Quantcast
SpaceX - Grasshopper 325m Test - Beyond.ca - Car Forums
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 37

Thread: SpaceX - Grasshopper 325m Test

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    Tesla Model 3 AWD
    Posts
    439
    Rep Power
    0

    Default SpaceX - Grasshopper 325m Test

    Pretty sweet video of spacex rocket launching then landing back on the pad vertically.

    Current rockets are all single use which is a huge waste and isn't feasible for regular transportation, spacex wants to create a rapidly reusable rocket to power interstellar space travel. Step one would be to land these rockets.


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    6,794
    Rep Power
    16

    Default

    ...
    Last edited by Sugarphreak; 07-21-2019 at 12:42 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    west side
    Posts
    342
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    pretty cool

    Originally posted by Sugarphreak
    That is pretty amazing


    That said, it would need twice as much fuel... which means the rocket needs to be a lot bigger, and thus more expensive. Hard to say if it would be cost effective.
    good point, but i'm sure these were some of the first calculations they did.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Home of the Flames beaotch
    My Ride
    the bandwagon!
    Posts
    2,533
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    So wouldn't this come down to the huge cost benefit failure!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    Tesla Model 3 AWD
    Posts
    439
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    For sure this would be cost effective. The current rockets that are used are complete wasted after every use. Imagine flying a plane to wherever and afterwards they throw away the plane.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    6,794
    Rep Power
    16

    Default

    ...
    Last edited by Sugarphreak; 07-21-2019 at 12:42 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    S.E. (not the drrty south)
    My Ride
    Natural gas, and natural gas accessories
    Posts
    7,495
    Rep Power
    42

    Default

    Originally posted by Sugarphreak
    I thought they were just run by billionare playboy idiots who do whatever they want to be honest
    You're being WAY too cynical about this. The entire world has gotten too "cost effective". That's why NASA isn't doing much these days compared to the past. If it wasn't for these billionaire playboy "idiots", there'd be no chance of future space travel.

    Innovation isn't cost effective.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Parked in Baygirl's garage.
    My Ride
    2019 F150 Lariat 3.5L BOOST!
    Posts
    4,362
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Originally posted by Tik-Tok


    You're being WAY too cynical about this. The entire world has gotten too "cost effective". That's why NASA isn't doing much these days compared to the past. If it wasn't for these billionaire playboy "idiots", there'd be no chance of future space travel.

    Innovation isn't cost effective.
    agreed.

    Innovation has slowed WAY down, and these contests are the only thing keeping things advancing.

    Back in the 50s and 60s, with the space race and world wars, technology was forced to grow in leaps and bounds in the fears someone would be out paced and thus at a disadvantage in the event of war.

    I say, keep these space x type challenges going!
    Boosted life tip #329
    Girlfriends cost money
    Turbos cost money
    Both make whining noises
    Make the smart choice.

    Originally posted by Mibz
    Always a fucking awful experience seeing spikers. Extra awful when he laps me.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    AB
    My Ride
    16' Tacoma Offroad
    Posts
    1,540
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    We honestly need another war to progress any further from the public sector.

    Nothing advances civilization like a good old war between super powers!

    When I first saw this video awhile back I didnt read the point of it, I thought nothing of it, but its really neat what they are going after. And there's a lot less failures than the Russian programs lol

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    west side
    Posts
    342
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    innovation hasnt slowed down, We've had rovers on Mars for 10 years. Just because we're not shooting people up for photo ops in the space station doesn't mean we're not making scientific progress. Truth is that manned space flight is an outdated and passť concept. Same thing is happening with military aircraft and drone technology.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Parked in Baygirl's garage.
    My Ride
    2019 F150 Lariat 3.5L BOOST!
    Posts
    4,362
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    yes, rovers for the past 10 years. All that is, is a radio controlled car with a really good transmitter and receiver to learn about rocks. While the feat itself is impressive, and I don't mean to make light of it, but it is not innovative.

    people going to the space station or the moon are almost monthly occurrences now.

    Manned flight and space flight and switching to drones are not innovative either, it is just the logical next step. there is nothing ground breaking nor innovative.

    Lets face it, fighterjets around the world are 40+ years old, with the exception of a couple.

    The only "innovative" things I have seen, are deep space probes and and japanese sperm collection devices in hospitals. Kidding aside, the possible discovery of the higgs boson at CERN is the only real innovative discovery in who knows how long.

    The days of lasers, space elevators, super and hyper sonic flight, space travel, etc...they have all stalled. We need something big to happen, we need to make progress. the status quo is boring!
    Boosted life tip #329
    Girlfriends cost money
    Turbos cost money
    Both make whining noises
    Make the smart choice.

    Originally posted by Mibz
    Always a fucking awful experience seeing spikers. Extra awful when he laps me.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    west side
    Posts
    342
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    i could waste my time writing about how everything you're just typed is wrong, but thankfully i've learned not to argue with the Beyond Science Experts.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Parked in Baygirl's garage.
    My Ride
    2019 F150 Lariat 3.5L BOOST!
    Posts
    4,362
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Originally posted by FixedGear
    i could waste my time writing about how everything you're just typed is wrong, but thankfully i've learned not to argue with the Beyond Science Experts.
    you've*
    Boosted life tip #329
    Girlfriends cost money
    Turbos cost money
    Both make whining noises
    Make the smart choice.

    Originally posted by Mibz
    Always a fucking awful experience seeing spikers. Extra awful when he laps me.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    west side
    Posts
    342
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    thanks

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    Tesla Model 3 AWD
    Posts
    439
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by Sugarphreak
    I thought they were just run by billionare playboy idiots who do whatever they want to be honest

    Wouldn't a more obvious way to go be to have rockets that disconnect from the main occupant area and parachute to the ground?

    In the industry of space travel, weight is a major factor because it exponentially increases the amount of fuel you need. Why would you pack twice as much fuel as required causing your rocket design to be way larger and use far more energy for the trip, just so you can land using rocket power instead of parachutes?

    Don't get me wrong, it is really cool they can do that, but there is no way this is cost effective. It is a hair brain idea powered by people who have no limits financially.
    There are major benefits to creating rapidly reusable rockets. Your idea is interesting but I don't know how you can say with any confidence that it is not cost effective.

    This type of 'it can't be done' kind of thinking is what separates you from Elon Musk. The reason why he has no limits financially is because he isn't afraid to think outside the box and execute on those ideas.



    Originally posted by spikers


    I say, keep these space x type challenges going!
    I think you may be confusing spacex with the x prize.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Parked in Baygirl's garage.
    My Ride
    2019 F150 Lariat 3.5L BOOST!
    Posts
    4,362
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    not really, I know there are a few different ones out there, hence the space x type comment.
    Boosted life tip #329
    Girlfriends cost money
    Turbos cost money
    Both make whining noises
    Make the smart choice.

    Originally posted by Mibz
    Always a fucking awful experience seeing spikers. Extra awful when he laps me.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    D40/ED9/R6
    Posts
    1,103
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Very cool stuff, I love seeing rocket launches.
    "Anarchism is not a romantic fable but the hardheaded realization, based on five thousand years of experience, that we cannot entrust the management of our lives to kings, priests, politicians, generals, and county commissioners."

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    west side
    Posts
    342
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by supe


    There are major benefits to creating rapidly reusable rockets. Your idea is interesting but I don't know how you can say with any confidence that it is not cost effective.

    This type of 'it can't be done' kind of thinking is what separates you from Elon Musk. The reason why he has no limits financially is because he isn't afraid to think outside the box and execute on those ideas.
    clearly, and with all due respect, sugarphreak has no idea wtf he's talking about.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    '01 B15 Sentra & '10 C11X Versa 6Sp 5Dr
    Posts
    971
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    Originally posted by spikers

    people going to the space station or the moon are almost monthly occurrences now.
    Space station sure at ~6 months or so, but we haven't had an official manned landing on the moon since 1972. The US put men on the moon for 3 years and haven't done so since. This space stuff is quite interesting in terms of exploration and military advancements. I could see the major world powers trying to put military stuff on the moon, especially with the recent havoc that a meteor caused in Russia. Just think, an arsenal of fairly destructive weapons that's currently undetectable. Satellites, lens and sensor improvements have made hiding stuff on the Earth's surface rather difficult, but if you're got stuff hidden where no one else can get to you've got quite an advantage. I'm kinda surprised SpaceX is allowed to work on rockets like this. Space stuff can be very serious business with the rocket technology involved. Definitely wouldn't want other countries getting a hold of these rockets or even the plans for them and strapping a nuke to them.
    Someday we may need to activate the halo structure off Deerfoot and destroy the North East.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    My Ride
    GLC43
    Posts
    8,538
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Originally posted by Sugarphreak
    Don't get me wrong, it is really cool they can do that, but there is no way this is cost effective. It is a hair brain idea powered by people who have no limits financially.
    Parachute means it needs to land in water to be reusable. As we learn from the Space Shuttle, the cost of retrofitting boosters reliably after recover from sea water is almost like building a new one from scratch. Crafts recovered from sea is hardly "reusable" as turn around time is way too high.

    Fuel is cheap, you just fill it up. The man hours and material needed to build the craft is astronomical compared to the fuel. So if VTVL can be done reliably, you will cut time down time = lower cost. Same theory is already proven in the airline industry.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. SpaceX falcon 9 barge test

    By nzwasp in forum Society / Law / Current Events / Politics
    Replies: 9
    Latest Threads: 05-06-2016, 07:23 AM
  2. SpaceX 'Splosion.

    By ZenOps in forum Society / Law / Current Events / Politics
    Replies: 2
    Latest Threads: 06-30-2015, 08:49 AM
  3. Spacex Falcon1 successfully launches satellite

    By alloroc in forum Society / Law / Current Events / Politics
    Replies: 4
    Latest Threads: 07-16-2009, 01:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •