If there's still problems with using a second stage for lunar missions because of loiter time, how much longer does LTO take than GTO?
Quote from: envy887 on 03/06/2017 02:53 amQuote from: envy887 on 03/05/2017 11:57 pmQuote from: Lee Jay on 03/05/2017 11:38 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 03/05/2017 09:31 pmQuote from: BobHk on 03/05/2017 03:55 pmSo who wants to bet the moon mission will use a second stage with a methane fed raptor engine?....The Raptor upper stage is going to have a large PLF in which you'll find an Atlas Centaur below Dragon. This will make TLI happen and preserve all of Dragon's fuel.....Now you did it. I'm going to go calculate the fuel remainder after TLI of Falcon Heavy with Centaur as a third stage. It's probably pretty good... Almost 17 tonnes translunar after recovering all three boosters!!! That's more than double the current reusable payload... Elon should look into this What's the payload to TLI if you expended the center core?
Quote from: envy887 on 03/05/2017 11:57 pmQuote from: Lee Jay on 03/05/2017 11:38 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 03/05/2017 09:31 pmQuote from: BobHk on 03/05/2017 03:55 pmSo who wants to bet the moon mission will use a second stage with a methane fed raptor engine?....The Raptor upper stage is going to have a large PLF in which you'll find an Atlas Centaur below Dragon. This will make TLI happen and preserve all of Dragon's fuel.....Now you did it. I'm going to go calculate the fuel remainder after TLI of Falcon Heavy with Centaur as a third stage. It's probably pretty good... Almost 17 tonnes translunar after recovering all three boosters!!! That's more than double the current reusable payload... Elon should look into this
Quote from: Lee Jay on 03/05/2017 11:38 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 03/05/2017 09:31 pmQuote from: BobHk on 03/05/2017 03:55 pmSo who wants to bet the moon mission will use a second stage with a methane fed raptor engine?....The Raptor upper stage is going to have a large PLF in which you'll find an Atlas Centaur below Dragon. This will make TLI happen and preserve all of Dragon's fuel.....Now you did it. I'm going to go calculate the fuel remainder after TLI of Falcon Heavy with Centaur as a third stage. It's probably pretty good...
Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/05/2017 09:31 pmQuote from: BobHk on 03/05/2017 03:55 pmSo who wants to bet the moon mission will use a second stage with a methane fed raptor engine?....The Raptor upper stage is going to have a large PLF in which you'll find an Atlas Centaur below Dragon. This will make TLI happen and preserve all of Dragon's fuel.....
Quote from: BobHk on 03/05/2017 03:55 pmSo who wants to bet the moon mission will use a second stage with a methane fed raptor engine?....
So who wants to bet the moon mission will use a second stage with a methane fed raptor engine?
Quote from: CuddlyRocket on 03/06/2017 05:48 amQuote from: DAZ on 03/05/2017 05:44 pm About the only exception to this would be the deep space communications system on the Dragon 2 capsule.NASA will be providing that facility for Red Dragon in exchange for Martian entry, descent, and landing data.No, he is talking about the hardware on the Dragon. NASA is providing the ground portion and not the hardware on the Dragon
Quote from: DAZ on 03/05/2017 05:44 pm About the only exception to this would be the deep space communications system on the Dragon 2 capsule.NASA will be providing that facility for Red Dragon in exchange for Martian entry, descent, and landing data.
About the only exception to this would be the deep space communications system on the Dragon 2 capsule.
As to the ground portion, we don't yet know with the STARGATE at Boca Chica can do but it is conceivable that it could handle at least a portion of the ground part of the system.
Quote from: punder on 03/04/2017 09:06 pmQuote from: Lee Jay on 03/02/2017 07:10 pmI'll watch the mission, but this sort of thing benefits a very small number of people, and only for a short time.Yes. Sort of like Lindbergh's flight across the Atlantic. Okay, a small bunch of investors got some cash out of it. Otherwise, the flight had no discernible affect on the advancement of aviation.(Sorry, catching up, many pages behind. But this attitude just really puzzles me.)If Lindbergh's flight occurred today, decades after the first trans-Atlantic passenger service started, what effect do you think it would have on aviation?
Quote from: Lee Jay on 03/02/2017 07:10 pmI'll watch the mission, but this sort of thing benefits a very small number of people, and only for a short time.Yes. Sort of like Lindbergh's flight across the Atlantic. Okay, a small bunch of investors got some cash out of it. Otherwise, the flight had no discernible affect on the advancement of aviation.(Sorry, catching up, many pages behind. But this attitude just really puzzles me.)
I'll watch the mission, but this sort of thing benefits a very small number of people, and only for a short time.
I heard someone mention upthread that they thought Space Adventures was very likely involved in this. Why? What do they bring to the table when there's no Soyuz to procure or ISS paperwork to manage?
FutureSpaceTourist posted a tweet from Alan Boyle saying ".@SpaceAdventures has an intriguing comment on @SpaceX's circumlunar mission, saying it can't comment on its clients' plans prematurely." It seems to be trying to leave the impression that they have brokered the deal, or at least had some part in it.
People have been reading fantasies about travelling to other worlds for more than a century. Apollo made it real, but was an incredible effort that took resources few can really wrap their brains around. The idea that mere mortals could do it simply by paying the price would make it real in a way that's been science fiction till now. All the panty twisted wienies in the world swooning over the notion that it's just too dangerous are irrelevant. They don't pay for, go on or decide anything about turning points like this.
Quote from: dcporter on 03/06/2017 06:17 amI heard someone mention upthread that they thought Space Adventures was very likely involved in this. Why? What do they bring to the table when there's no Soyuz to procure or ISS paperwork to manage?AgainQuote from: Comga on 03/03/2017 03:20 amFutureSpaceTourist posted a tweet from Alan Boyle saying ".@SpaceAdventures has an intriguing comment on @SpaceX's circumlunar mission, saying it can't comment on its clients' plans prematurely." It seems to be trying to leave the impression that they have brokered the deal, or at least had some part in it.edit: But your question is valid. What value do they add, especially if it is Jurvetson, who is already involved with SpaceX?
Quote from: Comga on 03/03/2017 03:20 amFutureSpaceTourist posted a tweet from Alan Boyle saying ".@SpaceAdventures has an intriguing comment on @SpaceX's circumlunar mission, saying it can't comment on its clients' plans prematurely." It seems to be trying to leave the impression that they have brokered the deal, or at least had some part in it.
Quote from: Comga on 03/06/2017 06:27 pmQuote from: Comga on 03/03/2017 03:20 amFutureSpaceTourist posted a tweet from Alan Boyle saying ".@SpaceAdventures has an intriguing comment on @SpaceX's circumlunar mission, saying it can't comment on its clients' plans prematurely." It seems to be trying to leave the impression that they have brokered the deal, or at least had some part in it.Hmm, missed that. Interesting. That would seem to back up the James Cameron speculation:http://nasawatch.com/archives/2011/06/is-james-camero.htmlOf course, that's based on limited information backed by an insinuation, so take it with a nice handful of salt...
Quote from: rakaydos on 03/06/2017 05:54 am If there's still problems with using a second stage for lunar missions because of loiter time, how much longer does LTO take than GTO?more than 2 days vs 6 hours.
SpaceX has better things to do than answering questions from handfuls of 'me-too' wealthy individuals. Just like for cube sats, a broker can be the clearing house and earn a tidy profit in the process. This all (or at least partly) about profit, right?
Hmm, missed that. Interesting. That would seem to back up the James Cameron speculation:http://nasawatch.com/archives/2011/06/is-james-camero.html