Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Spacex first human launch 27th May

11415161719

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    Randomly found an Easter Egg on that ISS docking simulator... Was curious as to what would happen if you moved away from the ISS instead of docking.

    514897.png


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,544 ✭✭✭Mollyb60


    Ha that's a really nice one!
    Did anyone manage to dock successfully with that simulator? I spent ages at it but just couldn't get it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,394 ✭✭✭✭Timmaay


    Got it in my 2nd attempt, maybe that was fluke ha. Really took my time, and slowed right up and had to keep correcting whole way to the end.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    Got it on the second attempt also. The first attempt didn't read any instructions, was travelling 0.03m/s. It was much harder at one stage seems a lot easier since my first go.


  • Registered Users Posts: 39,366 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Interesting to hear the two lads taking about the difference between the dragon and the shuttle launches. They also said the staging between the first and second stages was kind of like how it was shown in the film Apollo 13 which is interesting. I mean that's what this flight is about, it's to put the vehicle through its paces and see what was expected and what wasn't.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,133 ✭✭✭Hamsterchops


    Anyone know how big the ISS is inside, and can it be added to to make it bigger?


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    Anyone know how big the ISS is inside, and can it be added to to make it bigger?

    If I recall it is slightly bigger than an american football field. It is completely modular. From the looks of pictures and stuff 10x10 foot but some modules are long 10x10x30. Pressurized Module Length: 167.3 feet (73 meters); Truss Length: 357.5 feet (109 meters)

    https://www.nasa.gov/feature/facts-and-figures


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,371 ✭✭✭Westernyelp


    There are some cool tours by the astronauts on YouTube. To give a real life idea of the numbers above


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,538 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight



    Habitable Volume 388 cubic meters. not including visiting vehicles



    What might have been if it wasn't for the Space Shuttle -

    Skylab was 361 cubic meters Nearly as much as the ISS.
    It weighed 76,295 kg, a lot less than a Shuttle.

    Mir was also lost because the Soviet Union wasted too many resources building their Shuttles. Energia put the 80tonne Polyus into LEO.

    polypad.jpg


    Shuttle tanks were taken almost to orbit. So could in theory have been repurposed. See Wet workshop


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,538 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    If I recall it is slightly bigger than an american football field. It is completely modular.
    Modular yes.

    If the US stop funding it the Russian plan is to close the hatch, release the docking clamps and float away with their sections.

    the guidance, navigation, control, and propulsion capabilities of the ISS are entirely contained in the Russian Zvezda module.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 18,055 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    The US and NASA currently plan to stop funding the ISS after 2024. It costs NASA c.$4bn a year currently. The plan is to support the construction of a new smaller space station in lunar orbit called the Lunar Gateway by the middle of the 2020s. The purpose of the Lunar Gateway is to support the Artemis program and human and robotic lunar landings and exploration in the next decade plus. The Lunar Gateway is currently under development and will include international modules including 2 being developed by the European Space Agency. If course this is an subject to development and most importantly money and delays and other issues are likely.

    4519DA52-9E20-4E0F-8859-5A211AED9B7B-scaled.jpeg


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,371 ✭✭✭Westernyelp


    I don't think even NASA are saying 2024 for the Gateway anymore. It is not part of the critical architecture of Artemis for the first landing. Starship and and others developing Landers etc
    Might be wrong on this


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,055 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    I don't think even NASA are saying 2024 for the Gateway anymore. It is not part of the critical architecture of Artemis for the first landing. Starship and and others developing Landers etc
    Might be wrong on this

    No you're right which is unfortunate. The usual issues of political wranglings and budget issues rearing their heads again. I'd be sceptical that crewed Artemis lunar landings will happen in 2024 also.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    The US and NASA currently plan to stop funding the ISS after 2024. It costs NASA c.$4bn a year currently. The plan is to support the construction of a new smaller space station in lunar orbit called the Lunar Gateway by the middle of the 2020s. The purpose of the Lunar Gateway is to support the Artemis program and human and robotic lunar landings and exploration in the next decade plus. The Lunar Gateway is currently under development and will include international modules including 2 being developed by the European Space Agency. If course this is an subject to development and most importantly money and delays and other issues are likely.

    Bad news, it is the middle of 2020 right now!


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,574 ✭✭✭✭josip


    Bad news, it is the middle of 2020 right now!


    "middle of 2020" != "middle of the 2020s"


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,055 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    Bad news, it is the middle of 2020 right now!

    It says middle of the 2020s. As in, the middle years of the next decade. :confused:


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,112 ✭✭✭Quantum Erasure


    just watched this again... next stop, Mars



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    It says middle of the 2020s. As in, the middle years of the next decade. :confused:

    2030's ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,055 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    2030's ;)

    What?? :confused:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭Gooey Looey


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    What?? :confused:

    He's right, the next decade is the 2030s. This current decade is the 2020s


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 18,055 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    He's right, the next decade is the 2030s. This current decade is the 2020s

    I think it was quiet clear what I was saying. He made an error with the first comment by claiming it was the middle of this year I was referring to and instead of acknowledging that he tried to score points. It would be best if we could be a bit more civil and discuss the topic at hand and not resort to cheap and unnecessary shots. Thanks.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭iLikeWaffles


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    I think it was quiet clear what I was saying. He made an error with the first comment by claiming it was the middle of this year I was referring to and instead of acknowledging that he tried to score points. It would be best if we could be a bit more civil and discuss the topic at hand and not resort to cheap and unnecessary shots. Thanks.

    What does it matter?? I misread the comment in the first place. Not sure where you are coming from everyone has been civil here.


  • Registered Users Posts: 39,366 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy




    Some posters were asking how big the ISS is. I've watched this video several times over the years and it's great. You also get to see how cramped a Soyuz is at the very end.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,587 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    Mollyb60 wrote: »
    Ha that's a really nice one!
    Did anyone manage to dock successfully with that simulator? I spent ages at it but just couldn't get it.

    I got the target lined up with the cursor keys but couldnt figure out what button was needed to thrust it forwards, the space bar didnt do anything.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,997 ✭✭✭Adyx


    I've had years of practice in KSP. :p


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,544 ✭✭✭Mollyb60


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    I got the target lined up with the cursor keys but couldnt figure out what button was needed to thrust it forwards, the space bar didnt do anything.

    Yeah I think that was my problem too. I'm no pilot!

    I saw that Space X's heavy rocket exploded during a test last Friday too. Surely that'll put a big dent in the Mars/Artemis program? Kept out of the news too with all the hurrah about the Crew Dragon launch.
    https://www.space.com/spacex-starship-sn4-prototype-explodes.html


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,574 ✭✭✭✭josip


    Mollyb60 wrote: »
    ...

    Surely that'll put a big dent in the Mars/Artemis program? Kept out of the news too with all the hurrah about the Crew Dragon launch.
    ...

    Not necessarily.
    Explosions like this aren't exactly a failure or a setback when it's part of the testing program.
    That's the purpose of the testing, to find weaknesses such as these.
    The SN5, mentioned in that article will be finished in June, so that means at most a 4-6 week delay compared to still using SN4.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,371 ✭✭✭Westernyelp


    Yes. SpaceX have a totally different ethos with Starship compared to others. Rapid prototyping and development will lead to failures of the test articles like this. SN5 is pretty much ready. SN6 is also stacking in the high bay and. Parts of SN7 are already around the complex.

    'Rapid unscheduled disassemblies' are a hazard of the process. But not a huge deal. All the previous test articles had a similar enough fate. From Mark1 up to the last boom.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,055 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    Mollyb60 wrote: »
    Yeah I think that was my problem too. I'm no pilot!

    I saw that Space X's heavy rocket exploded during a test last Friday too. Surely that'll put a big dent in the Mars/Artemis program? Kept out of the news too with all the hurrah about the Crew Dragon launch.
    https://www.space.com/spacex-starship-sn4-prototype-explodes.html

    Spacex have a completely different design philosophy to traditional aerospace development. They push the boundaries and rapidly learn from failures and implement improvements from what they learn. Their mantra is, if you're not failing in development then your not innovating or trying hard enough. I would bet they learned more from the SN4 test article exploding than if it didn't. They are already assembling the next 2 test articles and bits of the one after that on site.

    .

    They comfortably beat Boeing to get the first commercial crew delivered to the ISS this week by having a much more agile and rapid development approach. This despite Boeing having decades head start of aerospace engineering experience.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,848 ✭✭✭✭Thargor




Advertisement