4 ms·

I just want to point out that SpaceX has not yet successfully put a human in LEO. The moon seems well beyond their technical capabilites at the moment and Mars

I just want to point out that SpaceX has not yet successfully put a human in LEO. The moon seems well beyond their technical capabilites at the moment and Mars seems like a fools dream at this point in time.

Cannibusted 7y ago
Try to relax.
- dang 7y ago
  Personal attacks aren't allowed here and we ban accounts that post them. Would you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when commenting here?
SECProto 7y ago
> I just want to point out that SpaceX has not yet successfully put a human in LEO. Does this preclude them from doing so in the future? They certainly will within the next year or so (crew dragon). The moon has been out of reach of humans for 47-ish years mostly because we haven't had the orbital capacity to get there. Humanity has not had a super-heavy-lift launcher since the Saturn V (excluding the Shuttle and Energia, as they're mostly launching inert structural mass, rather than the fuel necessary to get elsewhere and back). Certainly it's challenging, and their timelines are incredibly optimistic, but I've been watching SpaceX for about a decade, and they generally do the things they claim they will (on delayed timelines).
- computerex 7y ago
  > Does this preclude them from doing so in the future? Certainly it doesn't preclude them from doing so, but a healthy dose of skepticism never hurts. Talking about the moon and mars when they have not yet successfully put someone in LEO is a little bit like putting the wagon before the horse.
imron 7y ago
> I just want to point out that SpaceX has not yet successfully put a human in LEO 5 years ago, you could have said the same about SpaceX and reusable rockets, and look where they are now.
- computerex 7y ago
  I don't understand the point you're trying to make. All I am saying is that I think they should first demonstrate LEO capability if they want to be taken seriously about putting 100 people on the moon or mars.
wongarsu 7y ago
Getting anything, including humans, to LEO is the hard part though. Once they have brought crew to the ISS and have demonstrated a spaceship flying to the moon, landing and returning to earth they will have solved most of the challenges of bringing humans to the moon. And they make good progress on both fronts.
- hollerith 7y ago
  The other hard part is keeping the health of humans from declining rapidly in zero g. I don't know whether the surface of Mars (.378 g) or the Moon (.165 g) will prove any less destructive to human health.
- computerex 7y ago
  I disagree. Going to LEO vs going to the moon vs going to Mars each pose a unique set of challenges. Manned flights to the moon for instance is many times harder to achieve than putting someone in LEO. U.S, China and Russia have all achieved manned flights to LEO for decades whereas only the U.S was successfully able to put someone on the moon.
  - wongarsu 7y ago
    >only the U.S was successfully able to put someone on the moon But is that because it's hard to put people on the moon or because only one country tried? (Sure, the USSR tried too, but they stopped trying before succeeding to put a large enough rocket into LEO). There is a very unique challenge in landing on the moon, and most moon landings still fail. But that can be perfected with unmanned landings, and Space X has the unique advantage of having plenty of experience with powered landings, and not requiring a separate lander.
    - simonh 7y ago
      As you say yourself, the USSR did try and failed. The N1 failed in all four launch attempts, including destroying the launch complex. They even orbited two prototypes of their lander design. I think that counts as trying.
quotemstr 7y ago
They could if they wanted to. I'd fly on SpaceX's current hardware given the chance, "human rated" or not.
- computerex 7y ago
  Then I think you'd be very reckless with your life, given the failure that happened with crew dragon this year that resulted in the vehicle blowing up.

Cannibusted 7y ago

Try to relax.

dang 7y ago
Personal attacks aren't allowed here and we ban accounts that post them. Would you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when commenting here?

SECProto 7y ago

> I just want to point out that SpaceX has not yet successfully put a human in LEO. Does this preclude them from doing so in the future? They certainly will within the next year or so (crew dragon). The moon has been out of reach of humans for 47-ish years mostly because we haven't had the orbital capacity to get there. Humanity has not had a super-heavy-lift launcher since the Saturn V (excluding the Shuttle and Energia, as they're mostly launching inert structural mass, rather than the fuel necessary to get elsewhere and back). Certainly it's challenging, and their timelines are incredibly optimistic, but I've been watching SpaceX for about a decade, and they generally do the things they claim they will (on delayed timelines).

computerex 7y ago
> Does this preclude them from doing so in the future? Certainly it doesn't preclude them from doing so, but a healthy dose of skepticism never hurts. Talking about the moon and mars when they have not yet successfully put someone in LEO is a little bit like putting the wagon before the horse.

imron 7y ago

> I just want to point out that SpaceX has not yet successfully put a human in LEO 5 years ago, you could have said the same about SpaceX and reusable rockets, and look where they are now.

computerex 7y ago
I don't understand the point you're trying to make. All I am saying is that I think they should first demonstrate LEO capability if they want to be taken seriously about putting 100 people on the moon or mars.

wongarsu 7y ago

Getting anything, including humans, to LEO is the hard part though. Once they have brought crew to the ISS and have demonstrated a spaceship flying to the moon, landing and returning to earth they will have solved most of the challenges of bringing humans to the moon. And they make good progress on both fronts.

hollerith 7y ago
The other hard part is keeping the health of humans from declining rapidly in zero g. I don't know whether the surface of Mars (.378 g) or the Moon (.165 g) will prove any less destructive to human health.
computerex 7y ago
I disagree. Going to LEO vs going to the moon vs going to Mars each pose a unique set of challenges. Manned flights to the moon for instance is many times harder to achieve than putting someone in LEO. U.S, China and Russia have all achieved manned flights to LEO for decades whereas only the U.S was successfully able to put someone on the moon.
- wongarsu 7y ago
  >only the U.S was successfully able to put someone on the moon But is that because it's hard to put people on the moon or because only one country tried? (Sure, the USSR tried too, but they stopped trying before succeeding to put a large enough rocket into LEO). There is a very unique challenge in landing on the moon, and most moon landings still fail. But that can be perfected with unmanned landings, and Space X has the unique advantage of having plenty of experience with powered landings, and not requiring a separate lander.
  - simonh 7y ago
    As you say yourself, the USSR did try and failed. The N1 failed in all four launch attempts, including destroying the launch complex. They even orbited two prototypes of their lander design. I think that counts as trying.

quotemstr 7y ago

They could if they wanted to. I'd fly on SpaceX's current hardware given the chance, "human rated" or not.

computerex 7y ago
Then I think you'd be very reckless with your life, given the failure that happened with crew dragon this year that resulted in the vehicle blowing up.