Slashdot Mirror


Elon Musk Shows Off the Tesla Roadster That SpaceX Will Send Beyond Mars (theverge.com)

Elon Musk has released photos of the Tesla Roadster he plans to send to space via a Falcon Heavy rocket. "The series of photos, posted to Instagram, show the Roadster attached to a fitting and placed between the two halves of the payload fairing that caps the rocket," reports The Verge. "The photos were posted just hours after a picture leaked on Reddit that showed a grainy view of the car being readied for its final ride." From the report: This will be the inaugural flight of the Falcon Heavy, a rocket that SpaceX has been planning for years. The successor to the Falcon 9 , it's essentially (and simply put) three boosters strapped together, all of which will add enough thrust to make it the most powerful rocket in the world. It will give SpaceX the ability to send bigger payloads to space while also helping the company push farther out into the Solar System. But SpaceX doesn't want to put a valuable payload on the very first flight, which even Musk has admitted could end (or begin) with an explosion. So the company plans to use a "dummy payload" instead. "Test flights of new rockets usually contain mass simulators in the form of concrete or steel blocks. That seemed extremely boring," Musk wrote on Instagram today. "Of course, anything boring is terrible, especially companies, so we decided to send something unusual, something that made us feel."

118 comments

  1. Will he send a charging station as well? by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    Naturally with a chicken game like the space gas station in Leisure Suit Larry.

  2. Overloaded? by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 0

    I'm worried that Elon Musk is overloading himself. I'm extremely impressed with his accomplishments, but I think he doesn't give himself enough rest.

    1. Re:Overloaded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't really think it's all him, right? Steve Jobs built the iPhone from scratch too, I bet.

    2. Re:Overloaded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It certainly is not all him, but the carrier of the faith when it flies in the face of the beliefs of so many does carry a terrible burden.

      It is OK to have a heart for the man. It is also OK to admire, no matter what you feel of his beliefs, anyone who exhibits the courage and conviction that this man has shown in the face of constant vicious, destructive, vile attacks on his character. Musk exhibits the best of the character of a dead age that made America the technological leader that it was.

      I personally think it is precisely that reminder of when character, perseverance, and faith meant something that his detractors hate the most. He may yet go down with his ship, but he has been the consummate captain.

    3. Re: Overloaded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. He is driven and I admire that about him. Plus he's trying to improve things with engineering. Not just trying to make a profit.

    4. Re:Overloaded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The fraction of Tesla's gross proceeds since it started that come from government "subsidies" - most of which are to encourage the advancement of electric vehicles, not to support Tesla - is very small, around 10% perhaps. The "subsidies" wouldn't even be discussed if they were only benefitting the established manufacturers. They don't come close to the historical and ongoing subsidies, both in dollars and lives, of the petrol-based infrastructure.

      Moreover, whether or not Tesla survives, the subsidies have done their purpose. They have accelerated the switchover to electric cars by a decade or more. The established manufacturers would not be switching now if not for Tesla throwing a wrench into the works by proving that electric vehicles are viable with current technology. That is what is pissing the establishment off.

    5. Re:Overloaded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The established manufacturers would not be switching now if not for Tesla throwing a wrench into the works by proving that electric vehicles are viable with current technology. That is what is pissing the establishment off.

      We're not worried.

      We'll get the greens and NIMBYs all fired up and get them to prevent the necessary charging infrastructure and additional electrical power generation infrastructure required from being built, so electric vehicles won't be at any level above novelty for at least 3 more decades.

      Love and kisses,

      --Big Auto & Big Petroleum

    6. Re:Overloaded? by Teancum · · Score: 1

      It should be pointed out that these subsidies were in place well before Tesla existed as a company and were intended to encourage companies like GM, Ford, and Chrysler (as well as foreign companies) to try an invest in "green" automobiles. If the government is pouring so much money around that it is raining cash everywhere, you would be an idiot if you didn't pick up a bucket and start collecting that cash where it might do some good.

      It also turns out that even with those subsidies they did almost no good. General Motors made the infamous EV-1 that turned out to be so expensive they wouldn't even offer the vehicles to be sold. The purpose of that vehicle really was to kill the subsidy and to in particular get the California Air Resources Board (the California equivalent to the EPA but operating at the state level) to stop making electric automobiles any sort of big deal. I guess that blew up really well.

      Other automobile companies have tried to take advantage of those same subsidies. GM started the Volt literally right as it was going bankrupt and that was the only vehicle which survived the bankruptcy as a major engineering project. The Fisker Karma was actually built depending almost exclusively on those subsidies, and of course you have the Nissan Leaf.

      If Tesla is able to make a business case for electric automobiles, I would dare say it is in spite of those subsidies instead of because of them. Yes, a thumb is on the scale in Tesla's favor, but they weren't really enough to make other companies profitable and there have been some spectacular failures and bankruptcies resulting from people other than Elon Musk trying to grab that same cash.

      I also don't think the switch to electric automobiles is necessarily inevitable either. There are other "alternative fuel" sources which in theory could work out better as well. What makes electric vehicles work isn't the subsidies, but rather the energy density due to somewhat recent developments in energy storage technologies (aka batteries). It is also interesting that Tesla is now putting some significant money into basic R&D for that technology too and not simply waiting for some other company to come up with the next best thing.

  3. Going out in style by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Of course, if the Heavy does not make it to orbit, the Roadster may end up swimming with the fishes (which might also be interesting).

    1. Re:Going out in style by TWX · · Score: 1

      That's part of the reasoning for using it. It's not especially valuable in the grand scheme of things, but it's not a lump of steel or concrete either. It's like when server manufacturers throw a piece of candy or two into the box when they ship product, something to look forward to.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:Going out in style by MichaelSmith · · Score: 2

      SpaceX could give somebody (maybe a university) a free launch though.

    3. Re: Going out in style by saloomy · · Score: 0

      That is a terrific idea. The university would have to spend a lot of money to build a payload, even if the launch is âoepro bonoâ. Satellites cost a small fortune, which is why they test using blocks of concrete.

    4. Re:Going out in style by TWX · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well Trump said he wants to go to Mars, and SpaceX has a capsule design...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    5. Re: Going out in style by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      They could launch an experimental payload though. Anything is better than an old car which will accomplish fuck all apart from promoting Tesla.

    6. Re: Going out in style by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      SpaceX has said the chance of a failure is quite high for this launch. Satellites or science payloads take a huge amount of development time and resources, and nobody wants to have theirs go all asplodey if something goes wrong.

    7. Re:Going out in style by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      As long as lockheed martin calculates the trajectory I am okay with it,

    8. Re: Going out in style by Lohrno · · Score: 1

      If he wants to go, we should send him!

    9. Re: Going out in style by guruevi · · Score: 2

      I have some old servers that could go up there with a bunch of older batteries, Tesla could also provide a dead battery bank. Would be interesting to see what if anything is necessary to run regular hardware in space, failure modes and whether ECC correction rates or a metal casing would suffice. That way we donâ(TM)t have to send rad-shielded expensive stuff for âoenon-criticalâ entertainment to future Mars missions.

      There is plenty of old gear laying around research universities, there is no need for expensive stuff.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    10. Re: Going out in style by eaglesrule · · Score: 1

      We're talking about the car with the acknowledgement that it is included because it likely to be lost, and that can only happen with the rocket exploding or some other massive failure. Musk is smart to be setting expectations in this way that gets the most public awareness in case the worst happens. There has to be some value in that.

    11. Re: Going out in style by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Musk could test a dragon capsule and launch escape system. There is value in demonstrating that launch escape works before they fly a human cargo.

    12. Re:Going out in style by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      As long as lockheed martin calculates the trajectory I am okay with it,

      I have played Kerbal Space Program. Please let me do it.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    13. Re:Going out in style by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Have you perfected the Jupiter gravity assist then fly directly into the sun trajectory?

    14. Re:Going out in style by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

      Set the controls
      for the heart of the sun.

      --
      The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
    15. Re:Going out in style by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      And get bad press if the rocket explodes and takes out a dozen university projects with it?

      On the other hand, I think the idea of exploding an electric car is pretty cool.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    16. Re:Going out in style by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

      Of course, if the Heavy does not make it to orbit, the Roadster may end up swimming with the fishes (which might also be interesting).

      If it does make it, let's say it goes into orbit around Mars. And everyone forgets about it until 2062. The first manned mission to the red planet has just landed. Everyone is congratulating themselves on accomplishing the impossible. Earth communications loses contact with the crew on the return transport vehicle parked in orbit. The last picture received from it's external camera showed a "Tesla" logo.

      --
      The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
    17. Re:Going out in style by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      And get bad press if the rocket explodes and takes out a dozen university projects with it?

      Yeah better not to try in the first place.

    18. Re:Going out in style by haruchai · · Score: 1

      SpaceX could give somebody (maybe a university) a free launch though.

      There's no such thing

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    19. Re:Going out in style by cjameshuff · · Score: 1

      No, better to put the resources to something less risky. Spending millions on interplanetary comms, power systems, thermal control, etc. and putting the result on an experimental rocket that has a good chance of destroying it all would just be foolish.

      Using a low-value payload is not unusual. The Saturn SA-1 payload was a bunch of Florida beach sand.

    20. Re: Going out in style by cjameshuff · · Score: 1

      They're already going to do an in-flight abort test, they're just not going to risk an expensive Dragon capsule and critical test milestone on an untested rocket to do it.

    21. Re: Going out in style by aussie_a · · Score: 0

      This is clearly a way for Musk to funnel money from Tesla to Space X for this marketing opportunity. Downside for investors when there is such a clear conflict of interest. Musk profits though.

    22. Re: Going out in style by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That Roadster is Musk's own, he donated it for the test. No money changed hands, though Musk may lose a few bucks on his car (I doubt many insurance policies cover "being launched to Mars orbit on an experimental rocket").

    23. Re:Going out in style by wooferhound · · Score: 2

      SpaceX could give somebody (maybe a university) a free launch though.

      There is no such thing as a free launch . . .

      --
      We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
    24. Re:Going out in style by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      It won't go into Mars orbit, though. It will end up (if everything goes right) in an elliptical solar orbit that goes as far out as the orbit of Mars.

    25. Re:Going out in style by Teancum · · Score: 1

      SpaceX could give somebody (maybe a university) a free launch though.

      They have. The first Falcon 1 launch had a satellite built by the students at the U.S. Air Force Academy. While there was practically no chance to get that satellite to fly as there was no budget to make it happen without this "free" launch, it was sort of sad to see literally years of effort on the part of the academy cadets blow up on the launch pad and have parts and pieces of that satellite scattered across the South Pacific in an explosion.

      I can appreciate that SpaceX would rather not see that happen. Again. If there is going to be a "free" launch, it will be on a much better flight proven vehicle on a space available basis where the primary customer is happy to see them come along for the ride. There is room on the SpaceX Dragon capsules (and the Orbital ATK Cygnus capsules I might add) for university experiments where funding is even available including from any ISS participating country to help build the experiment.

      This is just too risky of a flight even for a supposedly "throw away" space craft.

    26. Re: Going out in style by Teancum · · Score: 1

      You mean an untested rocket like the original maiden launch of the Falcon 9 and the Dragon capsule that currently hangs above the cafeteria in the SpaceX Headquarters?

    27. Re: Going out in style by cjameshuff · · Score: 1

      There's a slight difference in circumstances between the two cases. For one, when they launched the first Dragon, they didn't have an already-operating launch system that has just done 18 launches in one year. For another, this is a more expensive manned capsule and a much more complicated and risky launch vehicle.

      Additionally, the Dragon will operate almost exclusively on the Falcon 9 under considerably different flight conditions, not the Heavy, and the Heavy will operate almost exclusively with fairing-encapsulated payloads, not Dragons. Performing an abort test would also prevent them from doing a full test flight of the Heavy, on top of likely making core recovery impossible. Such a test would be expensive, high risk, and afterward they'd still need to do a Dragon abort test on the Falcon 9 and a full test flight of the Falcon Heavy.

      There's a long list of reasons *not* to do this. Where's one reason to do it?

    28. Re:Going out in style by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Which is weird. The Shuttle, for all its faults, flew almost perfectly first time,

    29. Re: Going out in style by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope your comment is meant to be sarcasm.

    30. Re:Going out in style by Teancum · · Score: 1

      The first flight of the Space Shuttle (STS) was incredibly risky. So much so that the astronauts actually sat in ejection seats (which were removed in later flights) and only two astronauts flew in what was arguably a test flight without any cargo at all... other than the two crew members and food for about a day. It didn't spend that much time in space either, but was mostly a flight up, a few orbits to evaluate systems in actual spaceflight, and then an incredibly risky landing.

      It should be pointed out also that there were nearly a dozen landing tests prior to STS-1.

      The Shuttle flew without major problems and did not blow up on the pad on the first flight (that happened later). The truth be told, the Shuttle was an experimental vehicle on all 135 flights, and on the last flight it was evaluated that the odds of survival (literally.... the odds of the crew living after the flight) was less than 90%. That is less than a Sigma 1 reliability... hardly something of any kind of praise.

    31. Re:Going out in style by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      The shuttle never blew up on the pad.

      I think experience has shown that the first flights were the safest. Later flights were less safe because there was weaker oversight.

  4. Would be interesting if they... by TWX · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...were clandestinely building a means to soft-land the car on its wheels on the planet. Even funnier if they landed it in the pathway of one of the rovers...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    1. Re:Would be interesting if they... by UnderCoverPenguin · · Score: 1

      Or even make it a "Martian Sputnik" beeping at us on its way and from Martian orbit.

      --
      Don't try to out wierd me, three-eyes. I get stranger things than you, free with my breakfast cereal. --Zaphod Beeblebr
    2. Re:Would be interesting if they... by sconeu · · Score: 1

      You can't hear the horn when it's in orbit...

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    3. Re:Would be interesting if they... by TWX · · Score: 2

      Someone doesn't understand what Sputnik was...

      I'd rather them put a tape deck with batteries that will slowly reduce voltage so the tape plays slower... and slower ... and ... slow ... er... Something like the Rolling Stones' Time Is On My Side.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    4. Re:Would be interesting if they... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      I initially thought they were going to crash it into Mars which would be a stupid idea because the Tesla was never designed to be sterilized. But even in solar orbit its going to be a needless hazard in the long term and objects which originate at Earth eventually come back.

    5. Re:Would be interesting if they... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nowhere near enough dV available for that. They won't even able able to get it into a Mars orbit. It'll be on an Earth/Mars transfer orbit.

    6. Re:Would be interesting if they... by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Whoosh.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    7. Re: Would be interesting if they... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the sound of an early-model Roadster flying overhead.

    8. Re:Would be interesting if they... by Teancum · · Score: 1

      To paraphrase Douglas Adams, Space is big. Very big. You really can't comprehend just how large the Solar System is on a human scale, where something which is very definitely on a human scale in the form of a Tesla Roadster really is an insignificant hunk of nothing that won't even get in the way for the next billion years, won't even hit the Earth in that time frame nor even get to Mars.

      Well before it becomes an object to be concerned about (which it isn't even if it was filled with swamp water and the deliberate goal was to infect Mars with life... of which some swamp water from the K-T Event on the Earth likely hit Mars a long, long time ago doing the same thing), this particular Tesla Roadster is going to be "rescued" or "salvaged" by some future team of archaeologists who are going to be drooling over the unique preservation of early 21st Century automobiles in this fashion.

      I give it under 10k years before it is salvaged from a deliberate effort to locate this Roadster in the future. In that time frame, it won't even be a hazard at all and can't possibly hit Mars.

  5. Seems like a Crvette would be more appropriate by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

    It is rather iconic after all

    http://agentpalmer.com/wp-cont...

  6. +1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    School project payload or Celestis space burial payload
    like they did for the first few Falcon 1 launches.

    Source:
    https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/12/spacex-50-taming-falcon-1-achieving-cadence-falcon-9/

    1. Re:+1 by Teancum · · Score: 1

      Having the ashes of James Doohan (yes.... Mr. Scott from Star Trek) scattered all over the South Pacific instead of in space due to mishaps and rocket failures is not the kind of publicity anybody wants. That is precisely what happened with the Falcon 1.

  7. "something that made us feel." by Nutria · · Score: 1

    Phosgene makes us feel, too. Send up a few hundred tanks!!!

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    1. Re: "something that made us feel." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Roadster is supposed to make us feel an emotion. Having our lungs destroyed makes us feel a sensation. The difference may be subtle, but it's still important.

  8. OK I get it by AlanObject · · Score: 4, Funny

    I fully get why he is doing this. I just think that someone somewhere has a worthwhile payload that they have but they otherwise couldn't afford to pay to boost.

    Worst case is a cache of supplies to park in Martian orbit for the next time Matt Damon is stuck there and the Home Depot he used last time is closed.

    1. Re:OK I get it by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I fully get why he is doing this. I just think that someone somewhere has a worthwhile payload that they have but they otherwise couldn't afford to pay to boost.

      I just think he's loading a military payload, and the roadster is a dummy. It will be subbed out for some payload of approximately the same mass.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:OK I get it by The+Good+Reverend · · Score: 1

      It seems unlikely that he's do that on a rocket design that's never flown before, considering the risks to the payload.

    3. Re:OK I get it by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      Any serious payload will be too expensive to risk on the first launch of a new rocket. That's why test launches like this usually use just a large hunk of material.

    4. Re:OK I get it by eaglesrule · · Score: 2

      I just think he's loading a military payload, and the roadster is a dummy.

      That seems too risky. Military hardware is too expensive when there are other more reliable ways to put it in orbit.

      Could he just be doing it out of a sense of pride? His first production vehicle going for a ride in yet another great accomplishment for transportation, because he can and why not.

      It is just as possible he's setting expectations in case the falcon heavy test fails, as is likely to happen.

    5. Re:OK I get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then we hear the story about the poor student from the developing nation whose precious payload that cost his entire University's annual budget was blown up because of Musk's ego...

    6. Re:OK I get it by Teancum · · Score: 1

      The other choice is to do something like the RatSat spacecraft which flew on the Falcon 1 Flight 4. That was basically a big hunk of Aluminum which had the names of the SpaceX employees who were working for the company at the time go up into space (and it is still in orbit BTW).

      Oddly enough, sending up a Roadster is actually cheaper than the custom made spacecraft even if it is just a hunk of metal. A bill of materials can even be quickly sent to the FAA-AST for clearance and review in a format that they can evaluate as well.

  9. Payload by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Needs more cowbell.

    Get a lot of stuffed cows and put them into orbit.

    Akin to his moon made of cheese, this can be the "Herd shot 'round the world".

    AC

    1. Re:Payload by TimSSG · · Score: 1
      Yep, I liked the punch line when Paul Harvey did in his "Now for the rest of the story".

      Tim S.

      Needs more cowbell.

      Get a lot of stuffed cows and put them into orbit.

      Akin to his moon made of cheese, this can be the "Herd shot 'round the world".

      AC

    2. Re:Payload by TWX · · Score: 1

      Like, stuffed animal cows, or like taxidermy cows? 'cause one wouldn't be enough mass and the other is a bit on the creepy side...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    3. Re:Payload by BarryHaworth · · Score: 5, Funny

      Like, stuffed animal cows, or like taxidermy cows? 'cause one wouldn't be enough mass and the other is a bit on the creepy side...

      The herd shot round the world ...

      --
      I am a Statistician. One false move and you are a Statistic
    4. Re:Payload by blindseer · · Score: 1

      Get a lot of stuffed cows and put them into orbit.

      Just to be clear that would be the female of the species, because if it were male cattle then that would be a payload of bull.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
  10. live feed by kiviQr · · Score: 2

    I hope the transmit real time from all cameras on the Roadster!

    1. Re:live feed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have been promised that there will be cameras.

    2. Re:live feed by TWX · · Score: 0

      T-10 - inside of the cargo bay...

      T=0 - inside of the cargo bay...

      T+3 - inside of the cargo bay, very mild amount of visible vibration...

      T+30 - inside of the cargo bay, mild amount of visible vibration...

      T+60 - inside of the cargo bay, mild amount of visible vibration...

      T+120 - inside of the cargo bay, mild amount of visible vibration...

      T+2400 - inside of the cargo bay, very mild amount of visible vibration...

      T+3600 - inside of the cargo bay...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    3. Re:live feed by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.

      Best sig i've seen in a long time.

      --
      The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
    4. Re:live feed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fairing separation will occur at around T+150.

    5. Re:live feed by TWX · · Score: 1

      I was inspired by this 20 year old comic.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    6. Re: live feed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd be most worriead about T-1000 inside the cargo bay.

  11. Send it into space. by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    They should put on some kind or propellant tanks on the car, and launch it into space and target the moon.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    1. Re:Send it into space. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should put on some kind or propellant tanks on the car, and launch it into space and target the moon.

      There are already three electric cars on the moon.

  12. Did they strip anything out first? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am wondering what all they stripped out out of the car for its journey. I would think they would not risk the launch by leaving in things like the battery packs, brake fluid, electrolytic capacitors, etc.

    1. Re:Did they strip anything out first? by TWX · · Score: 1

      Compared what's normally launched in satellites I doubt that such materials would matter in the slightest, or if they do, then there are more fundamental problems.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:Did they strip anything out first? by Cochonou · · Score: 1

      Yes. But cars are not rated for the same mechanical environments (shocks, vibrations) as satellites. They are designed (and tested) not to come apart during launch.

    3. Re:Did they strip anything out first? by cjameshuff · · Score: 1

      There's nothing stopping them putting the Tesla on the shake table for vibration testing. I do expect that they've had to make modifications. Stripping out or draining/purging things like the brake system, applying copious amounts of epoxy and the occasional weld to fix things in place, etc.

  13. Let it be known... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...that every great endeavor accomplished my great men throughout history was almost always accompanied by a symphony of neigh-saying from pathetic, small minded losers. For it was that the anti-Musk brigade were not worthy to lick the sweat from his glorious balls. Amen.

    1. Re: Let it be known... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially those involving horses.

  14. When I read this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I keep thinking about the movie Heavy Metal. The part where the astronaut is driving a Corvette in space. Musk is too cool!

  15. Why does anyone care about this? by asackett · · Score: 0

    Honestly, that's my question: Why should anyone not employed by him give a damn about Elon Musk and/or his toys?

    --

    Warning: This signature may offend some viewers.

    1. Re:Why does anyone care about this? by TWX · · Score: 1

      Because his companies are developing new products that are accessible to the middle-class in many cases, and disrupt the traditional pricing models across the board?

      Solar City was arguably the least innovative company of the bunch but a lot of people have achieved greater energy independence because of them. Sure, other companies do solar too, but the more players, the cheaper the prices.

      Tesla Motors has shown that a car company can manufacture only electric cars and manage to move models. True, they may not be profitable yet, but not only have they managed to make sales, but they've managed to stir up enough interest that other automakers are now selling multiple models of electrics and plug-in hybrids that are primary-electric instead of primary-gasoline. They've also demonstrated that electric cars can be cool looking, they don't have to be dorky like so many production vehicles have been. Tesla's influence has undoubtedly shifted the market on vehicles even if Tesla themselves doesn't survive.

      SpaceX may not be accessible to the average person, but they've managed to create a paradigm shift in rocketry to the point that competitors that don't follow suit and manage to make relaunchable rockets won't be in the industry anymore. Think about it, even the price of a first-flight rocket launch will be far less if the launch company expects to land and reuse the rocket, and so far SpaceX has not had a launch failure of a used rocket in-flight. So far all payloads that saw T=0 have made it to orbit on used rockets, and I fully expect flights with used rockets to cost less than those with new ones. Access to space, formerly the purview of nations and of megacorporations, suddenly becomes accessible to smaller corporations and even to public nonprofits. Groups with ideas for space science or space settlement might actually be able to afford to test their ideas without having to convince a government agency to fund them, and science into multiple directions of research may yield unexpected positive results.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:Why does anyone care about this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly, that's my question: Why should anyone not employed by him give a damn about Elon Musk and/or his toys?

      If Blue Origin were launching a Chevrolet Bolt into deep space, I would think it was just as cool.

      Just because you hate Elon Musk / Tesla / SpaceX doesn't mean this isn't news for nerds.

  16. potatoes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not non perishable foodstuffs as well. Cheap in they blow up. Invaluable if they could get to mars

  17. Two words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Space Litter

    1. Re:Two words by cjameshuff · · Score: 1

      Asteroids.
      Solar orbit's already filled with more junk than SpaceX will ever launch, and most of it's gone millions to billions of years without encountering anything else. It's not crowded out there.

  18. The Heavy Metal landing... by Grog6 · · Score: 1

    I'd hope if they could land on Mars, that that would at least do the landing like the Corvette in Heavy Metal.

    I'm sure Musk could come up with a Loc-Nar somewhere... :)

    --
    Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
  19. Legit thought he was joking by cyberman27 · · Score: 1

    Very cool, but I thought they specifically chose payloads like brick or concrete because they don't shift around much and cause undo motion inside the rocket.? Can't imagine a car would be a good idea but I think it's funny

  20. Ok, Why? by WindowsStar · · Score: 1

    Why the HE double hockey sticks would you send a car into outer space. This is the dumbest idea ever.

    1. Re:Ok, Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Publicity. Who else has sent a car in to space?

      Musk is constantly striving to publicise himself and his companies because it helps get people to invest in them.

      If he was just sending up a lump of concrete, there wouldn't be half the amount of stories on this launch, would there?

  21. Stupidest thing ever by GoRK · · Score: 1

    This is the dumbest possible thing that they could do. They need some cheap mass on their rocket; and this mass might be able to get into Martian orbit.

    They should send a couple thousand pounds of water. The containers to store it are are already 'off the shelf' inasmuch as we already are capable of rapidly producing a flight-tested design for holding water in space for a long period of time. And by chance if the thing makes it, a large quantity of water floating around mars would be an incredibly valuable and useful commodity

    1. Re:Stupidest thing ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't matter what they send, its not going to Mars orbit, its going to heliocentric orbit that just happens to intersect Mars orbit and maybe do a distant flyby.

    2. Re:Stupidest thing ever by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      And by chance if the thing makes it, a large quantity of water floating around mars would be an incredibly valuable and useful commodity

      First of all, it's not going into a Mars orbit. Secondly, it would be virtually useless anyway. There's plenty of water on Mars, much easier to reach than from orbit.

  22. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Space is fake. The Earth is flat. The eclipses prove it.

    No. Just no. NASA is not the CIA. They don't pull that sort of thing. But let's pretend yes.

    Q: How does it affect your life?
    A: Not at all.

  23. because he can by Tom · · Score: 1

    And to all who post that he could shoot up something more valuable, like a university science project - did you read that they usually do these tests with blocks of cement or such? You just never complained about that because it wasn't on /.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    1. Re: because he can by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I've seen a few no-imagination-prudes complaining the tesla is too valuable!

  24. Tesla roadster mass by Cochonou · · Score: 1

    The Telsa Roadster mass is about 1400 kg, isn't it ? This seems way too light for a payload simulator. The mass of the Soyouz is above 7000 kg, a loaded Dragon is about 10000 kg, and the Orion is close to 25000 kg !
    So this only makes sense if they also add a "boring" (but useful) dummy payload along it.

    1. Re:Tesla roadster mass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Telsa Roadster mass is about 1400 kg, isn't it ? This seems way too light for a payload simulator. The mass of the Soyouz is above 7000 kg, a loaded Dragon is about 10000 kg, and the Orion is close to 25000 kg !

      So this only makes sense if they also add a "boring" (but useful) dummy payload along it.

      mass to low earth orbit is not the same as mass to mars orbit

    2. Re:Tesla roadster mass by Cochonou · · Score: 1

      For sure, but they'll need to launch a capsule at Mars at some time to achieve their stated goals, which will be much heavier than a Tesla. The advertised payload to Mars of the Falcon Heavy is almost 17000 kg !

  25. Hopefully everything goes well by CustomSolvers2 · · Score: 0

    Justifying an accident when such an irrelevant frivolity is involved would be quite difficult. Personally, I am pretty much the opposite of a show-off, although don't mind taking risks/bringing things further as a way to accomplish something really worthy. I don't even care about (or/or feel a bit sorry for and/or make fun of) people behaving ostentatiously.

    Combining both unnecessary ostentation and unnecessary risk seems particularly difficult to defend. I seriously hope that nothing goes wrong, but I would expect a fair reaction (from clients, public opinion, authorities) otherwise. Kind of my motto: feel free to do whatever you want, but better be ready for the consequences.

    --
    Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
    1. Re:Hopefully everything goes well by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      Justifying an accident when such an irrelevant frivolity is involved would be quite difficult.

      I don't see why justifying an accident with a block of concrete would be any easier. In both cases, it's a setback, and you lose the rocket. The value of the car is peanuts.

    2. Re:Hopefully everything goes well by CustomSolvers2 · · Score: 1

      There are evident differences in mass, weight distribution (inertial mass, reactions to turbulent conditions, stability, etc.) and even price between a car and a block of concrete. On the other hand, I am honestly not sure about how using any of these objects is really affecting the rocket setup. In principle, it seems quite sensible to assume that the car option would required an important adaptation (+ provoke not properly tested conditions). In case that both alternatives behaved similarly, my previous comment would logically not be applicable.

      --
      Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
    3. Re:Hopefully everything goes well by CustomSolvers2 · · Score: 1

      -1 Overrated! Same thing yesterday when I wrote another not-blindly-appraising post to an Elon-related article! You can say whatever you want about the Elon's army, but at least they act consistently! LOL.

      --
      Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
    4. Re:Hopefully everything goes well by Teancum · · Score: 1

      What testing would a Tesla Roadster need to go through that hasn't been already done by the U.S. Department of Transportation, given that the vehicle has already a mountain of test data simply to put the vehicle into serial production?

      It would be far more expensive to certify a block of concrete than to take a vehicle which already has the data needed for evaluation available. It isn't like this is the first automobile that the FAA has needed to certify for flight worthiness before.

    5. Re:Hopefully everything goes well by CustomSolvers2 · · Score: 1

      From the point of view of being inside a rocket, most of tests done to that car are pretty much irrelevant. It has a very complex geometry and distribution of masses/densities/materials; there are lots of moving/easily removable parts; it is difficult to be kept perfectly balanced; etc. Nothing of this applies to a regular simple shape (e.g., a cube) made of cement or any other material.

      I don't think that this or any other car has ever passed through tests analysing its behaviour under as demanding conditions as the ones associated with being launched inside a rocket; and certainly not from the rocket perspective, what really matters here. Or you can see it in other way if you wish: 1000 kg of steel are identical to 1000 kg of cement from the static/weight point of view; but it is impossible to tell how similar/different both objects are from the dynamic perspective unless geometries, mass/density distributions, etc. are brought into account.

      --
      Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
  26. Not a successor! by hackertourist · · Score: 1

    Nothing I've seen so far indicates the Falcon Heavy will replace the Falcon 9. A Falcon Heavy is far too large for most payloads: a Falcon 9 can launch most payloads and still have enough margin to land the first stage (and soon, the fairing).
    FH will be used for those payloads that an F9 could only launch in expendable mode. There might be some US military/national security payloads that are too heavy for F9 altogether. Plus the occasional interplanetary mission, perhaps.

    1. Re:Not a successor! by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      If they can find a way to reuse the 2nd stage, the FH may end up cheaper than F9.

    2. Re:Not a successor! by Teancum · · Score: 1

      I agree. The Falcon Heavy isn't a successor. It is an additional launch vehicle which can put up payloads that the Falcon 9 simply can't do.

      The largest advantage of the Falcon Heavy is that it shares a great many components with the Falcon 9, including the engines and the internal tank design. That is also the reason why it has taken so long to get built, as the Falcon 9 design kept shifting and getting rolled onto the Falcon Heavy. As a matter of fact, the Falcon 9 is currently capable of sending the same tonnage that was anticipated for the Falcon Heavy when it was originally unveiled at the National Press Club so many years ago.

      That whole thing is moot anyways as both the Falcon 9 and the Falcon Heavy are slated to be retired as a design in the next 5-10 years and factory production may even be slowed down or stop altogether in the next couple of years in favor of the BFR. The only thing that will keep them coming out of the factory is due to the fact that the BFR is by necessity going to be built in another factory as the City of Hawthorn has refused to give permits to move the BFR through city streets. And yes, SpaceX asked.

  27. Does Elon Musk push himself too much? by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 2

    I'm impressed with what you said. I agree with "courage and conviction" and "character, perseverance, and faith".

    I haven't seen "constant vicious, destructive, vile attacks on his character". I have seen people evaluate his chances based on the idea that he is an average person, and an average person would fail at what he attempts.

    I hope that Elon Musk will be especially caring toward himself. Sometimes I get the impression he pushes himself too much.

  28. Not valuable payload, dummy, terribly boring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not valuable payload, dummy, terribly boring, my step mother seems a good fit. Wanna her as first payload?

  29. second to the right, and straight on till morning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    second to the right, and straight on till morning

  30. fuel efficiency by spongman · · Score: 1

    100 million miles on one tank of gas!