnitude of cost savings. All of the Saturn V, minus the capsule, was single use. Shuttle main fuel tanks were single use. SRBs were "multiuse". Shuttle was over a billion dollars per flight. Falcon 9 is $60 million and will only go lower once they are reusable (granted, shuttle had about double capacity to LEO). Falcon Heavy will double the shuttle capacity for $90 million. You're forgetting that the shuttle also carried 7 fucking people |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:11:20 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That is amazing! Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: High res video of landing from helicopter. https://youtu.be/ZCBE8ocOkAQ https://youtu.be/ZCBE8ocOkAQThat is amazing! Yes it is.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:15:44 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And it will be able to abort. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
We don't use pure O2 atmosphere anymore. The difference between a Gemini mission and a space X mission is that the first stage lands back on the pad? Ok. Yea! I guess? Where Saturn v first stages a single use item? I know the Shuttle SRB and main fuel tanks where reused. As was the rest of the vehicle...and that fucker was designed in the 70s...I guess I'm failing to grasp the revolutionary aspects of this. It's fuckin neat as shit. We're talking about an order of magnitude of cost savings. All of the Saturn V, minus the capsule, was single use. Shuttle main fuel tanks were single use. SRBs were "multiuse". Shuttle was over a billion dollars per flight. Falcon 9 is $60 million and will only go lower once they are reusable (granted, shuttle had about double capacity to LEO). Falcon Heavy will double the shuttle capacity for $90 million. You're forgetting that the shuttle also carried 7 fucking people
So will the Crew Dragon. And it will be able to abort. Even from the pad. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:17:39 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes it is.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
High res video of landing from helicopter. https://youtu.be/ZCBE8ocOkAQ https://youtu.be/ZCBE8ocOkAQThat is amazing! Yes it is.
Daylight test.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:18:58 AM EDT
[#34]
Shuttle was a failure at re-usability.
Every aspect was more expensive to make it ready to use again than throwing away an equivalent rocket for each flight. Solids? Dowsed with ocean salt water. Cheaper to just use new ones. External tank? Not reused. Orbiter? Has to be taken apart after each flight and everything re-tested and re-certified for flight. You could build a normal rocket that you throw away with the same amount of payload to orbit of the shuttle for much cheaper per launch. SpaceX is in the process of doing that... oh and they'll make it re-usable... And hopefully soon it will be rapidly re-usable. This will drastically reduce the cost of getting to orbit... which opens up the ability for business to make money in space... which allows our species to get off this rock. But, what the shuttle did do is test the necessary technology and gather data on how such systems work. This information in part is what allows SpaceX to do what they do. That is what Government is good for. The research for research's sake efforts. And business is good at taking that research and making something practical out of it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:35:23 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We spend so much money on stupid, entitlement inspired bullshit. This where this kind of money should be going in the first place, truly advancing the human race with the US leading the way. Also this bit about Elon warmed my heart 
'Musk is a self-described American exceptionalist and nationalist, describing himself as "nauseatingly pro-American". According to Musk, the United States is "[inarguably] the greatest country that has ever existed on Earth" i like this, very much. 
seems he & I have that in common. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:52:16 AM EDT
[#36]
AWESOME!!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:53:08 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're forgetting that the shuttle also carried 7 fucking people
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
We don't use pure O2 atmosphere anymore. The difference between a Gemini mission and a space X mission is that the first stage lands back on the pad? Ok. Yea! I guess? Where Saturn v first stages a single use item? I know the Shuttle SRB and main fuel tanks where reused. As was the rest of the vehicle...and that fucker was designed in the 70s...I guess I'm failing to grasp the revolutionary aspects of this. It's fuckin neat as shit. We're talking about an order of magnitude of cost savings. All of the Saturn V, minus the capsule, was single use. Shuttle main fuel tanks were single use. SRBs were "multiuse". Shuttle was over a billion dollars per flight. Falcon 9 is $60 million and will only go lower once they are reusable (granted, shuttle had about double capacity to LEO). Falcon Heavy will double the shuttle capacity for $90 million. You're forgetting that the shuttle also carried 7 fucking people
7 fucking people? The would suck to be the odd man out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 2:09:30 AM EDT
[#38]
Remember, Mars is next. Because no one wants to go back to jacuu. haha fucking nerd! I love it!
I might have to shoot them my resume, I already know some folks that took jobs with them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 2:43:22 AM EDT
[#39]
That was pretty cool.
Glad to see them succeed. My only wish is that America and NASA would have done it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 6:15:41 AM EDT
[#40]
you know. every corny sci fi movie i saw as a kid 60s-70s had the rocket ship landing that way.
glad to see it finally happening. see 53 seconds into this video for a landing on Planet X .
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 6:34:22 AM EDT
[#41]
Sadly, I am at work and missed it.
Hopefully this makes space travel much cheaper. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 9:43:03 AM EDT
[#42]
Woke up this morning still excited about this
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 10:54:02 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Remember, Mars is next. Because no one wants to go back to jacuu. haha fucking nerd! I love it! I might have to shoot them my resume, I already know some folks that took jobs with them. Nevermind, found their salary ranges. 
"But you get to work on something cool," only goes so far. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 11:12:43 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nevermind, found their salary ranges. "But you get to work on something cool," only goes so far. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Remember, Mars is next. Because no one wants to go back to jacuu. haha fucking nerd! I love it! I might have to shoot them my resume, I already know some folks that took jobs with them. Nevermind, found their salary ranges. "But you get to work on something cool," only goes so far. At the end of your career, when you're retired and looking back, it isn't the salary that you'll remember. ETA: You could tell your grandkids that you worked on the first manned mission to Mars. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:14:37 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm beyond astonished. I watched the first stage of a fucking space rocket LAND ITSELF ON A CONCRETE PAD for reuse. Live. Holy. Shit. 'Murica. One question about this: did the rocket actually land itself? In other words, was there a "pilot" making course corrections or was the whole thing automated from launch to landing, like hitting a giant "EASY" button and letting the computer take it from there? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:34:25 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Shuttle was a failure at re-usability. Every aspect was more expensive to make it ready to use again than throwing away an equivalent rocket for each flight. Solids? Dowsed with ocean salt water. Cheaper to just use new ones. External tank? Not reused. Orbiter? Has to be taken apart after each flight and everything re-tested and re-certified for flight. You could build a normal rocket that you throw away with the same amount of payload to orbit of the shuttle for much cheaper per launch. SpaceX is in the process of doing that... oh and they'll make it re-usable... And hopefully soon it will be rapidly re-usable. This will drastically reduce the cost of getting to orbit... which opens up the ability for business to make money in space... which allows our species to get off this rock. But, what the shuttle did do is test the necessary technology and gather data on how such systems work. This information in part is what allows SpaceX to do what they do. That is what Government is good for. The research for research's sake efforts. And business is good at taking that research and making something practical out of it. The shuttle did everything backwards, as it turned out. I can remember when people still thought the shuttle was going to reduce costs enough to bring the system within reach. Falcon architecture actually does that, I wish folks were more focused on NEOs, Ceres and the belt than Mars though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:38:12 PM EDT
[#47]
I see Matt Damon, Jason Cerbone from The Sopranos and Sullivan Stapleton (Damien Scott from Strike Back) with a different hairstyle. That right?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 1:42:08 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
High res video of landing from helicopter. https://youtu.be/ZCBE8ocOkAQ https://youtu.be/ZCBE8ocOkAQThat is amazing! Yes it is.
Daylight test. https://youtu.be/2t15vP1PyoAThat is so freaking cool. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 2:06:12 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: One question about this: did the rocket actually land itself? In other words, was there a "pilot" making course corrections or was the whole thing automated from launch to landing, like hitting a giant "EASY" button and letting the computer take it from there? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'm beyond astonished. I watched the first stage of a fucking space rocket LAND ITSELF ON A CONCRETE PAD for reuse. Live. Holy. Shit. 'Murica. One question about this: did the rocket actually land itself? In other words, was there a "pilot" making course corrections or was the whole thing automated from launch to landing, like hitting a giant "EASY" button and letting the computer take it from there? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2015 2:46:31 PM EDT
[#50]
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
