Quote from: geza on 12/02/2017 10:59 amQuote from: Jarnis on 12/02/2017 10:16 amWell, it has been confirmed by multiple reputable members of the press and by another SpaceX manager. Tesla Roadster is it.With, or without, a satellite bus, that is the question.With cameras. That's as much as we've gotten so far beyond Elon's original tweets.
Quote from: Jarnis on 12/02/2017 10:16 amWell, it has been confirmed by multiple reputable members of the press and by another SpaceX manager. Tesla Roadster is it.With, or without, a satellite bus, that is the question.
Well, it has been confirmed by multiple reputable members of the press and by another SpaceX manager. Tesla Roadster is it.
Quote from: deruch on 12/02/2017 11:11 amQuote from: geza on 12/02/2017 10:59 amQuote from: Jarnis on 12/02/2017 10:16 amWell, it has been confirmed by multiple reputable members of the press and by another SpaceX manager. Tesla Roadster is it.With, or without, a satellite bus, that is the question.With cameras. That's as much as we've gotten so far beyond Elon's original tweets.Cameras only means, that we will not have picture from Mars, only from the vicinity of Earth. Still great, but the huge PR could be even more fantastic via seeing Mars through the windshield!
Quote from: geza on 12/02/2017 11:54 amQuote from: deruch on 12/02/2017 11:11 amQuote from: geza on 12/02/2017 10:59 amQuote from: Jarnis on 12/02/2017 10:16 amWell, it has been confirmed by multiple reputable members of the press and by another SpaceX manager. Tesla Roadster is it.With, or without, a satellite bus, that is the question.With cameras. That's as much as we've gotten so far beyond Elon's original tweets.Cameras only means, that we will not have picture from Mars, only from the vicinity of Earth. Still great, but the huge PR could be even more fantastic via seeing Mars through the windshield!I doubt it will end up anywhere near Mars itself. And by the time its get to a Mars orbit batteries will be flatter than a flat thing that is really flat. Unless it has solar panels, which I doubt. This I reckon is going to be a bung it in the general direction and let it go shot.
Couldn't Mars aerocapture lead to an eventual orbit?If they experiment with (hitherto untried) Mars aerocapture it will be a highly useful test mission, despite the playful payload.
Quote from: Elthiryel on 12/02/2017 10:46 amElon said "Mars orbit", which is quite confusing. But he also said it's going to stay in the deep space for years, I think it leaves us with two options left. Actual orbit around Mars does not seem plausible, with transfer window a few months away and most probably no motor to perform braking maneuver.The first option is that it may be something like a Hohmann transfer orbit with an apogee at the Mars orbit (they would go to the Mars orbit then, to some extent), but with the planet in the other place at the same time.The second option is just a Mars flyby, far enough from the planet to make sure the payload won't smash into the surface. I guess that Roadster is not going to have any trajectory correction thrusters, so I don't they they would risk going too close.Considering the cost of something space-navigation-propulsion-worthy of braking over a ton to Mars orbit after many months, I'm pretty sure "Mars orbit" in this case means "an orbit around the Sun that touches Mars orbit at one end, Earth orbit at the other". Might target for a Mars flyby, might not. Launch date would imply probably not, at least not a very close one.
Elon said "Mars orbit", which is quite confusing. But he also said it's going to stay in the deep space for years, I think it leaves us with two options left. Actual orbit around Mars does not seem plausible, with transfer window a few months away and most probably no motor to perform braking maneuver.The first option is that it may be something like a Hohmann transfer orbit with an apogee at the Mars orbit (they would go to the Mars orbit then, to some extent), but with the planet in the other place at the same time.The second option is just a Mars flyby, far enough from the planet to make sure the payload won't smash into the surface. I guess that Roadster is not going to have any trajectory correction thrusters, so I don't they they would risk going too close.
Quote from: Jarnis on 12/02/2017 11:27 amQuote from: Elthiryel on 12/02/2017 10:46 amElon said "Mars orbit", which is quite confusing. But he also said it's going to stay in the deep space for years, I think it leaves us with two options left. Actual orbit around Mars does not seem plausible, with transfer window a few months away and most probably no motor to perform braking maneuver.The first option is that it may be something like a Hohmann transfer orbit with an apogee at the Mars orbit (they would go to the Mars orbit then, to some extent), but with the planet in the other place at the same time.The second option is just a Mars flyby, far enough from the planet to make sure the payload won't smash into the surface. I guess that Roadster is not going to have any trajectory correction thrusters, so I don't they they would risk going too close.Considering the cost of something space-navigation-propulsion-worthy of braking over a ton to Mars orbit after many months, I'm pretty sure "Mars orbit" in this case means "an orbit around the Sun that touches Mars orbit at one end, Earth orbit at the other". Might target for a Mars flyby, might not. Launch date would imply probably not, at least not a very close one.They have had a long time to work on this and have plenty of spare parts to play with. A Super Draco has the in space endurance and performance to brake into orbit. There are probably test articles aplenty. A weldment to attach to the car's chassis, some solar panels, precise location of the COG, etc. I think SpaceX could cobble something up in a month or so. No big deal if it does not work, right? Still a completely insane idea. Matthew
Maybe not so crazy... GM spende almost $4B per year on advertising. What have they purchased with that tidy sum that will get as much press?
Good point, especially as Tesla has a marketing budget of essentially zero.
If, as they have said, they're not completely sure it'll go off without a hitch, would it be smarter *not* to include large amounts of toxic hyperbolic propellants? In an RUD, most of them would disappear in the big fireball, but could enough remain to be inconvenient?Of course, even if there's absolutely no potential post-RUD issue, not having hypergols to deal with during the test and launch campaign would be convenient.(Elon should have just used an apostrophe and made it perfectly clear: destination Mars' orbit.)
Quote from: nacnud on 12/02/2017 02:08 pmGood point, especially as Tesla has a marketing budget of essentially zero.I wouldn't exactly call the cost of a Falcon Heavy zero ;-)
We need to be careful. I am 100% sure it will fly out to the orbit OF Mars around the sun, NOT enter orbit around Mars. The press and twitterguys already getting it wrong per default.
"Payload will be my midnight cherry Tesla Roadster playing Space Oddity. Destination is Mars orbit. Will be in deep space for a billion years or so if it doesn’t blow up on ascent."
the vehicle will be permanently attached to the second stage.
I haven't noticed any FCC filings under the SpaceX name for this payload. Unless they're registering a payload under some foreign subsidiary that only communicates with ground stations outside the U.S., it should have FCC filings if they intend to communicate with it.
Do the Tesla going past Mars!!