ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 8th December 2017, 01:59 PM   #481
phunk
Illuminator
 
phunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,608
Originally Posted by barehl View Post
How much schedule slip is that by now for Falcon Heavy, 18 months?
More than that but none of the previous delay happened with it in the hanger by the launchpad basically ready to go.
phunk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th December 2017, 02:05 PM   #482
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie City, Arcadia
Posts: 21,334
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I can't imagine any regulatory body having a legitimate say in where on Mars SpaceX chooses to attempt a landing.
With people on board? OK, I'm very prepared to stand corrected here, but if an experimental SpaceX landing - with passengers - was scheduled for the wild desert places of SW USA then then the PTB wouldn't step in to stop it?
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut

Last edited by GlennB; 8th December 2017 at 02:07 PM.
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th December 2017, 02:08 PM   #483
phunk
Illuminator
 
phunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,608
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
With people on board? OK, I'm very prepared to stand corrected here, but if an experimental SpaceX landing - with passengers - was scheduled for the wild desert places of SW USA then then the PTB wouldn't step in to stop it?
He did say "where on Mars". Of course they have say over where in the USA they test landings.
phunk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th December 2017, 02:21 PM   #484
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,463
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
With people on board? OK, I'm very prepared to stand corrected here, but if an experimental SpaceX landing - with passengers - was scheduled for the wild desert places of SW USA then then the PTB wouldn't step in to stop it?
What regulatory agency has jurisdiction over where on the open ocean people choose to go sailing, or swimming, or fishing?

What's with the nanny-state fetish? "We must stop people from choosing to attempt landings on Mars! For their own good! Think of the children!"
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th December 2017, 02:42 PM   #485
crescent
Graduate Poster
 
crescent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,820
Originally Posted by barehl View Post
How much schedule slip is that by now for Falcon Heavy, 18 months?
Originally Posted by phunk View Post
More than that but none of the previous delay happened with it in the hanger by the launchpad basically ready to go.
I thought the current date is about four years later than the first announced date (or maybe five years, Wiki says that when the rocket was first announced, they intended to launch in 2013).

Not too abnormal as development of a new large rocket goes. Remember, the first regular mission of the Space Shuttle was proposed to boost the orbit of Skylab - which ended up falling out of orbit several years before the shuttle launched. That is, when the shuttle was in development, there was a proposal for the first mission to be to Skylab, which would include boosting the orbit.

I am not clear how far the launch of SLS has been pushed back since it was first announced - but that would be a good comparison.

Now, if this thing really does blow up on this first launch, I would expect the next launch would be pushed back by at least an extra year. Time will tell.


ETA: Wikipedia even has a graph of the delays: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon...ule_delays.png

Last edited by crescent; 8th December 2017 at 02:51 PM.
crescent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th December 2017, 04:18 PM   #486
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 6,678
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
They spent several years doing test landings of their grasshopper and F9R vehicles in Texas. I don't see why landing off the concrete pad in similar tests would be a huge problem. They did get FAA approvals for those.

Blue Origin has also been doing similar tests.

I don't think any regulatory agency has jurisdiction over Mars.
Exactly

This how the Musk-haters operate. They think the engineers at SpaceX are all stupid and haven't thought through any of this, and that they are going to send BFR to Mars to land on a rough patch of ground on its maiden flight without testing anything.

Anyone who knows (or claims to know) anything about aerospace engineering, KNOWS that these things are tested and tested and tested again.

God its frustrating reading some of the ill-considered, ill-informed crap that gets posted in threads like this.
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th December 2017, 04:36 PM   #487
barehl
Master Poster
 
barehl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,628
Originally Posted by crescent View Post
I thought the current date is about four years later than the first announced date (or maybe five years, Wiki says that when the rocket was first announced, they intended to launch in 2013).
Yes, that estimate seemed pretty reasonable at the time considering that Falcon 9 was in regular production by the end of 2010. But, the test stand wasn't built until 2013 so some slippage was inevitable. I guess I was thinking along these lines:

By September 2015, impacted by the failure of SpaceX CRS-7 that June, SpaceX rescheduled the maiden Falcon Heavy flight for April/May 2016, but by February 2016 had moved that back again to late 2016.

So, something like 18 months after that point.

Elon Musk stated publicly in July 2017 that "It actually ended up being way harder to do Falcon Heavy than we thought. ... Really way, way more difficult than we originally thought. We were pretty naive about that."

I would say that this same statement applies to his idea of a Mars rocket only with a much greater degree of naiveté.

Quote:
I am not clear how far the launch of SLS has been pushed back since it was first announced - but that would be a good comparison.
They did the test firing for 8.5 minutes back on July 25. That puts SLS many years ahead of Musk's Mars Rocket. In fact, SLS was ahead of the Mars Rocket as far back as 2013 when it passed design review.
barehl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th December 2017, 04:39 PM   #488
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 6,678
Originally Posted by crescent View Post
Remember, the first regular mission of the Space Shuttle was proposed to boost the orbit of Skylab - which ended up falling out of orbit several years before the shuttle launched. That is, when the shuttle was in development, there was a proposal for the first mission to be to Skylab, which would include boosting the orbit.
After cancellation of Apollo 18 through 22, NASA announced that the Space Shuttle would be operational by 1976, but Columbia wasn't delivered to the launch pad until early 1979, and didn't launch until 1981 - a five year slip.

Originally Posted by crescent View Post
I am not clear how far the launch of SLS has been pushed back since it was first announced - but that would be a good comparison.
The initial launch date was to be mid 2017 but was slipped to November 2018 after delays in reaching key decision points during development. It has now slipped again to "no earlier than December 2019"

As you say, its normal for these things to happen with big developments especially in aerospace , but while SpaceX gets lambasted when they don't meet deadlines, NASA gets a free pass.
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th December 2017, 05:10 PM   #489
barehl
Master Poster
 
barehl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,628
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
As you say, its normal for these things to happen with big developments especially in aerospace , but while SpaceX gets lambasted when they don't meet deadlines, NASA gets a free pass.
That's right, everyone's beating up on your favorite teddy bear. Everyone is just so mean. Be serious. Who here do you think doesn't know that:
  • NASA should have understood the hazard of Apollo block 1.
  • Apollo 13 should never have happened.
  • NASA should have understood that the orbiter weight itself consumed an unacceptable amount of payload capacity.
  • NASA should have understood how impractical single stage to orbit concepts were.
I can't really blame NASA for SLS since Constellation was shoved down their throats by Griffin and the Bush administration. Ares 1 wasn't cancelled until 2010 when it became crystal clear that it wasn't cost effective. Even so, congress prevented the Obama administration from canceling Ares V, so SLS is hanging on, still in search of a mission. Also, the Bush administration had done budgets based on a retirement of ISS. That hasn't happened so there has been less money for other things.

What puzzles me about your position is that SpaceX wouldn't exist if it weren't for the COTS contract with NASA. But somehow you attempt to give SpaceX credit without giving any to NASA. That's ridiculous. However, I will give SpaceX credit for their aggressive COTS bid, well ahead of the nearest competitor.

Last edited by barehl; 8th December 2017 at 05:15 PM.
barehl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th December 2017, 10:26 PM   #490
Octavo
Illuminator
 
Octavo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,128
Originally Posted by barehl View Post
Elon Musk stated publicly in July 2017 that "It actually ended up being way harder to do Falcon Heavy than we thought. ... Really way, way more difficult than we originally thought. We were pretty naive about that."

I would say that this same statement applies to his idea of a Mars rocket only with a much greater degree of naiveté.

They did the test firing for 8.5 minutes back on July 25. That puts SLS many years ahead of Musk's Mars Rocket. In fact, SLS was ahead of the Mars Rocket as far back as 2013 when it passed design review.
SLS undoubtedly has the jump on BFR, and deep down I agree with you that he's being naive about the challenges that rocket will face in production and testing.

I do think that they'll catch up with SLS though, I wouldn't be surprised to see the first BFR stack being static fired by the time block 1b is ready to fly.

The TEL and crawler upgrades for 1B alone will take years!
__________________
This signature is intended to imitate people.
Octavo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th December 2017, 03:22 AM   #491
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 19,658
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
<snip>

As you say, its normal for these things to happen with big developments especially in aerospace , but while SpaceX gets lambasted when they don't meet deadlines, NASA gets a free pass.

I think "target date" is a much more accurate description then "deadline".
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:15 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.