|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 12, 2022 7:45:20 GMT -5
On Sept. 26, DART will intentionally crash into Dimorphos, the asteroid moonlet of Didymos. While the asteroid poses no threat to Earth, this is the world’s first test of the kinetic impact technique, using a spacecraft to deflect an asteroid for planetary defense. www.nasa.gov/feature/dart-sets-sights-on-asteroid-targetHopefully, this asteroid pair will continue to not pose a threat after the impact. Since NASA is outsourcing the job to SpaceX, I feel somewhat more comfortable about this than if the vehicle was one of NASA's own. BTW, after replacing the leaking seals on the hydrogen fuel lines of the booster for Artemis, the (unmanned) moon mission might launch as early as September 23. www.space.com/artemis-1-moon-rocket-leaky-seals-replaced |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Sept 12, 2022 8:36:28 GMT -5
Back in September of 1999, NASA crashed an orbiter into Mars. I admit to losing a bit of faith in the "smartest guys in to room" after that. SpaceX. Don't get me started on Elon Musk... This is the same gaggle of geniuses that gave you an electric semi-truck that can carry only 9 tons of cargo...because it has to haul a 14 ton battery pack...then it'll only do it for 600 miles? You want a 900 mile range? That battery pack will weigh around 22 tons. Don't get me wrong. When I was a kid I was glued to the TV watching the moon landing. I've also wasted many electrons looking at the images from the new Webb telescope. I find this stuff fascinating. I hope they get this rocket up. I hope they come to their senses on using recycled components before any people get in that thing. My confidence in NASA is just slightly below the USPS these days. I think Alan Clark put it best, albeit 100 years ago..."Lions led by donkeys" HTC1 |
|
|
|
Post by b4nj0 on Sept 12, 2022 10:23:03 GMT -5
Nuevo NASA (as opposed to Viejo NASA, which was extant prior to Congress exerting its will over the purse strings, no doubt quite rightly.)
I too am fascinated with all things space related, and have the repeater frequencies programmed cross band in my dual band transceiver. I've lost count of the hours I've spent addictively craning my neck up at The I.S.S. fueled by NASA's timely location-centric heads-up eMails.
でつ e&oe ...
|
|
|
|
Post by unreg on Sept 12, 2022 18:11:00 GMT -5
This is the same gaggle of geniuses that gave you an electric semi-truck that can carry only 9 tons of cargo...because it has to haul a 14 ton battery pack...then it'll only do it for 600 miles? You want a 900 mile range? That battery pack will weigh around 22 tons. , you are criticizing a current technology creator for his creation. Well before actress Hedy Lamarr invented wifi, I was stuck using a 2600 baud modem for internet access. Then, I too wondered about download speeds so low that provided a super quick image download of 30 minutes. It was easy, for me, to be critical then. But, as technology improves, technology becomes better if built competently. Have you created an electric semi-truck that can carry 10 tons? Now that Elon Musk has created the truck you speak of, it’s helpful to view its bad aspects; but it’s wrong, to me at least now, to criticize a person for a technological premiere. I’ll crawl back into my hole in the ground now. |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Sept 12, 2022 19:20:44 GMT -5
Have you created an electric semi-truck that can carry 10 tons? No. And neither has anyone else, as there is no market for it in its current iteration. HTC1 |
|
|
|
Post by newey on Sept 12, 2022 20:31:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 26, 2022 11:53:00 GMT -5
I'd suggest: Undaunted Probe - Uranus. Which could be shortened to: UP - Uranus. |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 26, 2022 11:59:59 GMT -5
Getting back to DART ... NASA Television will broadcast coverage of the end of this mission beginning at 6 p.m. here: A stream of the images from the spacecraft (beginning at 5:30 p.m. will be provided here: |
|
|
|
Post by roadtonever on Sept 26, 2022 14:57:18 GMT -5
Have you created an electric semi-truck that can carry 10 tons? No. And neither has anyone else, as there is no market for it in its current iteration. HTC1 I didn't realize you were so concerned with Elon Musk finding a market for his creations. Jokes aside, basically every product Elon Musk reveals is met with similar set of reactions. A mix of amazement and criticism. That's basically his main product, generating a ton of reactions. Turns out it works works with investors too. That's how Elon Musk stays afloat so he can keep churning out novel creations. He was never about saving the world or bringing something useful for the majority of people. Without this straw man there's little to criticize in my mind. People with more altruistic motives could easily learn from his methods but criticism steals the show usually...There's also the corrupt political class of people posing as altruists, who seem to acquire peoples trust more easily than ol' Elon could ever dream of, using a lot of the same persuasion techniques. But that's another can of worms. |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Sept 27, 2022 6:19:48 GMT -5
I didn't realize you were so concerned with Elon Musk finding a market for his creations. Well, you got me on that one. I believe most of my issues with Elon Musk and his ilk are the solutions they invent...most seem to be seeking a problem to justify their existence. Battery technology is critical to most of Tesla's vehicle development. You know what else could use a big leg up in the battery development sector? Wind and solar farms. Without opening another can of worms, this is an area that has been neglected for the majority of their development...and we're talking about only a few years after Benz built his first "horseless carriage". This is important in that currently all wind farms require existing generation (oil, gas, coal, nuclear...etc) to run at normal capacity so their generated power doesn't "evaporate" essentially due to line loss before it gets to a distribution point. As it stands currently, what they do generate is merely siphoned onto an existing transmission line carrying a load. A battery array would allow these solar and wind electric generating facilities to push their load onto a transmission line without the need for "legacy" power generation to be present. I've read of only two of these projects Musk has been involved in. But he did send a car into space and create a traffic jam underground in Las Vegas... I guess I just fail to be impressed with anyone who has the money, power and influence to effect a significant change in the direction of life on this planet...but only uses it for self-aggrandizing carnival stunts. We have enough of that in world already... HTC1 |
|
|
|
Post by thetragichero on Sept 27, 2022 7:28:54 GMT -5
my issue is that homeboy doesn't actually invent anything. when he buys a product he also buys the inventor's rights so that he can claim he invented things and act like he's the smartest guy in the room. he ain't, he just came from an extremely wealthy family from apartheid south africa
|
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Sept 27, 2022 9:45:30 GMT -5
my issue is that homeboy doesn't actually invent anything. when he buys a product he also buys the inventor's rights so that he can claim he invented things and act like he's the smartest guy in the room. How did Microsoft get so big and Motorola get so small? Like Picasso said, "Good artists copy, great artists steal." But hey, they hit Dimorphos. There is some comfort knowing they can do it once. Sort of improves the odds when we need it to work again. Hat's off. HTC1 |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 27, 2022 10:29:49 GMT -5
But hey, they hit Dimorphos. There is some comfort knowing they can do it once. Sort of improves the odds when we need it to work again. Hat's off. I'm nicknaming this Spudnik. They hit the potato. Now comes the real work. Assessing the calculations of what they predicted the redirection to be, and the actual results. Should be roughly a week until they get accurate measurements. |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Sept 27, 2022 11:26:16 GMT -5
 The last thing $308,000,000.00 sees before it hits a fikado rock in the middle of space... To think, we could have bought just over 1700 Tesla Semi quad-motor semi trucks with that money...one of which would have only needed around 34,000 charging cycles to get to Dimorphos...sorry, had to get one more shot in...no pun intended... HTC1
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 27, 2022 22:07:54 GMT -5
I had to Google that. You naughty boy. lol |
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Sept 28, 2022 14:20:37 GMT -5
I had to Google that. You naughty boy. lol You're just now figuring that out?  I've long been convinced that this is his favorite word that starts with the letter "F". (But admittedly, he's not as prolific with that word as was Jordan Belfort. (Who does not hold the record for most uses of 'fikado' in a movie. Wikipedia has a comprehensive list, if you're interested (but I won't link it, the very title contains our magic word!).)) sumgai |
|
|
|
Post by b4nj0 on Sept 28, 2022 16:25:35 GMT -5
You must be referring to "Feldgarbe" SG
;<D
でつ e&oe ...
|
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Sept 28, 2022 17:08:02 GMT -5
I noticed that they cut the video just before the ship landed.
They didn't show the part where Bruce Willis climbed outside, drilled a big hole and dropped an atom bomb down it.
I guess that in 2022, that might not have gone down so well on social media and prime-time TV?
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Sept 28, 2022 20:45:56 GMT -5
You must be referring to "Feldgarbe" SG ;<D でつ e&oe ...Sorry, wrong Mentor Emeritus. Please insert another quarter to play again.  |
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Sept 28, 2022 20:51:48 GMT -5
I noticed that they cut the video just before the ship landed. They didn't show the part where Bruce Willis climbed outside, drilled a big hole and dropped an atom bomb down it. I guess that in 2022, that might not have gone down so well on social media and prime-time TV? Well, to be fair, it's the nearly-elder-abuse use of BW's name and image that's not going down so well with the public these days. And to be even more fair, what we're really upset about is that he used to make good movies, but now he's being used as a prop in order to sell 2nd and 3rd tier movies, via name recognition. That's called taking advantage of someone who's becoming increasingly unable to exert personal control over his affairs, and if my opinion were asked (as a fellow senior citizen), I'd be pretty outspoken about the situation. sumgai |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Sept 29, 2022 7:26:37 GMT -5
I had to Google that. You naughty boy. lol You're just now figuring that out? I've long been convinced that this is his favorite word that starts with the letter "F". It's a Chicago thing. You got a problem with that? Amateur...please... Without looking, my first guess was The Commitments...but that was 113th... I looked up the list...I love Scorsese movies for a reason, it appears... And as long as we're completely off the rails now, Bruce Willis. I like Bruce Willis. I like Pacino and Cage, but they both seem to be phoning it in along with Willis these days. Sadly, it's not that much different than Axl Rose, or the host of other aging talents who have seen the zenith of their career and are now just punching a clock until proteins plaque up the brain. Entertainment is a business...and entropy is...
I just wanted to see Steve Bushemi shoot up the asteroid.
HTC1
|
|
|
|
Post by newey on Sept 29, 2022 7:55:34 GMT -5
NASA missed a chance for a spectacle. Rather than just trying to alter the orbit of the smaller asteroid, they should have arranged for it to Crash into the bigger one. Of course, probably would have taken a larger mass spacecraft to do that, but the PR from that video could have secured their budget for years to come . . .
The science of it is great, but they need to think more about merging the science with cool promotions. People loved the Apollo program not for the science in the rocks they brought back, but for the spectacle of it. When the spectacle ceased, so did the funding.
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 29, 2022 10:45:22 GMT -5
I noticed that they cut the video just before the ship landed. They didn't show the part where Bruce Willis climbed outside, drilled a big hole and dropped an atom bomb down it. I guess that in 2022, that might not have gone down so well on social media and prime-time TV? You're right. Nukes have always been controversial but drilling has recently become such a politically charged issue, they were wise to edit that part out. I'll stop now before I get my own thread closed. lol |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Sept 29, 2022 11:50:23 GMT -5
Newey makes a very good point. I was 11 years old when NASA put men on the moon. I had the first pictures from the moon all over my room. I wasn't even aware of the DART project at all until ReTread posted it here. NASA did do a much better job with marketing, a.k.a. fundraising, 53 years ago. There was also more political will behind it. In 1961 Kennedy said "I believe that this Nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth." In the mid 60's NASA could count on roughly 4% of the fiscal spending the United States budgeted for the year...now they get 0.48%. These days, the only time NASA makes the news is if there's a crash of some sort involved... Lack of political will and a general rejection of most things scientific in the United States seems to be driving it. 50 years ago science was said to hold all the answers. Now that scientists are coming back with some these answers no one wants to hear it. Newey's right, this was their chance to make science sexy...and they missed the ball... HTC1
|
|
|
|
Post by newey on Sept 29, 2022 16:02:32 GMT -5
Alan Shepard didn't. Which perfectly illustrates my point about needing a bit of spectacle. www.space.com/apollo-14-moon-landing-golf-shot-analysisWhat's interesting about the article (before someone types "tl;dr") is not that Shepard managed to pull off taking a 6-iron club (it was just the head, attached to a sample collection tool) and two golf balls to the Moon. The article details the science that the USGA went through to try to verify how far his shot went (answer: Not far, as he was hitting one-handed in a spacesuit). But the USGA clearly must have time on their collective hands, given what they did here. |
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Sept 29, 2022 19:51:12 GMT -5
my issue is that homeboy doesn't actually invent anything. when he buys a product he also buys the inventor's rights so that he can claim he invented things and act like he's the smartest guy in the room. he ain't, he just came from an extremely wealthy family from apartheid south africa True. The main difference between him and any other person/organization with similar vision/goals is that he controls/attracts money to turn his (others'?) ideas into realities without the customary necessity of chasing down the money and/or approvals to spend that money. He has shown no reluctance to spend money to re-invent solutions for problems that have already been solved, and suffers little or no repercussions for frequent unnecessary spending and failures. It does mean that he eventually achieves something within a faster timeline than others would. I also agree that electric vehicles of all types are still too new to fully exhibit benefits that may eventually come into reality, and it seems that battery technology, as impressively improved as it is, still has some way to go before it can fully replace gasoline-powered engines (i.e. specific energy and energy density, recharge time, lifecycle cost and replacement cost to name a few). It may get there, but there is still a *very* large performance gap of around 2 orders of magnitude: gasoline at 47.5 MJ/kg and 34.6 MJ/liter; lithium-ion battery packs at around 0.3 MJ/kg and about 0.4 MJ/liter. I admit that this ignores the mass and efficiency difference between gasoline engines versus electric motors. |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Sept 30, 2022 8:59:53 GMT -5
The main difference between him and any other person/organization with similar vision/goals is that he controls/attracts money to turn his (others'?) ideas into realities without the customary necessity of chasing down the money and/or approvals to spend that money. Donald Trump can do that...so I fail to see that attribute as particularly special...it's sort of baked into the entrepreneur model. Yeah, that whole "tunnel loop" in Las Vegas...I bet he'd like to forget that one, too. He is a master of the 90's Internet business model, in that he made a fortune developing an idea that could be sold to someone else for a ridiculous profit...all you had to do was get 90% of it working and it didn't even need to be making money to attract a buyer. Anyone else remember how notoriously unsecure PayPal was in it's infancy? My hat is off to him for doing that better than anyone. Somewhere back in the days when I worked, someone gave me a pearl: There are three things you can have in any transaction. They are: 1.) The absolute highest quality. 2.) The absolute lowest price. 3.) The absolute fastest delivery. Then they said, "Now, pick two." Because that's how it works. Without starting a flame war, let me digress a moment. In the United States we are well known for our car-centric culture. This effected our civil planning in that it spawned a host of suburban development that necessitated more road expansions...which made room for more development...et cetera ad nauseam... In my humble opinion, with the current debate on climate conditions, it just strikes me as imprudent to encourage this trend by merely offering an electric pig with lipstick as a solution. Musk isn't alone. Obama took a similar tack with his "Cash for Clunkers" initiative. Where am I going with this? Mass transit, when done correctly, provides low cost transportation, employment within the operator and an incubator for smaller businesses that benefit from the daily passage of commuters. But hey, I can see where launching a bus into space would be a hard sell... And there it is. If you want to move an automobile, truck, bus or train the most efficient way to perform said task for the past 130 odd years is through some variant of internal combustion power transmission. Somewhere in the 1830's Robert Anderson is said to have developed the first battery powered vehicle in Scotland. Granted, no method existed for recharging those batteries, but it worked as long as the batteries held their charge. Skip ahead around 60 years and Karl Benz produces his first internal combustion automobile. We are now well out of the 19th century. Free enterprise favors the predicable, practical and economical solution. Granted, other economic factors, such as the development of the oil and coal industries and the huge profits associated with their development tilted the scales accordingly...but you don't need a chart to see which way it went. I'm continually amused at the claim of electric vehicles being "clean". Over 60% of the electricity generated to charge said vehicle is generated with fossil fuels. This strikes me as the man who is fine eating the steak, provided he doesn't have to kill the cow... Hydrogen. It's renewable. Cheaper to produce than gasoline. Distribution is the largest obstacle to its introduction into the mix. If we do nothing else well in the States, it's distribution. You can get $100.00 of useless merdo delivered the same day from Uncle Jeff. You'd think if they put their big brains to it the problem becomes an opportunity...
Musk is actually working with Toyota on a hydrogen\electric hybrid. Supposed to be out next year. Of all the crazy things that come out of Musk's brain, this one might help change a trend. Hope springs eternal.
HTC1
|
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Sept 30, 2022 15:44:15 GMT -5
This is an excellently de-railable thread!
So on electric propulsion - it's tantalising, once you get the power into the vehicle.
An IC engine is a massively compromised workaround that has been refined exquisitely until it works really well. But as a concept, it's a motor that can't start unless it's already going, it's heavy, bulky and only works well over a limited range of speeds, which are much higher than can be applied to wheels without complex gearing. Hence we need a another motor to start it, a clutch, a gearbox, a drive train to distribute power from the large engine to the wheels.
An electric motor is more compact, gives its max torque when you need it starting off, works over a wide RPM range and can have drive at each wheel, with power distribution by a wire.
But....liquid fuel for IC engines is easily squirted in fast, is very compact and is easy to move using pipes, tanks hoses and jerry-cans. Electric charging is slow, and storage is bulky. Also, how long for tbe expensive batteries last? Everyone knows how a 3 year-old phone or laptop runs out of charge soon, even though it's better than a decade ago.
Hydrogen made from renewable power could be the way...but it has its own issues due to the need for pressure to contain it. NASA knows this well and I hope they get Artemis up soon.
Maybe there's a solution with renewables creating hydrogen to go into an IC engine, but there's a long way to go.
For me, I have a moderate/short commute that i dont do every day and lots of sunshine. I could imagine an electric vehicle that I charge from banks of my own solar panels at home. Maybe even spare battery packs swapped out like on a cordless drill.(but bigger!)
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 30, 2022 16:56:57 GMT -5
And there it is. If you want to move an automobile, truck, bus or train the most efficient way to perform said task for the past 130 odd years is through some variant of internal combustion power transmission. I disagree. It depends on the weight of the vehicle and cargo, the range required, and the type of driving. IC engines waste a lot of energy through heat. And additional heat losses occur when braking. In stop and go driving at speeds where aerodynamic drag isn't much of a factor, a lightweight electric vehicles with a smaller battery array (very limited range) are FAR more efficient than similar vehicles with IC engines, even using fossil fuels as the original source for the electric power. The greatest energy cost in city driving is accelerating a vehicle from a stop to operational speed. And EV recovers much of the kinetic energy during braking. Vehicles with IC engines completely waste that, turning it directly into heat. "Zero Emission Vehicle" is a marketing lie. While there are no tailpipe emissions ... in fact no tailpipe at all, the emissions occur at the electric power generating plant. AND there are significant carbon costs embedded in the batteries. Mining and refining relatively rare elements for batteries causes emissions. For vehicles with long-range battery arrays, the break-even point on emissions doesn't occur until a LOT of miles have elapsed. The future is electric eclectic. Hydrogen. It's renewable. Cheaper to produce than gasoline. Distribution is the largest obstacle to its introduction into the mix. If we do nothing else well in the States, it's distribution. You can get $100.00 of useless merdo delivered the same day from Uncle Jeff. You'd think if they put their big brains to it the problem becomes an opportunity... Storage is a huge issue. With gases, the way to maximize the storage, is in liquid form. Gases like propane require modest pressure to contain them as a liquid at room temperature. Hydrogen requires incredible pressure to maintain a liquid state at room temperature. However, the combustion byproduct is water vapor. And hydrogen can be used in fuel cells to generate electricity. I'm glad you mentioned hydrogen. Although there are still challenges to be met, hydrogen may one day be great solution.
However, at the present time I believe short-range EVs with a small onboard gasoline or diesel engine to generate electricity when extended range is needed, might be a worthwhile concept to investigate. But it should probably be more sophisticated than this:  |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 30, 2022 17:05:51 GMT -5
This is an excellently de-railable thread! And the distinct possibility of it descending into partisan politics. I reckon as long as we remain focused on the technology rather than the politics, we'll be okay. |
|
I've long been convinced that this is his favorite word that starts with the letter "F".
