Total Members Voted: 245
Voting closed: 10/30/2017 05:15 pm
Quote from: high road on 10/04/2017 09:00 amconsidering EM wasn't even born in America, I don't see any reason for him to be loyal to a country that stifles his dreams.That's a really terrible thing to say, man.
considering EM wasn't even born in America, I don't see any reason for him to be loyal to a country that stifles his dreams.
First, I like to state that I am a huge Apollo fan and SpaceX fan. Being born in 1975, I missed the lunar landings but at 6 years old, I did see when space shuttle Colombia took off. Apollo showed that if politicians decide to go, it will happened. As I see it now there is not the political will to land on the moon and to land on mars. As of now, there is no dedicated lander that I know of for ether moon or mars. Therefor I do not think that SLS will be operational in 10 years’ time. Like Ares 1-X, EM-1 and Em-2 will fly. Then the crystal ball gets murky. For BFR I don´t think that it will be operational in 10 years’ time. In the current incarnation, I do not think it will fly. I think that BFR will undergo additional sliming. What Elon Musk is a master of doing is to take proven technology, improve it and package it in a new package. BFR is uncharted territory. There will be design hurdles that will take time. Government have almost an unlimited supply of taxpayer’s money. Private company’s do not. In my opinion the BFR and ITS is too big. It is going to be very complex to get it airborne, safe and reliably. I don´t think it is the right way to go if we want to get to the moon or mars. What I think will happened is that Falcon Heavy will play a large role. Launching modules to get to our destination. Modules that in itself is not that expensive. Doing so will be more easy to pay for and you will get incremented results faster.
Anyone wanna do a 10-year bet that there will be no operational 30+ ton launchers ? Beyond one or two test flights ala Energia or Falcon 1I'll happily put down like a hundred dollars, collecting interest too
Quote from: savuporo on 10/05/2017 04:32 amAnyone wanna do a 10-year bet that there will be no operational 30+ ton launchers ? Beyond one or two test flights ala Energia or Falcon 1I'll happily put down like a hundred dollars, collecting interest tooYou are aware that there are 6 such launchers in various stages of serious and active development in the US alone? Vulcan, New Glenn, Falcon Heavy, NGL, SLS, and BFR all fit that description. The Chinese and Russians are also working on similar vehicles. The chance that any particular vehicle gets to operational status is relatively low, but at least one will almost certainly get there.
Quote from: envy887 on 10/05/2017 05:44 pmQuote from: savuporo on 10/05/2017 04:32 amAnyone wanna do a 10-year bet that there will be no operational 30+ ton launchers ? Beyond one or two test flights ala Energia or Falcon 1I'll happily put down like a hundred dollars, collecting interest tooYou are aware that there are 6 such launchers in various stages of serious and active development in the US alone? Vulcan, New Glenn, Falcon Heavy, NGL, SLS, and BFR all fit that description. The Chinese and Russians are also working on similar vehicles. The chance that any particular vehicle gets to operational status is relatively low, but at least one will almost certainly get there.I'd take these odds.
"Operational" means that the rocket is now carrying the type of payload and conducting the type(s) of missions for which it was designed.
having the BFR operational by 2022 is absolutely absurd.
Or are you saying that in the next 10 years no 30+ tonne capable rocket will achieve operational status anywhere in the world?
Yeah you can split hairs to no end. No i don't think Atlas 552 can be called an operational capability quite yet. Dual engine centaur isn't a done deal.If a thing flies more than 2 times, and has hit at least 1 flight a year cadence at some point, I'd say its properly operational. Quote Or are you saying that in the next 10 years no 30+ tonne capable rocket will achieve operational status anywhere in the world? That is what I'm saying.
Quote from: savuporo on 10/06/2017 12:42 amYeah you can split hairs to no end. No i don't think Atlas 552 can be called an operational capability quite yet. Dual engine centaur isn't a done deal.If a thing flies more than 2 times, and has hit at least 1 flight a year cadence at some point, I'd say its properly operational. Quote Or are you saying that in the next 10 years no 30+ tonne capable rocket will achieve operational status anywhere in the world? That is what I'm saying.This seems like a terrible bet for you, since you can't win for 10 years. But if you really think it worthwhile, I'll bet 6 months of L2 membership (or equivalent value when the bet ends, but not more than $100 US). Conditions: a launch vehicle in a configuration nominally capable of 30,000 kg of separable payload to LEO must successfully fly 3 times including at least 2 times in less than 2 consecutive calendar years before today's date in 2027. And the vehicle can't be explicitly considered experimental, even if completing those flights. Once those flights are complete, I win. If the end date passes without those flights happening, you win. Good?
Jim's prediction of less than 5 SLS flights puts the last flight of the 4 (EM-1 [2020], EM-2 [2023], EC [2024], EM-3 [2025]) ~2025. That is less than 10 years. It flies all of the left over RS-25's. The reason I specify these 4 is that NASA could cancel the RS-25 line restart contract before it produces any engines around 2020 because of evident progress being made on BFR saving as much as $750M. Actual RS-25"E" engines would be produced and available for qualification testing NET 2022. The 4 flights are NASA saying until the BFR is flying we will continue our BEO plans (hedging the bet) by prototyping BEO hardware placing it in BEO and testing it (PPE and DSG habitat) which would have some usefulness even with BFR.
Quote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 10/05/2017 03:24 pmJim's prediction of less than 5 SLS flights puts the last flight of the 4 (EM-1 [2020], EM-2 [2023], EC [2024], EM-3 [2025]) ~2025. That is less than 10 years. It flies all of the left over RS-25's. The reason I specify these 4 is that NASA could cancel the RS-25 line restart contract before it produces any engines around 2020 because of evident progress being made on BFR saving as much as $750M. Actual RS-25"E" engines would be produced and available for qualification testing NET 2022. The 4 flights are NASA saying until the BFR is flying we will continue our BEO plans (hedging the bet) by prototyping BEO hardware placing it in BEO and testing it (PPE and DSG habitat) which would have some usefulness even with BFR.I actually for got about the limited quantity of existing engines.
Last post plus the renewed dreamyness of the National Space Council has brought my views around 360 degrees.I voted that neither BFR or SLS will NOT be able to deliver in 10 years. But now I’m thinking it is just a matter of too much optimism, heightened desire for things not achievable.The dream keeps changing while the CDR has already occurred. Mission creep while over-constraining/over-specifying eventually grounds hardware. Think about it! You’ve got your moonbase, your Mars ISRU, Phobos station, Mars transfer vehicle, Mars lander, Moon lander, man rated craziness, lunar return vehicles, and then add twenty other flagship vehicles. Modularity requirements, ultra high reliability that a lifetime of testing couldn’t achieve...Come on!
Your views did a 360? So, back where you started. Sill not making much sense though, sadly.