SpaceX rockets and launches
- Thread starter rover07
- Start date
2hats
Dust.
Falcon 9 Block 5 has a 100% launch reliability record (29/29); Falcon 9 Full Thrust also a 100% launch reliability record (65/65). Soyuz FG has a 98.5% launch reliability record (68/69).
This year another SpaceX Crew Dragon mission to the ISS is planned for August. Boeing hope to get their crewed CST-100 Starliner to the ISS before the end of the year. Then there is one planned Soyuz mission to the ISS in October to take up the Expedition 63 crew.
So far for 2021, to build the Expedition 64 crew, there is scheduled one Boeing flight and one Soyuz, both in April. Plus there is a third SpaceX Crew Dragon mission slated for May.
SpaceX work in metric.
Mogden
I like tea
Twitter lit up last night with Flat Earthers and their fish eye lens theory 
I watched last night and then a catch up programme this morning via YouTube. I just find it so incredible and weird. We can walk for miles and it's not exciting but change the trajectory and it's literally a different world.
I watched last night and then a catch up programme this morning via YouTube. I just find it so incredible and weird. We can walk for miles and it's not exciting but change the trajectory and it's literally a different world.
tommers
It was... Rebekah Vardy's account
How much will Elon charge?
2hats
Dust.
It's costing NASA around $55 million per seat on F9/Crew Dragon, whilst they pay $86 million per seat on Soyuz. The estimated cost for the Boeing CST-100 Starliner will be around $90 million per seat. For comparison, the shuttle cost at least $200 million per seat to the ISS.
weltweit
Well-Known Member
2hats which part of the sky should we be looking in?
weltweit
Well-Known Member
Nope missed it, shame. Another time.
Limejuice
Well-Known Member
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
Love this comparison:
Space Shuttle 1999
Space X
It still looks like a prop off a sci-film to me!
Photos of the Sleek New Ride Ready To Return US Astronauts To Space
This is the SpaceX Crew Dragon capsule, sitting on its cargo-carrying “trunk”. The dragon will (God willing) carry two astronauts to the Internationalpetapixel.com
Can't say that I approve of replacing almost every physical dial and switch with bloody touchscreens (FFS). What happens when a screen breaks? You've now just lost control of a whole bunch of stuff, and you might even lose the ability to check on the status of critical systems, if the screen stops displaying stuff. You might be able to jury-rig a fix for a physical switch, or otherwise test it with a multimeter, to see if it's still working even if the little light on the switch has blown out. How the fuck would you field-repair or bypass a broken touch display? I wouldn't want to try soldering anything in a confined space, in free-fall.
I don't think having touchscreens is a 100% bad idea for a spacecraft cockpit, but it looks like they've made them the predominant control interface and info display, with hardly any backup systems. This is especially puzzling for a control interface that is far more sensitive to damage and interference, than a physical switch with no micro-scale components that could be disrupted by cosmic radiation.
Space is a hostile environment, even considering the fact that LEO is still well within the majority of the Earth's protective magnetosphere. In such cases I think you really shouldn't be putting so much reliance on flashy, gimmicky toys, as opposed to solid and proven engineering that has been proven to be reliable for decades. What happens if NASA ever decides to go beyond LEO?
For comparison, here's the interior of a 747-8, a modern commercial aircraft. Note how even though it's a plane that first flew as recently as 2010, and is not expected to deal with the harsher conditions of LEO, the designers didn't go batshit and replace everything with goddamn touchscreens.
Of course I'm no engineer, so I might be well off the mark in my assessment. But given my own experience with touchscreen interfaces vs physical switches, this looks like they went more for "ooh flashy" rather than practicality. Style over substance.
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
It’s very simple. Massive walls of dials, switches and knobs are cool. A screen will never, ever be that.
Can't say that I approve of replacing almost every physical dial and switch with bloody touchscreens (FFS). What happens when a screen breaks? You've now just lost control of a whole bunch of stuff, and you might even lose the ability to check on the status of critical systems, if the screen stops displaying stuff. You might be able to jury-rig a fix for a physical switch, or otherwise test it with a multimeter, to see if it's still working even if the little light on the switch has blown out. How the fuck would you field-repair or bypass a broken touch display? I wouldn't want to try soldering anything in a confined space, in free-fall.
I don't think having touchscreens is a 100% bad idea for a spacecraft cockpit, but it looks like they've made them the predominant control interface and info display, with hardly any backup systems. This is especially puzzling for a control interface that is far more sensitive to damage and interference, than a physical switch with no micro-scale components that could be disrupted by cosmic radiation.
Space is a hostile environment, even considering the fact that LEO is still well within the majority of the Earth's protective magnetosphere. In such cases I think you really shouldn't be putting so much reliance on flashy, gimmicky toys, as opposed to solid and proven engineering that has been proven to be reliable for decades. What happens if NASA ever decides to go beyond LEO?
For comparison, here's the interior of a 747-8, a modern commercial aircraft. Note how even though it's a plane that first flew as recently as 2010, and is not expected to deal with the harsher conditions of LEO, the designers didn't go batshit and replace everything with goddamn touchscreens.
Of course I'm no engineer, so I might be well off the mark in my assessment. But given my own experience with touchscreen interfaces vs physical switches, this looks like they went more for "ooh flashy" rather than practicality. Style over substance.
My guess is that for spacex their role is spam in can, computers doing the flying. Where as with Apollo and Space shuttles, astronauts were expected to do some flying.
(buttons for changing radio channels on steering wheel significantly better than trackpads or touch screen
)
2hats
Dust.
There are a few tactile, physical buttons, selectors for time critical/emergency procedures (replicated on the touchscreens) below the finger tray at the bottom of the touchscreen displays (which itself provides a reference point, to rest part of the hand/wrist upon, for helping make screen selections during the ride to orbit). Those switches are for (eg) initiating ascent abort modes, deorbit, depressurisation, cabin fire suppression, emergency lighting...
Note 26 seconds into this short video of the interior:
Note 26 seconds into this short video of the interior:
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
My guess is that for spacex their role is spam in can, computers doing the flying. Where as with Apollo and Space shuttles, astronauts were expected to do some flying.
(buttons for changing radio channels on steering wheel significantly better than trackpads or touch screen
I didn't think they'd gotten rid of all the other buttons, but I swear that I've seen more actual buttons on the consoles of most consumer vehicles. I'd really love to hear comments on the design from the perspective of those aerospace engineers who are not working for SpaceX. Their design philosophy makes me uneasy. I really don't think space is the place for taking this neoliberal de-skilling approach that's insanely popular elsewhere in society. I know they probably want less expensive (i.e. less skilled) people to pilot their vehicles, but if even commercial airlines haven't found a way of completely replacing trained pilots with strategically shaved chimps, then what makes SpaceX think that they can get away with it?
Personally I wouldn't want to travel on a spacecraft where none of the crew knows how to use a slide rule in an emergency. I bet they don't even have a slide rule on board, with markings in radioluminescent paint in case the lights aren't working. Nah, I bet they've replaced it with some New Age music and a pamphlet on mindfulness, "Coming to Terms With your Impending Demise". California was a mistake.
