"Unplanned Dismantling"

59Tebo

59Tebo
Top Contributor
Messages
1,412
Reaction score
6,055
Points
513
Location
Oswego County, NY
Think what you will. Mr. Musk is doing all the R & D on his (okay, corporate) nickel. NASA never had failures of any kind (said nobody, ever). The launch was a success. The flight wasn't. Remember: this guy's guys launched a ship into space, where all the boosters returned, and landed. You don't do that without crashing into something, or "rapidly deconstructing" a number of test vehicles. As in all things, success requires some degree of failures. :twocents:
 

Jim

Beyond the edge is the unknown. Here be Dragons
Top Contributor
XS650.com Supporter
Messages
15,636
Reaction score
62,160
Points
813
Location
Kansas City Mo.
Think what you will. Mr. Musk is doing all the R & D on his (okay, corporate) nickel. NASA never had failures of any kind (said nobody, ever). The launch was a success. The flight wasn't. Remember: this guy's guys launched a ship into space, where all the boosters returned, and landed. You don't do that without crashing into something, or "rapidly deconstructing" a number of test vehicles. As in all things, success requires some degree of failures. :twocents:
NASA had a lot of failures... and that's what they called 'em... failures. NASA learned a lot, 'cause no one had ever done what they did. There was no huge data base to draw from. They had to write the book. When a rocket blew up 4 miles up, they learned something... and gave it a name... "Max Dynamic Q." Musk didn't learn that, NASA did. NASA invented turbo pumps when they found out normal pressure systems couldn't supply the fuel and O2 at high enough chamber pressures to even clear the gantry. NASA did that, not Musk.
I could go on and on, but the point is, Musk didn't suddenly invent the wheel. NASA spend the better part of 60ys learning what worked and what blew up.
Musk is standing on the shoulder of giants. Credit where it's due. NASA had (has) some fine intelligent people that wrote the book on space flight... to the Moon and back. Musk is using that book... and yes, improving on it, but it was NASA that learned how to safely put people in space, not Musk.

He's just standing on the shoulders of giants, thinking he's the King. There's a lot of fine people that led the way many many years ago.
Musk is cashing in on that. And good for him for doing it, but lets give credit where it's due.... to those that wrote the book he's using.
 

Grimly

XS650 Junkie
Top Contributor
Messages
782
Reaction score
3,189
Points
243
Location
Ireland
Unmanned Japanese lunar landing makes it within feet of a controlled landing.
Mission described as failure.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-01441-y
The Falcon 9 performed perfectly.......... ;)
Wow, three months to get there. I assume that was a low-fuel journey, using gravity slings.
Makes me realise how close to the limits NASA were when they threw three guys at the Moon, several times.
 

650Skull

Cockytoo
Top Contributor
Messages
10,831
Reaction score
14,813
Points
813
Location
FNQ Australia
Robert Clark raises some very good points and why would Musk question mark the statement, "63 corrective actions". A stameant/question like that leaves himself open to interpretation or conspiracies.
 

gggGary

Just call me squirrel brain
Top Contributor
XS650.com Supporter
Messages
30,203
Reaction score
56,192
Points
813
Location
Baraboo, WI, USA
Robert Clark raises some very good points and why would Musk question mark the statement, "63 corrective actions". A stameant/question like that leaves himself open to interpretation or conspiracies.
Watch this Explains a lot, there's another video from WAI that covers the checklist in more depth, but what's discussed here, financing, business model, why so much investment in starship (they're building ship 32?) was eye opening for me.
 

650Skull

Cockytoo
Top Contributor
Messages
10,831
Reaction score
14,813
Points
813
Location
FNQ Australia
Watch this Explains a lot, there's another video from WAI that covers the checklist in more depth, but what's discussed here, financing, business model, why so much investment in starship (they're building ship 32?) was eye opening for me.

Some interesting points. I saw a puff piece. where NASA cant make money but Musk can make a profit after 4 years and this shows the quality of the Man and Private enterprise....................Lets set out some points that changes the narrative a bit

NASA got around 26 Billion last year...............gov't funded dep't and is not set up to make a profit like private enterprise has to.

NASA cost is 0.03% of the total Gov't Budget.

10-15% of NASA's budget goes to Cal-Tech, (basically run/funded by NASA), and JPL, a Subsidiary of Cal-Tech................That's all the physics and jet propulsion needed for space travel/rockets.

All space associated Patents NASA registers cost around $100,000 for a world wide patent. All of these patents are free for companies who do work with them, (don't know where the line is drawn), but they state they are free to use.....................This cost is absorbed within their budget and the cost of registration, ($100,000), would be a small part of the cost to develop any associated patent..................The cost to develop, trial and refine a patent, (also the time), can take years and millions if not billions, (today.) on top of the Registration cost.

NASA was said to generate $77 billion worth of Tax's and supports private enterprise companies, and their associated distribution/generation of wealth for the $26 Billion cost to Gov't....................Indirectly it makes money, at roughly $3 for $1 Spent.

NASA has given billions to Boeing and SpaceX to create Enterprise. Last year, (22), SpaceX got $2.04 Billion, (almost 10% of NASA's total budget) to develop their space ship. Another 1.4 billion, (another, roughly, 6% of their budget), for another 5 Astronaut trips to and from the space station. 2.9 billion was payed to SpaceX in ( April 21) to develop a moon lander.

NASA is still funding Boeing to the tune of Billions. Why, maybe it is so there is some competition and a back up just in case............and not create a monopoly

Now we are onto the money/profit SpaceX is making, well the cost in time development and implementation it hasn't had to pay out because NASA has already done the work, Patented it and given the patents to them for free. Not just the cost of development but the time $ saved because years of work does not need to be done. ..................The launch pad readiness was questioned long before launch and it was well discussed by experts the pad wouldn't stand up to the rocket engines. Steel plate and using water to help generate thrust. ..........................Was the failure of the launch pad a cost cutting exercise by SpaceX?? because the technology is there for them to use

Going off the video SpaceX made a 55 million profit last year.
They have received at least 6 Billion in the last 3 years from NASA alone without the free patents or cost of time or cost of developing.. In 2021 private investors poured $14.5 billion into space companies. No idea how much SpaceX got but, they would have received a good part of it


Star-link revenue was 1.4 billion in 22 but he needs Star-liner to be operational to be able to finish putting up the satellites or it will take years to finish and will not make any money due to cost/time of how many launch's it would take to finish the satellites placement, and not being able to finish. Star-liner is partly funded by NASA, Starliner is integral to the star-link program.

Trying to compare, a private company, (who receive the largest portion of NASA' budget payed to contractors, more than Caltech), to a Gov't funded agency that s not designed to make money, (but indirectly it generates $3 for every $1 in funding), but funds a University, public and private enterprises and has/is paving the way for pace exploration and Mars with the rovers, voyagers, (50 years ongoing), Hubble, Asteroid probes, ect,ect, is a non argument.

And it is all done on 0.03% of congress's budget...............0.03%. Don't know about any of you guys but to me that is exceptional value for cost. Even better when it is making 3 times the amount of money spent........................Elon also has the advantage where he can offset losses against profits at Tax time where all those losse's are ultimately payed for by all the other tax payers................all a part of a private/public business structure.............NASA does not have that luxury. Also cannot compare NASA to SpaceX because a lot of their funding is spent with other companies other than SpaceX, Boeing, Russians, European Space-agency, Cal-tech, (JAs), and all of those other smaller companies integral to the pace program, which is all designed for the development of many and the US Gov't.
 
Last edited:

2XSive

At least one screw loose behind the handle bars
Top Contributor
XS650.com Supporter
Messages
664
Reaction score
2,275
Points
243
Location
Michigan
"money tit"....I can think of many people and programs that phrase applies to in today's "entitlement" leaning society, all due to huge government spending on the backs of current tax payers and future generations. It's not everywhere but certainly more prevalent. I'll remember that phrase, lol.
 

gggGary

Just call me squirrel brain
Top Contributor
XS650.com Supporter
Messages
30,203
Reaction score
56,192
Points
813
Location
Baraboo, WI, USA
Sounds like Starship launch #2 has been cleared for tomorrow Friday 11/17/23.

1700148855369.png

Yea HAW!

https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-flight-2
 
Last edited:

gggGary

Just call me squirrel brain
Top Contributor
XS650.com Supporter
Messages
30,203
Reaction score
56,192
Points
813
Location
Baraboo, WI, USA
Well it went further this time.....
Progress? I think so.
All booster motors fired all the way to separation.
Survived hot stage separation.
Booster had stability issues after separation and was purposely exploded.
Launch platform looks good one of the tank farm tanks is dented?
Second stage terminated (was exploded by command?) early also. An issue with how the motors fired during manuevering?
 
Last edited:

650Skull

Cockytoo
Top Contributor
Messages
10,831
Reaction score
14,813
Points
813
Location
FNQ Australia
Starship #2 where are you ????

So what happens now. It keeps going out into space. Get caught in earths orbit and either crashes into some satellites or slowly descends back to earth and hopefully lands in the ocean.

Not a good couple of days for Elon, with loosing all his twitter advertisers.
 

gggGary

Just call me squirrel brain
Top Contributor
XS650.com Supporter
Messages
30,203
Reaction score
56,192
Points
813
Location
Baraboo, WI, USA
Starship #2 where are you ????

So what happens now. It keeps going out into space. Get caught in earths orbit and either crashes into some satellites or slowly descends back to earth and hopefully lands in the ocean.

Not a good couple of days for Elon, with loosing all his twitter advertisers.
Early tea leaves; they also blew up the second stage, FTS (Flight Termination System) 8 minutes after launch.
 

Mailman

Hardly a Guru
Top Contributor
Messages
9,676
Reaction score
46,091
Points
688
Location
Surprise Az
Two more launches, I'd go along for the ride!

You first! 😄 I watched the whole thing, exciting to watch, it’s a shame they exploded but all things considered it looked good. That was an interesting Space X website you linked to Gary, I had never really looked into the SpaceX program before. For a private venture it really is extraordinary.
When things work properly, watching these rockets rotate themselves around and land vertically , looks like something straight out of an old science fiction movie.
IMG_6364.jpeg
 
Top