I guessed 36 engines, did not see anybody guessing more, so if we use The Price Is Right rules....Matthew
Quote from: matthewkantar on 09/27/2016 11:31 pmI guessed 36 engines, did not see anybody guessing more, so if we use The Price Is Right rules....MatthewMy guess was 46
Quote from: malu5531 on 09/27/2016 11:33 pmQuote from: matthewkantar on 09/27/2016 11:31 pmI guessed 36 engines, did not see anybody guessing more, so if we use The Price Is Right rules....MatthewMy guess was 46Must have missed that. Are you familiar with The Price Is Right over there in Sweden?
My best guess4 - 120 MN SL thrust
I'm thrilled by the Musk presentation. However, I'm worried by what I didn't see. Two MCT concerns in particular I have; heat and power. How, exactly, will they preserve the subcooled LOX and methane needed for landing during interplanetary cruise (80 to 115 days)? And also, how will they handle the heat generated on MCT by the 100 people aboard, plus life support, plus lighting, etc? On ISS, cooling is very complex, and if I'm remembering correctly, the cooling system (ammonia based) outmasses the solar arrays. Also, regarding solar arrays for power... what we see in the demo looks like an area on par with the ISS arrays, so how does one get sufficient power from that area to handle life support, etc, for 100 people? And that's without considering the diminished sunlight at Mars. One guess I have regarding mass fractions, etc, is that refueling won't be done in LEO, but in an elliptical orbit - lower delta/v needed for the TMI burn that way, thus reducing the mass fraction issue.
...One guess I have regarding mass fractions, etc, is that refueling won't be done in LEO, but in an elliptical orbit - lower delta/v needed for the TMI burn that way, thus reducing the mass fraction issue.
Quote from: matthewkantar on 09/27/2016 11:41 pmMust have missed that. Are you familiar with The Price Is Right over there in Sweden?I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with that.
Must have missed that. Are you familiar with The Price Is Right over there in Sweden?
Here is my rough MSPaint size comparison between the ICT and some space stations/craft.
Quote from: ZachF on 09/28/2016 03:03 amHere is my rough MSPaint size comparison between the ICT and some space stations/craft.Can you do the IST/MCT sitting on the deck of the ASDS?
Might be fun for folks to go back and edit their prediction lists to show how they did (me? not that great)
Quote from: Chris_Pi on 02/25/2016 03:17 amA good look at those enormous rainbirds in that photo. Assuming the yellow railing is 4' high, I get a quick-and dirty estimate of the rainbirds at 57'. That seems ridiculously big.Could they be backed off from the rocket far enough that that actually makes sense? Or am I way off on the height?Pure speculation - These are oversized for an F9 family vehicle but are right sized for a larger follow on vehicle. 39A is the eventual BFR launch site.
A good look at those enormous rainbirds in that photo. Assuming the yellow railing is 4' high, I get a quick-and dirty estimate of the rainbirds at 57'. That seems ridiculously big.Could they be backed off from the rocket far enough that that actually makes sense? Or am I way off on the height?
Quote from: Lar on 09/28/2016 02:37 amMight be fun for folks to go back and edit their prediction lists to show how they did (me? not that great)I don't know if I ever made real "prediction checkbox list", but I have made several posts with the following predictions that came true: - spacecraft as integrated 2nd stage - biconic/side entry - powered by multiple raptors instead of a single one (although I was off on the count, I expected 5) - no launch abort capsule (abort the whole thing)The booster was roughly what I expected, but bigger and lacking landing gear.