-
#620
by
speedevil
on 25 Feb, 2018 18:51
-
Would any of those small satellites have been able to return useful information from the asteroid belt though? Or are you thinking they'd have taken such a huge load of them that they'd all have been deposited in LEO?
LEO, for the most part - dumping off a large pile of satellites in a rapidly decaying orbit.
The stage could then have restarted and thrown stuff further, done coast tests, ...
-
#621
by
Space Ghost 1962
on 27 Feb, 2018 17:06
-
Would any of those small satellites have been able to return useful information from the asteroid belt though?
The chief issue with such cubesats is longevity, signal integrity, and data rate.
Just by being "reachable" by DSN on a routine schedule (weekly, monthly, ... yearly) is a major achievement.
(Those mentioned above are relay/comm in purpose.) As a science product, a simple SEP detector (about an ounce in weight including electronics) would return valuable solar wind science, useful in following missions.
-
#622
by
speedevil
on 27 Feb, 2018 17:30
-
Just by being "reachable" by DSN on a routine schedule (weekly, monthly, ... yearly) is a major achievement.
(Those mentioned above are relay/comm in purpose.) As a science product, a simple SEP detector (about an ounce in weight including electronics) would return valuable solar wind science, useful in following missions.
Add little more than an additional cubesat, a tiny amount of propulsion for mid-course correction and you can have an entirely independent mars atmospheric probe that might even survive impact.
as an example.
MIRKA2 - designed for earth reentry, would need the iridium radio swapped out of course.
With a little more orbital manoevering, close flybys and a cellphone class camera can do enormously better than any billion dollar telescope or probe at 1AU.
-
#623
by
Space Ghost 1962
on 27 Feb, 2018 19:11
-
Been trying to do stuff like that for decades. Here's why it doesn't happen:
Nobody believes in low cost, long lived, DSN cubesats. Cubesats are seen as strictly short lived, short range comm "missions:.
And a lot of them are junk - they don't even work long enough to commisson on orbit.
The large sat vendors don't want the disruption, so they make things hard.
Which is why a few FH high c3 cubesats could have corrected this block to disruption.
If you correct it, then planetary missions have "tag on" secondaries routinely.
Which increases market competition on all missions, matures the cubesat markets, and restructures the entire sat/SC market for higher growth (they have the same myopia that the LV guys have had).
-
#624
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 07 Mar, 2018 09:00
-
EU space conferences, on any topic, evoke @SpaceX. Here's EU @GalileoGNSS director Matthias Petschke Mar 6 at #MunichSatnavSummit: 'Some global players are sending cars into space; we prefer to send satellites that help cars navigate on the ground.' @esa chief Woerner applauded.
https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/971320811230580737Not laughing: @esa chief @janwoerner isn't only European who thinks @SpaceX Falcon Heavy Starman roadster-in-orbit headlines should have read: SpaceX Voluntarily Creates Orbital Debris.
https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/971322796612702208
-
#625
by
deruch
on 07 Mar, 2018 09:38
-
Not laughing: @esa chief @janwoerner isn't only European who thinks @SpaceX Falcon Heavy Starman roadster-in-orbit headlines should have read: SpaceX Voluntarily Creates Orbital Debris.
https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/971322796612702208
Obnoxious, sour grapes nonsense. Orbital debris is only controlled for "useful" orbits which is why disposing of satellites or rocket bodies into graveyard orbits is totally acceptable.
-
#626
by
Jakusb
on 07 Mar, 2018 10:11
-
Not laughing: @esa chief @janwoerner isn't only European who thinks @SpaceX Falcon Heavy Starman roadster-in-orbit headlines should have read: SpaceX Voluntarily Creates Orbital Debris.
https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/971322796612702208
Obnoxious, sour grapes nonsense. Orbital debris is only controlled for "useful" orbits which is why disposing of satellites or rocket bodies into graveyard orbits is totally acceptable.
Indeed a clear and painful sign that upper management of ESA is not getting the intentions and immense progress SpaceX is bringing to the world of Spaceflight...
ESA should not feel threatened but inspired and motivated to take advantage of the previously considered impossible options now proven possible and economically feasible..
Not feeling too proud on 'our' ESA, being European
-
#627
by
woods170
on 07 Mar, 2018 11:49
-
Not laughing: @esa chief @janwoerner isn't only European who thinks @SpaceX Falcon Heavy Starman roadster-in-orbit headlines should have read: SpaceX Voluntarily Creates Orbital Debris.
https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/971322796612702208
Obnoxious, sour grapes nonsense. Orbital debris is only controlled for "useful" orbits which is why disposing of satellites or rocket bodies into graveyard orbits is totally acceptable.
Indeed a clear and painful sign that upper management of ESA is not getting the intentions and immense progress SpaceX is bringing to the world of Spaceflight...
ESA should not feel threatened but inspired and motivated to take advantage of the previously considered impossible options now proven possible and economically feasible..
Not feeling too proud on 'our' ESA, being European
Me neither.
Just plain stupid remark by Jan given that ESA itself has voluntarily created orbital debris, by injecting mass simulators into orbit, on at least seven (7) Ariane missions:
- Ariane L01 (CAT 1)
- Ariane L02 (CAT 2)
- Ariane L03 (CAT 3)
- Ariane L04 (CAT 4)
- Ariane 502 (Maqsat B, Maqsat H)
- Ariane 503 (Maqsat 3)
- Ariane 521 (Maqsat B2)
Pot meet Kettle. ESA sour grapes. Jan Woerner really ought to know better than to react like this.
-
#628
by
kevin-rf
on 07 Mar, 2018 11:52
-
I thought "Orbital Debris" only applied to Earth Orbit, not Solar Orbit... The chance of it ever impacting any satellite operation, or just random asteroid are so small to not even be worth discussing... Just crazy.
-
#629
by
AncientU
on 07 Mar, 2018 11:54
-
EU space conferences, on any topic, evoke @SpaceX. Here's EU @GalileoGNSS director Matthias Petschke Mar 6 at #MunichSatnavSummit: 'Some global players are sending cars into space; we prefer to send satellites that help cars navigate on the ground.' @esa chief Woerner applauded.
https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/971320811230580737
Gentlemen,
Now that you brought up the subjects of satellites and cars, one global player is out launching constellation satellites put up by EU/ESA (who are actually hiring the Russians to send most to orbit). That global player is also manufacturing, launching, and operating a satellite constellation that will out number and out compete the constellation being built by Airbus/One Web. They are also building the autonomous electric vehicles and their AI supercomputer brains to use these constellations. These vehicles are already out competing established European luxury cars BMW/Mercedes Benz who along with all other auto makers are scrambling to bring their own BEVs to market. This movement is allowing many European nations to declare an internal combustion engine free future.
So yes, the Tesla in space was a one-off stunt that you can look down your collective noses at... otherwise, it's going to be Simon Says with that global player for a very long time.
-
#630
by
Reflectiv
on 07 Mar, 2018 16:57
-
Me neither.
Just plain stupid remark by Jan given that ESA itself has voluntarily created orbital debris...
FWIW I asked him about the remark, here's the answer:
You did not get my message, unfortunately: I said that I admire how fast they could succeed in getting the Tesla on top of the launcher. And I said that I could not dare to send a car in space. I dont know whom you are quoting.
Jan
ESA - European Space Agency
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Johann-Dietrich Wörner
Director General
-
#631
by
rcoppola
on 07 Mar, 2018 17:39
-
Disbelief has settled into an anxious nervousness. Theory is now becoming practice. With Block-5 imminent and nothing ready to counter it, I'm afraid we'll hear more of these types of comments in the months and years to come.
Just wait until the first Block-5 FH returns all 3 cores from a real mission. Or a Block 5 F9 core is flown 14 days post return. Or better yet, the first hop of the BFS. ESA/EU better get used to this nightmare. It's only going to get worse.
-
#632
by
AncientU
on 07 Mar, 2018 17:52
-
Disbelief has settled into an anxious nervousness. Theory is now becoming practice. With Block-5 imminent and nothing ready to counter it, I'm afraid we'll hear more of these types of comments in the months and years to come.
Just wait until the first Block-5 FH returns all 3 cores from a real mission. Or a Block 5 F9 core is flown 14 days post return. Or better yet, the first hop of the BFS. ESA/EU better get used to this nightmare. It's only going to get worse.
Global player is just hitting stride:
First truly reusable booster is on the test stand.
Fully 'Full Thrust' finally arriving.
30 launches scheduled this year.
Raptor soon to flight quals.
BFR/BFS is being built.
Meanwhile:
Starlink is in its infancy.
Tesla, too...
-
#633
by
woods170
on 08 Mar, 2018 06:43
-
Me neither.
Just plain stupid remark by Jan given that ESA itself has voluntarily created orbital debris...
FWIW I asked him about the remark, here's the answer:
You did not get my message, unfortunately: I said that I admire how fast they could succeed in getting the Tesla on top of the launcher. And I said that I could not dare to send a car in space. I dont know whom you are quoting.
Jan
ESA - European Space Agency
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Johann-Dietrich Wörner
Director General
Peter B. de Selding is the reporter in question and he is not known for mis-quoting or mis-interpreting people.
-
#634
by
JamesH65
on 08 Mar, 2018 09:14
-
Me neither.
Just plain stupid remark by Jan given that ESA itself has voluntarily created orbital debris...
FWIW I asked him about the remark, here's the answer:
You did not get my message, unfortunately: I said that I admire how fast they could succeed in getting the Tesla on top of the launcher. And I said that I could not dare to send a car in space. I dont know whom you are quoting.
Jan
ESA - European Space Agency
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Johann-Dietrich Wörner
Director General
Peter B. de Selding is the reporter in question and he is not known for mis-quoting or mis-interpreting people.
On the other hand, you have an extremely specific comment from the PERSON INVOLVED saying he does not recognise the quote.
Who should you believe, the person who is supposed to have said it but who says he didn't, or the reporter that reported it.
Sounds like a misquote or misinterpretation to me.
-
#635
by
saliva_sweet
on 08 Mar, 2018 09:17
-
Who should you believe, the person who is supposed to have said it but who says he didn't, or the reporter that reported it.
Pbdes didn't say Woerner said anything. He clapped.
-
#636
by
woods170
on 08 Mar, 2018 10:32
-
The tweet in question once more:
Not laughing: @esa chief @janwoerner isn't only European who thinks @SpaceX Falcon Heavy Starman roadster-in-orbit headlines should have read: SpaceX Voluntarily Creates Orbital Debris.
https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/971322796612702208The ESA DG agreeing on the less-than-stellar alternative headline (even if it was just by applauding, not actually speaking) does not project favorable on the space-activities of his very own organisation, given that it has added to orbital debris, in a similar manner, not once but at least seven times.
-
#637
by
Nehkara
on 08 Mar, 2018 15:24
-
The tweet in question once more:
Not laughing: @esa chief @janwoerner isn't only European who thinks @SpaceX Falcon Heavy Starman roadster-in-orbit headlines should have read: SpaceX Voluntarily Creates Orbital Debris.
https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/971322796612702208
The ESA DG agreeing on the less-than-stellar alternative headline (even if it was just by applauding, not actually speaking) does not project favorable on the space-activities of his very own organisation, given that it has added to orbital debris, in a similar manner, not once but at least seven times.
Even worse... I'm guessing that orbital debris from ESA activites was around the Earth rather than in a heliocentric orbit that honestly will have no conceivable impact on any space operation, ever.
-
#638
by
CJ
on 08 Mar, 2018 20:31
-
I have a hunch that we'll be seeing more of Starman and the Roadster.
What I'm basing this on is the still image Elon sent out titled the last picture of Starman (or words to that effect) that was from several hours post TMI burn, showing Earth well behind.
My guess, based on that, is there is more video/images taken between the final burn and that photo, and SpaceX and/or Tesla are saving it for later release or use. I hope this is correct, because I'd love to see more. (the 4 hours they posted was epic.)
BTW, did we ever hear definitively if they removed the roadster's battery pack? I have a hard time believing they'd launch with it unless they both needed the mass and electrical capacity and were certain it would pose no danger to the mission (such as via rupturing or exploding in vacuum).
-
#639
by
Steven Pietrobon
on 09 Mar, 2018 05:04
-
BTW, did we ever hear definitively if they removed the roadster's battery pack? I have a hard time believing they'd launch with it unless they both needed the mass and electrical capacity and were certain it would pose no danger to the mission (such as via rupturing or exploding in vacuum).
We haven't heard anything, but as the front brakes were removed (as seen from the footage), presumably to reduce mass, I think its a good bet that the batteries and other heavy internal parts were also removed.