Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(YouTube)   NASA teleconference live at 4PM EST to make an announcement on the human landing system project. Rumors are that SpaceX is the only winner. This should be a blast   (youtube.com) divider line
    More: Live  
•       •       •

201 clicks; posted to STEM » and Discussion » on 16 Apr 2021 at 3:50 PM (3 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



38 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-04-16 3:51:30 PM  
 
2021-04-16 3:52:37 PM  

khitsicker: https://www.washingtonpost.com/techno​l​ogy/2021/04/16/nasa-lunar-lander-contr​act-spacex/?fbclid=IwAR32st2mhJ0mv7QYa​Ebk6LXRj6mffFWbjUBBjFVsXm6cKa4JlO_wX8b​hUsE

Sauce from the WP. Its boom time.


memegenerator.netView Full Size
 
2021-04-16 3:53:51 PM  
Bit of a foregone conclusion then innit?
 
2021-04-16 3:58:20 PM  
Nice that wapo can use their boss getting turned down for this into a scoop.
 
2021-04-16 4:02:04 PM  

Wanebo: Nice that wapo can use their boss getting turned down for this into a scoop.


I hadn't thought of that lol
 
2021-04-16 4:03:17 PM  

reveal101: Bit of a foregone conclusion then innit?


Seems so. What was that thing about "lowest cost contractor"?
 
2021-04-16 4:07:26 PM  
Doesn't this whole presentation come off, rather unpleasantly, like a reality TV show?
 
2021-04-16 4:09:45 PM  
Good for SpaceX
 
2021-04-16 4:10:53 PM  
i.redd.itView Full Size


/haters gonna hate
 
2021-04-16 4:15:29 PM  

tuxq: [i.redd.it image 542x540]

/haters gonna hate


Is he a great man? I think that's pretty undebatable. Is he a good man? Maybe not so much...
 
2021-04-16 4:15:39 PM  
I admit, I kinda laughed when they said they successfully proved their automated vertical landing system on the Starship.
 
2021-04-16 4:19:41 PM  
Shame, I thought the Dynetics lander was really well thought out.  IMHO this is one SpaceX should have lost, but my guess is that since they could only pick one (thought it was supposed to be two?) they would take the one that's going anyway and work around the serious problems Starship has as a lander.
 
2021-04-16 4:23:02 PM  
Well I'm quite surprised. I realize that Starship has both a simpler system and much lower expected cost but I really thought they'd go with the National Team lander due to their overwhelming experience and more conventional system.

It's especially surprising since they are only choosing one. Starship seems like a bit of a risk given that it requires a launch vehicle that does not yet exist, needs in-orbit refueling that hasn't been demonstrated, and (aside from Dragon) their experience in everything else is quite limited.
 
2021-04-16 4:27:55 PM  

falkone32: Well I'm quite surprised. I realize that Starship has both a simpler system and much lower expected cost but I really thought they'd go with the National Team lander due to their overwhelming experience and more conventional system.

It's especially surprising since they are only choosing one. Starship seems like a bit of a risk given that it requires a launch vehicle that does not yet exist, needs in-orbit refueling that hasn't been demonstrated, and (aside from Dragon) their experience in everything else is quite limited.


Part of speculation I saw is leaning to the fact the Congress didn't get NASA enough money so they had to go with the cheaper option. SpaceX was around 2-2.5 billion, Blue Origin was 3-4 billion and Dynetics was ~5 billion in costs.
 
2021-04-16 4:29:38 PM  

falkone32: Well I'm quite surprised. I realize that Starship has both a simpler system and much lower expected cost but I really thought they'd go with the National Team lander due to their overwhelming experience and more conventional system.

It's especially surprising since they are only choosing one. Starship seems like a bit of a risk given that it requires a launch vehicle that does not yet exist, needs in-orbit refueling that hasn't been demonstrated, and (aside from Dragon) their experience in everything else is quite limited.


I'm sure there are multiple points in the contract that NASA can bail if SpaceX isn't meeting milestones. I think the big win for them is that they can use the technology here in many other things as its a very flexable launch system, where they other systems had a more limited ability scale.
 
2021-04-16 4:47:50 PM  

falkone32: Well I'm quite surprised. I realize that Starship has both a simpler system and much lower expected cost but I really thought they'd go with the National Team lander due to their overwhelming experience and more conventional system.

It's especially surprising since they are only choosing one. Starship seems like a bit of a risk given that it requires a launch vehicle that does not yet exist, needs in-orbit refueling that hasn't been demonstrated, and (aside from Dragon) their experience in everything else is quite limited.


True, but then again: no lunar-capable launch vehicle exists anywhere; orbital refueling--a problem to be solved right across the field--needs to be solved; and SpaceX's experience in satellite and manned missions has been proved.

I would have thought they would have gone for the "National Team" simply because of the pork, though.
 
2021-04-16 4:48:21 PM  

reveal101: tuxq: [i.redd.it image 542x540]

/haters gonna hate

Is he a great man? I think that's pretty undebatable. Is he a good man? Maybe not so much...


No. He will prolly be looked upon favorably but it is gonna depend on when and how he f*cks you. He's not as smart as he thinks he is plus, you've hopefully learned his method of asshole acting. Americans love his kind of crap so history will bend. I've already made 2 other assholes exactly like him rich for nothing and that influences my opinion which is not very nice. I am into SpaceX up to my neck but this is because of the people who are REALLY doing the work.

Corporate welfare that has been going directly into his pockets. Not as bad as the pharmaceutical industry but ....

Oh yes, he is a monumental asshole.
 
2021-04-16 4:52:48 PM  

psilocyberguy: I've already made 2 other assholes exactly like him rich for nothing and that influences my opinion which is not very nice.


I understand. It is occasionally difficult when username checks out.
 
2021-04-16 5:36:12 PM  

PartTimeBuddha:

True, but then again: no lunar-capable launch vehicle exists anywhere;

Uhhhh.. they most definitely do exist. That's one of the selling points of the ILV. Its components can launch individually on existing commercial vehicles or together aboard the SLS (which wouldn't happen due to cost and availability). There are multiple options for launching it while Starship can only ever launch with Super Heavy. Refueling is very important for Starship's ability to leave earth orbit but it's still an extra step that needs to be developed and tested. The National Team has all the experience SpaceX has and much much more.

MindStalker:I'm sure there are multiple points in the contract that NASA can bail if SpaceX isn't meeting milestones. I think the big win for them is that they can use the technology here in many other things as its a very flexable launch system, where they other systems had a more limited ability scale.

My concern is in meeting the 2024 deadline. If something unexpected happens and SpaceX can't deliver then NASA is stuck for a while. It would seem wiser to go with the more expensive but conservative system though I'm sure NASA knows what it's doing. This is definitely great for SpaceX as making Starship profitable will be a challenge.

Slives: Part of speculation I saw is leaning to the fact the Congress didn't get NASA enough money so they had to go with the cheaper option. SpaceX was around 2-2.5 billion, Blue Origin was 3-4 billion and Dynetics was ~5 billion in costs.


This seems very plausible.
 
2021-04-16 6:04:09 PM  

falkone32: overwhelming experience


Understand that in reality, no one has any experience; let alone overwhelming. The Apollo program ended 50 years ago, and although some entities would like to pretend that they have some kind of flight heritage due to the work of engineers done two generations back, the fact is that competency has been gone for decades. All three teams were working with a clean sheet design and engineers who have never built a crewed lunar lander. Any resemblance to the Apollo landers from a distance is purely visual.

The real kicker is that it seems SpaceX was the only option NASA could afford with their given funding which may ruffle some congressional feathers quite spectacularly.
 
2021-04-16 6:10:24 PM  
SpaceX is the only US company in the last 40 years to have developed and successfully used a new vehicle for getting humans into earth orbit (so far).
 
2021-04-16 6:15:10 PM  

PartTimeBuddha: Doesn't this whole presentation come off, rather unpleasantly, like a reality TV show?


So LeBron is going to SpaceX?
 
2021-04-16 6:16:29 PM  

Slives: falkone32: Well I'm quite surprised. I realize that Starship has both a simpler system and much lower expected cost but I really thought they'd go with the National Team lander due to their overwhelming experience and more conventional system.

It's especially surprising since they are only choosing one. Starship seems like a bit of a risk given that it requires a launch vehicle that does not yet exist, needs in-orbit refueling that hasn't been demonstrated, and (aside from Dragon) their experience in everything else is quite limited.

Part of speculation I saw is leaning to the fact the Congress didn't get NASA enough money so they had to go with the cheaper option. SpaceX was around 2-2.5 billion, Blue Origin was 3-4 billion and Dynetics was ~5 billion in costs.


Wish to the Moon?

/JohnWalker.jpg
 
2021-04-16 6:17:49 PM  

Sharkey's End: SpaceX is the only US company in the last 40 years to have developed and successfully used a new vehicle for getting humans into earth orbit (so far).


Only anything, company, US agency, you name it to do this. Bezos is gonna hate it, but until he is actually flying something, anything, it all sounds like a whiny billionaire sob story to me.

I actually liked the Dynetics bid the best. It seemed to be the most realistic.
 
2021-04-16 6:31:36 PM  

falkone32: PartTimeBuddha:

True, but then again: no lunar-capable launch vehicle exists anywhere;

Uhhhh.. they most definitely do exist. That's one of the selling points of the ILV. Its components can launch individually on existing commercial vehicles or together aboard the SLS (which wouldn't happen due to cost and availability). There are multiple options for launching it while Starship can only ever launch with Super Heavy. Refueling is very important for Starship's ability to leave earth orbit but it's still an extra step that needs to be developed and tested. The National Team has all the experience SpaceX has and much much more.

MindStalker:I'm sure there are multiple points in the contract that NASA can bail if SpaceX isn't meeting milestones. I think the big win for them is that they can use the technology here in many other things as its a very flexable launch system, where they other systems had a more limited ability scale.

My concern is in meeting the 2024 deadline. If something unexpected happens and SpaceX can't deliver then NASA is stuck for a while. It would seem wiser to go with the more expensive but conservative system though I'm sure NASA knows what it's doing. This is definitely great for SpaceX as making Starship profitable will be a challenge.

Slives: Part of speculation I saw is leaning to the fact the Congress didn't get NASA enough money so they had to go with the cheaper option. SpaceX was around 2-2.5 billion, Blue Origin was 3-4 billion and Dynetics was ~5 billion in costs.

This seems very plausible.


I don't honestly think either of the I other options could possibly have been ready by 2024 (not that I think starship will either)
 
2021-04-16 6:36:05 PM  

psilocyberguy: reveal101: tuxq: [i.redd.it image 542x540]

/haters gonna hate

Is he a great man? I think that's pretty undebatable. Is he a good man? Maybe not so much...

No. He will prolly be looked upon favorably but it is gonna depend on when and how he f*cks you. He's not as smart as he thinks he is plus, you've hopefully learned his method of asshole acting. Americans love his kind of crap so history will bend. I've already made 2 other assholes exactly like him rich for nothing and that influences my opinion which is not very nice. I am into SpaceX up to my neck but this is because of the people who are REALLY doing the work.

Corporate welfare that has been going directly into his pockets. Not as bad as the pharmaceutical industry but ....

Oh yes, he is a monumental asshole.


show me on this iphone where the capitalist touched you
 
2021-04-16 6:36:10 PM  

Glockenspiel Hero: Shame, I thought the Dynetics lander was really well thought out.  IMHO this is one SpaceX should have lost, but my guess is that since they could only pick one (thought it was supposed to be two?) they would take the one that's going anyway and work around the serious problems Starship has as a lander.


Starship doesn't need to do the 'death swoop' on Luna - no atmosphere, no heat shield needed, no atmospheric braking.

It can come in a lot more like a Falcon 9 booster, only with cold gas jets instead of grid fins.
 
2021-04-16 6:38:07 PM  

falkone32: Uhhhh.. they most definitely do exist. That's one of the selling points of the ILV. Its components can launch individually on existing commercial vehicles or together aboard the SLS (which wouldn't happen due to cost and availability). There are multiple options for launching it while Starship can only ever launch with Super Heavy. Refueling is very important for Starship's ability to leave earth orbit but it's still an extra step that needs to be developed and tested. The National Team has all the experience SpaceX has and much much more.


They most definitely don't. That's one of the non-buying poilt of the  ILV. There simply aren't the options. Putting a payload on top of a rocket isn't the same as putting a payload on top of a rocket designed to fly that payload.

The "National Team" is not yet good enough at its job.
 
2021-04-16 7:10:45 PM  

Nicholas D. Wolfwood: Glockenspiel Hero: Shame, I thought the Dynetics lander was really well thought out.  IMHO this is one SpaceX should have lost, but my guess is that since they could only pick one (thought it was supposed to be two?) they would take the one that's going anyway and work around the serious problems Starship has as a lander.

Starship doesn't need to do the 'death swoop' on Luna - no atmosphere, no heat shield needed, no atmospheric braking.

It can come in a lot more like a Falcon 9 booster, only with cold gas jets instead of grid fins.


I'm not worried about that, I'm worried about how damn tall it is.  Only way in or out is an elevator right now, and it would have to be a hell of a ladder or a winch as backup.

Dynetics lander was easy to step in and out, the hatch was almost at the surface.
 
2021-04-16 7:14:05 PM  

Glockenspiel Hero: Nicholas D. Wolfwood: Glockenspiel Hero: Shame, I thought the Dynetics lander was really well thought out.  IMHO this is one SpaceX should have lost, but my guess is that since they could only pick one (thought it was supposed to be two?) they would take the one that's going anyway and work around the serious problems Starship has as a lander.

Starship doesn't need to do the 'death swoop' on Luna - no atmosphere, no heat shield needed, no atmospheric braking.

It can come in a lot more like a Falcon 9 booster, only with cold gas jets instead of grid fins.

I'm not worried about that, I'm worried about how damn tall it is.  Only way in or out is an elevator right now, and it would have to be a hell of a ladder or a winch as backup.

Dynetics lander was easy to step in and out, the hatch was almost at the surface.


But the ability to get the amount of cargo the starship can bring to the moon will be essential if they want to build.
 
2021-04-16 7:23:55 PM  

psilocyberguy: reveal101: tuxq: [i.redd.it image 542x540]

/haters gonna hate

Is he a great man? I think that's pretty undebatable. Is he a good man? Maybe not so much...

No. He will prolly be looked upon favorably but it is gonna depend on when and how he f*cks you. He's not as smart as he thinks he is plus, you've hopefully learned his method of asshole acting. Americans love his kind of crap so history will bend. I've already made 2 other assholes exactly like him rich for nothing and that influences my opinion which is not very nice. I am into SpaceX up to my neck but this is because of the people who are REALLY doing the work.

Corporate welfare that has been going directly into his pockets. Not as bad as the pharmaceutical industry but ....

Oh yes, he is a monumental asshole.


Both of the competing companies have received far more government money than SpaceX. The National Team seemed to be designed around spreading the pork as widely across the country as possible, so I'm sure it has the most support from the politicians.
 
2021-04-16 9:16:26 PM  
"Lowest-Price Technically Acceptable" means that only the deepest pockets win.
 
2021-04-16 10:40:05 PM  

PartTimeBuddha: falkone32: Uhhhh.. they most definitely do exist. That's one of the selling points of the ILV. Its components can launch individually on existing commercial vehicles or together aboard the SLS (which wouldn't happen due to cost and availability). There are multiple options for launching it while Starship can only ever launch with Super Heavy. Refueling is very important for Starship's ability to leave earth orbit but it's still an extra step that needs to be developed and tested. The National Team has all the experience SpaceX has and much much more.

They most definitely don't. That's one of the non-buying poilt of the  ILV. There simply aren't the options. Putting a payload on top of a rocket isn't the same as putting a payload on top of a rocket designed to fly that payload.

The "National Team" is not yet good enough at its job.


I'm not even sure what you are trying to articulate nor your reason for thinking that your mystery point is true. Can you provide more information? Your initial statement of "no lunar-capable launch vehicle exists anywhere" is hilariously wrong on its own and just saying "Nuh uhhh!" isn't very compelling.
 
2021-04-16 11:31:00 PM  

falkone32: PartTimeBuddha: falkone32: Uhhhh.. they most definitely do exist. That's one of the selling points of the ILV. Its components can launch individually on existing commercial vehicles or together aboard the SLS (which wouldn't happen due to cost and availability). There are multiple options for launching it while Starship can only ever launch with Super Heavy. Refueling is very important for Starship's ability to leave earth orbit but it's still an extra step that needs to be developed and tested. The National Team has all the experience SpaceX has and much much more.

They most definitely don't. That's one of the non-buying poilt of the  ILV. There simply aren't the options. Putting a payload on top of a rocket isn't the same as putting a payload on top of a rocket designed to fly that payload.

The "National Team" is not yet good enough at its job.

I'm not even sure what you are trying to articulate nor your reason for thinking that your mystery point is true. Can you provide more information? Your initial statement of "no lunar-capable launch vehicle exists anywhere" is hilariously wrong on its own and just saying "Nuh uhhh!" isn't very compelling.


Given that NASA has selected the Falcon Heavy to fly the VIPER payload to the Moon seems like a clear rebuttal to that particular point.

But let's be fair.  It also seems pretty clear that he meant that no one currently has a *man-rated* rocket (and proven capsule) capable of carrying passengers to the Moon.

Which makes me wonder why Crew Dragon is incapable of at least a loop-around flyby of Luna - if it is in fact incapable of such a flight.

What's the limiting factor?  Life support consumables?  Instrumentation?  Communications?

If SpaceX is talking about making a modified Crew Dragon with the nose docking port replaced by a dome window for sightseeing trips, how practical would it be to make a 'stretch' variant of Crew Dragon capable of a round trip to the moon?

Note I am NOT proposing that Crew Dragon could land - just wondering what the engineering challenges would be to make it capable of an Apollo 8 style 'there and back again'.
 
2021-04-17 12:00:29 AM  
Nicholas D. Wolfwood:
Which makes me wonder why Crew Dragon is incapable of at least a loop-around flyby of Luna - if it is in fact incapable of such a flight.

What's the limiting factor?  Life support consumables?  Instrumentation?  Communications?

If SpaceX is talking about making a modified Crew Dragon with the nose docking port replaced by a dome window for sightseeing trips, how practical would it be to make a 'stretch' variant of Crew Dragon capable of a round trip to the moon?

Note I am NOT proposing that Crew Dra ...


My understanding when the Lunar fly-around tourist trip that was announced was quietly canceled that the main concerns were radiation (outside the Van Allen belts) and Falcon Heavy crew-rating. Maybe comms too.

Not incapable, but like Red Dragon, SpaceX chose to focus on Starship/Superheavy.
 
2021-04-17 12:07:35 AM  

Glockenspiel Hero: Nicholas D. Wolfwood: Glockenspiel Hero: Shame, I thought the Dynetics lander was really well thought out.  IMHO this is one SpaceX should have lost, but my guess is that since they could only pick one (thought it was supposed to be two?) they would take the one that's going anyway and work around the serious problems Starship has as a lander.

Starship doesn't need to do the 'death swoop' on Luna - no atmosphere, no heat shield needed, no atmospheric braking.

It can come in a lot more like a Falcon 9 booster, only with cold gas jets instead of grid fins.

I'm not worried about that, I'm worried about how damn tall it is.  Only way in or out is an elevator right now, and it would have to be a hell of a ladder or a winch as backup.

Dynetics lander was easy to step in and out, the hatch was almost at the surface.


i.kinja-img.comView Full Size


Yeah, that's not ideal
 
2021-04-17 8:49:17 AM  

arrogantbastich: Good for SpaceX


Public tax money is a wonderful thing.
 
2021-04-17 8:54:38 AM  

psilocyberguy: reveal101: tuxq: [i.redd.it image 542x540]

/haters gonna hate

Is he a great man? I think that's pretty undebatable. Is he a good man? Maybe not so much...

No. He will prolly be looked upon favorably but it is gonna depend on when and how he f*cks you. He's not as smart as he thinks he is plus, you've hopefully learned his method of asshole acting. Americans love his kind of crap so history will bend. I've already made 2 other assholes exactly like him rich for nothing and that influences my opinion which is not very nice. I am into SpaceX up to my neck but this is because of the people who are REALLY doing the work.

Corporate welfare that has been going directly into his pockets. Not as bad as the pharmaceutical industry but ....

Oh yes, he is a monumental asshole.


I wouldnt go that far.

Corporate murca and its stock owners love public money.

Socialize the costs/liabilities
Privatize the profits.

Murca

"Socialist" bernie sanders would be so proud!
 
Displayed 38 of 38 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.