SpaceX Launches Supplies to ISS, Including Its First 3D Printer

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

SpaceX Launches Supplies to ISS, Including Its First 3D Printer

Posted by timothy on Sunday September 21, 2014 @03:31AM from the from-fantasy-to-routine dept.

A "flawless" launch early Sunday from Cape Canaveral has sent a load of supplies on its way to the International Space Station aboard a Falcon 9-lofted SpaceX Dragon capsule. Food, care packages and provisions for NASA's astronauts make up more than a third of the cargo onboard Dragon. But the spacecraft also has experiments and equipment that will eventually help scientists complete 255 research projects in total, according to NASA. In Dragon's trunk, there's an instrument dubbed RapidScat, which will be installed outside the space station to measure the speed and direction of ocean winds on Earth. Among the commercially funded experiments onboard Dragon is a materials-science test from the sports company Cobra Puma Golf designed to build a stronger golf club. Dragon is also hauling the first space-grade 3D printer, built by Made in Space, which will test whether the on-the-spot manufacturing technology is viable without gravity.

129 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

on youtube by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 03:43 · Score: 2, Informative

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH5EErE8QnI
So we just gave all this money by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 03:45 · Score: 1

To people (Boing, et al) who couldn't launch a rocket of their own if they dropped it on a trampoline, and SpaceX casually brushes them aside with a fraction of the money and a homebrewed design?
No cronyism in that decision at all. Absolutely none.
1. Re:So we just gave all this money by TWX · 2014-09-21 04:03 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  In Boeing's defense, it's b-o-e-i-n-g, not 'boing'. A trampoline was never being considered.
  
  --
  Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
2. Re:So we just gave all this money by mspohr · 2014-09-21 05:08 · Score: 1
  
  I think it's better as Boing, boing, boing!
  
  --
  I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
3. Re:So we just gave all this money by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 05:13 · Score: 0, Insightful
  
  Are you high, or do you really buy into this religious nonsense about SpaceX?
  Boeing have contributed to hundreds of significant aerospace advances over the past century. They are still a fine engineering company. Yes, they've become bloated and expensive, but that happens to EVERY large organisation over time.
  SpaceX has achieved pretty much fuck all in its first decade compared to what Boeing was working on when it received its first (far smaller) government contracts.
4. Re: So we just gave all this money by bill_mcgonigle · 2014-09-21 05:30 · Score: 1
  
  Where is Boeing's reusable, low-cost, kerosene (safe) launch vehicle?
  
  --
  My God, it's Full of Source!
  OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
5. Re: So we just gave all this money by ColdWetDog · 2014-09-21 05:55 · Score: 1
  
  Right here. (It's engineering, you can only get two out of three.)
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
6. Re: So we just gave all this money by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 06:37 · Score: 1
  
  Nice try. X-37 isn't a launch vehicle, and its onboard OMS propulsion uses toxic hypergolics.
7. Re:So we just gave all this money by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 06:49 · Score: 0
  
  ULA troll.
8. Re:So we just gave all this money by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2014-09-21 07:01 · Score: 1
  
  SpaceX has achieved pretty much fuck all in its first decade compared to what Boeing was working on when it received its first (far smaller) government contracts.
  Really? I thought Boeing was forced to build furniture after WW I. :-p
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
9. Re:So we just gave all this money by davester666 · 2014-09-21 07:07 · Score: 1
  
  yes, they prefer using pogo sticks.
  
  --
  Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
10. Re:So we just gave all this money by Applehu+Akbar · 2014-09-21 07:59 · Score: 1
  
  Those must be the airline seats we're still sitting in.
11. Re: So we just gave all this money by Redbehrend · 2014-09-21 08:53 · Score: 1
  
  Boeing made that thing way overly complicated and expensive. But hey that's what they are good at lol
12. Re:So we just gave all this money by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 09:30 · Score: 0
  
  Actually it's Böing, but don't try pronouncing that.
13. Re:So we just gave all this money by l0n3s0m3phr34k · 2014-09-21 10:54 · Score: 1
  
  yeah, that was Putin's idea, not Boeing's. But if they did use one, naming it the "Boeing Boing Launch System" would be great.
14. Re: So we just gave all this money by cheesybagel · 2014-09-21 11:12 · Score: 2
  
  Its launched on top of an Atlas V which uses Russian RD-180 engines. Next.
15. Re:So we just gave all this money by Megane · 2014-09-21 11:32 · Score: 2
  
  A trampoline was never being considered.
  Except by the Russians. Sort of.
  
  --
  #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
16. Re:So we just gave all this money by DigiShaman · 2014-09-21 14:47 · Score: 1
  
  You've obviously never been double-bounced properly. Get it right, and it's off to the moon you go!
  
  --
  Life is not for the lazy.
17. Re: So we just gave all this money by AC-x · 2014-09-21 23:56 · Score: 1
  
  The X-37 isn't the launch vehicle, it's the payload...
18. Re:So we just gave all this money by TWX · 2014-09-22 12:44 · Score: 1
  
  That's what she said...
  
  --
  Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Only 255 projects? by Whiternoise · 2014-09-21 03:52 · Score: 5, Funny

Someone needs to update from 8-bit mission plans!
1. Re:Only 255 projects? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 13:26 · Score: 1
  
  They neglected a bit.
oh wow by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 03:53 · Score: 0, Offtopic

a space-rated 3D printer! what a fucking joke.
1. Re:oh wow by TWX · 2014-09-21 04:10 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I actually don't care for this modern 3d printer hype, but this is one of the few places where I could see a 3d printer being particularly useful.
  
  Thing is, you're melting plastic and placing that melted plastic where you want it to be. In gravity and endless atmosphere this is easy, the gravity helps feed the raw materials through a hopper and ensure that the plastic stays where you place it, and the essentially endless atmosphere carries away noxious fumes so that you don't poison yourself. Unfortunately on a space station or in a spacecraft you have no effective gravity and a very limited atmosphere, so you cannot pollute nor can you rely on gravity to make things go where you want them.
  
  Consider the effort and design that goes into the toilet. A simple act that humans have always done on Earth is not so simple in space, and millions of dollars have been spent to account for biology designed to function with gravity assistance when that gravity is not available.
  
  --
  Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
2. Re:oh wow by ArcadeMan · 2014-09-21 04:19 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  The gravity helps feed the raw materials through a hopper? You think 3D printers use plastic pellets?
  Have you ever seen a 3D printer in action in the last few years? They use plastic filament and can print upside-down without any problems. The fumes can probably be eliminated by using an enclosed printing space with a filtered exhaust, and the toxicity of the fumes lowered by using PLA instead of ABS.
  
  --
  Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
3. Re:oh wow by MightyYar · 2014-09-21 04:33 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I'd expect that from eight year olds, not adults.
  Perhaps the problem is that you've lost hold of what makes 8-year-olds so delightful? There was a cynical curmudgeon about just about every technological advance throughout human history, and despite that flight is routine and inexpensive. Horseless carriages clog the roads. Skyscrapers crown cities. Nuclear reactors pump out gigawatts of electricity. Ships the size of skyscrapers ply the seas carrying stuff built by robots. We carry some significant percentage of all human knowledge in our pockets. At every step, there were doubters. You are that guy now.
  If you want to manufacture stuff in space, you can't just jump right to space foundries and space smelters. Baby steps.
  
  --
  W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
4. Re:oh wow by SuricouRaven · 2014-09-21 04:37 · Score: 2
  
  Launch costs are still falling. Technology is still improving. The technology is almost ready to colonise mars now - all that is lacking is the collective will to spend several trillion dollars and more than a few lives on mega-project that would take centuries to complete. That's a socio-political problem, not a technological one.
  Why did we go to the moon? It was hugely expensive and the only benefit it brought was a slightly better understanding of the formation of the solar system based on recovered samples. We went because there was a political drive: A need to one-up the Russians (And develop better ICBM engines as a bonus). Why do we not go back? Because the drive is gone now, and the cost-benefits analysis was never favorable without that non-rational justification. It's quite conceivable that it could be reignited, perhaps by a popular movement or perhaps by a change in political situation. If China were to establish even a small manned outpost on moon or mars, for example, it would create immediate pressure on the rest of the world to join in the game once again. If sixties-tech can get a man to the moon and back, think what modern technology could do with the materials and design refinements available now.
5. Re:oh wow by SuricouRaven · 2014-09-21 04:41 · Score: 2
  
  I expect some minor refinements to the chemistry could reduce the fumes from PLA considerably. PLA isn't just PLA - it's got other things mixed in. Plasticisers, dye, stabiliser, etc.
6. Re:oh wow by Bing+Tsher+E · 2014-09-21 05:10 · Score: 1
  
  We carry some significant percentage of all human information in our pockets.
7. Re:oh wow by TWX · 2014-09-21 05:14 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Yes, melting plastic in a closed environment. Brilliant. Instead of planning for their little hobby-jump in Low Earth Orbit, let's bring a cranky, tiny toy to make coat hangers... (in free-fall LOL). I just love the armchair engineers and programmers here going on about the 3D printer will be this tool to help colonize the universe..
  I never said that it would help colonize the universe.
  
  I expect that it'll be useful when that plastic tab on that rocker switch that's used all of the time breaks off, so they an print themselves a replacement instead of waiting weeks or months for a resupply mission to bring them one, or when an astronaut realizes that a particular control stick or other device is causing skin abrasions, so they could design and print a different one that doesn't cause sores, or any of a whole set of times when a spaceman needs some small, insignificant-on-earth part that is literally worth its weight in gold because they just don't have access to it.
  
  I could even see circumstances in an Apollo-Thirteen kind of accident where engineers at NASA could come up with a fix that's safer and more reliable than duct-taping some plastic sheeting to a bulkhead because the tech to manufacture a few parts exists with those that need those parts.
  
  --
  Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
8. Re:oh wow by Electricity+Likes+Me · 2014-09-21 05:32 · Score: 2
  
  Yes, melting plastic in a closed environment. Brilliant. Instead of planning for their little hobby-jump in Low Earth Orbit, let's bring a cranky, tiny toy to make coat hangers... (in free-fall LOL). I just love the armchair engineers and programmers here going on about the 3D printer will be this tool to help colonize the universe..
  It's baffling to me where this nonsense comes from. I'd expect that from eight year olds, not adults.
  But then again, simple math and reality in the video game generation is too much to ask for, I guess.
  http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...
  http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...
  We don't even have the Concorde anymore, and you loons are talking about going outside the Solar System as if it's even remotely possible. The only propositions you have are decades-old fantasies.
  Reality isn't going away. You're not going anywhere. Not you, not me, not your kids, not their kids, and not whatever will replace us in a hundred thousand years... Evolution is still happening, you know.
  As opposed to the idiot who's pretty sure that the actual engineers and scientists involved in building the device, planning its mission and experiments on the ISS, and then putting it in an actual rocket and launching it into space...didn't consider all of this?
9. Re:oh wow by sexconker · 2014-09-21 05:39 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, melting plastic in a closed environment. Brilliant. Instead of planning for their little hobby-jump in Low Earth Orbit, let's bring a cranky, tiny toy to make coat hangers... (in free-fall LOL). I just love the armchair engineers and programmers here going on about the 3D printer will be this tool to help colonize the universe..
  It's baffling to me where this nonsense comes from. I'd expect that from eight year olds, not adults.
  But then again, simple math and reality in the video game generation is too much to ask for, I guess.
  http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...
  http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...
  We don't even have the Concorde anymore, and you loons are talking about going outside the Solar System as if it's even remotely possible. The only propositions you have are decades-old fantasies.
  Reality isn't going away. You're not going anywhere. Not you, not me, not your kids, not their kids, and not whatever will replace us in a hundred thousand years... Evolution is still happening, you know.
  As opposed to the idiot who's pretty sure that the actual engineers and scientists involved in building the device, planning its mission and experiments on the ISS, and then putting it in an actual rocket and launching it into space...didn't consider all of this?
  The only consideration done is with respect to the budget. Usefulness or purpose? Nope, they just have to sell it.
10. Re:oh wow by itzly · 2014-09-21 05:53 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  The technology is almost ready to colonise mars now
  Not quite. With a lot of effort and a huge budget, we may be able to get a man on the surface, but that's a far cry from colonisation.
11. Re:oh wow by ColdWetDog · 2014-09-21 05:56 · Score: 1
  
  Congratulations. You've just confused the mods. +2 Troll. You ought to win something.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
12. Re:oh wow by ColdWetDog · 2014-09-21 05:58 · Score: 1
  
  That is NOT what "Is that a rocket in your pocket or are you glad to just see me?" means.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
13. Re:oh wow by ColdWetDog · 2014-09-21 06:02 · Score: 1
  
  I could even see circumstances in an Apollo-Thirteen kind of accident where engineers at NASA could come up with a fix that's safer and more reliable than duct-taping some plastic sheeting to a bulkhead because the tech to manufacture a few parts exists with those that need those parts.
  As opposed to use socks and duct tape? Philistine. I weep for the world that was.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
14. Re:oh wow by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 06:06 · Score: 0
  
  "The technology is almost ready to colonise mars now"
  Sure, so why don't you make a demonstrator like in the Gobi Desert or Antarctica to show me?? Hm??
15. Re:oh wow by SuricouRaven · 2014-09-21 06:50 · Score: 2
  
  I said 'almost.' If you assume money is no issue, getting things there is doable - been done for robots, just needs scaling up. Landing large structures without parachutes (Mars atmosphere is very thing) has been done too - lunar lander module. Higher gravity poses some issue, but doable. What remains is long-term-independant life support systems - something capable of running for years between resupplies. That we don't have the technology for, yet. But it doesn't require any new physics - no need for anyone to invent a warp drive. Just refinements to existing approaches. A colony would be insanely expensive, I can agree - you're looking at sending tens of tons of equipment and supplies ahead before you even send the first humans, so they can arrive to find a generous stockpile of spare parts, construction equipment and tanks of life support supplies. Then many manned missions, each bringing along new structures to deploy (Many of which will require much digging and earthmoving, so you're going to be sending heavy construction machines too, all designed to operate in martian atmosphere). All of which is to absolutely no commercial benefit at all. The question isn't "Could we colonise mars?" The question is "Who in the hell is going to donate enough money to bankrupt a superpower with no payoff at the end?" If money weren't an issue, experts could start planning tomorrow and have the first unmanned prepatory missions on their way in five years.
  That's why I drew comparison to the moon landing. Because it was pointless. There was no commercial reason to go. No military reason to go. Minimal scientific reason to go. There was no reason at all, beyond raising the national middle finger at communism. And yet, we went anyway. That's the kind of reckless stupidity it would take to make manned space exploration or settling possible: Screw the rationality, we go because it's cool, and because we can't let the other superpower steal the prestige. It's happened once, so there is always the possibility it will happen again.
16. Re:oh wow by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 07:13 · Score: 0
  
  "No points left."
  If only I'd saved them for this. +1 Insightful.
17. Re:oh wow by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 07:19 · Score: 0
  
  who cares that Launch costs are falling as soon as space x manages 1 or two successful pizza deliveries they will lobby the political critters to have their profit margins enshrined in a government monopoly.
  Tis the American way.
18. Re:oh wow by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 07:23 · Score: 0
  
  You never had the Concorde #France and Britain #1 !!!! - hmm maybe doesn't have quite the same ring to it to American patriots. Ah well at least you still invented the Harrier jump jet ....
19. Re:oh wow by Kjella · 2014-09-21 09:11 · Score: 1
  
  That's why I drew comparison to the moon landing. Because it was pointless. There was no commercial reason to go. No military reason to go. Minimal scientific reason to go. There was no reason at all, beyond raising the national middle finger at communism. And yet, we went anyway. That's the kind of reckless stupidity it would take to make manned space exploration or settling possible: Screw the rationality, we go because it's cool, and because we can't let the other superpower steal the prestige. It's happened once, so there is always the possibility it will happen again.
  Sure if you disregard the Cold War, the thousands of warheads pointed at each other and the Cuban missile crisis then there was no military benefit. NASA was the velvet glove around the iron fist but I think everyone except you saw what the real message was: "Our rocket technology is so advanced, don't you f*cking try anything." The moon is of course of no military significance, but the Apollo program was.
  The alternative would have been a military program under the DoD, but pushing those kinds of amounts into the military budget would look aggressive and militant. Instead they got all the essential technology, plenty opportunity to show off and talk to the media, good old-fashioned heroes, honoring the great visions of a dead president and all under a formally civilian authority. The drive was the military need, the moon was just a convenient rallying flag.
  
  --
  Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
20. Re:oh wow by Ogive17 · 2014-09-21 09:58 · Score: 1
  
  FYI, most plastic injection machines use a screw to move the pellets that get melted and eventually extruded into molds. Sure there is some gravity at the beginning but that would be easily remedied by a 2nd screw in the cylinder shaped hopper.
  
  --
  "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
21. Re:oh wow by l0n3s0m3phr34k · 2014-09-21 10:57 · Score: 1
  
  The tech is here, but the practical engineering of anything off-planet has a long ways to go. We could easily build some "Mars-rated" habitat here on Earth, but building it on Mars is far more difficult.
22. Re:oh wow by Bing+Tsher+E · 2014-09-21 23:34 · Score: 1
  
  Does that Rocket want to be free?
23. Re:oh wow by AC-x · 2014-09-22 00:04 · Score: 1
  
  Thing is, you're melting plastic and placing that melted plastic where you want it to be. In gravity and endless atmosphere this is easy, the gravity helps feed the raw materials through a hopper and ensure that the plastic stays where you place it, and the essentially endless atmosphere carries away noxious fumes so that you don't poison yourself. Unfortunately on a space station or in a spacecraft you have no effective gravity and a very limited atmosphere, so you cannot pollute nor can you rely on gravity to make things go where you want them.
  
  Gravity making things go where you want them?? Gravity is a limiting factor in terrestrial 3D printers! The plastic is loaded as a filament and is mechanically pushed through the nozzle so no gravity required there, and without gravity you could get much better overhangs without requiring supports.
  As for the fumes it would be pretty easy to have the printer in a separate fume cupboard if they needed.
24. Re:oh wow by jabuzz · 2014-09-22 02:22 · Score: 1
  
  And there was me thinking the Harrier jump jet was invented in the U.K.
25. Re:oh wow by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-22 03:07 · Score: 0
  
  couldn't they print in vacuum? would be neat to build a 3d printer spinarrete system on a robot, and build whole structures with 3d printing. I know the soviets experimented with Ebeam welding in orbit vacuum, and there are Ebeam based 3d printers out there (its going to space so device cost is clearly not a big deal)
26. Re:oh wow by TWX · 2014-09-22 03:53 · Score: 1
  
  I've actually had a +4 of one of the negatives before, but it's been many, many years since that happened.
  
  --
  Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Some details about the 3D printer by mrxak · 2014-09-21 03:54 · Score: 4, Informative

http://www.space.com/27211-made-in-space-3d-printer.html/
It's ABS, and quite small. It's more for testing than anything else, but they say they intend to print functional items rather than just toys.

--
-mrxak
Onions Will Kill You
1. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by CrimsonAvenger · 2014-09-21 04:02 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  3D printing is one of those things that will be pretty much essential for successful manned missions farther away than the moon.
  Being unable to fix broken things will be fatal if the nearest spare parts are nine months away, and a 3D printer or two can, conceivably, replace a great many individual spare parts....
  
  --
  
  "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
2. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 04:08 · Score: 0
  
  LOL yeah if they can make a 3D printer that never fails, what makes you think they can't make everything fail-safe?
  Never mind that, no one's going anywhere anyways. Hobbies in low Earth orbit are *it*. Space is like this religion for atheists...
3. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by mrxak · 2014-09-21 04:09 · Score: 1
  
  Or build those parts to begin with. Especially when we start colonizing outside our solar system, being able to pack solid containers of materials as densely as possible and then building everything when we get there, is going to be critical to keeping weight down by nature of requiring less packaging. A big cube of metal is a lot cheaper to ship than several large metal machines.
  
  --
  -mrxak
  Onions Will Kill You
4. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 04:22 · Score: 0
  
  If you think this planet will never, ever get hit by a big enough asteroid and wipe out all life, you're the delusional one. Probably a religious nut who thinks "god" will save you.
5. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by skine · 2014-09-21 04:23 · Score: 1
  
  Why not functional items as well as toys, or, even better, functional items including toys?
  These are people spending weeks to months, and sometimes even a whole year there. Surely they deserve some fun.
6. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 04:37 · Score: 0
  
  "Especially when we start colonizing outside our solar system"
  Wow, it's mind-boggling that someone would type that seriously. Are you serious???
  " when we get there"
  Get where? No one's going anywhere you delusional sci-fi moron...
  Yes, I get it, space is like Heaven for atheists. You have the same mind-set as any religious person.
  Oh this planet is evil, the species is doomed, the only solution is "up there", and you must listen to me or you're an idiot and you're doomed.
  I'd bet you're a programmer, and can't tell reality from fiction...
  Calm down... It's fun to think about these things.
  They probably wouldn't need to bring much material. If done right everything would be recyclable. You make a tool and when done just re add the material back to your cube of metal. Broken part? Print a new one and add the original back to the cube! Also I would imagine there will be harvest-able material "there" that can be used for the printers as well.
7. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by mrxak · 2014-09-21 04:38 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I am not an atheist, just practical. While I personally believe we'll get our acts together and get the technology to prevent most major extinction events before they happen (such as large asteroids, and even climate change), eventually our sun will expand and burn away all life on Earth. I see no reason why life on Earth should just accept its extinction lying down. There won't be any humans around, as we would recognize humans, but whatever our descendants look like, I'd like to hope they've gotten off the planet long before that happens, and brought along plenty of other Earthlings with them.
  This century, we have the ability to get at least some of our eggs out of this one basket. Over the coming millennium, I expect we will be able to travel to other solar systems in generational ships. I happen to believe life is sacred. Shouldn't we try to preserve it for as long as we can?
  
  --
  -mrxak
  Onions Will Kill You
8. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 04:42 · Score: 0
  
  No, obviously "all life" hasn't been wiped out here. And what does "god saving me" have to do with anything? There is no god, and I'm pretty happy right here, I'm willing to take the huge risk to live on this planet. I know I'm just a pattern encoded in a brain, I built myself up from childhood with energy from the Sun, I'm alive now, I'll slowly decay and die. That's it, that's all. Just like you, just like the species, and there's no afterlife, and no Mars colonies.
  Seems to me you're the one with the "all life wiped out" doomsday scenario and you're totally convinced of your position, your point of view and your solution. You're a zealot, no different from a fervent religious person handing out fliers.
  Go cry some more over your yellowed, cracking Space Age fantasy posters. No one's going anywhere.
9. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 04:52 · Score: 0
  
  Hmm, given the fact objects are not pinned down by gravity, I imagine in a while the astronauts could start playing that great game from Larry 7. You know, "Where's... not waldo"?
10. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by BarbaraHudson · 2014-09-21 04:59 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Anyone who saw the Big Bang Theory episode with the space toilet that was going to fail in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ... because of a badly designed part will definitely want one of these around before going into orbit - anything that will help keep the "manure from hitting the ventilator" will soon be must-have tech.
  
  --
  "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
11. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by tomhath · 2014-09-21 05:27 · Score: 1
  
  Here's a serious question. What is the point of launching a few people off into deep space if the Earth has been destroyed? It won't help the people left behind., and the Universe will get along just fine without humans.
12. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by king+neckbeard · 2014-09-21 05:29 · Score: 1
  
  Colonization is in no way unusual for humans or life in general. But let's forget that and assume that traveling outside of our solar system is impossible. 3D printing in space would potentially be useful for space mining operations, both in regards to reliability and efficiency, and space mining appears to be the most viable way of acquiring some rare substances. Even if that isn't viable, the research done for all of the above probably has some reasonable utility on Earth. So, even if it's all just religious delusions, they are at least productive religious delusions.
  
  --
  This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
13. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by itzly · 2014-09-21 05:56 · Score: 2
  
  space mining appears to be the most viable way of acquiring some rare substances
  Which ones, and do you have a cost analysis ?
14. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by DerekLyons · 2014-09-21 06:15 · Score: 1
  
  3D printing is one of those things that will be pretty much essential for successful manned missions farther away than the moon.
  Once 3D printing develops from it's current "stone knives and bearskins" stage of development and reaches the 21st century, sure. But even once the far off day arrives where we can print in a wide variety of materials (I.E. those suited to the task of the parts being replaced) and assuming it reaches the stage where the printed parts don't require substantial hand finishing for precision... it's highly unlikely to be able to print electrical and electronic components, particularly the IC's that will represent a very large component of the failed parts.
  
  Being unable to fix broken things will be fatal if the nearest spare parts are nine months away, and a 3D printer or two can, conceivably, replace a great many individual spare parts....
  That's why you carry spare parts with you. And why you "design for maintenance". And why you do extensive development and testing beforehand to figure out what parts are most likely to break. And design parts to be reliable. And reinforce the parts where you can. And... well, there's a vast amount of and dedicated sub fields of engineering dedicated to this kind of thing. No professional goes off the beaten path with the attitude of "oh well, I'm just gonna die if something breaks". There's a reason why "lack of spares" pretty much has never come up in any serious discussion of lunar colonies or missions to Mars. (Not until the amateurs, being largely blithely unaware of how the world works, started playing around with 3D printing.)
  
  Disclaimer: In addition to years of actually seriously studying the space program... I've lived where high reliability could mean the difference between life and death and spares were limited to what was on hand as there was no parts place up on the main road or next day mail. (I.E. a crewman on an SSBN.)
15. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by king+neckbeard · 2014-09-21 06:26 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, within this planet, which is utterly unlike the deadly hostile vacuum in space. Thanks for helping my argumen
  Crossing the ocean was a dangerous and hostile ordeal as well when we were first colonizing the New World.
  
  Yes, let's "assume" that... Eye roll...
  Are you saying that it is actually impossible? I would suggest brushing up on Newton's First Law if you think so, and explaining how Voyager 1 is doing what it's doing.
  
  Absolutely, completely delusional. Thanks for your time, but I stopped right there.
  And I will likely stop reading the rest of your posts, as you appear incapable of doing anything other than non-specific whining and calling interest in space exploration a religion.
  
  --
  This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
16. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 06:44 · Score: 0
  
  Well as long as they include at least one male and one female they can at least have a chance to re-start the human race. Inbreeding could be a problem but I doubt it would result in a population as stupid as it is today. While people keep building smart phones and smart cars everyone else is busy flooding the world with stupid people.
17. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2014-09-21 07:08 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, I get it, space is like Heaven for atheists.
  
  Ever since Muslims were banned from going to Mars by a fatwa? I guess it is!
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
18. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 07:30 · Score: 0
  
  Well if the Simpsons quote about one in four Americans are stupid is correct - we could improve that by killing of 1 in four Americans. Of course there would be no Guarantee we would cull the dumb ones, so we would have to do the one in 4 thing again. and again.
  Will the last American please do the decent thing and shoot him\her self please preferably AFTER turning out the lights.
19. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by CrimsonAvenger · 2014-09-21 08:05 · Score: 1
  
  That's why you carry spare parts with you. And why you "design for maintenance". And why you do extensive development and testing beforehand to figure out what parts are most likely to break. And design parts to be reliable. And reinforce the parts where you can. And...
  And after you do all of those things, sometimes something breaks that you don't have a spare for. And when the nearest replacement part is nine months away, you're screwed.
  Being able to make spare parts is a GOOD thing. And the fewer things you have to carry along to make spare parts with, the better.
  
  --
  
  "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
20. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by Applehu+Akbar · 2014-09-21 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  When you hang yourself, please remember to do it over your compose pit, and to use the biodegradable rope so Mother Gaia will not be offended.
21. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by Applehu+Akbar · 2014-09-21 08:34 · Score: 1
  
  The other important fact about human colonization is that was never, at any time in history, an example of waiting until until all problems "at home" were fixed before jumping off and colonizing a new place. Corollary: there is also no instance of a person who advocated not attempting to achieve X until all current problems have been resolved either (1) solving all current problems or (2) achieving X.
22. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by khallow · 2014-09-21 09:04 · Score: 1
  
  Here's a serious question. What is the point of launching a few people off into deep space if the Earth has been destroyed? It won't help the people left behind., and the Universe will get along just fine without humans.
  What party did you not consider? The people who got off of Earth. It helps them quite a bit to not be dead.
  
  Further, I think it would be of great comfort to the people about to die, that someone would survive and remember them. So I think a scheme to save some people by moving them off of Earth would help the ones who didn't get that chance.
23. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by l0n3s0m3phr34k · 2014-09-21 11:01 · Score: 1
  
  only if "God" is an excellent NEO detection system coupled with enough ships to evacuate humanity lol.
24. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by Fwipp · 2014-09-21 11:17 · Score: 1
  
  What's the point of restarting the human race? Like GP said, the universe will get along just fine without humans.
25. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by khallow · 2014-09-21 15:44 · Score: 1
  
  What's the point of restarting the human race? Like GP said, the universe will get along just fine without humans.
  So let me get this right, the universe will get along fine with humans and without humans. So therefore without humans is the obvious right choice?
  
  I suppose that it doesn't matter to me whether or not you're surgically attached to a toilet bowl or not, so clearly that's an argument for the toilet bowl.
26. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by DerekLyons · 2014-09-21 16:38 · Score: 1
  
  And after you do all of those things, sometimes something breaks that you don't have a spare for. And when the nearest replacement part is nine months away, you're screwed.
  Sure, there's that one-in-a-million chance. I never argued that point - only that you have no idea how the world works. And by insisting that we must take into account that one-in-a-million chance, I'd add the argument that you're resistant to any suggestion that you might know less than you do.
  
  Being able to make spare parts is a GOOD thing.
  Another point I never argued against. I merely pointed out just how far we are from being anywhere near that stage.
  
  And the fewer things you have to carry along to make spare parts with, the better.
  Again, a point I never argued against. (Etc... etc... just repeating the above.)
27. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by king+neckbeard · 2014-09-22 00:16 · Score: 1
  
  If you are advocating for the universe, that's a valid argument. I think most of us are more concerned about humans than the universe though.
  
  --
  This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
28. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by AC-x · 2014-09-22 00:21 · Score: 1
  
  Ever since Muslims were banned from going to Mars by a fatwa? I guess it is!
  Well, they're banned if the mission is one-way rather than two-way, mainly in response to that daft Mars One thing. Of course Islam doesn't have any central authority anyway so it's not like that "no suicide missions to Mars" fatwa is actually binding to anyone.
29. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by AC-x · 2014-09-22 00:40 · Score: 1
  
  That's why you carry spare parts with you.
  Still, with mass at a premium it would be more efficient to send up a stockpile of raw plastic rather than many combinations of different spare parts. After all you can't perfectly predict which parts will fail and how often, so you could get caught short on a part that was supposed to be reliable but failed more than often it was predicted to.
30. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-22 01:19 · Score: 0
  
  So let me get this right, the universe will get along fine with humans and without humans. So therefore without humans is the obvious right choice?
  Nah, I think what they're using is the same logic as those who are tired of all the climate change shenanigans
  The whole "asteroid might hit us and destroy all life" (as this other AC said further up) scenario is even more far fetched than the prospect of the climate changing so much it spells the end of human civilization as we know it.
  And just like many scams, space geeks urge that we gotta act NOW and get to space as soon as possible, out of this irrational fear that a civilization destroying asteroid is just around the corner, and Bruce Willis is getting too old to save us from it
  I don't think it's unreasonable for some people to not jump so quickly on the space bandwagon, same way they don't jump on the climate change bandwagon.
31. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by stiggle · 2014-09-22 02:20 · Score: 1
  
  You want a laser based 3D printer that fuses metallic dust rather than the plastic string melters.
32. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by GTRacer · 2014-09-22 02:28 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, I get it, space is like Heaven for atheists. You have the same mind-set as any religious person.
  Look, I get you have your rant-dial cranked all the way to 11, and maybe you haven't had a nutritious breakfast yet. So I'll ignore the strange hostility against humanity's general tendency to want to explore.
  
  I'm curious why you think space colonisation is the domain of the atheist. I'm Catholic and I've dreamed of space since I was little. I have no means now but I would *absolutely* go into space as a tourist (or professionally!) if I could. I have no idea why space itself or the desire to explore it precludes faith in God.
  
  *puts asbestos suit on in preparation for anti-ID flames*
  
  --
  Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
33. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by DerekLyons · 2014-09-22 04:07 · Score: 1
  
  Still, with mass at a premium it would be more efficient to send up a stockpile of raw plastic rather than many combinations of different spare parts.
  For the relatively small fraction of parts that will break that are printable plastics - that's a great thing. (At least with anything resembling current technology.) For everything else, especially the electronics parts that will represent the greatest proportion of the failures... not so much.
34. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by Fwipp · 2014-09-22 06:36 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, individual humans, yeah, they're important. You shouldn't murder people.
  But is humanity important? Is the last human alive ethically obligated to clone themselves to perpetuate the species? Or is it okay if, when they dies, humanity dies with them? That's the question I was trying to get at.
35. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by painandgreed · 2014-09-22 06:55 · Score: 1
  
  space mining appears to be the most viable way of acquiring some rare substances
  Which ones, and do you have a cost analysis ?
  The ones already in space that don't have to be drug out of a gravity well to be used in space.
36. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by king+neckbeard · 2014-09-22 07:33 · Score: 1
  
  I was taking more of an evolutionary imperative perspective. We seek immortality, and achieve it somewhat through having offspring.
  
  --
  This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
37. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by david_thornley · 2014-09-22 08:31 · Score: 1
  
  Crossing the ocean was a dangerous and hostile ordeal. On the other hand, once across the ocean, conditions were far more hospitable. Humans can generally live off the land if they have to, and build some sort of civilization.
  Now, consider any place in the solar system outside Earth. There is no breathable atmosphere. Temperatures are way outside what is survivable. In most cases, there's no available water. In other words, there has to be complex life support apparatus, and this cannot be allowed to fail. If the remaining humans are to build a new civilization, they not only have to keep their life support going indefinitely, they've got to be able to expand it. They've got to be able to maintain and expand power plants of significant size. They have to be able to manufacture each and every part required. They have to be able to mine or otherwise acquire each and every resource needed.
  Consider a permanent self-sustaining Martian colony. It needs pressurization, so people can breathe. It needs to be able to replenish air. It needs to be able to produce food, and recycle water. It needs to be able to maintain a livable temperature. This implies some high tech and complicated machines. It also implies a sizable source of power. It probably has to be tens of thousands of people, to allow for necessary specialization.
  This might well happen eventually. It can't happen right now, and I don't see that sending a few people to Mars about now is going to help. Once we have all the tech we need lined up, and realistic plans of how to get it there, sending a few people to make preparations will make a lot of sense.
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
38. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by khallow · 2014-09-22 14:16 · Score: 1
  
  One doesn't need to go Bruce Willis in order to have a risk diversification argument. Even in terms of mundane human endeavors, the more diverse humanity's economy and extent is, the less risk there is from economic downturns, the more routine disasters, and the like. That's not enough in itself to justify space development, but it is an advantage even in the complete absence of existential threats.
  
  Further, the argument I noted is terrible. I think it comes about fundamentally because the arguer has a deeply flawed and cynical view of humanity rather than any fatigue concerning pro-space development rhetoric.
39. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-23 01:48 · Score: 0
  
  One doesn't need to go Bruce Willis in order to have a risk diversification argument.
  Never said you need Bruce Willis. The reference was a joke to lighten up the mood.
  And borrowing what you said later, I don't think the arguer was presenting a risk diversification argument. YOU may be, but not the one I noted. The scenario presented was asteroid-induced extinction. This is more complex to assess than climate change with less available data. We have the faintest idea how much resources should be devoted to mitigating this risk (via diversification, or any other method), or when to do it. We don't have to do it now you know. Same with climate change. Doing nothing is a powerful position.
  
  Further, the argument I noted is terrible.
  As is the one I pointed out over the fear of an asteroid killing us all.
  
  I think it comes about fundamentally because the arguer has a deeply flawed and cynical view of humanity rather than any fatigue concerning pro-space development rhetoric.
  I think other wise. The why-restart-humanity comment didn't appear in a vacuum. This thread started with this AC. He used phrases such as "Yes, I get it, space is like Heaven for atheists.", which to me indicates he's heard such rhetoric many times before (as in fatigue). Put it another way, he was presenting what you think in reverse before you did: he thinks it's the pro-space side that has flawed and naive and "delusional" (his words) views on humanity.
  I'm not saying I agree with him, but I don't think it's unlikely that subsequent posters attracted to this thread share this attitude, and I don't think this attitude stems from a flawed cynical view.
40. Re:Some details about the 3D printer by khallow · 2014-09-23 15:52 · Score: 1
  
  This thread started with this AC. He used phrases such as "Yes, I get it, space is like Heaven for atheists.", which to me indicates he's heard such rhetoric many times before (as in fatigue).
  That's an act. The original AC is "Quantum Apostrophe" who has a thing against both space flight and 3-D printing. This story has both. Of course, he has heard and ignored a whole lot of similar arguments yet he still keeps trawling with the same arguments. You can tell he's in a thread when he's belittling people for advocating space development, especially when the term "space nutter" gets bandied.
"without gravity"??? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 04:10 · Score: 0

Um, they're still very much in the gravity field of this wonderful life-giving planet... What is this shit?
1. Re: "without gravity"??? by tysonedwards · 2014-09-21 04:26 · Score: 1
  
  Except when under such significant velocity, one experiences weightlessness. While yes, there is a gravity field nearby, the localized inertial forces counteract it's effects. As a result, the information obtained would be for all intents and purposes equivalent to that obtained when a significant distance away from a celestial body.
  
  --
  Thirty four characters live here.
2. Re: "without gravity"??? by CrimsonAvenger · 2014-09-21 04:34 · Score: 2
  
  Was that another way of saying "free fall"?
  
  --
  
  "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
3. Re: "without gravity"??? by SuricouRaven · 2014-09-21 04:39 · Score: 1
  
  It's usually called microgravity, because there is a tiny, tiny bit - the ISS is low enough to interact with the atmosphere, and even outside of that there is always the tidal force. You'd just need very sensitive instruments to detect it.
4. Re: "without gravity"??? by wonkey_monkey · 2014-09-21 07:51 · Score: 1
  
  While yes, there is a gravity field nearby
  There's a gravity field everywhere.
  
  --
  systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
It's called redundancy by mrxak · 2014-09-21 04:11 · Score: 2

Redundancy, and 3D printers that can make all the parts for new 3D printers. Even if two of your three printers fail, use the third to build two more and hopefully the two that fail can be cannibalized for spare parts enough to build a complete working model.

--
-mrxak
Onions Will Kill You
1. Re:It's called redundancy by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 04:37 · Score: 0
  
  Once 3D printers learn to make other 3D printers, it's the beginning of Skynet!
2. Re:It's called redundancy by ArcadeMan · 2014-09-21 04:58 · Score: 2
  
  Ever heard of RepRap?
  
  --
  Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
3. Re:It's called redundancy by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 05:20 · Score: 0
  
  "3D printers that can make all the parts for new 3D printers"
  We're not even remotely close to doing that here! What makes space so special???? And if we did have "3D printers than can make more 3D printers", wouldn't that totally change everything to the point that the 1960s space fantasies make no sense anymore?
4. Re:It's called redundancy by Electricity+Likes+Me · 2014-09-21 05:34 · Score: 1
  
  For one thing, it doesn't have to support more then a fraction of it's weight against gravity. You could design a space printer that prioritized printable parts, so you only needed to take a much smaller supply of irreplaceable ones.
5. Re:It's called redundancy by ColdWetDog · 2014-09-21 06:04 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  "Horses can make other horses. That's a trick that tractor's haven't figured out yet."
  -- Heinlein
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
6. Re:It's called redundancy by Enigma2175 · 2014-09-21 06:50 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  "Horses can make other horses. That's a trick that tractor's haven't figured out yet."
  -- Heinlein
  I doubt Heinlein put an apostrophe in tractors.
  
  --
  Enigma
7. Re:It's called redundancy by 50000BTU_barbecue · 2014-09-21 08:05 · Score: 2
  
  Look's like apostrophe's figured out how to make other apostrophe's.
  
  --
  Mostly random stuff.
8. Re:It's called redundancy by mirix · 2014-09-21 08:12 · Score: 2
  
  Wake me up when it prints the motors, belts, and electronics.
  
  --
  Sent from my PDP-11
9. Re:It's called redundancy by ArcadeMan · 2014-09-21 11:51 · Score: 1
  
  The belts can be replaced with printed rack and pinion (probably herringbone too), the motors are being worked on (still slow and weak, but it's a start) and the electronics... I don't think so.
  Anyway there's still the bushings/linear bearings (I've seen PLA bushings), smooth rods, nuts and bolts, the hot end, etc.
  I don't think RepRap will ever achieve 100% replicating ability, but the highest percentage they can reach, the better it is.
  
  --
  Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
10. Re:It's called redundancy by WrecklessSandwich · 2014-09-22 10:38 · Score: 1
  
  Show me a RepRap that can print its own belts and motors and assembled PCBs and then we'll talk.
Only 255 projects? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 04:22 · Score: 0

Someone needs to update from 8-bit mission plans!
The Radio Shack TRS-80 remains a viable computing platform for Adventures in Space. The younger generation has no respect.
It's a "scaterometer" by 50000BTU_barbecue · 2014-09-21 04:25 · Score: 1

I thought I knew my instruments, I never heard of such a thing. I thought the "scat" part was maybe an error, but it's not.
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/f...

--
Mostly random stuff.
1. Re:It's a "scaterometer" by ShaunC · 2014-09-21 04:50 · Score: 2
  
  Thanks for the link, I was curious about that, too. "RapidScat" sounds like what I do after chili night.
  
  --
  Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
2. Re:It's a "scaterometer" by 50000BTU_barbecue · 2014-09-21 04:53 · Score: 1
  
  Just calling it the RapidScatt would have prevented that unfortunate association... I got it wrong, it is called a scaterrometer, two r...
  
  --
  Mostly random stuff.
Vacuum plate can mimic gravity effects by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 04:52 · Score: 0

For parts that require more than microgravity, a modified Leneta Vacuum Plate (with a high number of micro-holes) might help by pulling everything in the print area down at a controllable rate.
Any news on the first stage landing tests? by photonic · 2014-09-21 05:10 · Score: 2

This time, they launched without the landing legs, but since they are still testing above water that does not matter a lot. Deploying the legs and soft landing on water have been tried successfully already, so I imagine they could test other things like partially flying back to the launching site, fuel permitting. The twitters are silent, so far, however.

--
karma police: arrest this man, he talks in maths; he buzzes like a fridge, he's like a detuned radio. [radiohead]
1. Re: Any news on the first stage landing tests? by bill_mcgonigle · 2014-09-21 05:28 · Score: 2
  
  Came here to ask the same. Somebody is patent-troll threatening them from testing landings on a barge offshore which was the sensible thing to do before actual land - for safety, not ease (waves). I'm planning to drive the family down for the first land landing, and it looks like imaginary -property knaves are doing their best to screw up this trip (and retard the progress of science and the useful arts, as usual).
  
  --
  My God, it's Full of Source!
  OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
2. Re: Any news on the first stage landing tests? by photonic · 2014-09-21 07:19 · Score: 2
  
  I am not so worried about the patents. Vertically landing a rocket has been described in the TinTin comic ''Objectif Lune in 1953, has been demonstrated on the moon in 1969, with the Delta Clipper in 1993 and more recently with the X-prize in 2009. The patent by Blue Origin (sponsored by your purchases on Amazon) is from 2009, and is being challenged. I didn't read the patent and I am not a patent attorny, but the 'on a boat' part seems very much like the 'on a mobile device' part that gets slapped onto old ideas.
  
  --
  karma police: arrest this man, he talks in maths; he buzzes like a fridge, he's like a detuned radio. [radiohead]
3. Re: Any news on the first stage landing tests? by sconeu · 2014-09-21 14:08 · Score: 1
  
  Why am I not surprised that it's Blue Origin (aka Jeff Bezos) who's trolling with a patent on vertical landing?
  
  --
  General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
4. Re:Any news on the first stage landing tests? by bledri · 2014-09-21 14:48 · Score: 2
  
  This time, they launched without the landing legs, but since they are still testing above water that does not matter a lot. Deploying the legs and soft landing on water have been tried successfully already, so I imagine they could test other things like partially flying back to the launching site, fuel permitting. The twitters are silent, so far, however.
  At the NASA pre-launch press conference, Hans Koenigsmann said that they would be doing the first boost back burn, as well as a re-entry and "landing" burn. At the SpaceX CRS-4 Post Launch Briefing he said that it looked like all the burns wear successful, but they had to wait for the boat that collected telemetry to return.
  I feel like I've seen some confirmation on good telemetry on twitter, but I can't find it now and this story is old enough that no one will likely see my post anyway...
  
  --
  Some privacy policy Slashdot.
5. Re: Any news on the first stage landing tests? by camperdave · 2014-09-21 18:09 · Score: 1
  
  I am not so worried about the patents. Vertically landing a rocket has been described in the TinTin comic ''Objectif Lune...
  I'm not a patent attorney either, but I'm fairly sure that works of fiction are not eligible to be considered prior works.
  
  --
  When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
6. Re: Any news on the first stage landing tests? by photonic · 2014-09-22 03:03 · Score: 1
  
  Apparently, fiction does count as prior art in some cases. I guess the requirement that a patent must be 'non-obvious according to the state of the art" is greatly undermined if some artists already had the same idea before. This might depend on if the patent just describes the crazy idea (in which case the artist could have filed the same patent), or if the patent describes a new technical solution to an otherwise old idea. The famous example is that a crazy idea to raise a sunken boat with pingpong balls was rejected because the exact same idea was featured in a Donald Duck story 15 years earlier.
  
  --
  karma police: arrest this man, he talks in maths; he buzzes like a fridge, he's like a detuned radio. [radiohead]
7. Re: Any news on the first stage landing tests? by david_thornley · 2014-09-22 08:37 · Score: 1
  
  Rumor is that the water bed could not be patented in the US because Heinlein had described it in detail in one of his stories (Stranger in a Strange Land?) If something has been adequately described in a publicly accessible document, it's not patentable, regardless of what the document actually is.
  I rather suspect that the TinTin comic didn't describe vertical landings in sufficient detail to preclude patents. Remember that (at least theoretically) a patent does not cover an idea, but rather the implementation of an idea. Most comics and science fiction describe the effects of hypothetical inventions, not the mechanics.
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Like you failed Forrest? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 05:55 · Score: 0

Where apk made you "Run, Forrest: RUN" with 15 questions you evaded http://slashdot.org/comments.p... on hosts superiority over adblock in terms of abilities alone (let alone the fact hosts are more efficient on many levels) ?
Ames Research Center science payloads by k6mfw · 2014-09-21 06:47 · Score: 1

Friday night at Ames Visitor Center (the big white tent just before main gate) had presentations by Ames project scientists on bioscience payloads, and had Q&A from audience. Also nice pamphlets and brochures for these programs were handed out (real cool to get hardcopy unlike typical webpage downloads). They intended to show launch on the big screen (NASA-TV) but it was scrubbed.
Ames student Fruit-Fly Experiment (AFEx)
Rodent Research-1 will examine how microgravity affects the rodents.
Seedling Growth-2 will germinate and grow seeds of the Arabidopsis thaliana plant.
Micro-8 will examine how spaceflight affects potentially infectious organisms.
More at http://www.nasa.gov/ames/resea...

--
mfwright@batnet.com
Food, & provisions for NASA's astronauts by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 07:37 · Score: 0

isn't there just a one NASA astronaut - Wiseman?
Well if SpaceX is so advanced... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-09-21 08:13 · Score: 1

...how come they store the maximum number of experiments in a CHAR?