What a fine day for a launch ! Tremendous onboard and remote views of booster return. Newtonian poetry in motion. I do believe
marks the spot. :-)
I liked a Twitter comment that said SpaceX land rockets better than some people park a car :
.... a beautiful sight, that also deceives on the true scale of the gadget. I'll repeat what I said several years ago : no one else is anywhere near demonstrating SpaceX's expertise*.
Cheers, Mike.
* Save your breath, I mean hypersonic return from orbital ascent not a wee pogo jump straight up and down. Remember the tangential velocity ...... you can't leave the planet ( for very long ) without it.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
Since much has been made of elevation to 100 km ( official edge of space ) vs. orbital velocity at that height, here's a quick precis :
- gravitational potential energy change ~ m * g * h ( ignoring slight reduction of g at surface ~ 9.8 m/s2 to altitude )
- kinetic energy on orbit = 1/2 * m * v2 ( ditto with v = 7.8 km/s )
Mass is a common factor. For each one kilogram mass of payload :
Grav_pot = 9.8 * 100,000 = 980,000 J
K.E. = 0.5 * (7800)2 = 30,420,000 J
K.E./Grav_pot ~ 31
Meaning that whatever potential energy is gifted to a payload to climb up to 100km, you need ~ another 30 times that amount to orbit the Earth at that height. This is why bouncing on a trampoline won't cut it ! :-))
Cheers, Mike.
( edit ) One can link height and orbital velocity using an independent equation. That could give a relation involving Earth's surface radius and orbital height and Newton's gravitational constant G. Then throw in either Earth's mass or average density and one can deduce how close to impossible it can be to launch to orbit via a particular chemical means. That's because one can view unused fuel retained to a certain height as part of payload mass elevated and sped up thus far. In turn that decides the required available energy density that the fuel(s) must have. That may exceed known yields from some given reaction stoichiometry. The upshot is that for some planets ( fortunately not ours ) that have certain combinations of mass and surface radius to launch from you can't actually get to orbit at all for known/best choices of reactants to operate a rocket on.
Clearly smaller and denser planets are the hardest to escape from via chemical rocket methodology. What about Jupiter, say, known to have ~ 12g at the visible radius ? Yup, that depends on where you think the solid surface would be. Mega-trebuchet anyone ?? :-))
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
Falcon tanks had been loaded with explosive stuff to produce some 1 million pounds of thrust. Impressive. Live coverage on NASA channel. Afterwards in the press conference they announced that a first crew will be sent to ISS with a Falcon next year. Two crew names to be announced probably next month (Adam and Eve, I guess?).
Professor Hawking knows mankind has to leave earth in a hundred years, 'cause earth will be done by then. Will require a lot more thrust. Most impressive, but definitely not enough to induce a gravitational wave, which would have been helpful to announce the event to the universe. So mankind will have to rely upon Twitter: "Hey universe, we're prepared for launch. Peaceful mission! We're all sitting here on top of explosive stuff, in pairs of two on 1 million pounds each. Live coverage on all channels!"
Going over video from various angles : that landing was outrageously exact with just a light touch on final contact. Someone has done alot of homework plus the weather was helpful too.
@ROBL : Are you getting some solar eclipse next week ?
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
Going over video from various angles : that landing was outrageously exact with just a light touch on final contact. Someone has done alot of homework plus the weather was helpful too.
@ROBL : Are you getting some solar eclipse next week ?
Cheers, Mike.
yes, about 88%. There is a lot going on this week with two launches and the solar eclipse.
And your right. SpaceX has done their homework. It seems almost too easy.
* Save your breath, I mean hypersonic return from orbital ascent not a wee pogo jump straight up and down. Remember the tangential velocity ...... you can't leave the planet ( for very long ) without it.
But they aren't jumping straight up and down. If they did the earth would have moved by the time they get back to land. Unless they launch from the poles.
* Save your breath, I mean hypersonic return from orbital ascent not a wee pogo jump straight up and down. Remember the tangential velocity ...... you can't leave the planet ( for very long ) without it.
But they aren't jumping straight up and down. If they did the earth would have moved by the time they get back to land. Unless they launch from the poles.
LOL. That's the trick indeed ! :-)
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
Elon Musk has just announced that SpaceX have tested their new space suit at twice the pressure of a pure vacuum. LOL ! That's what I call thorough testing ..... :-)
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
What a fine day for a launch
)
What a fine day for a launch ! Tremendous onboard and remote views of booster return. Newtonian poetry in motion. I do believe
marks the spot. :-)
I liked a Twitter comment that said SpaceX land rockets better than some people park a car :
.... a beautiful sight, that also deceives on the true scale of the gadget. I'll repeat what I said several years ago : no one else is anywhere near demonstrating SpaceX's expertise*.
Cheers, Mike.
* Save your breath, I mean hypersonic return from orbital ascent not a wee pogo jump straight up and down. Remember the tangential velocity ...... you can't leave the planet ( for very long ) without it.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
Yes Space X is very, very
)
Yes Space X is very, very impressive. Elon Musk is the man!
Since much has been made of
)
Since much has been made of elevation to 100 km ( official edge of space ) vs. orbital velocity at that height, here's a quick precis :
- gravitational potential energy change ~ m * g * h ( ignoring slight reduction of g at surface ~ 9.8 m/s2 to altitude )
- kinetic energy on orbit = 1/2 * m * v2 ( ditto with v = 7.8 km/s )
Mass is a common factor. For each one kilogram mass of payload :
Grav_pot = 9.8 * 100,000 = 980,000 J
K.E. = 0.5 * (7800)2 = 30,420,000 J
K.E./Grav_pot ~ 31
Meaning that whatever potential energy is gifted to a payload to climb up to 100km, you need ~ another 30 times that amount to orbit the Earth at that height. This is why bouncing on a trampoline won't cut it ! :-))
Cheers, Mike.
( edit ) One can link height and orbital velocity using an independent equation. That could give a relation involving Earth's surface radius and orbital height and Newton's gravitational constant G. Then throw in either Earth's mass or average density and one can deduce how close to impossible it can be to launch to orbit via a particular chemical means. That's because one can view unused fuel retained to a certain height as part of payload mass elevated and sped up thus far. In turn that decides the required available energy density that the fuel(s) must have. That may exceed known yields from some given reaction stoichiometry. The upshot is that for some planets ( fortunately not ours ) that have certain combinations of mass and surface radius to launch from you can't actually get to orbit at all for known/best choices of reactants to operate a rocket on.
Clearly smaller and denser planets are the hardest to escape from via chemical rocket methodology. What about Jupiter, say, known to have ~ 12g at the visible radius ? Yup, that depends on where you think the solid surface would be. Mega-trebuchet anyone ?? :-))
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
http://wgntv.com/2017/08/14/s
)
http://wgntv.com/2017/08/14/spacex-to-launch-supercomputer-to-international-space-station/
http://wgntv.com/2017/08/14/arlington-heights-boy-scouts-have-project-launched-into-space/
David
Miserable old git
Patiently waiting for the asteroid with my name on it.
Falcon tanks had been loaded
)
Falcon tanks had been loaded with explosive stuff to produce some 1 million pounds of thrust. Impressive. Live coverage on NASA channel. Afterwards in the press conference they announced that a first crew will be sent to ISS with a Falcon next year. Two crew names to be announced probably next month (Adam and Eve, I guess?).
Professor Hawking knows mankind has to leave earth in a hundred years, 'cause earth will be done by then. Will require a lot more thrust. Most impressive, but definitely not enough to induce a gravitational wave, which would have been helpful to announce the event to the universe. So mankind will have to rely upon Twitter: "Hey universe, we're prepared for launch. Peaceful mission! We're all sitting here on top of explosive stuff, in pairs of two on 1 million pounds each. Live coverage on all channels!"
Going over video from various
)
Going over video from various angles : that landing was outrageously exact with just a light touch on final contact. Someone has done alot of homework plus the weather was helpful too.
@ROBL : Are you getting some solar eclipse next week ?
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
Mike Hewson wrote:Going over
)
yes, about 88%. There is a lot going on this week with two launches and the solar eclipse.
And your right. SpaceX has done their homework. It seems almost too easy.
Mike Hewson wrote:* Save your
)
But they aren't jumping straight up and down. If they did the earth would have moved by the time they get back to land. Unless they launch from the poles.
Gary Charpentier wrote:Mike
)
LOL. That's the trick indeed ! :-)
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
Elon Musk has just announced
)
Elon Musk has just announced that SpaceX have tested their new space suit at twice the pressure of a pure vacuum. LOL ! That's what I call thorough testing ..... :-)
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal