User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/30/2023 2:32:27 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By scul: 2 months Elon time, so 4 months to the next flight? Probably.  Update!! Starship now expected to launch in early August! Is this another example of Elon Time? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2023 3:58:24 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Fulcrum-5: Yeah, there's a lot of breathless fanboyism that thinks SpaceX is going to be delivering full-capability Starship/Superheavy mission as soon as the first Starship lands back at Starbase. Obviously, that's not going to happen (for a variety of reasons). However..... There is a lot to be excited about. As has been noted, even non-reusable (read: "Errr....the reentry/landing bit is a bit harder than anticipated....") or only partially reusable (read: Superheavy lives to fly another day, but Starship still isn't sticking the landing).....is still instantly a game-changer. 100-150+ tons to LEO, for ~$100 Million (not counting payload).....is unreal. So Starship/Superheavy will, as soon as they manage to get Starship into LEO in one piece, begin changing what we are capable of. That's cool. Fully-reusable, semi-quick turnaround (not "daily flights of the same equipment set").....changes things even more. Possibly to the point where NASA might run out of payloads to offer for bid (or be encouraged to begin re-engineering payloads to be less costly/more capable, due to the more forgiving mass margins/$). I suspect that the Cape will see Starship launches almost immediately after the first one or two Starships reach LEO successfully (whether or not they reenter/land successfully). So that'll be a significant uptick in launch tempo. Manned Starship is still a ways down the road (well, NASA-manned Starship....who knows what SpaceX's internal risk acceptance is).....but probably not as far as some assume (STS-1 was basically man-rated by fiat, and the first live STS launch was also the first manned launch....so the "100 successful unmanned missions before it can be man-rated" is patently ridiculous). Axiom or Polaris (or someone new) will likely step in on that, if NASA proves gunshy. Dear Moon....IDK. There's a lot of non-rocket development needed for that (just the Life Support System alone....a dozen or so people, for a week, in a fairly large volume?). I don't see it happening before 2027 (WAG/ballpark). Certainly, SpaceX is going to be prioritizing anything Artemis-related over Dear Moon. For the most part, I agree with you. This part is probably the biggest deal. You're already seeing that starting to happen with Falcon Heavy. Direct insertion to GEO? That doesn't happen because it's too expensive... until now it does, because now it's not. (Delta IV Heavy's last 4 launches were $2.2B for the set... a FH launch is roughly $100M; more if the side boosters are expended, but still...) You've seen F9 win launches that otherwise would have gone to much smaller launchers - same reason. FH didn't launch for a couple years... mainly because there were no payloads that needed it (Except Mil launches already on DIV-H), but once the capability was proven, now the launches are starting to come hot and heavy. Expect the same for Starship; but bigger, because FH's main advantage is Mass to orbit. Starship is Mass AND Volume. Not to disparage the Life Support system - it's not easy - but the mass and volume that Starship provides can make up for a LOT of sins. It both means that you can both not worry so much about miniaturization, but also that you can just say 'screw it, we're just bringing as much as we need with us instead of recycling' for some things. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2023 4:56:13 PM EDT
[#3]
https://newspaceeconomy.ca/2023/05/29/insights-into-starships-announced-commercial-flights-2024-to-2030/ |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2023 5:02:58 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Chokey:
https://newspaceeconomy.ca/2023/05/29/insights-into-starships-announced-commercial-flights-2024-to-2030/ |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2023 5:06:54 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By kill-9: This seems like putting the cart before the horse. You have to plan ahead even knowing that plans are subject to change. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2023 6:07:04 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ASUsax: For the most part, I agree with you. This part is probably the biggest deal. You're already seeing that starting to happen with Falcon Heavy. Direct insertion to GEO? That doesn't happen because it's too expensive... until now it does, because now it's not. (Delta IV Heavy's last 4 launches were $2.2B for the set... a FH launch is roughly $100M; more if the side boosters are expended, but still...) You've seen F9 win launches that otherwise would have gone to much smaller launchers - same reason. FH didn't launch for a couple years... mainly because there were no payloads that needed it (Except Mil launches already on DIV-H), but once the capability was proven, now the launches are starting to come hot and heavy. Expect the same for Starship; but bigger, because FH's main advantage is Mass to orbit. Starship is Mass AND Volume. Not to disparage the Life Support system - it's not easy - but the mass and volume that Starship provides can make up for a LOT of sins. It both means that you can both not worry so much about miniaturization, but also that you can just say 'screw it, we're just bringing as much as we need with us instead of recycling' for some things. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ASUsax: Originally Posted By Fulcrum-5: Yeah, there's a lot of breathless fanboyism that thinks SpaceX is going to be delivering full-capability Starship/Superheavy mission as soon as the first Starship lands back at Starbase. Obviously, that's not going to happen (for a variety of reasons). However..... There is a lot to be excited about. As has been noted, even non-reusable (read: "Errr....the reentry/landing bit is a bit harder than anticipated....") or only partially reusable (read: Superheavy lives to fly another day, but Starship still isn't sticking the landing).....is still instantly a game-changer. 100-150+ tons to LEO, for ~$100 Million (not counting payload).....is unreal. So Starship/Superheavy will, as soon as they manage to get Starship into LEO in one piece, begin changing what we are capable of. That's cool. Fully-reusable, semi-quick turnaround (not "daily flights of the same equipment set").....changes things even more. Possibly to the point where NASA might run out of payloads to offer for bid (or be encouraged to begin re-engineering payloads to be less costly/more capable, due to the more forgiving mass margins/$). I suspect that the Cape will see Starship launches almost immediately after the first one or two Starships reach LEO successfully (whether or not they reenter/land successfully). So that'll be a significant uptick in launch tempo. Manned Starship is still a ways down the road (well, NASA-manned Starship....who knows what SpaceX's internal risk acceptance is).....but probably not as far as some assume (STS-1 was basically man-rated by fiat, and the first live STS launch was also the first manned launch....so the "100 successful unmanned missions before it can be man-rated" is patently ridiculous). Axiom or Polaris (or someone new) will likely step in on that, if NASA proves gunshy. Dear Moon....IDK. There's a lot of non-rocket development needed for that (just the Life Support System alone....a dozen or so people, for a week, in a fairly large volume?). I don't see it happening before 2027 (WAG/ballpark). Certainly, SpaceX is going to be prioritizing anything Artemis-related over Dear Moon. For the most part, I agree with you. This part is probably the biggest deal. You're already seeing that starting to happen with Falcon Heavy. Direct insertion to GEO? That doesn't happen because it's too expensive... until now it does, because now it's not. (Delta IV Heavy's last 4 launches were $2.2B for the set... a FH launch is roughly $100M; more if the side boosters are expended, but still...) You've seen F9 win launches that otherwise would have gone to much smaller launchers - same reason. FH didn't launch for a couple years... mainly because there were no payloads that needed it (Except Mil launches already on DIV-H), but once the capability was proven, now the launches are starting to come hot and heavy. Expect the same for Starship; but bigger, because FH's main advantage is Mass to orbit. Starship is Mass AND Volume. Not to disparage the Life Support system - it's not easy - but the mass and volume that Starship provides can make up for a LOT of sins. It both means that you can both not worry so much about miniaturization, but also that you can just say 'screw it, we're just bringing as much as we need with us instead of recycling' for some things. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2023 10:54:53 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1Andy2: I'm curious about the new Masseys gun range. Supposedly moved not too far from the original property (that SpaceX bought) @1Andy2 Found it as we were leaving waiting in line to exit the border patrol check point so we didn’t stop because we didn’t want to wait in line again…but it is right next to the checkpoint  Attached File Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2023 11:00:27 PM EDT
[#8]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2023 11:01:38 PM EDT
[#9]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2023 11:03:51 PM EDT
[#10]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2023 11:10:19 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Drugmanrx: @1Andy2 Found it as we were leaving waiting in line to exit the border patrol check point so we didn’t stop because we didn’t want to wait in line again…but it is right next to the checkpoint https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/326156/D66221EC-929B-4092-8B6E-FA768F85D34B_png-2835105.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/326156/6BB36680-CA62-403E-860C-CBA3D5CF9C1A_jpe-2835108.JPG Neat, thanks for the heads up. Will have to remember that for when I go down. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2023 8:15:26 AM EDT
[#13]
Is that a 51% sign on the fence? Does that mean the Rocket Garden is a bar?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2023 9:00:56 AM EDT
[#14]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2023 9:22:53 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tortilla-flats: Is that a 51% sign on the fence? Does that mean the Rocket Garden is a bar? I’m not sure..wife was getting nervous with all the private property signs…house next to the rocket garden looks like they we’re getting ready to have some kind of party..anyone know what this place is?  Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2023 10:28:35 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Fulcrum-5: Yeah, there's a lot of breathless fanboyism that thinks SpaceX is going to be delivering full-capability Starship/Superheavy mission as soon as the first Starship lands back at Starbase. Obviously, that's not going to happen (for a variety of reasons). However..... There is a lot to be excited about. As has been noted, even non-reusable (read: "Errr....the reentry/landing bit is a bit harder than anticipated....") or only partially reusable (read: Superheavy lives to fly another day, but Starship still isn't sticking the landing).....is still instantly a game-changer. 100-150+ tons to LEO, for ~$100 Million (not counting payload).....is unreal. So Starship/Superheavy will, as soon as they manage to get Starship into LEO in one piece, begin changing what we are capable of. That's cool. Fully-reusable, semi-quick turnaround (not "daily flights of the same equipment set").....changes things even more. Possibly to the point where NASA might run out of payloads to offer for bid (or be encouraged to begin re-engineering payloads to be less costly/more capable, due to the more forgiving mass margins/$). I suspect that the Cape will see Starship launches almost immediately after the first one or two Starships reach LEO successfully (whether or not they reenter/land successfully). So that'll be a significant uptick in launch tempo. Manned Starship is still a ways down the road (well, NASA-manned Starship....who knows what SpaceX's internal risk acceptance is).....but probably not as far as some assume (STS-1 was basically man-rated by fiat, and the first live STS launch was also the first manned launch....so the "100 successful unmanned missions before it can be man-rated" is patently ridiculous). Axiom or Polaris (or someone new) will likely step in on that, if NASA proves gunshy. Dear Moon....IDK. There's a lot of non-rocket development needed for that (just the Life Support System alone....a dozen or so people, for a week, in a fairly large volume?). I don't see it happening before 2027 (WAG/ballpark). Certainly, SpaceX is going to be prioritizing anything Artemis-related over Dear Moon. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Fulcrum-5: Originally Posted By Yobro512: can someone help me? so many groups seem to think that "fully and rapidly reusable" starship is just around the corner and there is no reason Tim Dodd wont be zooming around the moon in two years then landing at LC39a at KSP for a cost to MZ of like 20m dollars. I cant believe any "fully and rapidly" is anything but a MINIMUM of 10 years away, probably 15. Launching is to in depth. FAA is far to stingy to allow "rapid launches" for a long time. Mexico and the US will need extreme reliability guaranteed before starship is allowed to re enter and fly over land. just landing second stages at BC or FL is a lot of launches away. a single "both stages attempting to land" launch will probably cost <100m+ for a customer. we wont see anything close to single digit millions cost of launches for a while or damn near ever. look how long its taken to get just a F9 booster to like a month turn around. and understand orbital re-entry is far far far more intense and will likely require an order of magnitude more refurb investment. getting 150T to orbit for 200m 12x a year is a GAME CHANGING capability. it would change the future of humanity. we are compressing every possible stretch goal of starship down to 3 years from now. Yeah, there's a lot of breathless fanboyism that thinks SpaceX is going to be delivering full-capability Starship/Superheavy mission as soon as the first Starship lands back at Starbase. Obviously, that's not going to happen (for a variety of reasons). However..... There is a lot to be excited about. As has been noted, even non-reusable (read: "Errr....the reentry/landing bit is a bit harder than anticipated....") or only partially reusable (read: Superheavy lives to fly another day, but Starship still isn't sticking the landing).....is still instantly a game-changer. 100-150+ tons to LEO, for ~$100 Million (not counting payload).....is unreal. So Starship/Superheavy will, as soon as they manage to get Starship into LEO in one piece, begin changing what we are capable of. That's cool. Fully-reusable, semi-quick turnaround (not "daily flights of the same equipment set").....changes things even more. Possibly to the point where NASA might run out of payloads to offer for bid (or be encouraged to begin re-engineering payloads to be less costly/more capable, due to the more forgiving mass margins/$). I suspect that the Cape will see Starship launches almost immediately after the first one or two Starships reach LEO successfully (whether or not they reenter/land successfully). So that'll be a significant uptick in launch tempo. Manned Starship is still a ways down the road (well, NASA-manned Starship....who knows what SpaceX's internal risk acceptance is).....but probably not as far as some assume (STS-1 was basically man-rated by fiat, and the first live STS launch was also the first manned launch....so the "100 successful unmanned missions before it can be man-rated" is patently ridiculous). Axiom or Polaris (or someone new) will likely step in on that, if NASA proves gunshy. Dear Moon....IDK. There's a lot of non-rocket development needed for that (just the Life Support System alone....a dozen or so people, for a week, in a fairly large volume?). I don't see it happening before 2027 (WAG/ballpark). Certainly, SpaceX is going to be prioritizing anything Artemis-related over Dear Moon. They just landed a Falcon 9 booster this morning that was it's 14th trip. Starship will get there in a few years and nothing about space will be the same. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2023 11:08:36 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By kill-9: This seems like putting the cart before the horse. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By kill-9: Originally Posted By Chokey:
https://newspaceeconomy.ca/2023/05/29/insights-into-starships-announced-commercial-flights-2024-to-2030/ I don't believe those 2024 crewed missions for a second. The Artemis/HLS mission timing is only slightly more believable because the meat cargo will be going up and returning in an Orion capsule and even then SpaceX is really going to have to kick it into an even higher gear this year to have a sniff at it. |
|
|
|
ID, USA
|
Posted: 5/31/2023 12:14:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Hesperus]
[#18]
In Scott Manley’s most recent deep space update he talks briefly about how as a result of disclosures concerning this environmental lawsuit that about $5 billion has been spent on Starship development and the facilities at Boca Chica so far.
I know that Starship development has a long way to go and $5,000,000,000 isn’t anything to sneeze at for all but a handful of nations and business entities. But really? Compared to the US governments military budget that’s almost a rounding error. Budweiser may have lost that much in their stock price in a day recently.  That said I suppose we shall how good an investment this is when we have a factory operational and regular launches from Cape Canaveral. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2023 1:16:54 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Hesperus: In Scott Manley’s most recent deep space update he talks briefly about how as a result of disclosures concerning this environmental lawsuit that about $5 billion has been spent on Starship development and the facilities at Boca Chica so far. I know that Starship development has a long way to go and $5,000,000,000 isn’t anything to sneeze at for all but a handful of nations and business entities. But really? Compared to the US governments military budget that’s almost a rounding error. Budweiser may have lost that much in their stock price in a day recently. That said I suppose we shall how good an investment this is when we have a factory operational and regular launches from Cape Canaveral. Space X has to be approaching the profit threshold for starlink and if the growth continues, it won't be long before they'll be able to fund Starship development just on that revenue stream.  Attached File |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 5/31/2023 8:01:25 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Houstons_Problem]
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By David0858: They just landed a Falcon 9 booster this morning that was it's 14th trip. Starship will get there in a few years and nothing about space will be the same. Falcon 9 beets the successful consecutive launch record by a factor of two. And Falcon 9 did shattered that record with at least one launcher that had been reused 14 times. |
|
|
VI, USA
|
Posted: 5/31/2023 8:36:37 PM EDT
[#21]
That's the thing they are on the V3 version of the Raptor engine and the increased thrust is allowing larger payloads than what was forecasted a few months ago.
Starship is going to allow huge increases of materials to LEO. |
|
|
CO, USA
|
Posted: 5/31/2023 8:45:15 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DarkGray: Space X has to be approaching the profit threshold for starlink and if the growth continues, it won't be long before they'll be able to fund Starship development just on that revenue stream. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/78606/Screenshot_20230531_105429_Chrome_jpg-2835507.JPG Shotwell was quoted as saying that Starlink recently had a positive cash flow quarter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2023 9:17:58 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Drugmanrx: I’m not sure..wife was getting nervous with all the private property signs…house next to the rocket garden looks like they we’re getting ready to have some kind of party..anyone know what this place is? https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/326156/8732C151-513A-4C30-AD1D-D783295C5276_jpe-2835326.JPG Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Drugmanrx: Originally Posted By tortilla-flats: Is that a 51% sign on the fence? Does that mean the Rocket Garden is a bar? I’m not sure..wife was getting nervous with all the private property signs…house next to the rocket garden looks like they we’re getting ready to have some kind of party..anyone know what this place is? https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/326156/8732C151-513A-4C30-AD1D-D783295C5276_jpe-2835326.JPG It looks like a small country club. Rotary club thing. They definitely use it as a meeting/party spot. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2023 1:24:05 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DarkGray: Space X has to be approaching the profit threshold for starlink and if the growth continues, it won't be long before they'll be able to fund Starship development just on that revenue stream. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/78606/Screenshot_20230531_105429_Chrome_jpg-2835507.JPG Starlink has been profitable since late last year. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2023 3:58:39 PM EDT
[#26]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/4/2023 7:04:20 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By David0858: They just landed a Falcon 9 booster this morning that was it's 14th trip. Starship will get there in a few years and nothing about space will be the same. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By David0858: Originally Posted By Fulcrum-5: Originally Posted By Yobro512: can someone help me? so many groups seem to think that "fully and rapidly reusable" starship is just around the corner and there is no reason Tim Dodd wont be zooming around the moon in two years then landing at LC39a at KSP for a cost to MZ of like 20m dollars. I cant believe any "fully and rapidly" is anything but a MINIMUM of 10 years away, probably 15. Launching is to in depth. FAA is far to stingy to allow "rapid launches" for a long time. Mexico and the US will need extreme reliability guaranteed before starship is allowed to re enter and fly over land. just landing second stages at BC or FL is a lot of launches away. a single "both stages attempting to land" launch will probably cost <100m+ for a customer. we wont see anything close to single digit millions cost of launches for a while or damn near ever. look how long its taken to get just a F9 booster to like a month turn around. and understand orbital re-entry is far far far more intense and will likely require an order of magnitude more refurb investment. getting 150T to orbit for 200m 12x a year is a GAME CHANGING capability. it would change the future of humanity. we are compressing every possible stretch goal of starship down to 3 years from now. Yeah, there's a lot of breathless fanboyism that thinks SpaceX is going to be delivering full-capability Starship/Superheavy mission as soon as the first Starship lands back at Starbase. Obviously, that's not going to happen (for a variety of reasons). However..... There is a lot to be excited about. As has been noted, even non-reusable (read: "Errr....the reentry/landing bit is a bit harder than anticipated....") or only partially reusable (read: Superheavy lives to fly another day, but Starship still isn't sticking the landing).....is still instantly a game-changer. 100-150+ tons to LEO, for ~$100 Million (not counting payload).....is unreal. So Starship/Superheavy will, as soon as they manage to get Starship into LEO in one piece, begin changing what we are capable of. That's cool. Fully-reusable, semi-quick turnaround (not "daily flights of the same equipment set").....changes things even more. Possibly to the point where NASA might run out of payloads to offer for bid (or be encouraged to begin re-engineering payloads to be less costly/more capable, due to the more forgiving mass margins/$). I suspect that the Cape will see Starship launches almost immediately after the first one or two Starships reach LEO successfully (whether or not they reenter/land successfully). So that'll be a significant uptick in launch tempo. Manned Starship is still a ways down the road (well, NASA-manned Starship....who knows what SpaceX's internal risk acceptance is).....but probably not as far as some assume (STS-1 was basically man-rated by fiat, and the first live STS launch was also the first manned launch....so the "100 successful unmanned missions before it can be man-rated" is patently ridiculous). Axiom or Polaris (or someone new) will likely step in on that, if NASA proves gunshy. Dear Moon....IDK. There's a lot of non-rocket development needed for that (just the Life Support System alone....a dozen or so people, for a week, in a fairly large volume?). I don't see it happening before 2027 (WAG/ballpark). Certainly, SpaceX is going to be prioritizing anything Artemis-related over Dear Moon. They just landed a Falcon 9 booster this morning that was it's 14th trip. Starship will get there in a few years and nothing about space will be the same. F9 booster landing are an order of magnitude easier than orbital re entry landings. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2023 5:36:15 PM EDT
[#28]
didn't really want to start another thread for this
 Vulcan Cert-1 Flight Readiness Firing |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2023 9:51:53 PM EDT
[#29]
video
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2023 8:23:50 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Yobro512: F9 booster landing are an order of magnitude easier than orbital re entry landings. No The booster itself is basically using the same technique as the F9. The Strarship is doing something new of course. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2023 9:22:42 AM EDT
[#31]
I guess something failed on Portzilla a couple of days ago so SpaceX brought in one of the cranes they are using for the construction at the KSC facility.
Something you don't see too often..  Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2023 2:53:21 PM EDT
[#32]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2023 2:59:52 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HeavyMetal: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/1878/Attachment-2847891.jpg  Attached File |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 6/11/2023 5:03:46 PM EDT
[#34]
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2023 10:09:42 PM EDT
[#35]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2023 11:51:29 AM EDT
[#36]
|
|
|
|
CO, USA
|
Posted: 6/13/2023 1:51:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AmericanPeople]
[#37]
NASA concerned SpaceX’s Starship schedule could delay moon landing
"A senior NASA official raised concerns Wednesday that “difficulties” with SpaceX’s development of the huge new Starship rocket could delay the Artemis program’s first moon landing with astronauts from late 2025, a mission that will use a derivative of the Starship vehicle to ferry a two-person crew to and from the lunar surface. Jim Free, head of NASA’s exploration systems development mission directorate, said SpaceX has much work to do before the Starship is cleared to land astronauts on the moon. NASA’s current schedule puts the Artemis program’s first astronaut landing on the moon, on the Artemis 3 mission, in late 2025. “For Artemis 3, I mentioned that December ’25 is our current manifest date,” Free said Wednesday in a meeting of the National Academies’ Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board. “But with the difficulties that SpaceX has had, I think that’s really concerning. So you can think about that slipping probably into ’26.” The guy is inept if he thinks that the late 2025 date was ever realistic. It may be years before Starship is ever man-rated if it even occurs. Then Artemis is hardly a blueprint for being affordable and perhaps the schedule has been fluid. Plus Artemis is just a pandering program anyway and should either be cancelled or have white males on the first few flights. |
|
|
ID, USA
|
Posted: 6/13/2023 3:35:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Hesperus]
[#38]
It took nearly a decade of work, tens of thousands of people and billions of 1960s dollars for Apollo 11 to get to the moon.
Did they really think they were going to pull this off with a pile of leftover Shuttle parts, leaning heavily on SpaceX and Blue Origin and funding that when compared to Apollo could be called couch cushion change? I think this program is going fairly well though. It would be interesting to see what Elon would be doing with Apollo bucks. But I have no complaints about how they are doing things. Heck I don’t have many complaints about BO except that they seem pretentious, weird and entirely too obsessed with secrecy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2023 4:12:46 PM EDT
[#39]
Lol make SpaceX the scapegoat. Go rip off someone else's wrench, maybe you can fuel your new rocket faster.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2023 6:10:23 PM EDT
[#40]
 SpaceX Abandons “Off-The-Grid” Operations At Starbase! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2023 7:28:12 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AmericanPeople: NASA concerned SpaceX's Starship schedule could delay moon landing "A senior NASA official raised concerns Wednesday that "difficulties" with SpaceX's development of the huge new Starship rocket could delay the Artemis program's first moon landing with astronauts from late 2025, a mission that will use a derivative of the Starship vehicle to ferry a two-person crew to and from the lunar surface. Jim Free, head of NASA's exploration systems development mission directorate, said SpaceX has much work to do before the Starship is cleared to land astronauts on the moon. NASA's current schedule puts the Artemis program's first astronaut landing on the moon, on the Artemis 3 mission, in late 2025. "For Artemis 3, I mentioned that December '25 is our current manifest date," Free said Wednesday in a meeting of the National Academies' Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board. "But with the difficulties that SpaceX has had, I think that's really concerning. So you can think about that slipping probably into '26." The guy is inept if he thinks that the late 2025 date was ever realistic. It may be years before Starship is ever man-rated if it even occurs. Then Artemis is hardly a blueprint for being affordable and perhaps the schedule has been fluid. Plus Artemis is just a pandering program anyway and should either be cancelled or have white males on the first few flights. Artemis will certainly be delayed. It won't be because of SpaceX though. It Might however get canceled due to SpaceX getting Starship operational and thus rendering Artemis entirely obsolete. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2023 11:48:37 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Master_of_Orion: yeah... Artemis will certainly be delayed. It won't be because of SpaceX though. It Might however get canceled due to SpaceX getting Starship operational and thus rendering Artemis entirely obsolete. Don’t confuse Artemis with SLS. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2023 11:58:58 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HeavyMetal: Don’t confuse Artemis with SLS. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HeavyMetal: Originally Posted By Master_of_Orion: yeah... Artemis will certainly be delayed. It won't be because of SpaceX though. It Might however get canceled due to SpaceX getting Starship operational and thus rendering Artemis entirely obsolete. Don’t confuse Artemis with SLS. The problem is that right now, the ONLY purpose of SLS is Artemis. The moment a strong woman of color has stepped foot on the moon, SLS will be quietly cancelled and will never fly again. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2023 1:16:57 PM EDT
[#44]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2023 1:26:45 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DK-Prof: The problem is that right now, the ONLY purpose of SLS is Artemis. The moment a strong woman of color has stepped foot on the moon, SLS will be quietly cancelled and will never fly again. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DK-Prof: Originally Posted By HeavyMetal: Originally Posted By Master_of_Orion: yeah... Artemis will certainly be delayed. It won't be because of SpaceX though. It Might however get canceled due to SpaceX getting Starship operational and thus rendering Artemis entirely obsolete. Don’t confuse Artemis with SLS. The problem is that right now, the ONLY purpose of SLS is Artemis. The moment a strong woman of color has stepped foot on the moon, SLS will be quietly cancelled and will never fly again. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2023 2:34:00 PM EDT
[#46]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2023 2:38:48 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryThis guy makes excellent videos, a bit long but chocked full of great information. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2023 2:40:05 PM EDT
[#48]
Starlink 87 had me freaked out. Night fishing Monday night, outside ATL. I am a pretty big space nerd, so I've seen starlink clusters before, but they were extremely close on Monday, like one solid beam of bright light that faded as it passed. It was so soon after launch that all my apps didn't show them yet. So they were a UFO to me for about two hours, until I figured it out.
My wife still hasn't stopped giving me a hard time, because I was a tad freaked out. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2023 4:29:24 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DK-Prof: The problem is that right now, the ONLY purpose of SLS is Artemis. The moment a strong woman of color has stepped foot on the moon, SLS will be quietly cancelled and will never fly again. Artemis will continue with or without because of China. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/14/2023 7:18:18 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.
Attached File
Attached File
Attached File
Attached File
Attached File
Attached File
Attached File
Attached File
Attached File
Attached File
Attached File
Attached File
Attached File
