SpaceX launches Falcon Heavy successfully - biggest rocket since Saturn V

[EGarrett]

Musk and Jobs are not polymaths. lol. I am talking about idea of breadth of knowledge in general.

You said this...

"That is your opinion. But I prefer polymaths. I relate more with Jobs. And Musk. We spread ourselves thin."

That looks exactly like you're labeling Musk and Jobs as polymaths.

And Dyson is being humble as usual. He'd probably say Neil De Grasse Tyson is a better scientist than him.

What he said makes sense and jibes with what I found. Note, this is NOT to insult you or anyone else who likes to study a lot of different things. If you take it that way, I apologize. It's certainly true that people who study different things seem to have happier lives overall and still can contribute a good amount. I would actually recommend that someone be a "wide study" person if they want to have a balanced and good life.

Dyson has won numerous scientific awards but never a Nobel Prize. Nobel physics laureate Steven Weinberg has said that the Nobel committee has "fleeced" Dyson, but Dyson himself remarked in 2009, "I think it's almost true without exception if you want to win a Nobel Prize, you should have a long attention span, get hold of some deep and important problem and stay with it for ten years. That wasn't my style."

Unfortunately, the Nobel Prize is very political, so much so that I lost respect for it some time ago. On top of that, Gandhi never received one...and neither did Jonas Salk.

 

[JonesBones]

You said this...

"That is your opinion. But I prefer polymaths. I relate more with Jobs. And Musk. We spread ourselves thin."

That looks exactly like you're labeling Musk and Jobs as polymaths.


What he said makes sense and jibes with what I found. Note, this is NOT to insult you or anyone else who likes to study a lot of different things. If you take it that way, I apologize. It's certainly true that people who study different things seem to have happier lives overall and still can contribute a good amount. I would actually recommend that someone be a "wide study" person if they want to have a balanced and good life.


Unfortunately, the Nobel Prize is very political, so much so that I lost respect for it some time ago. On top of that, Gandhi never received one...and neither did Jonas Salk.

I tend to mix thoughts together that I shouldnt. But that is not what I was trying to say. I was being lazy and just said some things without context. But trust me, I in no way believe that Musk or Jobs are polymaths. Not even close. I just messily jammed together the fact I like polymaths and jobs and musk. Though actually I don't really like them personally. Woz is a saint. I watched both movies. Maybe I am getting it mixed up with his personality irl too but Jobs came off terrible in those films and Woz came off like a good guy. And it was clear he was the inventor. I think Wozniak said he liked Rogen's portrayal and I believe was consulted about the movie. He wasn't consulted about the one with Ashton Kutcher. I don't think he liked that one.

I had to look up Dyson's wiki for that quote. Every time I go to his page I wonder if he is still a live. He is fuckin old. 90s.

 

[EGarrett]

I tend to mix thoughts together that I shouldnt. But that is not what I was trying to say. I was being lazy and just said some things without context. But trust me, I in no way believe that Musk or Jobs are polymaths. Not even close. I just messily jammed together the fact I like polymaths and jobs and musk. Though actually I don't really like them personally. Woz is a saint. I watched both movies. Maybe I am getting it mixed up with his personality irl too but Jobs came off terrible in those films and Woz came off like a good guy. And it was clear he was the inventor. I think Wozniak said he liked Rogen's portrayal and I believe was consulted about the movie. He wasn't consulted about the one with Ashton Kutcher. I don't think he liked that one.

I had to look up Dyson's wiki for that quote. Every time I go to his page I wonder if he is still a live. He is fuckin old. 90s.

Last I heard Dyson was still alive and lives at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, which actually is within driving distance of where I am. Unfortunately, it's not exactly an amusement park or a place where tourists can visit (although they might allow tours, don't recall off the top of my head)

I always hate when Musk comes up in discussions because I love that people are taking more of an interest in technology now, but they tend to go overboard and say a lot of things that you have to counteract, and then you feel like a jerk ruining their fun.

 

[V-2]

Fuck.

 

[V-2]

Last I heard Dyson was still alive and lives at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, which actually is within driving distance of where I am. Unfortunately, it's not exactly an amusement park or a place where tourists can visit (although they might allow tours, don't recall off the top of my head)

I always hate when Musk comes up in discussions because I love that people are taking more of an interest in technology now, but they tend to go overboard and say a lot of things that you have to counteract, and then you feel like a jerk ruining their fun.

That place is pretty overrated on the whole, although the faculty certainly isn't but that's just the thing: to take up residence there you'd of already had to make fundamental, career-best contributions to your respective field and that ordinarily happens about once in a lifetime, if you're extremely talented. Richard Feynman had some pretty scathing words for the IAS. As you probably know, Richard Feynman is arguably the greatest post-WW2 physicist in history as well as Top 10 all-time. Nobody is going to tell Richard Feynman anything. Dyson knows.

When I was at Princeton in the 1940s I could see what happened to those great minds at the Institute for Advanced Study, who had been specially selected for their tremendous brains and were now given this opportunity to sit in this lovely house by the woods there, with no classes to teach, with no obligations whatsoever. These poor bastards could now sit and think clearly all by themselves, OK?

So they don't get any ideas for a while: They have every opportunity to do something, and they're not getting any ideas. I believe that in a situation like this a kind of guilt or depression worms inside of you, and you begin to worry about not getting any ideas. And nothing happens. Still no ideas come. Nothing happens because there's not enough real activity and challenge: You're not in contact with the experimental guys. You don't have to think how to answer questions from the students. Nothing!"



Brilliant sonofabitch.

 

[JonesBones]

Last I heard Dyson was still alive and lives at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, which actually is within driving distance of where I am. Unfortunately, it's not exactly an amusement park or a place where tourists can visit (although they might allow tours, don't recall off the top of my head)

I always hate when Musk comes up in discussions because I love that people are taking more of an interest in technology now, but they tend to go overboard and say a lot of things that you have to counteract, and then you feel like a jerk ruining their fun.

It has seeped into pop culture. The new Star Trek Series. Discovery. I like it. In an early episode somebody says "You could be the next Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, or Elon Musk." Implying that Musk will be as revered in the future as guys on that level. I am not sure which examples were used specifically. But it was people like Einstein and Newton and Musk was added. lol. I shook my head.

Dyson has gotten a mention on Star Trek before. Dyson Sphere. Now Dyson is a great ideas guy. Some seem a little wacky but that is ok.

He is technically still head of the SSI I think. I am sure you have heard of it. O Neil is a guy I never hear anything about these days. People think Musk is like O'Neill.

Space Studies Institute is a non-profit organization that was founded in 1977 by the late Princeton University Professor Dr. Gerard K. O'Neill.

 

[ralphc1]

True, but they didn't have the financial backing or managerial ability to become a major car maker and jumpstart the EV industry, IMO. Tesla is definitely what created the electric car industry as we know if today, I and I just can't see them doing so without Musk. His money kept them alive, it was his vision to make the cars beautiful and fast to make them desirable, and to start with the high dollar low volume sports car, then the slightly cheaper, higher production luxury sedan, then the mass market car. He also personally has done an incredible amount with regard to ironing out their supply chain, and I believe he also recruited JB Straubel, their CTO, who has been instrumental in their battery development.



The EV1 story is pretty crazy. Didn't they force people who had them to return them, and then they just crushed them all?

Yes they did. GM claimed it was the government requirement to supply repair parts for 15 years that caused them to make the decision to scrap them. GMs management did not want to go into full production. The customers who were leasing, wanted to buy the vehicles and were willing to sign agreements to provide their own parts and service but GM wanted to end the program. They hadn't even started with lithium batteries then. Customers were fine with the limited range of both the lead/acid version at 60 to 100 miles and the nickle hydride version at 80 to 140.

Many of those who leased them, tried to lease one or knew someone who leased one are the ones waiting for Teslas now.

 

[ralphc1]

Wozniak is a genius. His work made Apple. Most people know that Wozniak was the genius. I mean people who know anything about the company. And I think the pendulum swung the other way now. Where now Jobs is being underrated because of being thought so overrated. He's like Bisping or someting. He goes back and forth between under and overrated all the time.

I loved that scene in the movie. Where Wozniak says "I am sick of being Ringo when I know I am John." lol.


Steve Wozniak: What do you do? You're not an engineer. You're not a designer. You can't put a hammer to a nail. I built the circuit board! The graphical interface was stolen! So how come ten times in a day I read Steve Jobs is a genius? What do you do?

Steve Jobs: Musicians play their instruments. I play the orchestra.

Steve Wozniak: ...to the only successful product that this company has ever made. I'm sorry to be blunt, but that happens to be the truth. The Lisa was a failure, the Macintosh was a failure. I don't like talking like this, but I am tired of being Ringo when I know I was John.

Steve Jobs: Everybody loves Ringo.

Steve Wozniak: And I am tired of being patronized by you!

Steve Jobs: You think John became John by winning a raffle, Woz? You think he tricked somebody or hit George Harrison over the head? He was John because he was John.

Steve Wozniak: He was John 'cause he wrote 'Ticket to Ride', and I wrote the Apple II.

Wozniak built it and Jobs convinced people that they wanted or needed to buy one. You can build the best machine in the world but if nobody buys it, what good is it. Nobody really needed one and there wasn't much use for it at the time. When Apple earned enough money to develop software it made it a product that could be used attracting more users.

 

[ralphc1]

Here is something I would like to eventually be able to discuss in layperson's terms:

What are the 5 (or so) main problems/issues/challenges that SpaceX has in successfully landing a giant rocket booster on an ocean-born landing pad?

And what are no longer problems? Meaning ones that were before (recent in time) but have been worked out once and for all and no longer require continued 'debugging'.

Can anyone comment on this or point me in the right direction. Me and a few friends started a sci.&tech. group to discuss things like this.

One of the problems with any landing is that the rocket engines that launched the rocket have to be restarted. In the last attempt, according to reports, 2 of the 3 engines used for landing failed so it didn't slow down enough and was likely diverted from hitting the barge at high speed.

The engines get very hot then are shut down at an altitude where it is very cold. Not many materials can handle that well.

 

[deltapapha]

One of the problems with any landing is that the rocket engines that launched the rocket have to be restarted. In the last attempt, according to reports, 2 of the 3 engines used for landing failed so it didn't slow down enough and was likely diverted from hitting the barge at high speed.

The engines get very hot then are shut down at an altitude where it is very cold. Not many materials can handle that well.

thanks for the reply.

So its a thermodynamics & materials engineering problem? Right now I am reading through three texts on statics, dynamics, and thermodynamics respectively (basically second year physics). Not that that level of mathematical treatment would be necessary to have a rocket-tech discussion group but since I have a math level of up to Calc 3, Differential Equations, and Linear Algebra I figured I would just go ahead and read books that I happen to understand the math for, even though relatively speaking that is low level math for truly rigorous discussions. And again I do realize that someone with little to no math at all could have a meaningful discussion about rocket engines.

Elon Musk tacked on a lot of new fans this week and a new enthusiastic community of lay-interest is developing about this in ways that (I think) are constructive and communal (as cheezy as that sounds). I mean aside from being just plain interesting for its own sake without there needing to be some 'public-spirited' good about it. But this really is something that I want to keep learning about in as technical a fashion as my math knowledge will allow. The thermo-materials aspect of this seems fascinating. I will try to follow up on it.

 

[JonesBones]

Wozniak built it and Jobs convinced people that they wanted or needed to buy one. You can build the best machine in the world but if nobody buys it, what good is it. Nobody really needed one and there wasn't much use for it at the time. When Apple earned enough money to develop software it made it a product that could be used attracting more users.

Wozniak was the first person he had to convince. Exactly. I think Jobs or somebody said something like, "Some people look at something and think, "how does this work?" And others look at something and think, "What can I do with this?" Jobs was the latter. That is vision and talent in itself.

 

[Cocrehamster]

Yes they did. GM claimed it was the government requirement to supply repair parts for 15 years that caused them to make the decision to scrap them. GMs management did not want to go into full production. The customers who were leasing, wanted to buy the vehicles and were willing to sign agreements to provide their own parts and service but GM wanted to end the program. They hadn't even started with lithium batteries then. Customers were fine with the limited range of both the lead/acid version at 60 to 100 miles and the nickle hydride version at 80 to 140.

Many of those who leased them, tried to lease one or knew someone who leased one are the ones waiting for Teslas now.

I was referring to the original founders of Tesla, hence why I went into all the things that Musk did to make Tesla Tesla.

 

[Cocrehamster]

I'm not so sure. That could all change in the near future. We will have to see how SpaceX does financially. Blue Origin could also change their strategy, plus they have more money:

"As a result of being completely privately funded, Bezos’ deep pockets could render Blue more flexible than SpaceX when pricing launches. If Blue chooses to aggressively price New Glenn by accounting for booster reusability, it could pose a threat to SpaceX’s own business strategy. If SpaceX is unable to recoup its investment in reusability before New Glenn is regularly conducting multiple commercial missions per year, likely no earlier than 2021 or 2022, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 pricing could be rendered distinctly noncompetitive."

"By contrast, NASA has invested no money into Blue Origin's New Glenn rocket. This launch system, which has a large payload fairing and is capable of many lunar missions, has almost exclusively been privately developed. Blue Origin is funded by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, who just sold $1.1 billion in Amazon stock to continue support for his rocket company. Another company, United Launch Alliance, has invested some funding to the BE-4 rocket engine but nothing to the New Glenn project."

"SpaceX's Falcon Heavy will have about 30% more thrust than Blue Origin's largest New Glenn rocket. Falcon Heavy's nine engines will together generate more than 5 million pounds of thrust at liftoff. Meanwhile, the 3-stage New Glenn will have a lower capability of 3.85 million pounds of thrust. The New Armstrong will be even more powerful."

NASA will beat them both. "NASA is building the Space Launch System (SLS), a rocket designed to take people into deep space and potentially Mars. The space agency will be able to configure the rocket differently for each mission."

Status: No earlier than late 2019
Height: 322 - 365 feet (98.1 - 111.3 meters)
Liftoff thrust: up to 11.9 million pounds (5 million kg)
Capability: 150,000 - 290,000 pounds (70,000 - 130,000 kilograms) to LEO
Planned payloads: Cargo, astronauts

What are you not so sure about? Talking about a future rocket that they have not launched or built is not accomplishing anything. At this point, SpaceX is far, far ahead of Blue Origin. There is absolutely nothing to not be sure about.

 

[Phr3121]

What are you not so sure about? Talking about a future rocket that they have not launched or built is not accomplishing anything. At this point, SpaceX is far, far ahead of Blue Origin. There is absolutely nothing to not be sure about.

Musk is bleeding money right now. Bezos is swimming in it, and to a degree NASA. This was the first flight of the Falcon Heavy. A success. Next flight is expected for June of this year. It's all there on the post you quoted. NASA has not launched or built the SLS either, but I have no doubt that thing will fly just fine. Yeah, with a liftoff thrust of up to 12 million pounds, it will blow the Falcon Heavy out of the game. We'll have to wait and see.

 

[Cocrehamster]

Musk is bleeding money right now. Bezos is swimming in it, and to a degree NASA. This was the first flight of the Falcon Heavy. A success. Next flight is expected for June of this year. It's all there on the post you quoted. NASA has not launched or built the SLS either, but I have no doubt that thing will fly just fine. Yeah, with a liftoff thrust of up to 12 million pounds, it will blow the Falcon Heavy out of the game. We'll have to wait and see.

Whether Bezos is rolling in money or not, he has never even launched an orbital class rocket. SpaceX launches and lands the Falcon 9 all the time. You’re trying to argue with my saying SpaceX I s far ahead by talking about what Blue Origin might do in the future. That’s not an argument for them having accomplished more or being ahead. I

I’m not a Blue Origin hater, I hope they start launching New Glenn ASAP. But they haven’t, at this point, accomplished anything compared to SpaceX. That’s a fact.

As for SLS, NASA is wasting resources on it. Are you familiar with the costs of the program? You sound like someone commenting on something you don’t follow very closely.

 

[Phr3121]

I am all for SpaceX, but I would like to see Blue Origin get more involved. Yes, right now SpaceX is leading, but Blue Origin could pick up the pace at any time. If Musk runs out of money, which is where he is heading at the moment, SpaceX could end. Maybe that is what Bezos is waiting for so he can purchase SpaceX from Musk. Bezos has 6 times the wealth Musk has.

"SpaceX's CEO Elon Musk stated in 2010 that he would 'personally guarantee' that his company could build a launch vehicle in the 140-150 t payload range, for $2.5 billion, or $300 million per launch, but cautioned that this price tag did not include a potential upper-stage upgrade."

As for SLS, NASA is wasting resources on it. Are you familiar with the costs of the program?

No, I don't think NASA is wasting resources on SLS. I think it is a great program. Engine tests are already at full swing.

. Project cost: Between $7 and $35 billion.
. Cost per launch: $500 million
. Missions: Lunar orbit, Jovian orbit, Martian orbit - Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune planned.

"For fiscal years 2011 through 2015, the SLS program had expended funding totaling $7.7 billion in nominal dollars. This is equivalent to $8.3 billion adjusting to 2016 dollars using the NASA New Start Inflation Indices. For 2016, the SLS program funding, excluding the Exploration Upper Stage (EUS), was enacted at $1,915M with an additional $7,180M planned for 2017 through 2021. The SLS program has a 70% confidence level for initial program completion by 2023 according to the Associate Administrator for NASA, Robert Lightfoot."

Missed the Saturn V launch but won't be missing this one.

 

[ShinkanPo]

The Saturn V was bigger, but the BFR (Big Fucking Rocket - that's actually the name) will surpass even the Saturn V if it gets built (seems realistic now).

Some of these payloads are subject to change, but here’s an estimate of how much each rocket can carry to space.

Saturn V - 310,000 lbs (33 elephants)
Falcon Heavy - 119,000 lbs (12.5 elephants)
SLS - 286,000 lbs (30 elephants)
BFR - 330,000 lbs (34 elephants)
New Glenn Rocket - 99,210 lbs (10 elephants)

The Falcon Heavy will be the first rocket since Saturn V capable of sending humans to the Moon, though it won’t be quite as powerful. Blue Origin’s New Glenn rocket will compete with SpaceX for commercial satellite launches.

http://www.businessinsider.com/spac...p-saturn-falcon-nasa-blue-origin-2017-12?IR=T

I read somewhere that the Saturn V was over powered for moon operations because Werner Von Brown intended the Rocket for used in interplanetary missions as well.

Althogh the Lunar Apolo missions is still heavier thsn a fully loaded Shuttle at Low earth orbit like the weight of the SIVB stage alone is like 70% of the total wieight

 

[Videer]

One of the problems with any landing is that the rocket engines that launched the rocket have to be restarted. In the last attempt, according to reports, 2 of the 3 engines used for landing failed so it didn't slow down enough and was likely diverted from hitting the barge at high speed.

The engines get very hot then are shut down at an altitude where it is very cold. Not many materials can handle that well.

It ran out of fuel, central core burned for longer than the side boosters.

 

[RockstarChris]

As soon as a private company gets to Mars im sure some government on Earth will figure out how to tax Mars.

 

[Cocrehamster]

I am all for SpaceX, but I would like to see Blue Origin get more involved. Yes, right now SpaceX is leading, but Blue Origin could pick up the pace at any time. If Musk runs out of money, which is where he is heading at the moment, SpaceX could end. Maybe that is what Bezos is waiting for so he can purchase SpaceX from Musk. Bezos has 6 times the wealth Musk has.

"SpaceX's CEO Elon Musk stated in 2010 that he would 'personally guarantee' that his company could build a launch vehicle in the 140-150 t payload range, for $2.5 billion, or $300 million per launch, but cautioned that this price tag did not include a potential upper-stage upgrade."



No, I don't think NASA is wasting resources on SLS. I think it is a great program. Engine tests are already at full swing.

. Project cost: Between $7 and $35 billion.
. Cost per launch: $500 million
. Missions: Lunar orbit, Jovian orbit, Martian orbit - Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune planned.

"For fiscal years 2011 through 2015, the SLS program had expended funding totaling $7.7 billion in nominal dollars. This is equivalent to $8.3 billion adjusting to 2016 dollars using the NASA New Start Inflation Indices. For 2016, the SLS program funding, excluding the Exploration Upper Stage (EUS), was enacted at $1,915M with an additional $7,180M planned for 2017 through 2021. The SLS program has a 70% confidence level for initial program completion by 2023 according to the Associate Administrator for NASA, Robert Lightfoot."

Missed the Saturn V launch but won't be missing this one.

So you agree, there is nothing to not be sure about, SpaceX is far ahead.

Do you think all their money is just cash in the bank? It’s mostly in stock of their companies. And do you think Elon Musk personally funds SpaceX’s operations from his bank account? SpaceX has an actual profitable business. They also have outside investors. And they could go public if they needed to raise more capital.

How can the project cost for SLS be as low as $7B if they already spent it over $7B between 2011 and 2015, they’ve still been spending the last 2 years, and they’re still years away from launch? $500M per launch is a pipe dream. That’s about what a space shuttle launch cost. SLS will probably be around $1B per launch. A complete waste when you look at what SpaceX and Blue Origin are building.