Author Topic: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan  (Read 28521 times)

Offline gladiator1332

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2431
  • Fort Myers, FL
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #40 on: 04/16/2010 05:57 pm »
...He is shucking for his industry and organization...

And I flat out don't have a problem with that either.

What some people view here as arrogance, I see as a "CAN DO" spirit....

And I flat out don't have a problem with that either.  It's not arrogance, it's confidence.

I was just already tired of reading that mushy stuff at the end.

I agree. I mean what do people expect Musk to say?

 "I am 100% confident my company cannot meet the deadlines. Our reliability numbers are completely made up, and I am pretty sure this thing will fail. And if you are wondering which vehicle I think is best for the job, well I would go talk to those Shuttle guys over there, or maybe ULA, they sure as hell have a better idea about what it is going on than I do!"

Yeah that sounds like the best thing to say before the most powerful man in the world shows up to check out your vehicle.  ::)

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8520
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3540
  • Likes Given: 758
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #41 on: 04/16/2010 06:03 pm »
Yeah that sounds like the best thing to say before the most powerful man in the world shows up to check out your vehicle.  ::)

Speaking of which... Originally, Obama was supposed to visit the Atlas pad If I'm not mistaken. I wonder why the late change of plan. No doubt this will cement the erroneous notion of "commercial = SpaceX" in many people's minds so maybe it wasn't such a good idea in that regard.
« Last Edit: 04/16/2010 06:04 pm by ugordan »

Offline Sen

  • Member
  • Posts: 70
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #42 on: 04/16/2010 07:19 pm »
Yeah that sounds like the best thing to say before the most powerful man in the world shows up to check out your vehicle.  ::)

Speaking of which... Originally, Obama was supposed to visit the Atlas pad If I'm not mistaken. I wonder why the late change of plan. No doubt this will cement the erroneous notion of "commercial = SpaceX" in many people's minds so maybe it wasn't such a good idea in that regard.

     People who say/think that are already partisans in the debate. As for why the last minute change, its not that hard to figure out given recent statements, testimony, etc. The plan doesnt depend on spacex, but it also doesnt depend on ULA, from the administrations perspective.
« Last Edit: 04/16/2010 07:20 pm by Sen »

Offline dks13827

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 468
  • Phoenix
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #43 on: 04/17/2010 04:50 am »
Mr Musk has put small payloads, very small, into orbit.  Nasa did that in the 1950's.
And by magic Mr Musk will leap forward many years of capability in 3 years ?  Come on !!!
Read   ANGLE OF ATTACK   or any other Apollo history book, learn a little physics.  You will see that Apollo was at least 100 times harder than what you might think.   It is true.  It is physics.

Offline dks13827

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 468
  • Phoenix
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #44 on: 04/17/2010 04:52 am »
Like the fact that he assumes he has the credibility to make these remarks. He has not sufficently demonstrated the viability of his LV's yet IMO. That he appears to assume that he is a serious player at this point is the arrogant part. Not until f9 has a few flights under its built would I have made ANY statement (let alone his statement) if I was in his position.

He is shucking for his industry and organization, no different than ULA talking up Fuel Depots, even though they have never built them, Virgin Galactic talking up their passenger vehicle wen they've never carried more than a single person at a time, or Shuttle Managers talking up the benefits of SDLV, even though their numbers are based off projections, just like ULA's.

Let's all just hope, no matter what Congress decides to green light, they fund it fully this time.
Boy do I agree with that !!!!

Offline dks13827

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 468
  • Phoenix
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #45 on: 04/17/2010 04:59 am »
...He is shucking for his industry and organization...

And I flat out don't have a problem with that either.

What some people view here as arrogance, I see as a "CAN DO" spirit....

And I flat out don't have a problem with that either.  It's not arrogance, it's confidence.

I was just already tired of reading that mushy stuff at the end.

I agree. I mean what do people expect Musk to say?

 "I am 100% confident my company cannot meet the deadlines. Our reliability numbers are completely made up, and I am pretty sure this thing will fail. And if you are wondering which vehicle I think is best for the job, well I would go talk to those Shuttle guys over there, or maybe ULA, they sure as hell have a better idea about what it is going on than I do!"

Yeah that sounds like the best thing to say before the most powerful man in the world shows up to check out your vehicle.  ::)
Mr Musk is naive, he's a kid.  I bet he would find fault with 1000 decisions made during Apollo, ask him !!  But it worked and it was based on reality.  Note that I did not say I wish him ill.  Also the can do spirit must be based somewhat on reality, also.

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8520
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3540
  • Likes Given: 758
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #46 on: 04/17/2010 10:24 am »
Mr Musk has put small payloads, very small, into orbit.  Nasa did that in the 1950's.
And by magic Mr Musk will leap forward many years of capability in 3 years ?  Come on !!!

First you pull out the usual "they're trying to do what NASA did way back in the 50's and 60's" and then further assume they cannot do it because they have to single-handedly relearn all the lessons NASA had to learn back then. I guess all of that hard-learned knowledge is off limits to SpaceX or anyone in the industry or something. How long did it take NASA from those small payloads to Glenn in orbit, with many unknowns of spaceflight back then?

You are essentially saying a complete booster sitting on the LC-40 pad right now cannot possibly be made to fly to LEO in that timeframe. While there may well be problems, I beg to differ. And I don't have to invoke known laws of physics to drive my point home.

Quote
Read   ANGLE OF ATTACK   or any other Apollo history book, learn a little physics.  You will see that Apollo was at least 100 times harder than what you might think.   It is true.  It is physics.

I see. Do these laws of physics change when going from a small booster to a bigger one? Do laws of physics actually prevent something to be done in 3 years, especially if it was already being worked on for the past years? They aren't building a frickin' warp-capable starship for crying out loud.

Actually, I'm not really sure what your point of comparing LEO taxi service to Apollo moon landings is. Did I miss the point where Musk promised to land people on the moon within 3 years?

Offline SpacexULA

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1756
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 73
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #47 on: 04/17/2010 03:20 pm »
Mr Musk is naive, he's a kid.  I bet he would find fault with 1000 decisions made during Apollo, ask him !!  But it worked and it was based on reality.  Note that I did not say I wish him ill.  Also the can do spirit must be based somewhat on reality, also.

He has the dot com attitude, same as the upper executives at Google, Craigslist, Twitter, and Amazon.  It's not naivete, it's a honest willingness to to try hard, be wrong, change direction, and try again. 

"I bet he would find fault in 1000 decisions made during Apollo, ask him!!".  Apollo was Safety and Time line optimized, not budget optimized.  By design there are thousands of ways to criticize Apollo on a budget basis, but you can't argue much with it's time line!

Constellation attempted to be Budget, Time line, and Safety optimized.  When you try to do that all 3 will fail spectacularly.

Flexible path is Safety and Budget optimized, not Time line optimized.  That's why you see people so up in arms.  You don't get all 3 in ANY development program I have ever seen.  Something has to give.

 
No Bucks no Buck Rogers, but at least Flexible path gets you Twiki.

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10972
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #48 on: 04/17/2010 03:43 pm »
...I wonder why the late change of plan...

C'mon guys.  Didja all notice that he was walking with a slight hunch to his shoulders, and that the looked down a couple of times while he was walking?  I think that sez a lot about his opinion of the concrete sub-contractor's work...  Y'all are reading too much gravity into some things.

...
Mr Musk is naive, he's a kid...

What possible positive value can come from this observation?  Please discuss the disposition of the various programs mentioned in the budget proposal.
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline MP99

Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #49 on: 04/19/2010 09:28 pm »
Constellation attempted to be Budget, Time line, and Safety optimized.  When you try to do that all 3 will fail spectacularly.

Flexible path is Safety and Budget optimized, not Time line optimized.  That's why you see people so up in arms.  You don't get all 3 in ANY development program I have ever seen.  Something has to give.

But how to keep Congress' interest alive through a 25-year programme that doesn't even intend to land on Mars?

cheers, Martin

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17256
  • Liked: 7111
  • Likes Given: 3061
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #50 on: 04/19/2010 10:05 pm »
By adopting a flexible path with various destinations along the way.

Offline Rabidpanda

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 532
  • Liked: 123
  • Likes Given: 572
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #51 on: 04/19/2010 10:51 pm »
Constellation attempted to be Budget, Time line, and Safety optimized.  When you try to do that all 3 will fail spectacularly.

Flexible path is Safety and Budget optimized, not Time line optimized.  That's why you see people so up in arms.  You don't get all 3 in ANY development program I have ever seen.  Something has to give.

But how to keep Congress' interest alive through a 25-year programme that doesn't even intend to land on Mars?

cheers, Martin

It does intend to land on Mars.  Didn't you see the president's speech?

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7276
  • Liked: 2781
  • Likes Given: 1461
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #52 on: 04/20/2010 02:36 am »
But how to keep Congress' interest alive through a 25-year programme that doesn't even intend to land on Mars?

Well, the Shuttle doesn't get anywhere near Mars, yet there's all kinds of Congressional interest in keeping it going.  As long as somebody's Congressional district is getting some jobs off of the program, I think they're will be an element of Congressional support.  The trick is just to make sure that Congressional opposition doesn't become too strong, and that probably means making sure that the cost doesn't rise too high and avoiding high-publicity disasters.

Offline mr. mark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1996
  • Liked: 172
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #53 on: 04/20/2010 02:59 am »
I would personally, start to look more at Bigelow's lunar base as private space's future plan. Bigelow just announced that after several sundancer space stations they plan on assembling a lunar station off site and landing it on the lunar surface. The future for private space is the moon not Mars in the near future.
« Last Edit: 04/20/2010 02:59 am by mr. mark »

Offline Nascent Ascent

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 739
  • Liked: 124
  • Likes Given: 106
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #54 on: 04/20/2010 03:04 am »
Quote
It does intend to land on Mars.  Didn't you see the president's speech?

 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Thanks!  I needed a laugh tonight.


Offline mr. mark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1996
  • Liked: 172
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #55 on: 04/20/2010 03:11 am »
Mars might as well be in the 22nd century. There will be no Mars landing till possibly the latter part of the 21st century. These predictions for the 2030's are way off. More like 2050's or 2060's. Bigelow has announced landing their inflatable space habitat on the Moon first before anything on Mars. Right now NASA is talking about flyby's not landings.

Offline Rabidpanda

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 532
  • Liked: 123
  • Likes Given: 572
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #56 on: 04/20/2010 04:45 am »
Quote
It does intend to land on Mars.  Didn't you see the president's speech?

 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Thanks!  I needed a laugh tonight.



The president specifically stated in his speech that landing on Mars was a goal.  Here is a direct quote:

Quote
By the mid-2030s, I believe we can send humans to orbit Mars and return them safely to Earth. And a landing on Mars will follow. And I expect to be around to see it.

You will probably call me naive for believing what Obama said.  However, I think it is perfectly correct to say that according to the speech that Obama made on the 15th,  his plan for NASA does intend to land on Mars.  Call me optimistic but I think it could happen.

Offline vt_hokie

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3054
  • Hazlet, NJ
  • Liked: 118
  • Likes Given: 435
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #57 on: 04/20/2010 04:52 am »

You will probably call me naive for believing what Obama said.  However, I think it is perfectly correct to say that according to the speech that Obama made on the 15th,  his plan for NASA does intend to land on Mars.  Call me optimistic but I think it could happen.

With all due respect, I do believe it is naive to assume that in return for dismantling our existing infrastructure and experience base, we will receive some wonderful breakthrough that enables a vastly superior HLV after 2015.

Also, history shows that vague promises of things 25 or 30 years down the road, particularly from politicians, have very little credibility.
« Last Edit: 04/20/2010 04:56 am by vt_hokie »

Offline Rabidpanda

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 532
  • Liked: 123
  • Likes Given: 572
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #58 on: 04/20/2010 04:53 am »
Mars might as well be in the 22nd century. There will be no Mars landing till possibly the latter part of the 21st century. These predictions for the 2030's are way off. More like 2050's or 2060's. Bigelow has announced landing their inflatable space habitat on the Moon first before anything on Mars. Right now NASA is talking about flyby's not landings.

Wrong.  NASA is talking about Mars orbit in the 2030s, not a Mars flyby,  There's a huge difference.  Once you have acheived mars orbit, the only thing you need to develop for a Mars surface mission is a lander.  Assuming that lander development takes 10 years we could land on mars sometime in the 40s.  That sounds pretty good to me.

Offline Rabidpanda

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 532
  • Liked: 123
  • Likes Given: 572
Re: Elon/SpaceX on FY2011 Plan
« Reply #59 on: 04/20/2010 04:58 am »

You will probably call me naive for believing what Obama said.  However, I think it is perfectly correct to say that according to the speech that Obama made on the 15th,  his plan for NASA does intend to land on Mars.  Call me optimistic but I think it could happen.

With all due respect, I do believe it is naive to assume that in return for dismantling our existing infrastructure and experience base, we will receive some wonderful breakthrough that enables a vastly superior HLV after 2015.

Then I would agree with you.  I never said that I thought any of that, I personally would prefer an EELV derived HLV to a completely new design.  My post was about whether or not Obama's plan intends to land us on Mars.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0