Space Travel & Exploration

[Fantomen]

do more WDRS then SpaceX has done in about a year

What is a WDRS?

[Masark]

What is a WDRS?

Wet Dress Rehearsal, I presume. Not sure about the S.

[plz delete account]

Wet Dress Rehearsal, I presume. Not sure about the S.

Yeah, originally wrote WDR, it got autocorrects to WARS, tried to fix it but forgot about the S

[CmdrShep2154]

I am troubled by the fact that the richest person in the world and the only person who is pushing spaceflight forward has become sympathetic to a group with conspiracy and anti vaccination beliefs.

https://www.businessinsider.com/elon...nd-hate-2022-5

I fear he may be the cause of many of the first Mars colonists dying from a Martian virus.

[PACOX]

Forgot that Starliner, the othet capsule that's supposed to take astronauts to the ISS, is getting its 2nd (or 3rd depending on who is counting) to getting its green light. I haven't been following it too much but if successful it would multiple the capability of the US. Realistically, probably not because I think the NASA has already adjusted to only having SpaceX to get to the ISS. Starliner will be a redundancy that's unlikely to be ever used.

If you don't remember Starliner, it's first test failed to reach its target orbit. The second test never got to launch, bad weather and putting a valve in a bad spot - the capsule basically went bad on the pad. Computer issues should be fixed. They made the capsule more serviceable, and the weather is clear. Hopefully this launch goes as planned.

- - - Updated - - -

And Starliner's flight is a success willing no unforeseen fluke happens. Crewed fight should be in the Fall.

[plz delete account]

Hey Boeing actually did a thing

[CmdrShep2154]

Who knew President Bartlet or to some, the "Illusive Man" was a big promoter of 90s commercial space!

[XDurionX]

You really need to pay better attention if you think Musk is solely responsible for pushing space flight forward.

..or implying that he hasn't always been a weirdo susceptible to conspiracy bullshit.

[PACOX]

Update on SLS.

Its back on the launch pad having another go at its WDR (wet dress rehearsal). That's when they load the rocket full of fuel and simulate a launch.


NASA is calling the WDR a success, getting to within 29 seconds of an actual launch if they were doing a real one. There's an asterisks though. They wanted to get within 9 seconds of launch but missed that mark due to a hydrogen leak. It must not be a huge issue because they still view the rehearsal as successful. If the same thing happened on a real launch they would have just launched the next day, that kind of leak is usually easy to fix if they don't have a burn off system already in place.

So maybe we'll get to see a launch before 2022 is over???

[cubby]

You really need to pay better attention if you think Musk is solely responsible for pushing space flight forward.

You really, really need to get over your ridiculous and illogical bias towards Musk. You've been categorically wrong on a number of issues centering around Musk and SpaceX's objective achievements.

- - - Updated - - -

Update on SLS.

Its back on the launch pad having another go at its WDR (wet dress rehearsal). That's when they load the rocket full of fuel and simulate a launch.


NASA is calling the WDR a success, getting to within 29 seconds of an actual launch if they were doing a real one. There's an asterisks though. They wanted to get within 9 seconds of launch but missed that mark due to a hydrogen leak. It must not be a huge issue because they still view the rehearsal as successful. If the same thing happened on a real launch they would have just launched the next day, that kind of leak is usually easy to fix if they don't have a burn off system already in place.

So maybe we'll get to see a launch before 2022 is over???

Super exciting if they can get off the ground this year. Having only one viable source for LEO is not good.

[Osmeric]

Super exciting if they can get off the ground this year. Having only one viable source for LEO is not good.

SLS isn't viable even if they can launch it. It's simply too expensive.

[PACOX]

Super exciting if they can get off the ground this year. Having only one viable source for LEO is not good.

SLS is the giant Moon rocket. The LEO project is Starliner, which went up about a month back. It was successful and might take people up to LEO by the end of year


More news:

Also SpaceX recently got the approval it needs to go forward with an orbital test of Starship.

- - - Updated - - -

SLS isn't viable even if they can launch it. It's simply too expensive.

What?

NASA's in-house rockets will always be expensive and overbudget. They aren't even trying to be commercially viable. That's just the nature of pioneering endeavors. The plan is and always been for SLS missions to law the foundation for returning people to the Moon. SLS establishing the foundation then more commercial entities like SpaceX take over.

SLS is viable as long as it can safely transport an expedition to the Moon.

[Osmeric]

What?

NASA's in-house rockets will always be expensive and overbudget. They aren't even trying to be commercially viable. That's just the nature of pioneering endeavors. The plan is and always been for SLS missions to law the foundation for returning people to the Moon. SLS establishing the foundation then more commercial entities like SpaceX take over.

SLS is viable as long as it can safely transport an expedition to the Moon.

No, it's not viable, since any program based on such an expensive rocket is necessarily a dead end. It would be better for the country to have no human space program than to have one based on SLS.

[cubby]

SLS is the giant Moon rocket. The LEO project is Starliner, which went up about a month back. It was successful and might take people up to LEO by the end of year


More news:

Also SpaceX recently got the approval it needs to go forward with an orbital test of Starship.

I do keep getting those switched around in my mind. Thanks for the clarification. I am glad that we'll have more soon-to-be-crew capable launch platforms available.

The news about Starship is exciting.

SLS establishing the foundation then more commercial entities like SpaceX take over.

How does SLS being success establish the foundation, when SpaceX already did it? I'm not quite following your thinking here. Help me out.

SLS is viable as long as it can safely transport an expedition to the Moon.

Will be amazing if we can ever get back there. IIRC, one of the bigger "sub" issues is getting better suits, and that ship is still at the dock, right?

[Osmeric]

By you logic all space flight is too expensive. Not buying it. Deep space exploration doesn’t come cheap unless you don’t care about safety.

Nonsense. A space program based on much more economical launchers could support activities in space that actually pay their way. Growing those activities and delivering value to society is sustainable, just like terrestrial research and industry are sustainable.

SLS is so hideously expensive that nothing that one can do with it delivers value that justifies the expense of having done it. Unless the thing that one does is "deliver pork to particular kickback providing constituents".

[cubby]

Well this is an embarrassing post. The SLS isn’t about LEO, it’s for deep space exploration. Its first manned mission is scheduled to be to the moon. And it isn’t built by Musk. Soooo, no, he’s not solely responsible for pushing space flight forward.

Awwwww, look at you trying so hard, copying what other people said, and not addressing any of your bigger problems.

See the news about how racist Tesla is? It’s so bad they force arbitration due to the numerous issues.

You're just so desperate for this to be about something other than the thread topic, aren't you.

[Unholyground]

Someone needs to turn a mountain into a gigantic coil gun and launch ships into space that way. They will be much closer to space and it would probably cost a lot less fuel.

[cubby]

Nonsense. A space program based on much more economical launchers could support activities in space that actually pay their way. Growing those activities and delivering value to society is sustainable, just like terrestrial research and industry are sustainable.

SLS is so hideously expensive that nothing that one can do with it delivers value that justifies the expense of having done it. Unless the thing that one does is "deliver pork to particular kickback providing constituents".

Also, unless the thing that you do is "go into space". We're no where near the point, even with SpaceX being wildly successful in every single area, where space flight is becoming "economical". All we're doing now is making is less "totally fucking expensive".

Although, SpaceX has made the cost of going into space an order of magnitude less expensive. So it's getting better.

[cubby]

Someone needs to turn a mountain into a gigantic coil gun and launch ships into space that way. They will be much closer to space and it would probably cost a lot less fuel.

I read a fictional story about launching a large craft from Earth into "above LEO" using small nuclear detonations. It was based on a theoretical idea, though. I like your rail/coil gun better though.

[PACOX]

No, it's not viable, since any program based on such an expensive rocket is necessarily a dead end. It would be better for the country to have no human space program than to have one based on SLS.

Youre telling me that you don't know much about the the objectives of the rocket or the Artemis program.

Your definition of 'viability' makes no sense in regards to the rocket or the program.

Again the purpose of the the rocket is to reestablish our presence on the Moon and then commercial companies will follow. Your definition only applies if it's the only part of the program or some long term solutions. SLS is everything but those things. It's not intended to be flown but a handful of times, afters you'll see vehicles like Starship take over.