• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
TO INFINITY AND BEYOND!

.Detective.

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,687
SpaceX, the rocket company founded by Elon Musk in 2002, is steamrolling toward its first-ever rocket launch of people into orbit.

The NASA-funded commercial mission is called Demo-2 and will fly two passengers: seasoned NASA astronauts Bob Behnken and Doug Hurley.

If all goes according to plan, the team will lift off inside the company's new Crew Dragon spaceship at 4:33 p.m. ET on Wednesday, in effect resurrecting human spaceflight from America after nearly a decade of dormancy. If the weather or other conditions don't cooperate, SpaceX's next chance to launch Demo-2 will be Saturday, May 30, at a similar time.
But before Demo-2's launch can happen, SpaceX needs to clear a number of final safety hurdles, and the company on Friday passed two of those penultimate steps.

"We are now preparing for a launch in five short days," NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine said during a televised press briefing on Friday, later adding: "We are a go."

The first milestone SpaceX achieved was a flight readiness review. Such pre-launch meetings are typically long, as stakeholders comb for any final issues and think of ways to reduce risk. When people are on the line, though, such reviews become even more painstakingly detailed.

Behnken and Hurley's mission has them docking to the International Space Station and living with a crew of three other people for up to 110 days, too. So Russia, Japan, and other member-states of the orbital outpost got a say in the decision to launch Demo-2 as well.

"Everybody in the room was very clear that now is the time to speak up if there are any challenges. And there were," Bridenstine said.

One apparently had to do with final discussions of an issue raised by members of Roscosmos. (The Russian space agency not only co-runs the space station with NASA, but also is — for now — the only way astronauts can reach the space station.)
Kirk Shireman, who manages the space station program at NASA's Johnson Space Center, said Roscosmos in 2019 made SpaceX aware of a "very, very remote possibility of a failure" with the Crew Dragon that might cause "catastrophic damage" when docking to the ISS.


"SpaceX said we understand, and we'll make a modification," Shireman added, noting the unspecified issue was resolved to Russia's satisfaction with the new Crew Dragon ship for Demo-2.

The meeting lasted nearly two workdays, but SpaceX came out the other end with permission.

www.businessinsider.com

'We are a go': SpaceX just cleared 2 huge hurdles toward its first rocket launch of NASA astronauts into space next week

SpaceX, founded by Elon Musk, passed a crucial pre-flight review and test-fired the Falcon 9 rocket that will launch two astronauts on Wednesday.

LIVE STREAM LINKS courtesy of Gashprex and gutshot

Streams are live.

SpaceX: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIZsnKGV8TE

NASA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21X5lGlDOfg

Twitch stream (for those who want to spam BlessRNG emotes later): https://www.twitch.tv/nasa

Yes - its going to be nuts. This is probably one of the biggest stories of the year.

Current view of the launchpad







And of course the best stream - SpaceX

 
Last edited:

Trey

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,088
Why did America privatize space exploration any way? Beyond being short sighted, these companies can only exist by being heavily subsidized by government contracts any way, so what's the point?
 

Weegian

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,733
Why did America privatize space exploration any way? Beyond being short sighted, these companies can only exist by being heavily subsidized by government contracts any way, so what's the point?
I think this is an early step toward realizing the plot of the movie Avatar.
 
OP
OP
.Detective.

.Detective.

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,687
They couldn't have come up with a better name than Demo-2?

Brave souls to be going up in a spacecraft aligned to a mission name that sounds like a Lab Test.

Wish them a safe and secure trip.
 

Jroc

Banned
Jun 9, 2018
6,145
Why did America privatize space exploration any way? Beyond being short sighted, these companies can only exist by being heavily subsidized by government contracts any way, so what's the point?

Stepping stone to commercial profitability.

Commercial satellite launches, private space stations, space mining, starlink, etc.

SpaceX doesn't have to deal as much with constantly changing leadership/goals/budgets compared to NASA.
 

Dekim

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,312
The relatively few years private space flight/exploration has been operating has done more to invigorate interest in space than the decades of slow-moving, handcuffed government bureaucracy that's NASA.
 

trembli0s

Member
Oct 28, 2017
228
it's the dumbest thing

BC it's expensive and bureaucracies are inefficient. SpaceX, BlueOrigin, etc. have done more with their private/public model than NASA has done in a LONG time. Part of that is that these government agencies are subject to the whims of the Executive branch and Congress and interest can wax and wane. A CEO is invested for the long-haul and wants to be successful bc the pay off is inordinately large if you can manage it. It's risky as fuck but Musk seems to have done it.
 

nekkid

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
21,823
Why did America privatize space exploration any way? Beyond being short sighted, these companies can only exist by being heavily subsidized by government contracts any way, so what's the point?

Because they're competitive with others, more flexible and dynamic than a public agency, and they can self-fund through private commercial operations. They're also more stable (the boss doesn't change every 4-8 years).

Studies have shown that NASA has saved billions by going this route.
 

Darknight

"I'd buy that for a dollar!"
Member
Oct 25, 2017
22,888
Why did America privatize space exploration any way? Beyond being short sighted, these companies can only exist by being heavily subsidized by government contracts any way, so what's the point?

I'm not sure that's true. There's a market for launching commercial satellites and by piggy backing on the privatization, it means they can leverage their infrastructure rather than having to maintain their own.
 

Dekim

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,312
Given how long it takes for an initiative to bear fruit, and given how often presidents and congress change hands, it is impossible for NASA to do any long term planning towards a goal in establishing humans in space beyond the ISS. I remember Bush giving NASA the initiative to establish a permanent presence on the moon. NASA already spent billion developing the hardware only for that moon base plan to be scrapped when Obama took office to fly to a nearby asteroid, a mission that has been altered and pared back constantly until it was a shadow of its initial proposal. Now, NASA has changed focus again with developing a "gateway" on the moon as a jump off point for deep space mission in the future. Given history, there is no way that plan survives whether Trump is re-elected or not.

Establishing a human presence in space beyong the ISS will take careful long-term planning that the US government just won't give to NASA.
 

SteveWinwood

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,698
USA USA USA
BC it's expensive and bureaucracies are inefficient. SpaceX, BlueOrigin, etc. have done more with their private/public model than NASA has done in a LONG time. Part of that is that these government agencies are subject to the whims of the Executive branch and Congress and interest can wax and wane. A CEO is invested for the long-haul and wants to be successful bc the pay off is inordinately large if you can manage it. It's risky as fuck but Musk seems to have done it.
yes those are things people claim are benefits
Because they're competitive with others, more flexible and dynamic than a public agency, and they can self-fund through private commercial operations. They're also more stable (the boss doesn't change every 4-8 years).

Studies have shown that NASA has saved billions by going this route.
wow they spend less money for things when they're not spending money for things that's crazy
 

DieH@rd

Member
Oct 26, 2017
10,611
This will be a must watch launch.

It should be at half past 10PM here in CET land if they don't delay it.
 

Peru

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,144
A little annoying Elon Musk has to be mentioned first in every Space X story. Pretty sure he's not involved in the daily business of the company. For one thing they announced strict corona isolation policies.
 

DrForester

Mod of the Year 2006
Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,743
Waiting for shitface to ruin this and blame Obama for ending American spaceflights and declare that he alone brought it back.


This is good thing though. Let private companies handle the mundane thing that NASA has done since the 60s and let NASA focus on new stuff.
 

Z-Beat

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
31,892
tenor.gif
 

Mobius 1

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,159
North Point, Osean Federation
Why did America privatize space exploration any way? Beyond being short sighted, these companies can only exist by being heavily subsidized by government contracts any way, so what's the point?

Low Earth Orbit flights are a solved problem, it's perfectly fine to privatize it in order to free up NASA resources for the larger efforts that carry too much risk and must be funded by the government, such as Moon exploration, asteroid and Mars missions, etc.
 

DrForester

Mod of the Year 2006
Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,743
Why did America privatize space exploration any way? Beyond being short sighted, these companies can only exist by being heavily subsidized by government contracts any way, so what's the point?

NASA is letting a private company take over, and do something NASA did in the 60s. They're just putting a man into low earth orbit. NASA will still be the one on the frontline doing new stuff.
 

papertowel

Member
Nov 6, 2017
2,023
This is the Commercial Crew Program finally bearing fruit. Commercial Crew really went full steam ahead at the direction of the Obama admin after seeing how behind schedule and over budget the Constellation Program was. Before that, NASA's plan was to send humans into orbit using the Ares-1, which is essentially a capsule riding a solid rocket motor from the shuttle era. Investigations found this to be an expensive death trap so it was abandoned in favor of commercial crew.

Its cost NASA 5 billion dollars to fund the development of two space capsules, Spacex's Dragon and Boeing's Starliner, while it would have cost over 30 billion to fund the Ares 1.

There were undoubtedly growing pains with this transition but I think in the long run it was the right move to make.

https://arstechnica.com/features/20...sas-move-to-commercial-space-has-saved-money/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Crew_Program
 

jotun?

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,509
Why did America privatize space exploration any way? Beyond being short sighted, these companies can only exist by being heavily subsidized by government contracts any way, so what's the point?
it's the dumbest thing
This approach has worked out better than anything since the Apollo era, as far as human spaceflight. The more-public programs have been FAR more grifty, as they've essentially been run by senators looking to pump money into their own states.
 

Crispy75

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,058
Why did America privatize space exploration any way? Beyond being short sighted, these companies can only exist by being heavily subsidized by government contracts any way, so what's the point?
It's much *much* cheaper.
arstechnica.com

The numbers don’t lie—NASA’s move to commercial space has saved money

“Together, we have become stronger for this nation.”
The old way of doing things was "cost plus" contracts, which meant NASA would pay whatever the contractor said it cost, plus extra for profit. This incentivised the contractor to milk NASA for as much money as it could get away with. The new commercial space contracts are fixed price.
NASA is letting a private company take over, and do something NASA did in the 60s. They're just putting a man into low earth orbit. NASA will still be the one on the frontline doing new stuff.
If only that were true. NASA's new rocket (SLS) is horrendously expensive and still does nothing new. It can just about put people into a high lunar orbit for a cost of $2bn per launch, no more often than twice a year. It is embarrassing.
SpaceX is on the frontline doing new stuff with their Starship programme. That has the potential to be truly revolutionary. There is a very strong possiblity that the next human on the moon will step out of SpaceX Starship while NASA's "lunar gateway" drifts by in high lunar orbit, empty and unused.

Musk is a champion asshole, but SpaceX is by far the most exciting thing in human spaceflight right now.
 
Jan 27, 2020
3,386
Washington, DC
Yep, I'm stoked for this launch. One nice thing about working from home is that I can watch it live this Wednesday. It's taken a while, but I feel like now we're finally turning the page from the shuttle program.
 

samoyed

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
15,191
I wish them luck, I just hope Musk doesn't tweet something dumb like "Rocket too high imo".
 

Crispy75

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,058
Oh it's a grift all right:

www.esquire.com

Elon Musk and the Grand Scheme That Tore Apart a Texas Town

SpaceX is dismantling a remote beach community in south Texas, one house at a time.
That article is not very well respected by some in Boca Chica:

SpaceX Boca Chica Property Acquisition

SpaceX Boca Chica Property Acquisition
"Yeah...The things she attributed to me are nonsense. I never even met the reporter. A few other residents have said that she fabricated just about everything they were quoted as saying."
 

nekkid

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
21,823
That article is not very well respected by some in Boca Chica:

SpaceX Boca Chica Property Acquisition

SpaceX Boca Chica Property Acquisition
"Yeah...The things she attributed to me are nonsense. I never even met the reporter. A few other residents have said that she fabricated just about everything they were quoted as saying."

Yeah I read that article was rife with bullshit, but I think it's fairly common knowledge that SpaceX are keen to get residents out of Boca Chica.
 

Gashprex

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,031
So this a go for tomorrow, weather conditions improving to 60%. Nobody around here seems to care though I guess?
 

Kill3r7

Member
Oct 25, 2017
24,505
Exciting stuff.

Why did America privatize space exploration any way? Beyond being short sighted, these companies can only exist by being heavily subsidized by government contracts any way, so what's the point?

Space exploration is only a fraction of the National budget and that is including these subsidies. Basically we went from spending between 4-5% of the National budget in 60s to around 0.5% today. FWIW, just to operate the ISS it costs around $8 million per day.