And exactly as I feared, Mars Sample Return becomes the next black hole project sucking up the funding that could be spent far more efficiently on other stuff.
Everything in space is there temporarily. We can reconstruct it here, but what kind of museum would it be up there? Just a place the rich can visit. No here a replica can inspire kids to be scientists and engineers and pilots. Let it die like the eagle lander died. Space is beautiful and should have its monuments, but we should make sure they’re worth the cost and effort
I mean, I get your point, but tracking it and going out with my telescope to see it fly by outside as a kid was such a foundational moment for me. It’ll be sad to know its gone without a replacement in the meantime
It seems like it might be. I suppose one could argue that the Falcon Heavy demo test flight could count as privately funded interplanetary mission, since its orbit crosses Mars’ orbit, but it didn’t go to Mars. There have also been a few interplanetary probes built by universities but launched by government agencies like NASA and JAXA.
Still technically next year! Though the Venus transfer window does extend into 2025, and modified version of Berger’s Law indicates that a slip to the right is likely:
Berger’s Law: If rocket is predicted to [launch] in Q4 of a calendar year, and that quarter is six or more months away, the launch will be delayed.
I don’t see why. Being close to the equator is generally good. The northern territories launch site is quite close. They also mention a southern launch site which would be farther, but even that one is almost as close to the equator as Florida.
Virgin Galactic proved pretty well that informed consent isn’t really sufficient, because there are too many unknown unknowns for them to properly inform someone. They’re on a good streak lately, but so was Blue Origin before their uncrewed abort last September that still has New Sheppard grounded. SpaceX has been the aberration so far, and seems to handle Dragon much more rigorously than Starship, and would have to be considered the LEO crew flight experts at this point, but they also lost rockets pretty well into Falcon 9’s operational life.
I don’t know what the right answer is, and I’m guessing a massive requirement list wouldn’t do anything to help newcomers. This is a tough one.
Arnhem Space Center is at a latitude of only -12, so that could be pretty beneficial to a company like ABL that’s trying a containerized launch system, especially with Cape Canaveral getting busier and busier. Rocket Lab Neutron seems too big and logistically annoying to get down there.
If you want to be weirded out watch the episode of Dresden Files she’s in. She nails it, don’t misunderstand, but if you know that’s not at all her accent…
Why is it "going to get worse"? A 4-second delay might need to be done for launches more frequently, but I don't see why the delays would get longer than that - debris moves out of the way at the same speed regardless of how much of it there is. This doesn't seem like a big deal. If a 4-second delay risks killing your mission then you probably should have designed the mission with more leeway in its launch window to begin with. There are a huge number of technical issues that could easily cause a 4-second delay.
Of course, that doesn't result in a headline that draws clicks.
Edit: I just read the article. "It's going to get worse" doesn't appear anywhere in it. You just made that up.
Do you think there will be less things in orbit in the future or more? Because it’s less ‘made that up’ and more ‘inferred based on what happens in reality.’
As I said, "more things in orbit" does not imply longer delays. It would mean that launches would have to delay 4 seconds more frequently, not that they would need to delay longer than 4 seconds.
If a 4 second delay is a problem then your mission is badly designed from the start since there are very many reasons you might encounter a 4 second delay.
4 seconds? Usually launch windows are in hours and days right? Unless you have barely any fuel margin and you're trying to hit a very very specific orbit I can't imagine 4 seconds being a huge issue. But I'm no orbital dynamicist
It's not a huge deal, and if it were then the mission is already balanced on a knife's edge and shouldn't have been designed that way in the first place. There are plenty of technical problems that could cause a 4-second delay.
spacenews.com
Active