Quake3World

I do, don't get me wrong, but it's also a popularity contest and making bold claims is more about getting investors rather than actually doing what they say.

Check out the NASAs plasma engine and forget about going to mars.

Imagine if Musk strapped a few of those to his BFRs.

It's nice to have some positive shit going on in the world

yeah but...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_propulsion_engine

For some plasma thruster technologies, such as Berkant Goskel's tiny plasma thruster, one of the largest problems is generating enough electricity to turn gases into plasma. This same problem plagues Diaz's VASIMR thruster. Diaz's device would need so much electricity, that any vehicle that uses a VASIMR engine would also need several nuclear reactors in order to generate enough power. Not only would the reactors add mass to the payload, this has caused concern by some who fear the possible fallout caused by an explosion of the reactor. Because of this possibility, NASA has previously stopped research in nuclear reactors that could be sent up into space.

Another common issue plasma rockets have run into is the possibility of the rocket breaking itself. Over time, the plasma these rockets produce will damage the walls of the device ultimately causing it to break. This means that on a mission to Mars, it is possible that the rocket will destroy itself.

not out of the woods yet

Transient wrote:The idea of a private space company launching reusable rockets was pie in the sky thinking not too long ago. C'mon guys, smoke a joint and embrace the future!

Don't get me wrong I'd love to be proven wrong and private space travel has been attempted for quite some time now with SpaceX exceeding expectations including mine - in the way that he made private space travel a sustainable business. To me SpaceX are the only reputable private space business whilst everyone else is pretty much an imposter, they seem to be the exception rather than the norm and even then they had to rely heavily on government contracts and grants.

They've had a lot of difficiulty just reaching LEO though without failure and it took them the better part of 10 years to reach that point ?, space is hard yo . His plans for Mars are incredibly ambitious and like DB said, as a private business these bold claims sound more like a marketing tool, even if only to garner investments to fund this ambition. NASA when reaching the moon had some of the greatest minds, an unlimited pot of money and a relaxed view on health and safety, fast forward a few more decades then placing a habitat in LEO took a worldwide effort over 10 years with the logisitics already in place (the shuttle program) with design starting in the 80s. Then what happens when something breaks ?, when inflation adjusted it cost Hubble nearly 12bn to get new glasses.

The R+D alone I'd be willing to bet would cost way more than the total value of the company, then the sheer logisitics behind it to run regular supplies to Mars n stuff without failure is gonna take decades in the planning and testing imo (for things like refineries, autonomous rovers, habitats, food, the rocket systems required for space docking / Mars landing n stuff).

I'd love to be proven wrong and have Musk exceed expectations but when it comes to Mars, I really can't see it.

Off topic a little but added for your interest

Tesla boss Elon Musk has held a party in South Australia's mid-north to mark the
halfway point of construction of the world's most powerful lithium ion battery.

A grid connection agreement for the 100-megawatt battery array was signed by
transmission company Electranet on Friday afternoon, sparking the start of a 100-
day deadline for Tesla to complete construction of the battery or build it for free.

Source
Another source

seremtan wrote:on a related note, the deployment of the JWST has been put back another year

space is hard work, guys

fuck a duck