Humans to Mars a Principle of Space Exploration:

Space Station is not on par with advancements and infrastructure required for Mars mission...albeit financially China is up for the challenge.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If Musk thinks that decades of space research could be squeezed into few years, by the MIT boys, to create a robust space access system that has high enough success factor chances...he is mistaken.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well, let's see: 12 flights so far, all successful (flight 4 delivered two payloads to Earth orbit; the booster for the second payload failed and the owners of the payload decided to abandon it in orbit.) They've resupplied the Space Station and managed to soft-land their boosters in the ocean using the main engines. No governmental space flight program has ever had such success. So based on their work so far, they have done _better_ than the decades of space research embarked upon by the governmental organizations.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Ok setting aside the Falcon 1 extremely high failure rate, Falcon 9 launches that are intended for resupply of ISS, one of the launches had a roll torque problems in the first stage engine and an overheated actuator in the second stage. The problem I see with SpaceX is that the goverment and the top satellite producers/operators are relying on an unproven longterm launch provider. The SpaceX is betting on the same token as the ShapeShuttle did, reusability, although this time SpaceX is betting on reusability of its boosters, which it has yet to reuse long-term.

 

That's a space station, we already have one and its going to be there at least another 20 years. I've always said to bring China onboard with the rest of the countries to work together on projects instead of not doing so. Its in everyones interest to try and have China work with us.

 

But they used information from NASA to build their rockets.

 

well the way the war is creeping up between USA and Russia, China is more likely to form a space alliance with Russia and set up a dual mission together instead. No wonder their Shenzhou was the expanded version of Soyuz. China has the money, Russia has the expertise.

 

The colonists didn't need air & water from Europe to survive. They were just unprepared for the conditions. Timber was fully available for shelters. Wildlife was abundant for food. Water was available everywhere. They were just unprepared, untrained for such a primitive lifestyle.

There were people living here when the colonists arrived.

The Discovery series Naked & Afraid. Drop 2 people off in the middle of nowhere with 1 tool each and they try to survive 21 days. Now try that on Mars where you have to worry about oxygen & water (not just clean water).

 

Definitely! And NASA used information from the Nazi rocketry program at Peenemunde to build _their_ rockets. Each generation uses what the previous generation learned to reach new heights.

 

They've certainly had problems, but again far fewer than NASA when they were starting their manned rocket program.

With 12 successful flights, they are rapidly losing the "unproven" aspect.

?? No, they're not. They will be profitable if every launch is completely discarded. If they can recover the boosters then that will be icing on the cake.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_reusable_launch_system_development_program

Oh yeah?

http://www.space.com/26921-spacex-reusable-rocket-explodes-over-texas-video.html

12 Successful flights out of how many total tests?

1) Falcon 9 partial engine failure, secondary payload delivery to orbit failure.
2) CRS-2 (March 1, 2012) Dragon S/C thruster anomaly, delay in rendezvous as a result of docking mechanism malfunction.
3) CRS-3 (April 18) Success

You got mulfunctions in the 2 out 3 commerical missions to ISS. (COTS 1 and COTS 2 do not count as they were demonstration of technology)

In 6 days from now they will launch CRS-4 mission, we are yet to see of the result of it.

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/152094-spacex-dragon-2-will-look-like-a-real-alien-spaceship

Does plunging into ocean sound safe for astronauts to experience? Or are we betting on a private company ambitious politically motivated slogans over lives of astronauts?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

mmm, nice and toasty, maybe they should join the Niichi ramen instant noodles to space challenge to cook up some ramen inside the Dragon 2 instead of the ashes of hopeful idealistic astronauts who decided not to follow common sense.

http://saatchi.com/en-us/news/instant-noodles-to-be-cooked-by-earths-atmosphere/

Cook em SpaceX, cook em good.

 

Yes. (You realize that launches with the first stage landing will cost MORE, right?)

12. The Falcon 9 has flown 12 times, and has been successful 12 times. You quoted a story about an explosion of a test vehicle that was doing engine tests. (A Falcon 9 has 9 engines; the test vehicle had 3.)
Expect more such tests (and more such failures) as designers test the design limits of the system.

Yep. And in all cases, the vehicle continued to orbit and was capable of completing its mission.

Yes, based on our experience with the Mercury, Apollo and Gemini programs.

Nope. If they prove themselves then we will pay a private company to perform a task for us.

Sounds a lot safer than what happened to Soyuz 5 - especially since that was picture was of a test vehicle that was not intended to re-enter and land safely, and Soyuz 5 had actual astronauts on board. I hear they never found their teeth after that landing:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Is roasted Russian a delicacy?

 

So you pick one faulty Soyuz mission out of many successful ones. Meanwhile no humans flew on the Dragon spacecraft as of yet.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s841626.htm

And that is written by Australians, the very people who hate Russia, currently.

 

There have been over 30 missions to Mars and only a third of them ever made it there successfully. Not a very good track record to me, perhaps we should wait until more missions are sent there and are successful.

 

Correct. It's new and has not been tested enough to be man-rated yet.

 

The track record has gone from bad, to fair to pretty good over the 40 years or so.
Opportunity, Spirit, Phoenix and Curiosity can attest to that fact.
In other words we do now have the expertise to get there safely.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the US has lost more astronauts than any other country. Two shuttle disasters, the Apollo 1 launchpad disaster. But that did not deter the US to continue with the great shuttle program. The present hiatus will end soon, allowing for greater exploration.

Yes, it is possible we will have other disasters. That should never deter us - just be very cautious and with great pride.

 

Hmm,

 

And your question is???????????

 

Hmmm. Can't you see how contradictory you are? Hmmm. NO?