so spaceX develops the falcon 9 for around $300 million, but NASA calculates that it would have cost around $4 billion to develop the same thing. If NASA would change its approach to development then it would probably accomplish more without budget restraints, they're not very efficient. But then again what can you do with all the political bureaucracy getting in the way. Hopefully these commercial companies succeed!
They are gonna need a little more than good retro rockets to land them on Mars. Needs a super sonic parachute and possibly a wider inflatable heat shield. I wager that no earth-bound space capsule can survive a landing on Mars without many modifications.
SpaceX, your efforts are the best that could happen to the Space program. :D The governments don't have the money to run a land and pump the resources needed into space development. With commercial companies like SpaceX, we have the resources needed to develop better technology, and speed up everything a lot!
@BrettDunbar only via capitalism could you achieve the efficiency, lower cost and higher quality. If nasa was a private company, it wouldn't survive Its bloatware
It's amazing how fast Space X is doing this. At this rate, they'll have the heavy lifter built in no time. We'll see Americans orbiting the moon before the end of the decade if not sooner. And to think that people are saying that China is "winning" the space race. American free enterprise will beat China like it did the Soviet Union. All it takes is responsible people like Space X, and not the types that will sell their mother's house from under her just to make a buck. That's what's hurt us.
NASA estimated $35B for a capsule and launch system for the Constellation program and they have little to show for it but a first stage test launch. The Dragon spacecraft was developed from a blank sheet to the first demonstration flight in just over four years for about $300 million
NASA might not be making a profit, that doesnt mean they will be cheaper. NASA is bloated and inefficient. Private companies are far less costly even with a profit.
@phillyguy95 People make a profit by being efficient. Not something a government entity cares about. Profit is not a dirty word - you do know that right?
1. Assemble big vehicle in space with lots of water as shielding. Probably could be bags of water. Put into continual transfer orbit to mars. Doesn't need any propulsion.
2. Put station in orbit around mars.
3. Use small transfer vehicles to get from:
a. ISS to mars transfer station.
b. mars transfer station to mars orbit.
c. mars orbit to surface.
Every 26 months mars and earth align. So that would be the cycle frequency of trips. Probably half that time for a one way trip.
Govt tries to build Ares I for billions of dollars, only gets to a BS test with a 4 seg srb + paperweight on top and it didn't even come back in one piece! Spacex takes <0.5 billion sends up a real rocket twice and gets the capsule back. Spacex, the govt has lost its mandate to space, it's yours for the taking. Hope the bureaucrats let you combine COTS 2 and 3.
Every time we privatize something that we used to do for the common good, it costs more money than it should. This is because the profit motive is built into commercialization. Not a good thing for the US Space program.
Always the big promisses from SpaceX... it's all good so far since they've delivered. I have a hunch this will be no different. They're about to club Lockheed and Boeing over the head with better, more efficient technology than either competitor can presently produce on-time.
I wish you guys the best of luck with your program. I for one am really proud to see space exploration taken to a open public setting. Thank you for the inspiration that you've given me : )
@FreedomLiberty21 Its actually NASA and thereby the taxpayers that have funded some of the SpaceX developments which includes funding from NASA's COTS program and now the C3P.
Its not the beginnings of the private space industry. Firms like Lockheed Martin and Boeing are private companies and have monopolized the space industry for years.
SpaceX is a step away from the cost plus privately operated NASA funded programs like the Shuttle operated by USA and the Delta4 Heavy run by ULA.
I'm just saying that for the first time ever, we have companies like SpaceX whose sole profit motif is travel into space and rocketry. Lockheed Martin is a defense (or weapons) company (depending on how you look at them) and Boeing is primarily an aerospace company minus the space (generally speaking). They make planes, commercial planes, that's where a lot of their profit comes from.
@SquirrelFromGradLife Yeah both of them have monopolized the space industry but its good to see some competition coming into the field because, as we know, genuine competition brings about innovation and the acceleration of progress. That's the role SpaceX is fulfilling and they're only among the first of many "space companies"
@madcio If you dont subscribe to the LEO Shuttle boys then not going to the Moon before taking a shot at Mars is not really a problem...
and your crawl walk run analogy doesnt really work because in all fairness "we" are already running and the space industry is a mature business... The Moon have already been visited and the lessons learned there can be utilized when going to Mars..
Theres no problem with going to the Moon first, buts its irrelevant and a costly detour in the big picture.
""we" are already running and the space industry is a mature business... "
You are joking, RIGHT? If not, then you are completely out of touch. There IS reason for phrase "rockiet science" being synonymous with something insanely hard. Were crawling. Barely.
"its irrelevant "
It is very revelant for learning how to work, live and survive in space for LONG time. For now ISS learned us that we cannot fly to Mars with current tech. Something breaks on ISS way too often.
@madcio The space industry is a mature business and have been for many years.. Maybe not in Poland but in America priavte companies build and fly commercial rockets on a regular basis.
Going to Mars involves exactly the same dangers as going to the Moon. Going to the Moon become therefor an unnecessary step involving lots of politics and money which is hindering space exploration.
The billions spent on going to the Moon could be spent on actually going to Mars.
"The space industry is a mature business and have been for many years."
In context of manned mission of Mars it is NOT. NASA had big problems with going to moon again and you want Mars?
"Going to Mars involves exactly the same dangers as going to the Moon"
And 3 days versus few month in case of epergency, broken machinery or accident or whatever is completely neligible difference. Yeahhh riiight. Going to Moon is orders of magnitude safer and cheaper than going to Mars.
@madcio Your understanding of the definition of what constitutes a mature business is non-existent.
Your understanding of the risk involved or for the matter risk management is likewise non-existent.
Whether you're sitting on the launch pad like the Apollo 1 crew or days from earth like the Apollo 13 crew was completely irrelevant as history showed us. Its the design of the systems that determine the risk involved not the distance from earth.
You need to study some more and think things over.
I’m guessing, but the ballistic coefficient of Dragon would hit the surface of Mars before the vehicle slowed down enough to get supersonic parachutes open. You need an inflatable entry shield to increase drag at a high enough altitude to get chutes open as a secondary stage. Your key point about a powered descent using the escape engines seems valid. The biconic vehicles in the background on the Mars surface scene would work fine.
Ah...Space has no atmosphere, No wings needed. Also every spacecraft up to the shuttle had no wings. As someone who was around during the Apollo days, I'll take an Apollo command module over a shuttle any day. Saturn 5 was the largest booster ever built launching men to the Moon as well as Skylab. I for one will be glad when the shuttle ends. If we would of had the Saturn 5 and Apollo spacecraft we still could have built the ISS and gone to the Moon as well, all with the same rocket.
Dear Mr. Musk, due to orbital mechanics 2019 is an energetically favourable year in which to launch a human mission to Mars. Please get on that. Thanks!
@cristohv How can you even suggest that the first privately built spacecraft to orbit the earth and return safely to earth is poorly made?.. what is the rational for that?...you do know that Dragon is rated by NASA to take cargo to the ISS... can Virgin's Spaceship2 do that?... or even go into earth orbit? or even into outer space?...no...
@cristohv Yeah, I'm sure that's why the Virgin Galactic is a suborbital design optimized for atmospheric interaction - and still carries one fewer passenger than the Dragon. But sure, the glorified rocket plane is more impressive than the potentially powered and interplanetary capsule...^^
@IIZODIIAC SpaceX is profitable because they are not building government owned rockets. They are selling services but own all the ip themselves. Look at ULA and shuttle to see the difference in price.
@LonghornPhysicist As an employee of ATK you will know that ATK, Lockheed Martin and Boeing are tree of the most profitable companies just because they build and run government rockets.
As a funny reminder you should also know that ULA gets ONE BILLION dollars a year regardless if they make any launch or not. ULA have recently informed NASA of ricing prices and they are actually in a monopoly situation where they get cost plus contracts...
@Idiomatick I dont know if you're talking about SETI or SETI@home.. Two different things..But you're saying that the Search for ExtraTerrestrial Life are no longer searching for extraterrestrial life...
@Idiomatick Well thats the sad thing that happens when you leave republicans in power...someone has to come and clean up the mess they've made...and sadly the republicans wanted to cut even more in the federal budget but hand out even more money to the defense industry... the very people that pays politicians million yearly to buy them the old fashioned way...
@evinado1 You don't have to come back. There is a large push for a one way trip in which the explorers stay on Mars until they die of old age or until return capability is made.
@oisiaa Your suggestion of sending people to their death on a one way trip is pure madness especially when wa are perfectly capable of returning them safely to the earth just as Kennedy laid forth..
How is the Dragon supposed to reach Mars orbit insertion speed and then slow down to enter Mars orbit? Unless I'm grossly mistaken, there's no way the Dragon has enough delta-V to slow down and land on retro rockets from interplanetary speeds.
@FonduFyre For the delta-V to go to Mars you use Earth orbit rendezvous. This provides a way to get the needed mass in orbit to get a Dragon to Mars, using Falcon Heavy(s) to get them to LEO. In addition, you can reduce that mass by using High Isp/low thrust propulsion to send it there. Couple this with Mars Direct-style in-situ propellant generation and a Mars mission starts looking viable at costs that are not prohibitive.
@CombinatorialImplosi I think all of that is fairly straight forward (so to speak) but I'm more directly concerned with EDL. Everything that I've read says you're going to need some pretty fancy aerocapture, plus parachutes that don't yet exist and the retrorockets. Unless, of course you're going to double your fuel requirements by dropping into Mars orbit and then using the Dragon to descend to the surface.
That's why at 1:18 in the video you see a Space Barge with a dragon return/accent vehicle on it. The martian accent vehicle would then dock with a in martian orbit command vehicle which would burn for a return to earth.
It's the "Big Three" of space travel: SpaceX, Bigelow, and NASA (Lockheed-Martin). Hopefully the NASA one will be replaced with something truly private in the years to come.
@maximalyst0292 Wheres Orbital, ATK and Boeing in that equation? Boeing and Lockheed Marting have with the explicit permission from NASA created a monopolized situation, usually a bad thing, where any form of competition or price concerns are silenced. Their joint ventures like ULA (United Launch Alliance, Lockheed Martin and Boeing with the Delta 4 Heavy etc) and USA in conjunction with ATK (United Space Alliance with the Shuttle, ISS etc.) have sucked NASA dry for billions over the years.
Going to Mars in the Dragon capsule with an estimated journey of about eight months would be slightly uncomfortable... you would definitely need some kind of crew vehicle and cargo transport thing to make it happen..but I would definitely still go..
@SquirrelFromGradLife they could launch a nice flight quarters in a falcon heavy faring, or maybe even on a falcon 9. you link up in orbit, ride with it to mars, then leave it in martian orbit while you land.
@kaplanfx Yes the possibilities are endless.. But since its going to be NASA and not SpaceX that will control and finance the mission then other space contractors will most definitely get a piece of the action.
@MickAv8r interesting. well that way you dont have to worry about an ignition system. i wonder if they downselected on MMH/NTO from something else. Remember the MLAS, that was solids, but you couldnt do a controlled descent with a solid.
@captainofiron I suspect the fuel decision is whatever is cheapest that gets the job done. Its a known entity and doesn't need much R&D. BTW the landing on any solid surface sales pitch for this is neat, but in the vid it looks like a one way trip! LOL Does that system have the fuel and thrust to get off the surface again? Otherwise that idea is odd. MLAS worked but damn is it complicated and really heavy, it had what 40 different fairing seps and 129 parachutes? ;)
@Scia52 Ironically, some have estimated that it would be easier to go to Mars and back, because you have an atmosphere to slow you down.
A realistic timeline for the first manned moon mission would be -42 years. For a manned return, as few as 5 if they get started NOW, 10 for a less-ambitious return. (Remember, it only took 12 years from the first orbital unmanned spacecraft to a manned landing on the moon, and 8 years from first manned orbital spacecraft to manned landing on the moon.)
@nois3 Well I don't think we've ever had a craft return to earth from Mars. Anyone who we sent to Mars would probably be there for life, imagine spending the rest of your life locked away from civilisation.
@nois3 Biggest challenge is probably the time it takes to get to Mars. It takes about 2/3 of a year to get to Mars using chemical rockets, and you'll have to bring tons and tons of food/water/air to keep astronauts alive during that trip, let alone enough supplies to survive on Mars once they arrive. All this takes lots of mass, which means a lot more fuel = very very expensive.
2: Political pressure from ATK, Lockheed Martin and Boeing to award them billion dollar contracts ie. Constellation
3: Policy makers and officials at NASA being married to the above mentioned companies.
4: Republicans back in power. Eight years with Bush in power landed billions in profit to ATK, Lockheed Martin and Boeing but saw the waist of billions of taxpayer dollars on an aging Shuttle and a flawed Constellation program.
I guess I am a 'space geek' - I have been following SpaceX for 4 or 5 years or before Falcon 1 made it's debut. Suffered with them on the disappointments and jumped for joy when they had successes. Kind of wish I was a member of the SpaceX team - what a great adventure! I'll be here and rooting for you all!
so spaceX develops the falcon 9 for around $300 million, but NASA calculates that it would have cost around $4 billion to develop the same thing. If NASA would change its approach to development then it would probably accomplish more without budget restraints, they're not very efficient. But then again what can you do with all the political bureaucracy getting in the way. Hopefully these commercial companies succeed!
ItzTheDean 1 week ago
They are gonna need a little more than good retro rockets to land them on Mars. Needs a super sonic parachute and possibly a wider inflatable heat shield. I wager that no earth-bound space capsule can survive a landing on Mars without many modifications.
lamorte42 1 week ago in playlist SpaceX Featured Videos
Chinese dominance of Earth? Likely. American domination of the solar system? GUARANTEED!
3333Daz 2 weeks ago in playlist SpaceX Featured Videos
Spacex. Keeping it real.
Can't wait until they finish the LAS and start flying our boys on these things. Hell, i'd volunteer to fly without an LAS if they'd let me.
Ledmaster2 1 month ago in playlist SpaceX Featured Videos
long as it aint Chinese or Indian.
fucktardickis 1 month ago
so what will the NASA do now? Scratch noses and pay the bills of spaceX?
Ulterior1980 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Long live the USA!
Long live SpaceX!!!
TOTCD 4 months ago
LOL, the guy on the left didn't get a high five at 1:20
johnson1095 5 months ago
I like this :3 First person on mars maybe... But may not be able to return.
spongebobworldonline 5 months ago
beautiful
destroyALLjihadists 6 months ago
SpaceX, your efforts are the best that could happen to the Space program. :D The governments don't have the money to run a land and pump the resources needed into space development. With commercial companies like SpaceX, we have the resources needed to develop better technology, and speed up everything a lot!
bartjoboy 6 months ago 5
YOU BETTER BEAT THE CRAP OUT OF THOSE RUSSIANS, SPACEX!!!!
CrusaderAmerica 6 months ago
@CrusaderAmerica
Just wait :) Russia will be the first in researching space.
WaterFlexGalaxy 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Oh, HELL YEAH!!
docmordrid 6 months ago
America and it's people at it's very best!
SantaFeJay 7 months ago 9
Can I be the next dummy in Dragon? :D
Vlakpage 7 months ago 8
I fucking love capitalism.
BrettDunbar 7 months ago 29
@BrettDunbar I know what you mean man. We can also thank the stimulus bill for kick starting commercial crew!!!!
evinado1 7 months ago
@BrettDunbar
But the vast majority of SpaceX's funding has come from the federal government....
donutey 2 months ago
@donutey
The vast majority of SpaceX's funding has come from Elon Musk's own wallet and venture capitalists.
digitaldud 2 months ago 3
@BrettDunbar only via capitalism could you achieve the efficiency, lower cost and higher quality. If nasa was a private company, it wouldn't survive Its bloatware
outforsushi 2 months ago in playlist More videos from spacexchannel
@BrettDunbar Before our gov't finds a way to get its filthy bureaucratic hands on the space industry, of course
rhinnawi95 1 month ago
DO IT
Nmisling 7 months ago 5
It's amazing how fast Space X is doing this. At this rate, they'll have the heavy lifter built in no time. We'll see Americans orbiting the moon before the end of the decade if not sooner. And to think that people are saying that China is "winning" the space race. American free enterprise will beat China like it did the Soviet Union. All it takes is responsible people like Space X, and not the types that will sell their mother's house from under her just to make a buck. That's what's hurt us.
Mainsail76 7 months ago 4
Looking good! Don't fuck it up :)
vdizhoor 7 months ago 4
SpaceX, we know you can do it! Your new technologies WILL get humans Mars "before the decade is out!" (>2020)
nitroxide2011 8 months ago
It's going to cost more money because spacex is a commercial company, as in they are trying to make a profit.
phillyguy95 8 months ago
@phillyguy95
NASA estimated $35B for a capsule and launch system for the Constellation program and they have little to show for it but a first stage test launch. The Dragon spacecraft was developed from a blank sheet to the first demonstration flight in just over four years for about $300 million
NASA might not be making a profit, that doesnt mean they will be cheaper. NASA is bloated and inefficient. Private companies are far less costly even with a profit.
ForTehNguyen 8 months ago 6
@ForTehNguyen Private companies can improve and refine what we have, but it will be government pushing the unprofitable boundaries.
Forgeable 7 months ago
@phillyguy95 People make a profit by being efficient. Not something a government entity cares about. Profit is not a dirty word - you do know that right?
AuburnCreed 8 months ago 5
To get to mars:
1. Assemble big vehicle in space with lots of water as shielding. Probably could be bags of water. Put into continual transfer orbit to mars. Doesn't need any propulsion.
2. Put station in orbit around mars.
3. Use small transfer vehicles to get from:
a. ISS to mars transfer station.
b. mars transfer station to mars orbit.
c. mars orbit to surface.
Every 26 months mars and earth align. So that would be the cycle frequency of trips. Probably half that time for a one way trip.
rsdavis8 8 months ago
@KiranaForever He delivered several satellites to orbit.
Nadirion1 8 months ago
Govt tries to build Ares I for billions of dollars, only gets to a BS test with a 4 seg srb + paperweight on top and it didn't even come back in one piece! Spacex takes <0.5 billion sends up a real rocket twice and gets the capsule back. Spacex, the govt has lost its mandate to space, it's yours for the taking. Hope the bureaucrats let you combine COTS 2 and 3.
cixelsyD1988 8 months ago
Peaceout SpaceX
jeetering1011 8 months ago
1:20 CG high five, HELL YEAH!
HiAdrian 8 months ago 34
Every time we privatize something that we used to do for the common good, it costs more money than it should. This is because the profit motive is built into commercialization. Not a good thing for the US Space program.
RocRizzo 8 months ago
@RocRizzo Do you mean like GPS? Microwaves? Internet?
Nadirion1 8 months ago
WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO LAUNCH TO THE ISS SPACEX!!
I"VE BEEN WAITING FOR HALF A YEAR SO GET ON IT, AND KICK THE ----RUSSIAN FOR THE ASTRONUTS CONTRACTS!!
CrusaderAmerica 8 months ago
The CEO of SpaceX is amazing, he is also the CEO of Tesla Motors, another really awesome company
mikemmb73 8 months ago
Out of the box thinking.....its excellent and what the USA needs.
dcb1138 8 months ago
After watching this video, I have grown another testicle.
ghostalin 8 months ago 2
Don't let the exit door hit you in the duff on the way out, Boeing- Lockheed-Martin-ATK-Roscosmos...and NASA for that matter
dewfus 8 months ago
OH MY GOD...I didn't realize that the escape rockets could be used for landing on Mars or the moon...this is AMAZING!
Cruiserfrank 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Always the big promisses from SpaceX... it's all good so far since they've delivered. I have a hunch this will be no different. They're about to club Lockheed and Boeing over the head with better, more efficient technology than either competitor can presently produce on-time.
budwheizzah 9 months ago
Comment removed
budwheizzah 9 months ago
I wish you guys the best of luck with your program. I for one am really proud to see space exploration taken to a open public setting. Thank you for the inspiration that you've given me : )
westcoast37 9 months ago
great to know that we have Spacex to get the USA into orbit instead of relying
on the Russians. Hope the best for Spacex and the sooner you launch men
into orbit the better.
rpick1954 9 months ago
2 people would rather spend the money on drugs
ChazdaJazz 10 months ago
considering SpaceX's impressive progress and speed of innovation, I would not be surprised if they beat NASA to Mars (by at least 10 years)
We're witnessing the beginnings of the private space industry :D
FreedomLiberty21 10 months ago
@FreedomLiberty21 Its actually NASA and thereby the taxpayers that have funded some of the SpaceX developments which includes funding from NASA's COTS program and now the C3P.
Its not the beginnings of the private space industry. Firms like Lockheed Martin and Boeing are private companies and have monopolized the space industry for years.
SpaceX is a step away from the cost plus privately operated NASA funded programs like the Shuttle operated by USA and the Delta4 Heavy run by ULA.
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago 2
@SquirrelFromGradLife well I knew all that xD
I'm just saying that for the first time ever, we have companies like SpaceX whose sole profit motif is travel into space and rocketry. Lockheed Martin is a defense (or weapons) company (depending on how you look at them) and Boeing is primarily an aerospace company minus the space (generally speaking). They make planes, commercial planes, that's where a lot of their profit comes from.
FreedomLiberty21 10 months ago
@SquirrelFromGradLife Yeah both of them have monopolized the space industry but its good to see some competition coming into the field because, as we know, genuine competition brings about innovation and the acceleration of progress. That's the role SpaceX is fulfilling and they're only among the first of many "space companies"
FreedomLiberty21 10 months ago
2 people here still think the world is flat...
Frosttty 10 months ago
After exactly 30 years of using Space Shuttles, the time has come for evolution.
CodeGreen47 10 months ago
Crawl before walk. Walk before run. In other words, Moon first. Going to Mars is for now suicidal.
madcio 10 months ago
@madcio If you dont subscribe to the LEO Shuttle boys then not going to the Moon before taking a shot at Mars is not really a problem...
and your crawl walk run analogy doesnt really work because in all fairness "we" are already running and the space industry is a mature business... The Moon have already been visited and the lessons learned there can be utilized when going to Mars..
Theres no problem with going to the Moon first, buts its irrelevant and a costly detour in the big picture.
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
@SquirrelFromGradLife
""we" are already running and the space industry is a mature business... "
You are joking, RIGHT? If not, then you are completely out of touch. There IS reason for phrase "rockiet science" being synonymous with something insanely hard. Were crawling. Barely.
"its irrelevant "
It is very revelant for learning how to work, live and survive in space for LONG time. For now ISS learned us that we cannot fly to Mars with current tech. Something breaks on ISS way too often.
madcio 10 months ago
@madcio The space industry is a mature business and have been for many years.. Maybe not in Poland but in America priavte companies build and fly commercial rockets on a regular basis.
Going to Mars involves exactly the same dangers as going to the Moon. Going to the Moon become therefor an unnecessary step involving lots of politics and money which is hindering space exploration.
The billions spent on going to the Moon could be spent on actually going to Mars.
Do you have the billions? No...
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
@SquirrelFromGradLife
"The space industry is a mature business and have been for many years."
In context of manned mission of Mars it is NOT. NASA had big problems with going to moon again and you want Mars?
"Going to Mars involves exactly the same dangers as going to the Moon"
And 3 days versus few month in case of epergency, broken machinery or accident or whatever is completely neligible difference. Yeahhh riiight. Going to Moon is orders of magnitude safer and cheaper than going to Mars.
madcio 10 months ago
@madcio Your understanding of the definition of what constitutes a mature business is non-existent.
Your understanding of the risk involved or for the matter risk management is likewise non-existent.
Whether you're sitting on the launch pad like the Apollo 1 crew or days from earth like the Apollo 13 crew was completely irrelevant as history showed us. Its the design of the systems that determine the risk involved not the distance from earth.
You need to study some more and think things over.
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
I’m guessing, but the ballistic coefficient of Dragon would hit the surface of Mars before the vehicle slowed down enough to get supersonic parachutes open. You need an inflatable entry shield to increase drag at a high enough altitude to get chutes open as a secondary stage. Your key point about a powered descent using the escape engines seems valid. The biconic vehicles in the background on the Mars surface scene would work fine.
Beautiful work, Space-X! On to Mars!
kentercat 10 months ago
@kentercat Going to Mars will take some eight months and mean a massive amount of cargo and vehicles...
So actually slowing down when nearing Mars will not be a problem....
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
Very, very exciting! You folks are doing great work and I'm looking forward to the future!
foobarmaru 10 months ago
Ah...Space has no atmosphere, No wings needed. Also every spacecraft up to the shuttle had no wings. As someone who was around during the Apollo days, I'll take an Apollo command module over a shuttle any day. Saturn 5 was the largest booster ever built launching men to the Moon as well as Skylab. I for one will be glad when the shuttle ends. If we would of had the Saturn 5 and Apollo spacecraft we still could have built the ISS and gone to the Moon as well, all with the same rocket.
beatlefriend 10 months ago 3
@asdfghjkl48402 Wings are useless in space
Dash801 10 months ago
@asdfghjkl48402 if it doesnt have wings its not a spacecraft...right... So thats your definition of a spacecraft.. something with wings...
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
Dear Mr. Musk, due to orbital mechanics 2019 is an energetically favourable year in which to launch a human mission to Mars. Please get on that. Thanks!
marsokhod 10 months ago 4
Go for it, Elon!
WiredDragoon 10 months ago
I love you SpaceX
Sprinterdrift 10 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this thing sucks...its so tiny and ahhh very poorly made....yall should see the virgin galactic spaceship now thats a ship
cristohv 10 months ago
@cristohv How can you even suggest that the first privately built spacecraft to orbit the earth and return safely to earth is poorly made?.. what is the rational for that?...you do know that Dragon is rated by NASA to take cargo to the ISS... can Virgin's Spaceship2 do that?... or even go into earth orbit? or even into outer space?...no...
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago 2
@cristohv Yeah, I'm sure that's why the Virgin Galactic is a suborbital design optimized for atmospheric interaction - and still carries one fewer passenger than the Dragon. But sure, the glorified rocket plane is more impressive than the potentially powered and interplanetary capsule...^^
WiredDragoon 10 months ago
what is the fuel payload , fuel mixture for the LES system?
mrbit10 10 months ago
ha, doing away with the LES tower, nice. i remember mercury's tower, then to Gemini's hatch escape and back to saturn V's LES to SpaceX's design.
mrbit10 10 months ago
Thank you SpaceX for allowing humankind to continue the journey to space!
aarobc 10 months ago 72
@aarobc and also say, SpaceX - A US Company
runningray 9 months ago
this is where peoples taxes should be going to not the business called NASA but a real space agency with real plans.
IIZODIIAC 10 months ago
@IIZODIIAC SpaceX is profitable because they are not building government owned rockets. They are selling services but own all the ip themselves. Look at ULA and shuttle to see the difference in price.
LonghornPhysicist 10 months ago
@LonghornPhysicist Agreed.
IIZODIIAC 10 months ago
@LonghornPhysicist As an employee of ATK you will know that ATK, Lockheed Martin and Boeing are tree of the most profitable companies just because they build and run government rockets.
As a funny reminder you should also know that ULA gets ONE BILLION dollars a year regardless if they make any launch or not. ULA have recently informed NASA of ricing prices and they are actually in a monopoly situation where they get cost plus contracts...
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
Ah, I see the bright future of space exploration.
TENJHOTENGE1 10 months ago
$75 million but SETI can't get 5?
PuglieseAnthony 10 months ago
@PuglieseAnthony 5 million dollar to search for aliens? really... go rent ET on DVD...
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
@SquirrelFromGradLife they were not only looking for aliens. educate yourself
PuglieseAnthony 10 months ago
@PuglieseAnthony So what are SETI actually doing other than searching for extraterrestrial life ie. aliens?
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
@SquirrelFromGradLife SETI actually isn't looking for aliens anymore, that branch got shut down last month sometime.
Idiomatick 10 months ago
@Idiomatick I dont know if you're talking about SETI or SETI@home.. Two different things..But you're saying that the Search for ExtraTerrestrial Life are no longer searching for extraterrestrial life...
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
@SquirrelFromGradLife I meant what I said sadly. They can't afford to run their telescopes any more. Look up the news for SETI.
Idiomatick 10 months ago
@Idiomatick Well thats the sad thing that happens when you leave republicans in power...someone has to come and clean up the mess they've made...and sadly the republicans wanted to cut even more in the federal budget but hand out even more money to the defense industry... the very people that pays politicians million yearly to buy them the old fashioned way...
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
@SquirrelFromGradLife Well, I guess when they say fiscally conservative they meant old-fashioned bribery.
Idiomatick 10 months ago
@Idiomatick thats actually a very good definition...
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
You guys are making history.
tobigforyou 10 months ago 4
I'm so excited about SpaceX. gotta love what they are all about.
Mc3lnosher 10 months ago 4
Does PayPal have enough juice to fund it?
heroineworshipper 10 months ago
I would literally sell one of my kidneys to be on the dragon when it does its first mission.
YNot1989 10 months ago 3
YES YOU WOULD a mars ascent vehicle. I am so exited about this keep it up spacex
spacegeek5 10 months ago
They depicted the dragon landing on mars, but how would you get off? You would need a return stage already on the planet correct?
evinado1 10 months ago
@evinado1 Correct sir. There would likely already be a Mars Return Vehicle on the surface.
thesnorklemonkey 10 months ago
@evinado1 You don't have to come back. There is a large push for a one way trip in which the explorers stay on Mars until they die of old age or until return capability is made.
oisiaa 10 months ago
@oisiaa Your suggestion of sending people to their death on a one way trip is pure madness especially when wa are perfectly capable of returning them safely to the earth just as Kennedy laid forth..
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
Thumbs up for moon first
Acheiropoietos 10 months ago
How is the Dragon supposed to reach Mars orbit insertion speed and then slow down to enter Mars orbit? Unless I'm grossly mistaken, there's no way the Dragon has enough delta-V to slow down and land on retro rockets from interplanetary speeds.
FonduFyre 10 months ago
@FonduFyre For the delta-V to go to Mars you use Earth orbit rendezvous. This provides a way to get the needed mass in orbit to get a Dragon to Mars, using Falcon Heavy(s) to get them to LEO. In addition, you can reduce that mass by using High Isp/low thrust propulsion to send it there. Couple this with Mars Direct-style in-situ propellant generation and a Mars mission starts looking viable at costs that are not prohibitive.
CombinatorialImplosi 10 months ago
@CombinatorialImplosi I think all of that is fairly straight forward (so to speak) but I'm more directly concerned with EDL. Everything that I've read says you're going to need some pretty fancy aerocapture, plus parachutes that don't yet exist and the retrorockets. Unless, of course you're going to double your fuel requirements by dropping into Mars orbit and then using the Dragon to descend to the surface.
FonduFyre 10 months ago
Spacex COTS 2 Falcon 9 first stage arrived today at the cape. Pictures are up on twitter.
beatlefriend 10 months ago
@beatlefriend cant find them anywhere... :-(
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
What does he say @ 1:19?
kenhes 10 months ago
@kenhes I think he says, "[c]rew capability is the very reason SpaceX was founded...".
Baxapaf 10 months ago
@kenhes "Crew Capability is the very reason spaceX was founded"
thesnorklemonkey 10 months ago
Hell yea... you know you're dealing with the private sector when theres sick beats and astronauts are high-fiving at 1:19!!
LIGHTRONIX 10 months ago 4
That's why at 1:18 in the video you see a Space Barge with a dragon return/accent vehicle on it. The martian accent vehicle would then dock with a in martian orbit command vehicle which would burn for a return to earth.
beatlefriend 10 months ago
There's no way a craft that small would be able to hold the fuel required to return to Earth after landing on the surface of Mars.
Fattyfatty2byy4 10 months ago
@Fattyfatty2byy4 It may not be intended to.
Craigthepope 10 months ago
@Fattyfatty2byy4 - it would re-dock with a command module, a la Apollo
Acheiropoietos 10 months ago
Google Nautilus-X about that mission to Mars.
It's the "Big Three" of space travel: SpaceX, Bigelow, and NASA (Lockheed-Martin). Hopefully the NASA one will be replaced with something truly private in the years to come.
maximalyst0292 10 months ago
@maximalyst0292 Wheres Orbital, ATK and Boeing in that equation? Boeing and Lockheed Marting have with the explicit permission from NASA created a monopolized situation, usually a bad thing, where any form of competition or price concerns are silenced. Their joint ventures like ULA (United Launch Alliance, Lockheed Martin and Boeing with the Delta 4 Heavy etc) and USA in conjunction with ATK (United Space Alliance with the Shuttle, ISS etc.) have sucked NASA dry for billions over the years.
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
Good luck Space X on the next COTS flight!!!
itsmemorp 10 months ago
Going to Mars in the Dragon capsule with an estimated journey of about eight months would be slightly uncomfortable... you would definitely need some kind of crew vehicle and cargo transport thing to make it happen..but I would definitely still go..
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
@SquirrelFromGradLife they could launch a nice flight quarters in a falcon heavy faring, or maybe even on a falcon 9. you link up in orbit, ride with it to mars, then leave it in martian orbit while you land.
kaplanfx 10 months ago 18
@kaplanfx Yes the possibilities are endless.. But since its going to be NASA and not SpaceX that will control and finance the mission then other space contractors will most definitely get a piece of the action.
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
Bloody brilliant!
nycrackhead 10 months ago
Its amazing what SpaceX can do with that relatively small amount of money...
Had NASA awarded just the 1.5 billion dollar cost of one single Shuttle launch to SpaceX we would be on the Moon and Mars by now
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
At 1:18 in the video, you can see a Spacex space barge. On the space barge is cargo and a return/accent dragon vehicle.
beatlefriend 10 months ago
Actually, a one-way mission to Mars has been gaining a lot of traction in recent years.
sideshow81192 10 months ago
i want to work for spacex
Basilisp89 10 months ago
You just made Robert Zubrin's day.
blacklinen99 10 months ago
Im curious about the "Pusher" LAS, very interesting, seems like a liquid propellant system.
I wonder how it would do at MaxQ during launch, also very smart idea using it as a descent control system
captainofiron 10 months ago
@captainofiron yes it's liquid. Hypergolic fuel aka nitrogen tetroxide and monomethyl hydrazine
MickAv8r 10 months ago
@MickAv8r interesting. well that way you dont have to worry about an ignition system. i wonder if they downselected on MMH/NTO from something else. Remember the MLAS, that was solids, but you couldnt do a controlled descent with a solid.
captainofiron 10 months ago
@captainofiron I suspect the fuel decision is whatever is cheapest that gets the job done. Its a known entity and doesn't need much R&D. BTW the landing on any solid surface sales pitch for this is neat, but in the vid it looks like a one way trip! LOL Does that system have the fuel and thrust to get off the surface again? Otherwise that idea is odd. MLAS worked but damn is it complicated and really heavy, it had what 40 different fairing seps and 129 parachutes? ;)
MickAv8r 10 months ago
@MickAv8r HAHA yes that is exactly what I thought of, one way trip.
captainofiron 10 months ago
Falcons are cool. Dragons are epic. Bring it on SpaceX. The world needs you.
spacefannumber1 10 months ago
@Scia52 Ironically, some have estimated that it would be easier to go to Mars and back, because you have an atmosphere to slow you down.
A realistic timeline for the first manned moon mission would be -42 years. For a manned return, as few as 5 if they get started NOW, 10 for a less-ambitious return. (Remember, it only took 12 years from the first orbital unmanned spacecraft to a manned landing on the moon, and 8 years from first manned orbital spacecraft to manned landing on the moon.)
ehurtley 10 months ago
@ehurtley 42 years?... how do you reach that number?
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
@SquirrelFromGradLife It's *negative* 42 years. As in: the length of time that has passed since Apollo 11 landed on the moon.
ehurtley 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I think the flight to Mars is impossible on Dragon. But I can imagine the flight to Moon on two Dragons which are joined together. Why not?
val222z4 10 months ago
Incredible video foreshadowing the future endeavors of SpaceX. That landing on Mars gave me goosebumps because I know that it just might happen.
oisiaa 10 months ago 3
Hell yeah!! Love SpaceX! Gettin' er done!!
Hootz99 10 months ago
1:07 That's a quite red-ish looking desert. =P
Dappdude 10 months ago 2
You say you can land on mars in 10-20 years.
I would assume that a Return to the moon would be far easier
What would be a realistic timeline for the first manned moon mission?
Scia52 10 months ago
what is the main obstacle of putting man on mars?
nois3 10 months ago
@nois3 money.
C0n5t4nt1ne 10 months ago
@nois3 The cost of launching the spacecraft and propellant from Earth.
fetchjim 10 months ago
@nois3 Well I don't think we've ever had a craft return to earth from Mars. Anyone who we sent to Mars would probably be there for life, imagine spending the rest of your life locked away from civilisation.
dezimo 10 months ago
@nois3 Biggest challenge is probably the time it takes to get to Mars. It takes about 2/3 of a year to get to Mars using chemical rockets, and you'll have to bring tons and tons of food/water/air to keep astronauts alive during that trip, let alone enough supplies to survive on Mars once they arrive. All this takes lots of mass, which means a lot more fuel = very very expensive.
noircat 10 months ago
@nois3 cosmic radiation on the way there, I think?
LinchpinPL 10 months ago
@nois3 Obstacles in order of importance:
1: Money
2: Political pressure from ATK, Lockheed Martin and Boeing to award them billion dollar contracts ie. Constellation
3: Policy makers and officials at NASA being married to the above mentioned companies.
4: Republicans back in power. Eight years with Bush in power landed billions in profit to ATK, Lockheed Martin and Boeing but saw the waist of billions of taxpayer dollars on an aging Shuttle and a flawed Constellation program.
SquirrelFromGradLife 10 months ago
Man I love SpaceX so much.
EdR8213 10 months ago
I guess I am a 'space geek' - I have been following SpaceX for 4 or 5 years or before Falcon 1 made it's debut. Suffered with them on the disappointments and jumped for joy when they had successes. Kind of wish I was a member of the SpaceX team - what a great adventure! I'll be here and rooting for you all!
AverageRetiredGeek 10 months ago 3
@AverageRetiredGeek Yeah I remember going to the SpaceX website and seeing them just talk about the Falcon 1 launch...Falcon 9 seemed so far away.
ccricers 8 months ago
Computer simulation or not, there is something about seeing Dragon land on Mars that makes me happy. :)
SpeedRunner 10 months ago 2
Comment removed
Nmisling 10 months ago
Dragon landing on Mars. I like.
quantumG 10 months ago 71
Wow, great video! I've been rooting for SpaceX to succeed since day 1!
P.S. What is that cool song?!
jtibble 10 months ago 2
Gave me goosebumps!
LoneCoder1 10 months ago
Cannot wait to see the Dragon in action
jasrapp 10 months ago 41