Would you even take 2:1 odds against it flying in 2016? I think it has at least a 50:50 chance of flying this year, so I would definitely take the other side of that bet.
Currently it is slated to november 2016, according to SpaceX. It is their codeword for "middle of 2017".
Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/09/2016 02:27 pmAnd the electronics have sufficient redundancy to work in the somewhat higher (but, let's be clear, NOT drastically higher) radiation environment of deep spaceDo you know that? Source? Or is this speculation?It will also have to actually work independently for much longer than in LEO and in a colder environment.
And the electronics have sufficient redundancy to work in the somewhat higher (but, let's be clear, NOT drastically higher) radiation environment of deep space
NASA and SpaceX figured out Dragon had "Sufficient lifetime & resources for Mars transfer trajectory" back in 2011.http://digitalvideo.8m.net/SpaceX/RedDragon/karcz-red_dragon-nac-2011-10-29-1.pdf
Quote from: stoker5432 on 03/10/2016 12:28 amNASA and SpaceX figured out Dragon had "Sufficient lifetime & resources for Mars transfer trajectory" back in 2011.http://digitalvideo.8m.net/SpaceX/RedDragon/karcz-red_dragon-nac-2011-10-29-1.pdfDragon had only flown one mission at the time. So not a really a given or valid source.
Dragon had only flown one mission at the time. So not a really a given or valid source. And the "NASA" people in the study are not the agency experts nor even the agency regulars for spacecraft development.
NASA is figuring out that Orion and SLS have sufficient capabilities for future missions and they haven't flown once.
What is a given or valid source?
Quote from: AncientU on 03/10/2016 12:44 amWhat is a given or valid source?a NASA group that has designed and flown many spacecraft. ARC is not that.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/09/2016 07:12 pmI simply want YOU to mark your opinion to market quantitatively.80:20 for FH not successfully launching in 2016.
I simply want YOU to mark your opinion to market quantitatively.
Quote from: stoker5432 on 03/10/2016 12:28 amNASA and SpaceX figured out Dragon had "Sufficient lifetime & resources for Mars transfer trajectory" back in 2011.http://digitalvideo.8m.net/SpaceX/RedDragon/karcz-red_dragon-nac-2011-10-29-1.pdfDragon had only flown one mission at the time. So not a really a given or valid source. And the "NASA" people in the study are not the agency experts nor even the agency regulars for spacecraft development.
So we're going on five years and not one valid source that I can find has disputed JPL's, ARC's, or SpaceX's findings. In fact there's been even more research saying it will work. You've been giving the same argument since 2011. Seems like you should be able to give some solid info by now to prove them wrong.
SpaceX has already said they plan to send Dragons to Mars with Falcon Heavy. Why would they launch a payload that's not capable of getting to its destination and waste a FH? Sure arguing about the time table seems logical, but doubting the capability of the payload, at least on this thread, doesn't.
Again, nobody has any incentive to lie in PR.