- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: SpaceX to fly passengers on trip around moon in 2018
Posted on 2/27/17 at 8:09 pm to RollTide1987
Posted on 2/27/17 at 8:09 pm to RollTide1987
quote:Apollo level budgets are never coming back. We just won't make any progress without taking risks that we aren't comfortable with anymore. If we keep working with our accustomed to level of safety we won't be leaving this planet for a loooooooong time.
Firstly, they didn't burn to death. They were asphyxiated by the smoke. They also died after 16 successful manned launches that equated to almost 2,000 hours in space.
Elon Musk is trying to run before he can crawl. He hasn't even put a man in space yet. Now he wants to send passengers to the moon by the end of next year.
0
Posted on 2/27/17 at 8:17 pm to NYNolaguy1
Won't happen. Everyone knows it's impossible to survive a trip through the Van Allen belts.
Posted on 2/27/17 at 8:18 pm to NYNolaguy1
My grandpa's rocket engines constitute about 36% of the man-made lunar debris... it'd be nice to see them in person 
Posted on 2/27/17 at 8:30 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Elon Musk is trying to run before he can crawl. He hasn't even put a man in space yet. Now he wants to send passengers to the moon by the end of next year.
The two most complicated parts of circling the moon are egress and re-entry. The rest has some latent risk, but it's significantly less.
Posted on 2/27/17 at 8:35 pm to NYNolaguy1
Lmk when he risks his own life, rather than our money.
Posted on 2/27/17 at 8:39 pm to NYNolaguy1
The moon is "deep space?"
Posted on 2/27/17 at 8:57 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
But that's still a pretty high percentage of putting your life on the line. 1/16 is a terrifying stat when you are the one being exposed to it.
But we didn't lose an American in actual spaceflight until STS-51-L in 1986. The Apollo One crew died in a launch pad fire during what was supposedly a routine test of the life support systems.
NASA has launched 166 manned missions into space since 1961. Of those 166, only two of them resulted in fatalities.
Posted on 2/27/17 at 9:05 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
The two most complicated parts of circling the moon are egress and re-entry. The rest has some latent risk, but it's significantly less.
That's beside the point. How many unmanned tests has he had with the Falcon 9 rocket since 2010? Compare that with NASA and the Mercury-Redstone rocket. They had four unmanned tests over the course of five and a half months before they put a man atop the rocket and sent him into space.
Elon Musk has launched the Falcon 9 a grand total of 32 times - not once with a human being. And I'm pretty sure the rocket (which he's never had the balls to put a man on top of) doesn't even have the capable power necessary to execute a successful trans-lunar injection burn.
This post was edited on 2/27/17 at 9:06 pm
Posted on 2/27/17 at 9:07 pm to RollTide1987
quote:Nobody can afford that kind of safety margin anymore.
Compare that with NASA and the Mercury-Redstone rocket. They had four unmanned tests over the course of five and a half months before they put a man atop the rocket and sent him into space.
Posted on 2/27/17 at 9:18 pm to NYNolaguy1
How do they plan on getting this going so soon when they've had so many problems with their rockets?
I hope like hell it happens, that would truly be a mindblowing experience. But, it happening in a year or 2 seems a little soon considering some of the problems they've had, doesn't it?
On another note, I think NASA dropped the ball big time on this. They could have done this, and probably sooner had they wanted to and instead of just sucking up government funding, could have used profits from something like this to apply to other projects as well and taken our money more directly, instead of through taxes.
I hope like hell it happens, that would truly be a mindblowing experience. But, it happening in a year or 2 seems a little soon considering some of the problems they've had, doesn't it?
On another note, I think NASA dropped the ball big time on this. They could have done this, and probably sooner had they wanted to and instead of just sucking up government funding, could have used profits from something like this to apply to other projects as well and taken our money more directly, instead of through taxes.
Posted on 2/27/17 at 9:19 pm to NYNolaguy1
What could possibly go wrong ?
Posted on 2/27/17 at 9:26 pm to saint tiger225
quote:Trump told NASA a few days ago to put astronauts around the moon in 2018 as well.
On another note, I think NASA dropped the ball big time on this. They could have done this, and probably sooner had they wanted to and instead of just sucking up government funding, could have used profits from something like this to apply to other projects as well and taken our money more directly, instead of through taxes.
Posted on 2/27/17 at 9:28 pm to NYNolaguy1
400,000 mile-high club?
Posted on 2/27/17 at 10:08 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
NASA has launched 166 manned missions into space since 1961. Of those 166, only two of them resulted in fatalities.
Thats pretty remarkable when one thinks about it.
Posted on 2/27/17 at 10:17 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
NASA has launched 166 manned missions into space since 1961. Of those 166, only two of them resulted in fatalities.
No, it's 3, and most of those were from the shuttle program, not attempting to escape Earth's orbit. That's 2%, roughly the chance of landing on a random slot on a Roulette wheel.
And there was Apollo 13 as well, which while it made it back, it was a bitch. It's now even higher at 2.5%.
This post was edited on 2/27/17 at 10:21 pm
Posted on 2/27/17 at 10:19 pm to Tempratt
quote:
Thats pretty remarkable when one thinks about it.
Really? If you were on a rocket launching into space, would you be comfortable with a 2% chance of getting killed? 2% is a terrifying stat when your life is on the line.
This post was edited on 2/27/17 at 10:22 pm
Posted on 2/27/17 at 10:47 pm to NYNolaguy1
No they wont.
Posted on 2/28/17 at 12:20 am to TigerstuckinMS
quote:
Navigating in space is much easier.
While I agree with most of what you said, this just isn't accurate.
Posted on 2/28/17 at 12:34 am to NYNolaguy1
They really should make it a competition or contest to see who are the two to go. Making it only available for the extremely wealthy seems like a middle finger to most people
Posted on 2/28/17 at 4:15 am to TigerstuckinMS
quote:
The later stuff the astronauts did like building the oxygen canister contraption doesn't require an intimate knowledge of the spacecraft and its systems.
As long as you have contact with someone on the ground who does. What happens if the communications systems are part of what's damaged?
I'd prefer to have an engineer onboard.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News