Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

SpaceX Plans To Send Two People Around the Moon In 2018 (gizmodo.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the private-spaceflight dept.

Today, SpaceX founder Elon Musk announced that in 2018, the company will fly two private citizens around the Moon in its Dragon 2 spacecraft, carried by its Falcon Heavy rocket. "While the voyagers' names have not been disclosed, according to SpaceX, a 'significant deposit' has already been made," Gizmodo reports. From the report: According to Musk, the mission will last approximately one week. The passengers will travel beyond the moon and loop back to Earth, spanning roughly 300,000 to 400,000 miles. While the passengers will undergo some sort of training beforehand, it's unclear if the two have any experience with piloting, nevermind spaceflight. The mission, although unrelated to NASA's plan to slingshot astronauts around the Moon in several years' time using the SLS rocket and the Orion capsule, was made possible in part by funding SpaceX has received to develop its human spaceflight technology through the commercial crew program. "This is a really thing that's happened," Elon Musk told reporters at a press conference. "We've been approached to do a crewed mission beyond the Moon ... [and these passengers] are very serious about it. We plan to do that probably Dragon 2 spacecraft with the Falcon Heavy rocket." He went on to say the company is "expected to do more than one mission of this nature."

132 of 195 comments (clear)

  1. Twice Ralf Cramden! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    He'd out ever planned on sending one!

    1. Re:Twice Ralf Cramden! by rpstrong · · Score: 1

      "To the moon, Alice! To the moon!"

  2. This could be the beggining by jediborg · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If (and that's a big if) private space companies can actually make money doing this, the profits could go towards funding more ambitious private projects, such as hotels on the moon, and astroid mining. Just need to start making money off of space tourism so space exploration and space science can be funded in the future without having to rely on government spending, which can be extremely fickle depending on politics and often comes with strings attached.

    1. Re:This could be the beggining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, this is Elon gaming the President. If he pulls this off he may get a significant portion of the NASA budget

    2. Re:This could be the beggining by sexconker · · Score: 1

      the profits could go towards funding more ambitious private projects, such as hotels on the moon, and astroid mining.

      LOL

    3. Re:This could be the beggining by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1

      There's an added attraction for the first two people who "outspend" a seat on that first rocket: A minor note in the history books, either as the first two commercial passengers to successfully enjoy a space tourism junket, or the first two fools who overpaid to die in a space tourism junket.

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
  3. All in the timing by GatorSnake · · Score: 3, Funny

    Makes sense to only allow ordinary citizens to make the trip the first few times to get the kinks out. Say the first 12 or so. Then Trump can give it a go for the 13th run!

    1. Re:All in the timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Let him have the first one.

    2. Re:All in the timing by sconeu · · Score: 2

      Send him at night.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    3. Re: All in the timing by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 2, Informative

      He/she could be a non-native looking forward to a prosperous life in the USA. Or he/she could be a victim of two enterprising (illegal) immigrants, and be forced to exiled from the land he/she was raised since a toddler, to a poverty stricken place where he/she can't even speak the language. Or even a legal immigrant who came here thinking Americans would come to eventually accept them and their children, but instead had Trump provide encouragement and legal indifference for another generation (20 years) of racist xenophobia against them. Either way, they're justified in hating Trump's guts.

      You're the fucking moron. And a fucking Anonymous Coward to boot.

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
    4. Re: All in the timing by murdocj · · Score: 1

      When a guy is threatening to dismantle your country for his own personal profit, the only rational response is hatred.

    5. Re: All in the timing by budgenator · · Score: 2

      But that is not the case. It is those who attempt to defend His Orangeness that are expending vast amounts of energy, having to work so very hard to keep their anger and hatred topped up.

      You What I've noticed, When Trump is shown on CNN, He's very Orange, but on Fox, He's a more natural Pink. What's up with that; if the liberal media can't even get the white balance correct, what chance does the facts have?

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    6. Re: All in the timing by GLMDesigns · · Score: 2

      The citizens of the US decide immigration laws through their representatives. What makes that concept so hard for you to understand.

      I want immigration. I am the children of immigrants, married to an immigrant. But it is the citizens of the US who decide immigration laws.. Not others.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    7. Re: All in the timing by GLMDesigns · · Score: 2

      Who's threatening to do this? Not by Trump wanting to hold immigration to its LEGAL F**KING limits.

      What dismantling? How about Obama who directed federal agencies to disobey the law (Immigration). The executive branch does not make laws. It's supposed to enforce them.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    8. Re: All in the timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You What I've noticed, When Trump is shown on CNN, He's very Orange, but on Fox, He's a more natural Pink. What's up with that; if the liberal media can't even get the white balance correct, what chance does the facts have?

      It's just more fake hues.

    9. Re: All in the timing by rpstrong · · Score: 1

      Why do you speak of his own personal profit? He already has luxury jet, a luxury penthouse, and all the money he can eat. And now he'll be slumming it at the White House, flying in less comfort, and working for about a buck a year.

      I just don't see financial profit as a driver for ANY president that I can think of.

    10. Re: All in the timing by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1

      As do I. But what Trump is doing is implementing the most venal, dumbest possible way to do this. And it still won't work, its already been tried. Any successful plan has to include financially savaging employers for knowingly hiring illegal immigrants. Most immigrants are only coming here for the "lucrative" job. They were running out of the country when the banks collapsed in 2008 and the economy shut down.

      There's a difference between addressing immigration reform and spitefully destroying people's lives and shitcanning our economy just to make condenscending dickbags with anonymity feel smug.

      Or even a legal immigrant who came here thinking Americans would come to eventually accept them and their children, but instead had Trump provide encouragement and legal indifference for another generation (20 years) of racist xenophobia against them.

      And these people have every right to wish that piece of shit was dead, or at least crack jokes about him. Trump is not a good guy. Trump may not be an intellectual leader of the alt-right, but that doesn't give him the pass George W. Bush's gets for his clusterfuck of a presidency.

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
    11. Re: All in the timing by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      So. I gather:

      1. You're in favor of the President enforcing existing immigration laws. And
      2. you're not in favor of Presidents doing extra-legal things like not following existing immigration laws.

      US citizens decide who comes in.

      We have laws regarding the hiring of illegal immigrants. I presume that you want the President to do his job and enforce the fu**ing law. As opposed to not doing his job by ignoring said laws.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    12. Re: All in the timing by invid · · Score: 1

      For the rich, money is no longer money. It is a point system in a game they are playing against each other. We are the pieces in that game.

      --
      The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
    13. Re: All in the timing by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1

      We have laws regarding the hiring of illegal immigrants. I presume that you want the President to do his job and enforce the fu**ing law. As opposed to not doing his job by ignoring said laws.

      Chasing after employers for illegal immigrants is not productive step at this moment, because the penalties hasn't been raise since the 1950's. What is rational is a comprehensive immigrant policy, that include cracking down on employers, having migrant worker visas, processing of current illegal immigrants to put them on a legal status, then enabling a path to citizenship, cease trying to deport kids of illegals that have been raised in this country and are adults now, and yes, real enforcement of immigration status once a functioning system is in place.

      I don't care right now if the current immigration laws are enforced right now. They don't fucking work right now, as is. Pissing away more money on the current enforcement regime is a waste of money. A fucking wall won't do jackshit. Indiscriminately deporting what we've rounded up at INS now, just means most of them will be back in a few years. Its just digging a hole up to your head, then filling it up, then digging another hole. The system, as is, will not significantly reduce the rate of illegal immigration.

      2. you're not in favor of Presidents doing extra-legal things like not following existing immigration laws.

      I supported most of what Obama did during his term concerning illegal immigration. An executive order is not "extra legal" when the fucking Congress won't do their fucking job.

      As opposed to not doing his job by ignoring said laws.

      How did Obama "ignore" said laws? He's done more deportations than any other administration, including George W Bush. Its been a waste of time and money. Do you seriously care about PotUS's following the law? Where the fuck was your outrage over the PotUS breaking the law when the Bush administration conducted an illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq???

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
    14. Re: All in the timing by GLMDesigns · · Score: 2

      I'm in favor of immigration.

      The point is that the Executive Branch does not write laws. It enforces them. The EO are there to help streamline the means by which the laws are enforced. They are not there as a means of ignoring or subverting the laws.

      The laws, good or bad, are created by the Legislative Branch.

      Should you want the law changed. Change the law. Don't (if you're the president) ignore it. Don't if you're a citizen applaud the president for not enforcing the law.

      Else, what have we? We have an Executive Branch that can do whatever the f**k it wants.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    15. Re: All in the timing by Nunya666 · · Score: 1

      The citizens of the US decide immigration laws through their representatives. What makes that concept so hard for you to understand.

      No, we don't. The citizens of the US elect the people who make the laws, but that's where it ends.

      When was the last time one of your representatives asked your opinion about a proposed new law? I'm willing to bet it's never happened, because it's certainly never happened to me.

    16. Re: All in the timing by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      The citizens of the US decide immigration laws through their representatives. What makes that concept so hard for you to understand.

      When was the last time one of your representatives asked your opinion about a proposed new law? I'm willing to bet it's never happened, because it's certainly never happened to me.

      We have a representative democracy. We elect people to represent us. Hence we decide through our representatives.

      If you're concerned about the aloofness of Imperial Washington then elect those who want to pare it down. There are plenty of people who want to do so. The federal government should deal with federal problems (eg: immigration) and everything else ought to be at the state level.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
  4. we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by argStyopa · · Score: 3, Informative

    "The passengers will travel beyond the moon and loop back to Earth, spanning roughly 300,000 to 400,000 miles. "

    The distance to the moon is 238,900 miles.
    I'm going to go way out on a limb here and postulate that a trip AROUND the moon is going to be something more than 477,000 miles.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by Octorian · · Score: 2

      Another detail that's unclear from the announcement is whether they plan to actually go into lunar orbit, or just put the craft on a free return trajectory.

    2. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by burhop · · Score: 1

      I'm going to go way out on a limb here and postulate that a trip AROUND the moon is going to be something more than 477,000 miles.

      I think you identified the wrong problem. "Around the moon" is fine with 300,000 to 400,000. It is the "loop back" part that is the issue.

      (Maybe they just stop when they get around the moon and wait for the Earth to swing by and pick them up?)

    3. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by Pascoea · · Score: 2

      They put an odometer on those spacecraft? I bet the 1/10ths wheel was really moving! (About 4000 RPM if my guestimate is right: 10.905KM/s escape velocity, multiply by 60 to get to minutes, by 10 to get the 10ths speed, by .6214 to get to from KPH to MPH.)

    4. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My guess (just a guess) would be free return, because the F9H doesn't really have THAT much lift capacity compared to a S V. Avoiding the mass of the fuel for lunar orbital insertion and then back would mean a lot of mass you don't need to launch.

    5. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by werepants · · Score: 1

      Free return, the Dragon 2 doesn't have the capability to do any significant maneuvering on its own.

    6. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      It also avoids things going wrong that leaves two private citizens in lunar orbit forever, dead once supplies run out.

      I'm sure they will sign one hell of a liability waiver, but there are no waivers for that kind of PR disaster.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    7. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Surely we'd be able to cobble together some type of mission to rescue them, perhaps crewed by rough and tumble oil rig workers?

    8. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Simple. They'll send them at .866 lightspeed. That will give a Lorentz factor of 2.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    9. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by sphealey · · Score: 1

      Unfortunate if you are swinging around the moon and surge pricing goes into effect for the trip home... High demand doncha know.

      sPh

    10. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by Rei · · Score: 2

      Another option apart from orbit is going to L2 and back, if they want to basically "hover" with the moon blocking the Earth, right on the cusp of drifting away from the Earth-Moon system and into a free orbit around the sun. They'd be the first people ever to go there. It's 3.5km/s outbound, 0.6km/s back. Or if they want a long-duration stay (~100d) they can get back by the interplay of the Sun-Earth-Moon system for only 0.1 km/s (in the process going way far away from Earth).. There's probably some such returns with intermediary dV and durations as well.

      But obviously a free return trajectory is the lowest energy. If I recall correctly Apollo's burn was ~3.2 km/s

      --
      I'll never forget the last thing grandma said to me before she died: "What are you doing in here with that knife?!?"
    11. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      "something more than 477,000 miles"

      You DO understand what "something more than.." means, yes?

      --
      -Styopa
    12. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by Enigma2175 · · Score: 2

      This is what they are trying to do, according to the quote from this space.com article:

      "This would be a long loop around the moon It would skim the surface of the moon, go quite a bit further out into deep space and then loop back to Earth," Musk said during the teleconference. "So I'm guessing, distance-wise, maybe [300,000] or 400,000 miles [about 500,000 to 650,000 kilometers]."

      If they do this, they will go down in the history books as the farthest people from the earth, I can see how a billionaire might be attracted to that.

      --

      Enigma

    13. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by Strider- · · Score: 1

      "The passengers will travel beyond the moon and loop back to Earth, spanning roughly 300,000 to 400,000 miles. "

      I think the idea is that they'll swing by the moon, out into deeper space, and return to earth.

      --
      ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
    14. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      I don't recommend long duration travel without significant radiation shields. I doubt the planned craft has them, meaning a solar flare and you fry. Lagrange points are useful for astronomy but not for tourism (lack of anything there). Rich tourists will certainly pay to travel to the moon if it involves landing at your lunar hotel and getting out on the surface. I expect that sort of tourism will fade quickly (lack of rich tourists, been there done that boredom).

    15. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by nadaou · · Score: 2

      If they do this, they will go down in the history books as the farthest people from the earth, I can see how a billionaire might be attracted to that.

      I have a billionaire I would like to nominate for this trip. We can throw in Carrot Top for surprise entertainment, to be revealed sometime after launch.

      --
      ~.~
      I'm a peripheral visionary.
    16. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but if you ignore that Fake Physics Newton clown, we have a fabulous shortcut. I know shortcuts!

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    17. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      I guess that "roughly 300,000 to 400,000 miles" is the farthest distance they would be from Earth.

      If you jump 50cm high, you don't say you jumped 1m, do you?

    18. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by slazzy · · Score: 1

      Come on now, it's not like it's rocket science right?

      --
      Website Just Down For Me? Find out
    19. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by Godwin+O'Hitler · · Score: 1

      So their take on "round figures" is numbers ending in 7. OK I'll buy that.

      --
      No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
    20. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by budgenator · · Score: 1

      "The passengers will travel beyond the moon and loop back to Earth, spanning roughly 300,000 to 400,000 miles. "

      The distance to the moon is 238,900 miles.
      I'm going to go way out on a limb here and postulate that a trip AROUND the moon is going to be something more than 477,000 miles.

      It depends on your frame of reference, the Moon orbits the Earth, so you have to travel to where the Moon will be when you get there, rather than where it is when you left. Then on the return you have to travel to where the Eart will be when you get there as well. Add in the Earth is orbiting the Sun and it becomes a 3 body problem and can only be approximated.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    21. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by xession · · Score: 1

      No, they are only going 300,000 to 400,000 miles. Thats all the further the space craft if warrantied for. If they would like to make it all the way back to Earth, they should consider purchasing an extended warranty.

    22. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by rpstrong · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but it's an American company (led by an immigrant) that is doing it.

    23. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by rpstrong · · Score: 1

      Uh . . . no.

      Not at all.

    24. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by rpstrong · · Score: 1

      The Dragon is re-usable; they're only renting it. Let the owner worry about warranties.

    25. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      Hilarious that you say this.

      What's the only country that's put people on the moon, again?

      What country is the dominant space power on the planet? (Trying like hell to lose it, but still...)
      What country has put more probes onto/around more planets than any other?
      What country has the only (barely) interstellar probes?

      We should use whatever units they used, don't you think?

      --
      -Styopa
    26. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      Now THAT is a fuckin' rocket scientist reply.

      Thank you.

      I miss the old slashdot tremendously.

      --
      -Styopa
    27. Re:we can't even be bothered to get that right.... by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Glad I could make your day brighter.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  5. Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by karlandtanya · · Score: 5, Funny

    Every time I read about stuff like this it just makes my day.

    The meek will inherit the earth. The rest of us are going to the stars.

    --
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
    1. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by Enigma2175 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, Elon is double-D but who are the mysterious customers? Since a Falcon Heavy launch is going to cost them about $100 million ($50 million each for 2 passengers) it has got to be a fairly short list of people who can afford it. I couldn't see a rich guy spending more than 5% of his fortune on a week long ride so we're talking billionaire or better.

      --

      Enigma

    2. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by ITRambo · · Score: 1

      I'd revise that to read .., "The wealthy are going to the stars." Not everyone can afford millions for a space trip.

    3. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by Megane · · Score: 5, Interesting

      James Cameron is a good bet as a one of the two. He's already been to the Mariana Trench, so why not go as far as possible in the other direction? He could film a 4K HDR of the trip, and it would probably even end up making a net profit in box office sales. If he can get a telescopic view of the Apollo 11 landing site, that would be pure gold.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    4. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I guess you are severlay mistaken.
      If I had 50,100,000 dollar and the flight really 'only' costs 50,000,000, I would take the flight.
      Considering that I'm 50 now, don't know if I could die of cance and have no heirs ....

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    5. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 2

      Basically, billionaires that feel old enough that they're willing to risk dying on an insufficiently tested space vehicle. (If I were old, and a billionaire, I'd seriously consider it, if I could negotiate certain preconditions.) Makes me wonder how many billionaires are willing to spend a fraction of that money to subsidize someone willing to risk Elon Musk's 2017 time schedule.

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
    6. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 2

      No way I'd make a week long trip in a capsule risking death, couped up with that asshole Larry Ellison.

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
    7. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by Enigma2175 · · Score: 2

      Basically, billionaires that feel old enough that they're willing to risk dying on an insufficiently tested space vehicle.

      But also young enough that they can stand the rigors of launch and spaceflight. Seems like a fairly narrow window. Of course, all this presupposes that the Falcon Heavy will actually fly on schedule and that they fly all the missions on the books before this one. Hmmm, Elon is right in that window, I think this is going to be exactly like D.D. Harriman, right before the flight Elon will say "One of the mysterious passengers is me!" and his board of directors at Telsa will sue to stop him from going.

      --

      Enigma

    8. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      I like the Earth. Physics is the same around the other stars. There will be only variants of the earth. Everywhere will have gravity. rocks, possibly liquid, but nothing better than the Earth. May or may not have an atmosphere, but can't get any better than the Earth. The most you'll find is better weather and it will be lie Malibu every day without the earthquakes or earth slides, but it's not really a big deal.

    9. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      Richard Branson and Obama.

      They seem to be having fun together (http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/07/politics/barack-obama-kitesurfing-richard-branson/), and Branson has enough money for both.

    10. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      If you have more than $50 million and spend them on coke and hookers, you're just one rich guy amid 60000 others (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra_high-net-worth_individual).

      If you spend those millions on a moon trip, you'll be in history books for a long time.

    11. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Hillary and Obama, if they name the ship Alice, I'd consider donating to a GoFundMe page and we could all chant "To the Moon Alice" at lijt off.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    12. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Also, buy both seats and bring one of the hookers with you.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    13. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by esperto · · Score: 1

      You could always space him while the moon blocks the line of sight to earth and say he wanted to see the dark side of the moon.

    14. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by idji · · Score: 1

      He said it is noone from Hollywood.

    15. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      According to research, men can't get it up in microgravity, so I can't really see the point of taking a hooker along for the ride.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    16. Re:Elon Musk is Delos D. Harriman by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      According to research, men can't get it up in microgravity

      This is serious problem that must be solved. WTF are we even paying NASA for?!

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  6. Whadda think, Bruce Perens? by raymorris · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yesterday Bruce wrote:

    > But good luck getting Elon Musk to focus on the practical and eminently desirable target of the Moon. He isn't interested. It's only Mars for Elon.

    https://science.slashdot.org/c...

    Eighteen hours later, we have this announcement. ;)

    Bruce, kindly please post your estimate of the likelihood that Sofia Vergara will show up in my bedroom. I can't wait to see what happens tomorrow if you do!

    1. Re:Whadda think, Bruce Perens? by Hartree · · Score: 2

      The heck with that. Have him estimate the likelihood of me winning the lottery I didn't buy tickets for.

      Yeah, Sofia Vergara showing up in my bedroom would be nice, but the likelihood of anything more happening than her channeling the Talking Heads and saying "This is not my beautiful house!" and walking out is less than the above.

    2. Re:Whadda think, Bruce Perens? by Megane · · Score: 3, Informative

      But it wasn't Elon's idea to go to the Moon, it was one or both of the mystery passengers. SpaceX isn't just his pie-in-the-sky road to Mars, it's also a company that sells rocket launches to paying customers.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    3. Re:Whadda think, Bruce Perens? by Jeremi · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, Sofia Vergara showing up in my bedroom would be nice, but the likelihood of anything more happening than her channeling the Talking Heads and saying "This is not my beautiful house!" and walking out is less than the above.

      Once you've engaged the Improbability Drive, you might as well crank it up to maximum power.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    4. Re:Whadda think, Bruce Perens? by mick129 · · Score: 1

      And turn her into a penguin?

      --
      Move along, no sig to see here.
  7. Makes the proposed SLS mission even more a waste. by JoshuaZ · · Score: 2

    There's a proposal for the first SLS mission to be an around the moon shot http://jalopnik.com/nasa-may-send-astronauts-around-the-moon-on-the-first-t-1792586594. There are a lot of problems with this; Amy Shira Teitel discussed it in detail https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdrEzIlecIk&t=3s. This would make it even more of a bad idea. Right now the SLS mission proposal is just highly unsafe, redundant, and not part of a coherent program. This would make it super-super redundant.

  8. Lottery? by trout007 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is there a legal reason SpaceX can't have a lottery for tickets? Seems like a good way to fund these types of things.

    --
    I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    1. Re:Lottery? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      How would they vet people before allowing them to buy a ticket?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Lottery? by werepants · · Score: 1

      Run one yourself. From the sounds of it SpaceX has sold these seats to private individuals - there's nothing preventing you or anybody from creating a company and associated lottery where people can buy $100 tickets... if you get a million people to participate then it pays for a seat. That's the beauty of private space access. ;)

    3. Re:Lottery? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Is there a legal reason SpaceX can't have a lottery for tickets? Seems like a good way to fund these types of things.

      Well what do you do if you don't sell all the lottery tickets, is the lottery stuck? Normally the prize pool is relative to the total paid in, but either you get a seat or you don't. Also you might end up with people that for medical or mental reasons shouldn't be trapped in a tiny little space capsule for a week with no chance of assistance, sure you can disqualify them in the terms and conditions but the whole "my number came up, but I was refused" bit would be negative PR. And it's just one lucky winner, in a regular lottery people like to win a little now and then while they hope for the jackpot. The rest will really be trinkets by comparison.

      And I think this is still just a joyride, not a life changer. You take a fling around the moon and then you're right back to where you were, sure it's for space nerds but hardly the mass market appeal an ordinary lottery has. I think it would be totally different if it were say a ticket to Mars. That's the kind of thing you could probably make a living off afterwards, just from selling interviews and speaking engagements and such. Then again you'd probably want to be more selective in the selection process so... I mean it would be cool, but I understand why SpaceX wouldn't do it. And it's easy to get their lottery confused with (semi-?)scams like Mars One.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re: Lottery? by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      I am in, where do I buy my ticket then?

    5. Re:Lottery? by Enigma2175 · · Score: 1

      You win the lottery, you have the right to dispose of one moon trip. If you are physically unable to go, you can sell it or give it away. In fact, the Dragon can hold more than two people (up to 7), the private customers should spec the mission for 3 people and sell raffle tickets for the third seat to defray expenses.

      --

      Enigma

    6. Re:Lottery? by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1

      Being the first space tourists does not require a lottery, but an auction with prerequisites.

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
    7. Re:Lottery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >capitalist royalty

      Yes, because using taxpayer money to send joe sixpack into space is a much better use of cash. I'd rather a few rich people risk their lives and money first.

      Guessing you're so retarded you think they're going up a space castle on the moon to fire lasers down on the masses, or something equally outlandish and disconnected from reality.

    8. Re:Lottery? by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      Make the tickets transferrable and include the right to refuse anyone who can't meet the fitness requirements (requirements which a clearly published so people can decide ahead of time)

      Have another clause allowing for a pair of alternates to be selected in case of a last-minute issue with insufficient time to vet/train anyone you might sell your tickets to.

      Have secondary prizes of sending a quarter kilo of inert material for the trip, or a place at the launch pad.

      A lottery system might actually work really well. Mainly the 'transferrable' part, because that means if you can't go or chicken out, you can make metric buttloads of cash selling your winning ticket.

    9. Re: Lottery? by werepants · · Score: 1

      Time to get in touch with a contracts person at SpaceX - I'm sure they would be game if someone was serious about this. ;)

    10. Re: Lottery? by swillden · · Score: 1

      I am in, where do I buy my ticket then?

      You have to set up the lottery. Or wait for someone else to set one up.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  9. all them unqualified engineers can SUCK IT. by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Well, Elon is creating jobs for qualified engineers in Texas and Florida, so at least he's trying to get them to somewhere where the price of living isn't insane.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  10. Re: Not inspiring at all by elfprince13 · · Score: 1

    Filming for Avatar 7?

  11. Re:"This is a really thing that's happened" by tim620 · · Score: 2
    You need to read the article more closely. He said "This is a really exciting thing that’s happened," and continued with "We’ve been approached to do a crewed mission beyond the Moon...[and these passengers] are very serious about it. We plan to do that probably [with] Dragon 2 spacecraft with the Falcon Heavy rocket.”

    The "exciting thing" that happened was being approached to do the mission. He is not saying the mission has happened yet.

  12. To the MOON! by bobbied · · Score: 1

    Who's going with Alice?

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    1. Re:To the MOON! by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Usually the guy who goes with Allice is called: Bob.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    2. Re:To the MOON! by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Trixie Norton of course.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    3. Re:To the MOON! by bobbied · · Score: 1

      No, Bob is always trying to send encrypted messages to Alice. They must not ever be together or the key transfer would be easy or private communications could take place directly.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    4. Re:To the MOON! by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Eve is stowed away in the hold.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  13. Von Braun by backslashdot · · Score: 1

    Von Braun didn't want to send a pilot into space. He wanted to use acrobats. Eisenhower insisted on using a pilot because the Soviets had sent air force pilot Yuri Gagarin into space.

  14. Enough time in this schedule to get the kinks out? by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1

    All I can say is: Better double-check the heater and fan wiring inside the oxygen tanks before setting out on this journey.

  15. Two people. Tee-hee. by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

    Here's their chance to become (the only) members of the 240,000-mile-high club.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    1. Re: Two people. Tee-hee. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Sceptical. They were pretty monitored, heart rate etc. Plus three military hard cases, not two. Even taking 10%, the odds are just very very long.

      What about the times they were in the moon's radio shadow? Command module pilot, alone, far side of the moon, might have rubbed one out for uncle sam. Hell, kids, might have rubbed on out each orbit. Anybody know how long the radio blackout per orbit was?

      IIRC a husband and wife flew together on the old Russian base. The have to have grabbed some 'quality time' in an empty supply module. Who honestly wouldn't? Anybody?

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re: Two people. Tee-hee. by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      Sceptical. They were pretty monitored, heart rate etc. Plus three military hard cases, not two. Even taking 10%, the odds are just very very long.

      Not that long, actually. Given P(gay) = 0.1 and assuming astronaut screening does not bias this, the probability of two astronauts in a three-man capsule being gay is 3 * 0.9 * 0.1 * 0.1 = 0.027. But as you say, they're closely monitored, not the least by the presumptive odd-man-out, who might object to the shenanigans.

      These guys had strong egos, but they were selected in part for their ability to get along with each other for two weeks in a small capsule. So, no matter what their orientation, I can imagine that they could put it aside for the duration of the mission.

      And while we're on the subject of gay astronauts, let's give a nod to American space pioneer Sally Ride. May she rest in peace.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    3. Re: Two people. Tee-hee. by Maritz · · Score: 1

      The big buzz about Buzz, the bum-buzzer. Did he fly on a rocket, or fly up a socket?

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    4. Re: Two people. Tee-hee. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Can you imaging the third guys reaction? I'd say all three would have to be down or it's a non-starter. Long odds.

      BTW 0.1 is the highest estimate. No competent polls show that. 0.04 is a more common result.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  16. Re:"This is a really thing that's happened" by Nutria · · Score: 1

    "We've been approached ...are very serious about it."

    I'm very serious about wanting to pork Laura Torrisi, but that doesn't mean it's gonna happen.

    The "exciting thing" that happened was being approached to do the mission.

    What's so fucking exciting about that???

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  17. The Honeymooners by nsaspook · · Score: 1

    "One of these days Alice, pow! Straight to the Moon!"

    --
    In GOD we trust, all others we monitor.
  18. Re:Crew Service Module?? by bobbied · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Elion is getting more and more like a space cadet all the time. But I think it's on purpose.

    I'm starting to think he's the modern day Howard Hughes. Not from being a personal eccentric mental case, but from his visionary "over the top" grand plans which far and away exceed his ability to achieve, both technically and financially. Like Hughes, Musk has some underlying reasons for these crazy ideas which obviously won't happen, related to creating some cover stories for some unrelated contract work for the government.

    Remember Glomar Explorer? Hughes said he was going to mine the ocean floor for minerals and make a fortune? Yea, that was a cover story for a black operation to go pick up a sunken soviet submarine so the USA could have a closer look..

    Is Musk doing the same thing? Mixing in some cover stories as grandiose plans that will never get off the ground just to cover up the real purpose? We might find out in 30 years that's what's going on...

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  19. Re:Makes the proposed SLS mission even more a wast by werepants · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Elon's not saying it, but that's got to be part of the calculus here. Outwardly SpaceX is very supportive of NASA and SLS, but this moonshot is estimated to cost around $200M, SLS is getting basically the same thing done and has a program cost of around $20B. There's no way anybody can rationally continue to support SLS when you realize that you could literally do the same thing 100 times with SpaceX for the money that has been spent to do this once the old way.

    The COTS program isn't perfect, but it is making it more and more plain that we need to get congress and their porkbarrel BS out of space policy. NASA needs to be allowed to set their program directives based on technical merit, not political expedience.

  20. What? by Princeofcups · · Score: 1

    No, no they're not. Simple as that. The delay announcements should start around September.

    --
    The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
  21. How is he getting them back? by mveloso · · Score: 1

    Shooting two people around the moon is hard. The trick is getting them back. Are they planning on coming back?

    1. Re:How is he getting them back? by Megane · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's not quite that easy. Do it wrong and you bounce out into space, at least for long enough that your oxygen runs out. And as I recall, Apollo had to brake more than once on re-entry.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  22. Re:Crew Service Module?? by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Crew Service Module??

    Are they gonna cook one up in 12-18 mos? I'd love to see it but I think its far fetched to say the least.

    Dragon capsules already fly pressurized, and the Dragon trunk already exists, and is designed to fulfill the duties of a crew service module.

    SpaceX was awarded $75 million as part of NASA's second phase Commercial Crew Development program in 2011, $460 million in 2013, $9.6 million in 2014, and $2.6 billion in 2015, for a total of $3.1 billion (not all of which they've collected yet, since Commercial Crew only pays once stuff works). They started development work on all things crew-related 6 years ago, not yesterday. This commercial flight is entirely predicated on the success of SpaceX's NASA-funded Commercial Crew effort, and that schedule says they'll be ready in 2018.

    Initial Falcon development was paid for out of Elon Musk's pocket. He hasn't had to pay directly for much since. Also known as "a successful business with paying customers", something unfamiliar in most headline companies today.

    Cue the complainers about tax money paying for joy rides for billionaires, who will be ignoring the fact that this tax money is being spent to develop an alternative to paying Russia for rides to the ISS. The tax money only paid to enable joy rides for billionaires as a side effect of paying to enable NASA astronauts to commute to work.

    And for the complainers, the same program awarded Boeing $4.8 billion (also not all collected yet), and started a year earlier, so this isn't something exclusive to SpaceX.

  23. Re:Not inspiring at all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Wealth is ethics and morals neutral. It's what you do with it that counts"

    ...but not how you get it?

  24. Sloppy Reporting by mykepredko · · Score: 1

    In http://www.cbc.ca/news/technol... the CBC article notes that the distance from Earth the spacecraft will go one way is 300k to 400k miles, not as TFA implies that's the total trip distance.

    --
    Mimetics Inc. Twitter
  25. Re:Not inspiring at all by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    I wonder which two paragons of obscene wealth paid for this vanity project.

    Obviously neither of them will be an AC troll.

  26. Re:Crew Service Module?? by swell · · Score: 1

    Mr. Musk certainly has some Howard Hughes qualities, but he's far more like
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... _The Man Who Fell to Earth_
    starring David Bowie as an advanced being who... well, he accomplishes amazing things while on Earth. Intriguing storyline and acting as only Bowie could manage. Could Musk be a remnant of the Roswell incident?

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
  27. Vegara + Hayek + Penelope Cruz by raymorris · · Score: 1

    What do you get of you put Sofia Vergara, Elma Hayek, and Penelope Cruz in a room together?

    A boner!

  28. Re:radiation anyone? by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

    Why? It has been done multiple times by both people and electronics (hundreds of times) which are much more susceptible to radiation.

  29. My money's on the Facebook Dude by ClarkMills · · Score: 1

    He's in the same Tech think-tank that Trump's lot has set up.
    Mark can see through the FUD crap that big business is throwing at Elon.
    He has the $.
    He's young enough.

  30. Another Apollo-series mission. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    One step forward, one huge step backwards in space travel.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  31. This seems unlikely by DrXym · · Score: 1
    SpaceX hasn't even demonstrated the Dragon 2 capsule that can take humans to the ISS, a trip which takes less than half a day.

    Apollo 8 took about 6 days round trip to go to the moon and back. The difference in terms of life support (oxygen, water, heat, sleep, toilet), communications, telemetry, etc. are so significant that I wonder how they expect to pull this off in less than 2 years. Maybe they intend to rig the Dragon 2 to only hold a couple of crew and hope the lifesupport is sufficient for the trip around. Though I very much doubt even paying guests would enjoy the severe discomfort of the trip with little to do to occupy their time.

    Maybe it's possible but not without delays and jury rigging. I also wonder if Musk is one of the guests himself. I wouldn't put it past him.

  32. Re:radiation anyone? by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

    Going through the Van Allen belts is easy. Momentum will do the job. As far as radiation damage, yes, it happens. It's not immediately fatal, but most Apollo astronauts have shown long term effects of radiation exposure.

  33. Skeptical by sycodon · · Score: 1

    2018?

    How long does it take to build a man rated capsule? Even one that's been designed, tested, approved, trained workers, supply chain in place, work instructions, quality instructions, etc?

    It took them about a year to rebuild Space Ship One and they had already done it once.

    I'm just not seeing it.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    1. Re:Skeptical by halltk1983 · · Score: 1

      f only they'd already been working on a capsule. It's a damn shame they'll have to start completely from scratch right now instead of using the one they've been developing and using for years now. Man-rating is a challenge, but literally nothing has ever obtained it.

      --
      Watch for Penguins, they eat Apples and throw rocks at Windows.
  34. Re:More fake CGI then... by oobayly · · Score: 1

    Assuming you're not trolling...

    CRS-8 | First Stage Landing on Droneship

  35. Re:Not inspiring at all by Maritz · · Score: 1

    "Obscene wealth" is an artifact of Christianity. Wealth is ethics and morals neutral. It's what you do with it that counts, sort of like belief systems.

    Nope. Sitting on mountains of wealth while many do not have water to drink is cuntish behaviour. Doesn't matter if you think Jesus had madical powers or not.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  36. Re:"This is a really thing that's happened" by Maritz · · Score: 1

    You think he's saying they've already been do you? How did you do in comprehension?

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  37. Re:"This is a really thing that's happened" by Maritz · · Score: 1

    He (rather stupidly) thinks that Musk is saying that they've already been to the moon and back with this. The kind of mistake that you'd make if you were learning to read or reading at a Trump-esque level.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  38. Re:Bets? by Maritz · · Score: 1

    I'm sure if I was semi-literate I'd find that hilarious too.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  39. Re:radiation anyone? by Maritz · · Score: 1

    good luck getting thru the van allen radiation belts

    Looks like someone else has been reading infowars.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  40. Re: we can't even be bothered to get that right... by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    100 days in A dragon 2 by myself would be horrible. 100 days with somebody else? No Thanx.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  41. Re:"This is a really thing that's happened" by Nutria · · Score: 1

    He's trying to mislead people into thinking that something technically significant happened.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  42. Re:Too soon by MirthScout · · Score: 1

    The only mention of life support capability for Dragon2 that I can find says 30 man-days. So I'd assume 1 crew and 2 passengers so that they have enough life support for the mission and a few days in reserve.

  43. Re:Falcon Heavy = 54t payload, SLS = 130t by werepants · · Score: 1

    Yeah, who needs SLS?! Except for the folks that have to get more than the 54,400 kg that Falcon Heavy is capable of:

    That's exactly the question. As it is, there are limited scenarios that call for such a beast - look at NASA's struggles filling up a manifest for SLS. Nobody can afford to buy a ride on SLS because it's so expensive, and the only people that could theoretically afford it (NASA themselves) have a budget that is currently being totally eaten up by... SLS. The very fact that NASA is burdened with SLS means that they can't afford to use it.

    It's worth noting as well that the first iteration of SLS will be able to lift 70 tons, not 130. Falcon Heavy's 54 compares much more favorably there. Sure, SLS will eventually be able to lift 130 tons, but ITS will eventually be able to lift 300-550 tons. It's powerpoint rocket vs powerpoint rocket. The important thing is to make the right decision with the technology that's available NOW, and based on that (or at least what will be online in 2018) nobody in their right mind would pay for SLS when they could get 75% of the capability for 1% of the cost on Falcon Heavy. Even if we generously ignore development costs and focus only on the claimed per-flight SLS cost of $500mil, Falcon Heavy is still far better in terms of $/kg to LEO.

    If NASA really wanted to start getting things done, they would start treating LEO access as a commodity service and procure it purely through the COTS program. Then they could focus on pushing the envelope - use that cheap lift capability to build up a Mars cycler, or a sustained Lunar presence, or further develop on-orbit manufacturing capabilities. They could get 10x as much science done and actually get back to developing new tech, rather than recycling the ideas of the past.

  44. The hundred-thousand mile high club? by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

    > Also, buy both seats and bring one of the hookers with you.

    Interesting idea

    --

    I'm not repeating myself
    I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
  45. Re:Crew Service Module?? by camperdave · · Score: 1

    Are they gonna cook one up in 12-18 mos? I'd love to see it but I think its far fetched to say the least.

    This isn't some rabbit they're pulling out of a hat. They've been "cooking one up" for the past 7+ years. They will be doing at least one unmanned test flight later this year.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!