[ExI] musk's ride
danust2012 at gmail.com
Wed Jan 3 20:45:26 UTC 2018
On Jan 3, 2018, at 11:26 AM, Dylan Distasio <interzone at gmail.com> wrote:
> Not being a rocket scientist, I guess that makes sense in general, but to John's point, it doesn't seem like a great idea when you are increasing complexity in a system that is somewhat prone to blowing up.
> In any case, I wish them a lot of success with the launch and am excited about the prospect of a rocket with that much power coming back into the space exploration toolkit.
Not rocket engineer either... I think they’ve demonstrated some success with the modular scalable approach. Building a bigger engine would mean basically having to go through the whole design, develop, test, and use process again for just that one component. Now they have a reliable engine with many successful flights. They’ve also tested some failure modes in flights — shutting down engines and such.
IIRC, no engine explosion has caused a failure of the Falcon 9 family of rockets in flight or on the pad. The explosions were caused by other components — not the engines.
I believe we’re all hoping for success here. If it all goes well, SpaceX will have a Mars-ready rocket. That might mean that Musk’s aggressive plan to put people on Mars in a few years will come to pass.
Sample my latest Kindle book "Sand Trap":
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat