5 ms·
SpaceX launches 1st commercial rocket into orbit
- zandorg 18y agoI watched flight 3 (live webcam) and on this one I was even more tense. It was like watching a football match for space pioneers. Would they win? Yes they did, and Elon Musk was hilariously incomprendible, probably from relief. Screw the Chinese, let's hear it for assembly line space travel.
- quickpost 18y agoThis is AWESOME. It could change everything, space-wise. No more being held hostage by the Defense Contractors or the Russians to get to orbit. I think the Falcon 1 is about 1/10th to 1/7th the cost of the nearest competitor at $3million to orbit (compared to ~26million for Pegasus).
- zandorg 18y agoRe: My comment, I just wanted to say I have nothing against the Chinese except their brutal regime. I don't intend to slut their nation on grounds of any prejudice.
- DanielBMarkham 18y agoFinally some good news from SpaceX! Way to go guys!
- DabAsteroid 18y agoVideo (09:59): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=To-XOPgaGsQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=To-XOPgaGsQ
- froo 18y agoI only have two words for this video. Awe Inspiring. I had to send it to everyone I know, Thanks for the link.
- DabAsteroid 18y agoYou're welcome. Here is the 40-minute version that includes Elon Musk's post-launch address to the SpaceX employees in Hawthorne, California, and post-launch interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FQhtMrUQlE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FQhtMrUQlE
- froo 18y agoThankyou again.
- netcan 18y agoWhat we need is a good, practical economic reason for any of this. I wonder how far space tourism can take us? It's a good place to start because it'll put a lot of pressure on making it easy. Training periods, prices, competence levels will have some downward pressure. If a decent little space tourism industry evolves, it'll be a great base to build on.
- DabAsteroid 18y agoHistorically, people have colonized just for the change of scenery. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamestown,_Virginia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamestown,_Virginia
- PieSquared 18y agoThe moon isn't too rich in breathtaking views and beautiful flora and fauna... not to mention the lack of oxygen :P
- DabAsteroid 18y agoFreespace is easier to get to and from, and offers full-g, zero-g and everything in-between. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_habitat http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_habitat Freespace also can offer low data latency -- low-enough even for realistic telepresence (e.g. sub 400 ms) (http://www.google.com/search?q=%22400+ms%22+conversation+latency http://www.google.com/search?q=%22400+ms%22+conversation+lat...). The moon probably would not be very popular, except for mining crews.
- Raphael 18y agoIsn't the view of Earth breathtaking?
- whatusername 18y agoI guess the argument is that you can see that from space anyway.. But The view of Earth from the moon would be better than any hotel on the planet!
- yters 18y agoWe also need a good way to clean up all that junk up there. I've head that its possible to start a cascade effect: smash one satellite, the others are so fragile that the shards will smash many more, and so on.
- zandorg 18y agoOne thing to wonder is who's going to come up with the law to determine how often the price per kilo to orbit halves? Assuming it's now been lowered to 10% over government 'efforts'.
- tom_rath 18y agoThat's a huge assumption. Let's not get ahead of ourselves just yet: Orbital Sciences thought they could create cheap launches with Pegasus too. As failures occurred, customers requested more and more safeguards and testing and the cost per launch rose correspondingly. SpaceX has done an awesome job, but there's a ways to go before the system is confirmed as reliable with consistently reproducible performance. (For what it's worth, I think they'll do it in time, but it may cost quite a bit more yet)
- zandorg 18y agoThanks for the update on previous attempts. I do think that you could send habitat modules and oxygen tanks up without a huge cost if the rocket blows up. With people, safety becomes crucial. With satellites, less crucial, but still expensive if it fails.
- tom_rath 18y agoFolks (myself included) have been "thinking" that since the 60s. If you put some commercial numbers on that problem, you'll see it's a lot harder than it looks. Satellite launch failures alone can cost in the hundreds of millions of dollars -- and that's not even touching the issue of revenue lost to the broadcast company who bought the thing (and waited 3-4 years to see it constructed and launched). Although awful regulation has played a role in preventing launch vehicles from becoming a truly commercial market, The Man hasn't been the only issue keeping launch costs high -- this stuff is hard!
- DabAsteroid 18y agoSatellite launch failures alone can cost in the hundreds of millions of dollars Satellite costs are driven partially by launch costs. If launches are expensive, then satellites need to be highly reliable. If launches are cheap, then satellites need not be so reliable, and therefore can be cheaper. Insurance averages out the costs of launch failures. Dropping the costs of satellites improves the market and introduces the possibility of mass-production, further dropping the costs and further increasing demand, which further drops the costs through economies of scale, etc. . We know what can happen, economically, because we have experience with mass-launchings in the form of the V2. http://www.google.com/search?q=v2+rocket+%2413000 http://www.google.com/search?q=v2+rocket+%2413000 A Rocket a Day Keeps the High Costs Away Then, starting with the US$13000 marginal cost of a V2, we arrive at a cost of ... One analogy in particular regarding V2 rockets, Nazis, and ignoring the use ... The recurring cost was $13000 a launch for those vehicles. ...
- kul 18y agoWas that ice on the screen at about 5m?