Quote from: mn on 02/28/2017 07:27 pmI understand that what they are planning is just to fly around the moon and not enter lunar orbit.I would love to know in terms of fuel requirements, once you reach the moon how much additional fuel would be needed for orbit insertion and then escape lunar orbit and head back to earth.If it takes X amount of fuel to do TLI, how much more would be needed for lunar orbit? are we talking about 20% more, 50% more, double? etc.Just Curious.TYAs a rough rule of thumb, using storable propellants:One kilogram on a translunar trajectory takes 4 kg in low Earth orbitOne kg in lunar orbit takes 4 kg in translunar trajectoryOne kg on the lunar surface takes 4 kg in lunar orbitOne kg returned to Earth takes 4 kg on the lunar surfaceNot suitable for use in navigation, but it supplies a good intuitive bound to the problem.
I understand that what they are planning is just to fly around the moon and not enter lunar orbit.I would love to know in terms of fuel requirements, once you reach the moon how much additional fuel would be needed for orbit insertion and then escape lunar orbit and head back to earth.If it takes X amount of fuel to do TLI, how much more would be needed for lunar orbit? are we talking about 20% more, 50% more, double? etc.Just Curious.TY
How can anyone, other than a member of congress, support SLS and Orion at their costs?
Quote from: ChrisWilson68 on 02/28/2017 06:33 pmThe timing of this announcement is all about the customer. Someone agreed to pay for the trip, no more, no less.The timing of the announcement is very calculated. Elon has too prominent a seat at the new administration's table for it not to be.
The timing of this announcement is all about the customer. Someone agreed to pay for the trip, no more, no less.
Quote from: dglow on 02/28/2017 07:13 pmQuote from: ChrisWilson68 on 02/28/2017 06:33 pmThe timing of this announcement is all about the customer. Someone agreed to pay for the trip, no more, no less.The timing of the announcement is very calculated. Elon has too prominent a seat at the new administration's table for it not to be.There's zero evidence for that, and it makes little sense. Elon said two people put a significant deposit down for a flight around the Moon. Do you think he was lying? If so, the lie will eventually be exposed. Elon isn't dumb enough to do that. If he wasn't lying, this isn't something Elon just dreamed up, it's based on an external factor: these two people who paid money. Do you think they put down a deposit long ago and Elon has been sitting on that news just waiting until he can use the announcement for political purposes? That doesn't make any sense to me. He wouldn't know if there would eventually be a time to announce it for political purposes, and in the meantime SpaceX would be failing to capitalize on this great PR.
Do you think they put down a deposit long ago and Elon has been sitting on that news just waiting until he can use the announcement for political purposes?
He wouldn't know if there would eventually be a time to announce it for political purposes, and in the meantime SpaceX would be failing to capitalize on this great PR.
...I think transportation-level ideas (e.g. depots) will be best handled by the launch providers. But there's a lot of science that can be done with fund that can be liberated from SLS. More science probes. More planetary science. More telescope platforms. More basic science and technology. Please.
Quote from: wannamoonbase on 02/28/2017 06:42 pmHow can anyone, other than a member of congress, support SLS and Orion at their costs? Its the same old two edged sword that we faced on DIRECT.SLS has become a money pit of a program, but the decision makers for that program are exactly the same ones who are the core supporters of NASA within Congress, and they are the only line of defense against the other members of Congress who would prefer to gut the whole agency budget for other programs of their choice.Don't forget that NASA's top line budget is also set by these same people (think: which leading appropriator represents NASA rocket design center in Alabama? Always follow the money).Then we must also remember that these same people are chosen by the electorate in their own states specifically to look out for the interests of the people in that state. So it isn't much of a surprise that they push programs that create jobs in those districts. That's their actual job.So, the choice sadly comes down to supporting the expensive SLS program and the rest of NASA in tow, or remove the core political support for the agency and see the whole of NASA's budget gutted - and that would include gutting SpaceX's contracts and the science budget too.You don't have to like it - I don't - but the choice comes down to putting up with SLS, or cutting everyone's budget. Pinching my nose, I'll continue to 'support' SLS.Ross.
Quote from: ChrisWilson68 on 02/28/2017 10:04 pmQuote from: dglow on 02/28/2017 07:13 pmQuote from: ChrisWilson68 on 02/28/2017 06:33 pmThe timing of this announcement is all about the customer. Someone agreed to pay for the trip, no more, no less.The timing of the announcement is very calculated. Elon has too prominent a seat at the new administration's table for it not to be.There's zero evidence for that, and it makes little sense. Elon said two people put a significant deposit down for a flight around the Moon. Do you think he was lying? If so, the lie will eventually be exposed. Elon isn't dumb enough to do that. If he wasn't lying, this isn't something Elon just dreamed up, it's based on an external factor: these two people who paid money. Do you think they put down a deposit long ago and Elon has been sitting on that news just waiting until he can use the announcement for political purposes? That doesn't make any sense to me. He wouldn't know if there would eventually be a time to announce it for political purposes, and in the meantime SpaceX would be failing to capitalize on this great PR.Whoa. Please take a breath and read what I wrote. In no way do I suggest Elon is lying.
Your opinion: the timing is all about the customer. Mine: the timing is very calculated. QuoteDo you think they put down a deposit long ago and Elon has been sitting on that news just waiting until he can use the announcement for political purposes?It appears Elon did not make his announcement as soon as the deposit was made. Read what Bergin wrote:"A NASA HQ source claimed they were not informed about the announcement ahead of Elon’s comments on Monday, although he believes Acting Administrator Robert Lightfoot and President Trump’s NASA “Landing Team” was briefed, which in turn – the source claimed – was why Mr. Lightfoot asked NASA to conduct a study into accelerating the schedule towards crewed missions on Orion."
QuoteHe wouldn't know if there would eventually be a time to announce it for political purposes, and in the meantime SpaceX would be failing to capitalize on this great PR.The evidence we have suggests otherwise. Musk didn't announce until after NASA made the EM-1 study public. He did announce in advance of Trump's speech tonight. Let's wait and see whether there's any connection there.
So, the choice sadly comes down to supporting the expensive SLS program and the rest of NASA in tow, or remove the core political support for the agency and see the whole of NASA's budget gutted - and that would include gutting SpaceX's contracts and the science budget too.You don't have to like it - I don't - but the choice comes down to putting up with SLS, or cutting everyone's budget. Pinching my nose, I'll continue to 'support' SLS.
As a rough rule of thumb, using storable propellants:One kilogram on a translunar trajectory takes 4 kg in low Earth orbitOne kg in lunar orbit takes 4 kg in translunar trajectoryOne kg on the lunar surface takes 4 kg in lunar orbitOne kg returned to Earth takes 4 kg on the lunar surfaceNot suitable for use in navigation, but it supplies a good intuitive bound to the problem.
You still haven't given any evidence. The timing of Musk's announcement relative to the EM-1 announcement could be coincidence. Or the EM-1 announcement could have been rushed to come before Musk's announcement, which the the opposite of the causal relationship you're claiming. Or the EM-1 announcement might have triggered the customers to do the deal with Musk. There are all kinds of possibilities. The truth is we just don't know.
This SpaceX mission is showing that we may have reached an inflection point in history where the technology has come down enough in overall price that private individuals can afford to not only leave Earth, but travel just as far as government employees have. And the government is not involved in a direct way.
Just wondering when this new mission will show up on the SpaceX Launch Manifest web page. Maybe they're still trying to decide on a title for it?