-
#100
by
docmordrid
on 02 Dec, 2017 14:57
-
Color and shape w/hardtop.
-
#101
by
Pete
on 02 Dec, 2017 14:57
-
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.
What if they were using NASA resources for deep space communication? Would an FCC filing be necessary in that case?
What communications?
The way i see it, the FH will shove it in the right direction, Hopefully separate from the payload/car, and that's it. No further comms , control or anything just a car drifting into a Mars-apogee solar orbit.
Well, likely some onboard cam coverage using the same sort of tech that we already have on the second stage, for the first couple minutes after launch.
We asked for a cool payload, Spacex needs a cheap and noncritical boilerplate mass, and this would be a very nice combination of the two!
-
#102
by
inonepiece
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:00
-
I am not really believing Elon on his latest tweet. I would still put my money on the pad abort Dragon inside the fairing. Or any pre flown Dragon. The adaptor for this has to be easier than for a Roadster. Anyone know where the pad abort Dragon is?
Well, it has been confirmed by multiple reputable members of the press and by another SpaceX manager. Tesla Roadster is it.
Right: Why wouldn't we believe him, he's a showman (of the best sort) and it's guaranteed to get SpaceX AND Tesla in the news.
We know he's read some Iain M. Banks. In the short Banks story "The State of the Art", Diziet Sma, a citizen of The Culture, travels to 1970s Earth in "a large red Volvo station wagon".
-
#103
by
Ludus
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:06
-
-
#104
by
Jim
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:07
-
Wonder if Road and Track could schedule a trial between the Roadster and Curiosity?
On Mars? That would be a crater vs a functioning rover
-
#105
by
cscott
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:08
-
Speculation seems to be split about whether this will be a basically-unmodified roadster pushed off into the void (with cameras on S2 watching it go), or else a souped up deal with some surplus superdracos bolted on the trunk, conformal solar panels scavenged from dragon 2, etc, capable of making Mars insertion burn with some low but nonzero probability of success.
If you're feeling ambitious, I'd take a shot at rendering both scenarios. The former should be fairly easy, and at a relatively large distance from mars (it would be using the stock S2 telemetry); the latter would be a Mad Max assemblage of pieces from other SpaceX ships, and end up close to Mars. Bonus points for showing the orbital insertion burn.
-
#106
by
Robotbeat
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:11
-
I'd go for stock. Anything else would cost millions extra.
-
#107
by
docmordrid
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:15
-
The thing keeping my imagination buzzing about an enhanced Roadster is this tweet from a couple of weeks ago. Granted, it seems about Gen 2, but rocket parts and flying?
"Elon Musk ✔ @elonmusk
Not saying the next gen Roadster special upgrade package *will* definitely enable it to fly short hops, but maybe
Certainly possible. Just a question of safety. Rocket tech applied to a car opens up revolutionary possibilities.
2:01 PM - Nov 19, 2017"
-
#108
by
Bynaus
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:18
-
For the "billion years" to be true, the Roadster would really have to be in orbit around Mars (in a carefully crafted orbit which isn't easily destabilized by flybys with the martian satellites, and is far enough from the atmosphere to exclude orbital decay).
If the Roadster is in heliocentric orbit (i.e., just crossing Mars' orbit around the sun), its dynamical lifetime will be no longer than for a near-Earth asteroid, on the order of a few 10 million years. This the typical time it can spend in this region of space without being thrown into the sun by an encounter with a planet or through orbital changes induced by resonances etc (or, much less likely, collide with one of the planets). Musk is probably just unaware of this though.
-
#109
by
docmordrid
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:23
-
Sun-Mars L4/L5?
-
#110
by
billh
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:24
-
I don't think there will be any pictures from deep space. SpaceX is not going to spend millions making it into a functioning spacecraft, and even if they did would NASA ever approve using the Deep Space Network for anything so frivolous?
-
#111
by
rakaydos
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:38
-
I don't think there will be any pictures from deep space. SpaceX is not going to spend millions making it into a functioning spacecraft, and even if they did would NASA ever approve using the Deep Space Network for anything so frivolous?
Y'know... Starlink is going up in just a few years... just saying.
-
#112
by
nacnud
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:40
-
To be honest it's all speculation for now but, Elon has the car, they manufacture an autonomous spacecraft (Dragon), and they are in the process of developing a global communication network (Starlink), they have the motivation (why, why not?) So there is the capability of doing exactly what was tweeted, or at least capable people available to look at the problem.
Beyond that it's whether we take at information at face value or not. So why would they mislead?
-
#113
by
whitelancer64
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:42
-
I want to see the PAF for the Roadster
-
#114
by
x15_fan
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:44
-
I don't think there will be any pictures from deep space. SpaceX is not going to spend millions making it into a functioning spacecraft, and even if they did would NASA ever approve using the Deep Space Network for anything so frivolous?
Y'know... Starlink is going up in just a few years... just saying.
What does Starlink have to do with deep space communication?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
#115
by
dror
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:44
-
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot
Mars orbit not in orbit around Mars would fit Russell’s Teapot exactly, be easier to achieve, and not generate any silly objections about planetary protection.
Thanks for the post and link.
Though, I don't understand why so many people around here treats planetary protection as silly.
Finding life on another planet would be THE greatest scientific discovery ever. Anything that could seriously undermine the credibility of such a potential discovery should be avoided. And, there's the chance of wreaking havoc to an entire plant.
(Do we have a thread about it?)
-
#116
by
nacnud
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:53
-
I don't think there will be any pictures from deep space. SpaceX is not going to spend millions making it into a functioning spacecraft, and even if they did would NASA ever approve using the Deep Space Network for anything so frivolous?
Y'know... Starlink is going up in just a few years... just saying.
What does Starlink have to do with deep space communication?
Communication engineers, lots of them (presumably)
-
#117
by
Kaputnik
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:58
-
Can we infer that the Hail-Mary upper stage recovery attempt is now off the table?
-
#118
by
billh
on 02 Dec, 2017 15:58
-
A couple of practical questions:
1. How long (and how far) could communication be maintained with the second stage? The payload cam we see on almost every F9 launch can presumably send pictures back.
2. How long (and how far) could an object the size of a Roadster be tracked by optical or radar astronomy?
-
#119
by
wilbobaggins
on 02 Dec, 2017 16:13
-
I'd go for stock. Anything else would cost millions extra.
Well I'd like to think, given the cost of the mission anyway due to the rocket they would put some stuff on it to make it worthwhile. I'd even go as far to think they would send something like a dragon capsule but with a roadster on the front.
It's not every day you are lobbing a rocket with several tonnes payload to spare (even with landing every core, the roadster won't be close to maximum payload)
Perhaps it will look a little like the cargo dream chaser but with the roadster instead of the shuttle.
Wouldn't cost too much seeing as dragon could be reused one from an iss mission.
