I would look at the Moon as a stepping stone. Go there first, build a nice size settlement then off to Mars
News SpaceX heavy-lift vehicles: Launch Thread
- Thread starter XCV330
- Start date
I would look at the Moon as a stepping stone. Go there first, build a nice size settlement then off to Mars
There could be some good economic reasons for the moon. And its not impossible that low grav could be beneficial for the elderly or people with certain heart problems. The only way to know for certain is to try, though.
Now it looks like Starship/SuperHeavy will be good for 220 tons…
A lovely Falcon side view
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2022/07...link-satellites-in-second-flight-in-two-days/
Time-lapse flight
https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/zuunzy/timelapse_of_a_falcon_9_rocket_taking_off_over_la/
Five years?
https://www.space.com/spacex-falcon-heavy-first-launch-fifth-anniversary
A lovely Falcon side view
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2022/07...link-satellites-in-second-flight-in-two-days/
Time-lapse flight
https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/zuunzy/timelapse_of_a_falcon_9_rocket_taking_off_over_la/
Five years?
https://www.space.com/spacex-falcon-heavy-first-launch-fifth-anniversary
Last edited:
That is like lifting ISS in about two launches.
Well that's a good thing isn't it?
I suppose. The fewer launches it takes the less pollution and cost, and I am sure there are other benefits I don't know about.
Google says... The International Space Station (ISS) took 10 years and more than 30 missions to assemble. It is the result of unprecedented scientific and engineering collaboration among five space agencies representing 15 countries.
Google says... The International Space Station (ISS) took 10 years and more than 30 missions to assemble. It is the result of unprecedented scientific and engineering collaboration among five space agencies representing 15 countries.
If they can do weight the size of ISS in two launches imagine the kind of structures that we can build, assuming we have the will to do that and don't drag our species into another war.
Agreed. SPSS/Sunshades.
There was a concept many years ago called an Orbital Antenna Farm.
(Sad acronym—OAF—I know).
Imagine an all truss ISS with big parabolic dishes sprouting all over.
Globis was another, similar HLLV launched comsat:
http://www.astronautix.com/g/globis.html
The idea was to have a few large comsats high up (and far from ASATs to boot)—rather than many sats in LEO. Higher latency, yes—-but less a Kessler syndrome waiting to happen.
An Orbital Antenna Farm could also double as a solar powersat and maybe even start life as a solar electric tug to move heavy objects out of LEO over time…fewer large assets would not hamper astronomy…esp if you are looking for fast movers that could be asteroid threats zipping by.
But nobody ever listen to Zathras…
There was a concept many years ago called an Orbital Antenna Farm.
(Sad acronym—OAF—I know).
Imagine an all truss ISS with big parabolic dishes sprouting all over.
Globis was another, similar HLLV launched comsat:
http://www.astronautix.com/g/globis.html
The idea was to have a few large comsats high up (and far from ASATs to boot)—rather than many sats in LEO. Higher latency, yes—-but less a Kessler syndrome waiting to happen.
An Orbital Antenna Farm could also double as a solar powersat and maybe even start life as a solar electric tug to move heavy objects out of LEO over time…fewer large assets would not hamper astronomy…esp if you are looking for fast movers that could be asteroid threats zipping by.
But nobody ever listen to Zathras…
Last edited:
It's Zathras and yes Zathras full of ideas but no one listen to Zathras till it too late
At the time though no one realized how important low latency was going to be. The big antenna farms in geo or elsewhere high up would be fine for voice, but anyone who has had the joy of using Hughesnet or some other geosat internet can attest, it's the last option before dial-up.
And non-voip voice just isn't a big enough justification for that kind of investment. I don't see LEO getting less crowded. If anything cheaper launches are going to just mean a new industry has to finally develop for LEO debris clearance. I could see Starship being used as a "You Only Live Twice" kind of debris grabber. It has to play the dramatic music every time it "Eats" another spacecraft, though.
OK, that's funny.
Every time the decommissioning of the ISS has come up online in the past decade or two, there has been someone to suggest – why not simply move it to the moon instead? Of course, the idea is just ridiculous, because that would be more than half the delta-V cost of launching half of a new ISS, and in many ways it does not compute.
But, see, uh, I'm not ignorant of that, but I always felt that... there had to be a way to avoid the complete destruction of a piece of space history, and prolong its life, making the ridiculous person sound like the more sensible. And the reason it pained me more – I thought in the future space will become easier, a hundred years from now, I'm thinking, they'd simply launch an array of thrusters and move it, then get the thrusters back.
And now, if Starship flies, and its re-usability works, kind of validates that earlier. Sure, you still couldn't move the ISS with it, because the whole thing would probably break apart. Or if there's a way to not break it apart, the logistics are still way too damn hard. Yet, just on the delta-V budget side, there's progress.
I should say was, as SpaceX are putting together advancements in all fields of technologies since the moon landings to do that. Being able to simulate the whole thing on a desktop computer first, then 3D print part of the engines simply wasn't possible in the 60s, and let's not forget material science.
if they could have ever gotten VASIMR running by now a propulsion module like that could have slowly gotten ISS to a high parking orbit where it would be safe for the next few hundred years. I agree. it is a shame to let the biggest peace-time international endeavor just fall into the ocean like trash. Someone would have to foot the bill of course, and that's where it gets dicey. Will all the partners agree to that? Russia has been threatening to detach their side and go it alone.
If Japan wanted to save their module for posterity they could detatch and use a final HTV X1 to boost it a bit if NASA let it go with one of the nodes, though not enough to keep it from being a recurring problem a few years down the road, I think. Oddly, I think Kibo + a US Node tended by the occasional HTV might make an interesting crew-tended mini station. Won't happen, of course.
OMG imagine all the drama if all nations involved detach their modules, for posterity 
Bond predicted this!OMG imagine all the drama if all nations involved detach their modules, for posterity
-------------------------
Quoted for context:
I am sorry, there seems to be some confusion. What is funny? Are you doubting it can lift that much?
If you are suggesting I am suggesting that, I am not. I was responding to the following post...
I do not follow how I am suggesting the ISS be moved to the Moon?
--------------------
Shouldn't the question be, which is less expensive; boosting ISS higher, and how much time does that add to it's lifespan? Or, how much to build from scratch and launch to higher orbit to begin with, and what is expected life span?
LOL at clip of Moonraker, worst Bond movie ever
This was in @YellowSubmarine suggestion that ISS be saved for posterity. Due to issues like metal fatigue (not to mention that new and interesting kinds of bacteria are evolving aboard it) , aging design, etc, it will eventually run out of lifespan. Unity and Zarya were launched in 98, IIRC, and Zarya and Zvezda were built much earlier than that) It will be time to retire it, eventually.
Sorry, I did not mean to suggest in any way you yourself said something funny (and in a negative way), let alone that you suggested the ISS to be moved to the Moon. I just meant to say that advancements in science and technology across the board, leading to advancement in private space launch as culminating in SpaceX Starship, are making things once truly silly look less and less silly as time goes on. Sometimes you don't even know what you can do when you put all the pieces together.
A reusable rocket with the proposed payload, and the price of 2.2 million USD for a launch that Elon has been hoping to achieve, looks a little bit unreal.
Last edited:
One thing I hope NASA considers, either with Starship, or as an add-on flight to Artemis, is 2020 XL5. Earlier during the Obama administration there had been a plan to visit a Near Earth Asteroid. At the time only one Earth Trojan had been found, and its orbital inclination was too high to make the mission doable. The most recent has a closer inclination (about 13 degrees) that might make it within reach for SLS/Artemis and definitively for Starship. (would essentially combine that with a Venus flyby.. whoever flew it would be in the history books.)
While this is a small rock, depending on its content, it might even prove economically viable to mine.
While this is a small rock, depending on its content, it might even prove economically viable to mine.
If the ISS falls to Earth with these bacteria onboard is there any health risk?
