Jump to content

and Now for Something Really Out of this World - SpaceX Dragon V2

KarenMichelle Lane
 Share
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3676 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

Medhue Simoni

Medhue Simoni

Posted
Posted

Here's a question. Why is it called dragon if there are no dragons? I know nothing about the game, or whatever it is, but it does very much annoy me when companies just pull names out of a hat. It's 1 thing for NASA to name their stuff like teenage nerds, but a game company should really name their products properly, especially the way the internet works. Imagine if I just named products willy nilly on my website. How many sales am I going to get from that?

I see people doing exactly what I did. I saw dragon, and now I'm interested. I goto the link, and I'm like, where is the fricken dragons. Ok, F this game, I'm not even going to look at it now, because they fooled me to get me here.

Just my thoughts, I'm sure it's a nice game and all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KarenMichelle Lane

KarenMichelle Lane

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Ok, F this game, I'm not even going to look at it now, because they fooled me to get me here.

Just my thoughts, I'm sure it's a nice game and all.

What game are you talking about?  The video is about an actual RL space craft.

...Dres

OMG - I am accused of misdirecting a reader with a cheesy reference to a Dragon.

~ mea culpa

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Medhue Simoni

Medhue Simoni

Posted
Posted

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Ok, F this game, I'm not even going to look at it now, because they fooled me to get me here.

Just my thoughts, I'm sure it's a nice game and all.

What game are you talking about?  The video is about an actual RL space craft.

...Dres

 

Ok, so what's the big deal then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KarenMichelle Lane

KarenMichelle Lane

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Coby Foden wrote:

Medhue Simoni wrote:

 

Ok, so what's the big deal then?

If you care to watch the video you will know.  :matte-motes-big-grin:

Ok, watched the whole video, and now I'm even more perplexed.

It's OK Medhue, Not everyone is into order of magnitude jumps in spacecraft design. I've been a big fan of SpaceX for years and the brilliant way they attacked the concept of conventional thinking in regards to access to space. This is not a game to play for SpaceX. This is about real life and making space more accessible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Perrie Juran

Perrie Juran

Posted
Posted

KarenMichelle Lane wrote:

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Coby Foden wrote:

Medhue Simoni wrote:

 

Ok, so what's the big deal then?

If you care to watch the video you will know.  :matte-motes-big-grin:

Ok, watched the whole video, and now I'm even more perplexed.

It's OK Medhue, Not everyone is into order of magnitude jumps in spacecraft design. I've been a big fan of SpaceX for years and the brilliant way they attacked the concept of conventional thinking in regards to access to space. This is not a game to play for SpaceX. This is about real life and making space more accessible.

I need all the space I can get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dresden Ceriano

Dresden Ceriano

Posted
Posted

Perrie Juran wrote:

KarenMichelle Lane wrote:

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Coby Foden wrote:

Medhue Simoni wrote:

 

Ok, so what's the big deal then?

If you care to watch the video you will know.  :matte-motes-big-grin:

Ok, watched the whole video, and now I'm even more perplexed.

It's OK Medhue, Not everyone is into order of magnitude jumps in spacecraft design. I've been a big fan of SpaceX for years and the brilliant way they attacked the concept of conventional thinking in regards to access to space. This is not a game to play for SpaceX. This is about real life and making space more accessible.

I need all the space I can get.

Is that where your modulator comes into play?

...Dres

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Perrie Juran

Perrie Juran

Posted
Posted

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

Perrie Juran wrote:

KarenMichelle Lane wrote:

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Coby Foden wrote:

Medhue Simoni wrote:

 

Ok, so what's the big deal then?

If you care to watch the video you will know.  :matte-motes-big-grin:

Ok, watched the whole video, and now I'm even more perplexed.

It's OK Medhue, Not everyone is into order of magnitude jumps in spacecraft design. I've been a big fan of SpaceX for years and the brilliant way they attacked the concept of conventional thinking in regards to access to space. This is not a game to play for SpaceX. This is about real life and making space more accessible.

I need all the space I can get.

Is that where your modulator comes into play?

...Dres

I just use "derender."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Medhue Simoni

Medhue Simoni

Posted
Posted

Space is cool and all, I just don't get excited about space travel at this point in time. The cost is still ridiculous and it is always the public paying the bill for grown men to play. Now, if it was all done with private money, or donations, or any voluntary way, then I'd be all for it. If it is a private company building it only to have the government buy the crafts, then I'm still against it.


Some day, it will be much more feasible, and we'll have many more toys to do it with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coby Foden

Coby Foden

Posted
Posted

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Some day, it will be much more feasible, and we'll have many more toys to do it with.

Does technology develop just by itself - we just sit and wait long enough for some magic to happen? Of course it does not work like that. To develop something lots of research must be done, experiments need to be made, stuff needs to be built. That's how new better and more advanced things are invented. Often that costs enormous amounts of money. But the money is not lost nor wasted. The money will just change hands, part of it goes here, part of goes there, part of it goes somewhere else.

Often high technology research has many spin off inventions which appear in our everyday life - just like has happened with space exploration.

http://www.universetoday.com/37079/benefits-of-space-exploration/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spin-off_technologies

https://sites.google.com/a/scasd.org/website-design/Space-Program/positive-effects-of-the-space-program

http://www.problem-solving-techniques.com/US-Space-Program.html

 

.. and so on and on..

Somehow it appears to me that the money used on space exploration has brought forth many good things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dillon Levenque

Dillon Levenque

Posted
Posted

Coby Foden wrote:

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Some day, it will be much more feasible, and we'll have many more toys to do it with.

Does technology develop just by itself - we just sit and wait long enough for some magic to happen? Of course it does not work like that. To develop something lots of research must be done, experiments need to be made, stuff needs to be built. That's how new better and more advanced things are invented. Often that costs enormous amounts of money. But the money is not lost nor wasted. The money will just change hands, part of it goes here, part of goes there, part of it goes somewhere else.

Often high technology research has many spin off inventions which appear in our everyday life - just like has happened with space exploration.

 

.. and so on and on..

Somehow it appears to me that the money used on space exploration has brought forth many good things.

 

Your post reminded me of comments back in the Apollo days complaining about all the money the government spent on the lunar missions. "They could have spent that money right here on Earth!", they'd say. I could hardly keep from yelling, "They DID spend that money right here on Earth, you idiot! Plus all the technologies developed for that program have been really helpful in our everyday lives."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Madelaine McMasters

Madelaine McMasters

Posted
Posted

Dillon Levenque wrote:

Coby Foden wrote:

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Some day, it will be much more feasible, and we'll have many more toys to do it with.

Does technology develop just by itself - we just sit and wait long enough for some magic to happen? Of course it does not work like that. To develop something lots of research must be done, experiments need to be made, stuff needs to be built. That's how new better and more advanced things are invented. Often that costs enormous amounts of money. But the money is not lost nor wasted. The money will just change hands, part of it goes here, part of goes there, part of it goes somewhere else.

Often high technology research has many spin off inventions which appear in our everyday life - just like has happened with space exploration.

 

.. and so on and on..

Somehow it appears to me that the money used on space exploration has brought forth many good things.

 

Your post reminded me of comments back in the Apollo days complaining about all the money the government spent on the lunar missions. "They could have spent that money right here on Earth!", they'd say. I could hardly keep from yelling, "
They DID spend that money right here on Earth, you idiot
!
Plus all the technologies developed for that program have been really helpful in our everyday lives."

Over time, I've become less of a believer in the trickle-down technology of NASA projects. I think the Space Shuttle was a tremendous waste of resources. There were surely less expensive ways to get stuff into orbit. I read an article some years ago debunking the myth that the space program brought us integrated circuits, the microwave, etc. Those things were already in development for commercial purposes, and were ultimately co-opted for the space program.

Yet I'm still a huge fan of space exploration. When done right, it's inspiring. And if there's something we really need to trickle down to us from somewhere, it's inspiration.

Your "spend that money on Earth" story reminds me of my favorite clueless comment... "Let the government pay for it!". At least people who proclaim belief in Martians (sorry Perrie) know they believe in Martians. Those who'd have the government pay for things are unaware they believe in extraterrestrial taxpayers.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kenbro Utu

Kenbro Utu

Posted
Posted

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Now, if it was all done with private money, or donations, or any voluntary way, then I'd be all for it. If it is a private company building it only to have the government buy the crafts, then I'm still against it.

Spacex is a private company, and they don't sell to the government. They are currently under contract from Nasa to deliver payloads to the ISS.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Perrie Juran

Perrie Juran

Posted
Posted

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

Dillon Levenque wrote:

Coby Foden wrote:

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Some day, it will be much more feasible, and we'll have many more toys to do it with.

Does technology develop just by itself - we just sit and wait long enough for some magic to happen? Of course it does not work like that. To develop something lots of research must be done, experiments need to be made, stuff needs to be built. That's how new better and more advanced things are invented. Often that costs enormous amounts of money. But the money is not lost nor wasted. The money will just change hands, part of it goes here, part of goes there, part of it goes somewhere else.

Often high technology research has many spin off inventions which appear in our everyday life - just like has happened with space exploration.

 

.. and so on and on..

Somehow it appears to me that the money used on space exploration has brought forth many good things.

 

Your post reminded me of comments back in the Apollo days complaining about all the money the government spent on the lunar missions. "They could have spent that money right here on Earth!", they'd say. I could hardly keep from yelling, "
They DID spend that money right here on Earth, you idiot
!
Plus all the technologies developed for that program have been really helpful in our everyday lives."

Over time, I've become less of a believer in the trickle-down technology of NASA projects. I think the Space Shuttle was a tremendous waste of resources. There were surely less expensive ways to get stuff into orbit. I read an article some years ago debunking the myth that the space program brought us integrated circuits, the microwave, etc. Those things were already in development for commercial purposes, and were ultimately co-opted for the space program.

Yet I'm still a huge fan of space exploration. When done right, it's inspiring. And if there's something we really need to trickle down to us from somewhere, it's inspiration.

Your "spend that money on Earth" story reminds me of my favorite clueless comment... "Let the government pay for it!". At least people who proclaim belief in Martians (sorry Perrie) know they believe in Martians. Those who'd have the government pay for things are unaware they believe in extraterrestrial taxpayers.

 

I don't know that there is any real way to measure the trickle down effect.  There were a lot of things already in development.  NASA's need for the technologies may have and probably did expedite their development. 

There were advances in medicine also, especially in the treatment of heart disease.  Again we may have eventually learned what we did but we did learn it sooner because of the Space Program.

Of course you do have to measure return on investment.  Theoretically a ball bearing manufactured in space would outlast one manufactured on Earth to the nth degree.

Still what chagrins me is this:  We can reprogram the Mars Rover a hundred million miles away from us but we seem unable to program a dependable Voting Machine right here on Earth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Madelaine McMasters

Madelaine McMasters

Posted
Posted

Perrie Juran wrote:

I don't know that there is any real way to measure the trickle down effect.  There were a lot of things already in development.  NASA's need for the technologies may have and probably did expedite their development. 

There were advances in medicine also, especially in the treatment of heart disease.  Again we may have eventually learned what we did but we did learn it sooner because of the Space Program.

Of course you do have to measure
  Theoretically a ball bearing manufactured in space would outlast one manufactured on Earth to the nth degree.

Still what chagrins me is this:  We can reprogram the Mars Rover a hundred million miles away from us but we seem unable to program a dependable Voting Machine right here on Earth.

Not only is it not easy to measure the trickle down effect, but there's another effect that's largely ignored when money is spent on anything, and that's the lost benefit of spending it better elsewhere. We never see what doesn't happen. While the "New Deal" poured money into the Tennessee Valley Authority, what didn't happen in Montana?

The Congressional Budget Office once projected the total cost of the Iraq/Afghan wars at $3 Trillion. We'll never know what life would be like if we'd spend that money elsewhere.

Dad designed things for NASA's Apollo program. He was a huge fan of going to the moon, but became disillusioned with NASA, saying that the level of bureaucratic incompetence he encountered there was approaching that of the Navy.

Here's what Burt Rutan has to say about the future of space flight...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Perrie Juran

Perrie Juran

Posted
Posted

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

Perrie Juran wrote:

I don't know that there is any real way to measure the trickle down effect.  There were a lot of things already in development.  NASA's need for the technologies may have and probably did expedite their development. 

There were advances in medicine also, especially in the treatment of heart disease.  Again we may have eventually learned what we did but we did learn it sooner because of the Space Program.

Of course you do have to measure
  Theoretically a ball bearing manufactured in space would outlast one manufactured on Earth to the nth degree.

Still what chagrins me is this:  We can reprogram the Mars Rover a hundred million miles away from us but we seem unable to program a dependable Voting Machine right here on Earth.

Not only is it not easy to measure the trickle down effect, but there's another effect that's largely ignored when money is spent on anything, and that's the lost benefit of spending it better elsewhere.

</snip>

 

 

 

It's a subject we can go round and round and round on.

When you stick your hand in a pork barrel you can find some very unpleasant things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Medhue Simoni

Medhue Simoni

Posted
Posted

Coby Foden wrote:

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Some day, it will be much more feasible, and we'll have many more toys to do it with.

Does technology develop just by itself - we just sit and wait long enough for some magic to happen? Of course it does not work like that. To develop something lots of research must be done, experiments need to be made, stuff needs to be built. That's how new better and more advanced things are invented. Often that costs enormous amounts of money. But the money is not lost nor wasted. The money will just change hands, part of it goes here, part of goes there, part of it goes somewhere else.

Often high technology research has many spin off inventions which appear in our everyday life - just like has happened with space exploration.

 

.. and so on and on..

Somehow it appears to me that the money used on space exploration has brought forth many good things.

Well, those aren't very good excuses to steal poor people's income to enable rich men to do unproductive things. Counter to popular belief, profits are not evil. Profits are a measure of usefulness. If you do not create something that can benefit others, you will not produce profits. I'm not against people or companies asking for donations to fund a program, as that is voluntary. I am against any group of people using government to steal from others. We could have gained the same amount of knowledge and spent significantly less. Who should decide at what level the people are made to suffer for the benefit of all. I say no1 should be able to decide this but each individual.

If you love spacy things, then you should want government to be involved as little as possible. They will always hold technology back. The US space program is a prime example of this. Just about all of it was a complete waste of the people's money, and it has gone on for decades now, with little to no real productive value. Why has no private company gotten involved until recently? That's obvious, as it was too expensive to be profitable at all. Now might be the time for private business to show us all what is possible. This will never happen if government is the primary buyer. If the people truly did want to explore space, then NASA could have gotten people to donate, instead of pointing a gun at them and stealing their money. The FACT that they needed to steal the money proves that the people did not want it, nor needed it.

If governments are the primary buyer, it is done that way on purpose, and is just another subsidized government business. They will innovate at whatever pace allows them to milk their cow of as much milk as possible. Again, it's our money, not NASA's money, as they produce nothing. If they did produce something, they would not need our money. If that SpaceX company had to compete for their profits, then society would all benefit from that open market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KarenMichelle Lane

KarenMichelle Lane

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Coby Foden wrote:

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Some day, it will be much more feasible, and we'll have many more toys to do it with.

Does technology develop just by itself - we just sit and wait long enough for some magic to happen? Of course it does not work like that. To develop something lots of research must be done, experiments need to be made, stuff needs to be built. That's how new better and more advanced things are invented. Often that costs enormous amounts of money. But the money is not lost nor wasted. The money will just change hands, part of it goes here, part of goes there, part of it goes somewhere else.

Often high technology research has many spin off inventions which appear in our everyday life - just like has happened with space exploration.

 

.. and so on and on..

Somehow it appears to me that the money used on space exploration has brought forth many good things.

Well, those aren't very good excuses to steal poor people's income to enable rich men to do unproductive things. Counter to popular belief, profits are not evil. Profits are a measure of usefulness. If you do not create something that can benefit others, you will not produce profits. I'm not against people or companies asking for donations to fund a program, as that is voluntary. I am against any group of people using government to steal from others. We could have gained the same amount of knowledge and spent significantly less. Who should decide at what level the people are made to suffer for the benefit of all. I say no1 should be able to decide this but each individual.

If you love spacy things, then you should want government to be involved as little as possible. They will always hold technology back. The US space program is a prime example of this. Just about all of it was a complete waste of the people's money, and it has gone on for decades now, with little to no real productive value. Why has no private company gotten involved until recently? That's obvious, as it was too expensive to be profitable at all. Now might be the time for private business to show us all what is possible. This will never happen if government is the primary buyer. If the people truly did want to explore space, then NASA could have gotten people to donate, instead of pointing a gun at them and stealing their money. The FACT that they needed to steal the money proves that the people did not want it, nor needed it.

If governments are the primary buyer, it is done that way on purpose, and is just another subsidized government business. They will innovate at whatever pace allows them to milk their cow of as much milk as possible. Again, it's our money, not NASA's money, as they produce nothing. If they did produce something, they would not need our money.
If that SpaceX company had to compete for their profits, then society would all benefit from that open market.

SpaceX [A Private Company along with many others] DOES compete for it's customer base's business. That the US government [or any government on earth of governmental agency] are one of the customer bases doesn't tarnish it's goals as a private designer & manufacturer of quality and reliable space systems.

As a reminder, we don't live in this pure non-government non-nationalistic world so many seem to think is the solution for all that ails us. 

NASA needs affordable ways to keep its projects afloat. It couldn't do it itself. Other governments, government agencies and private businesses are also contracting with SpaceX to launch commercial satellites into orbit as well as deep space research craft very soon.

The buyer [Government or Private] also gets to shop around and lay down requirements for space systems. SpaceX Systems did and continues to do this brilliantly with incredibly redundant systems design, efficient fuel sharing modules, single firm in-house manufacturing and on it's own dime leading the way in designing affordable reusable rocketry. The result - Low ETO expense and they continue to drive this price down.

NASA is not organized by design to allow this kind of development. The shuttle was an experiment from start to finish in how NOT to do reusable space vehicles.  The new NASA manned capsules are a retread of the Apollo designs sized up and filled with new electronics and tech from the current state of avionics engineering. 

NASA was in no way a waste of $. If nothing else, someone needed to lead the way for whatever reasons [political, pride, other] and take the 1st steps as successful [or not] as they were in achieving stated goals. Private businesses are now poised to step in and make space accessible to more and more businesses and governments. Individuals can experience space slight using low-orbit tech from Virgin Atlantic soon. The SpaceShip companies are cropping up all over with the eventual goal of being ready for affordable earth to orbit solution once the Space Hotels and Hostels are orbited [see Bigalow Systems].

Hindsight ragging is a useless exercise. [e.g. oh we should have spend money here and not here; Groups (Governments that tax their population) should never invest in space, only private groups (Businesses who risk there own earnings should) are the basic repeated themes of nonsense.]

Society in general is benefited by extra-planet endeavors when 1) we learn about where we came from and learn about our physical environment 2) We can make jumps in global communications allowing the free exchange of ideas all over this planet and 3) by putting our seeds all over this world and other planets & stars so that this miracle of life is not the only bulb of intelligence in the pantheon of the universe.

Space Exploration happens at the pace it can happen.

I'm tickled to be alive now when the potential for colonizing space privately [business related at 1st ROI based] is finally is developing wings of its own. There may be hope for us after all.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Madelaine McMasters

Madelaine McMasters

Posted
Posted

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Space is cool and all, I just don't get excited about space travel at this point in time. The cost is still ridiculous and it is always the public paying the bill for grown men to
play
. Now, if it was all done with private money, or donations, or any voluntary way, then I'd be all for it. If it is a private company building it only to have the government buy the crafts, then I'm still against it.

 

Some day, it will be much more feasible
, and we'll have many more toys to do it with.

Space travel has been quite feasible since probably before you were born, Medhue. A lot of the stuff in orbit is owned by private enterprise, and they're doing it not only because it's feasible, but because it's profitable.

Some level of public spending is required because no private enterprise has the resources or the incentive to get started on things deemed valuable to society long term, or when the value is simply unknown. How long would we have waited for private enterprise to loft a Hubble Space Telescope?

There is an argument to be made that, absent public sponsorship, someone eventually comes around to drum up private support for things, but there are some impressive examples of public programs pushing us ahead in ways we'd not expect from private enterprise.

While I'm not a huge fan of the NASA of my generation, that's because of its inefficiency, not its mission. I'm thrilled to see private enterprise enter the field. Since they haven't the ability to levy taxes, they must create value propositions we'll accept. Our government must do the same overall, but there's a level of obfuscation (both intentional and not), and a sluggishness in our response (voting) that seems to almost guarantee inefficiency.

Space travel will never be "much more feasible" if we don't constantly "play" with it. Play is one of the most important things we do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3676 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...