Agreed, Skylon has been mentioned seven times on Slashdot since 2009 and still don't really have anything to show for it.
They built and tested the precooler 3 years ago. It worked. It was technology the USA gave up on several decades ago as impractical if not impossible. Just like oxygen-rich pre-burners, until the Russians showed them the USSR was using them for decades.
They have also been doing rocket engine tests and releasing some of the findings. Big improvements with a better nozzle type they tested.
Anti-Mars people seem to miss that point. If you are on Mars surface, Mars is shielding you from half the constant radiation. Create buildings with a thick roof on top and big windows on the side, like most apartment and office buildings, and you are about as protected as on Earth.
would already have launched their much bigger BA330, but there's currently no rocket powerful enough to loft it.
This is not true. Their website, which you linked to, says "The B330 can be deployed by multiple launch vehicles". It could currently be launched on Ariane 5, Delta IV Heavy, and Proton-M. Bigelow has repeatedly said he is just waiting for a way to transport astronauts, which makes sense for a space station to be crewed.
EM-1 is not actually delayed to 2023 yet. Just expecting it will be eventually because usually these projects have unforeseen delays. Currently they are still working to do 2021.
Cloning an extinct species may be an important technology. We are currently creating a mass extinction event, and may need/want to bring back some species we killed off. It might even be profitable or lifesaving, like producing a cure for an infection or Star Trek IV.
The first visit of the transport to Mars will not be crewed. If a cycler is used, why not fill it from Mars, which is easier than from Earth, and the infrastructure is already going to be built up on Mars anyway.
If they were born in the last 40 years, all they have seen in China is a continuously rapidly increasing economy, like Japan before the 1990's. It was only possibly because China was so very poor to start and was sponsored by America. They are raised to trust the government will ensure the economy will continually grow much stronger.
At some point there will be a levelling off or crash, but before nearing Japan or USA gdp per capita. It will be very difficult for the government to survive the change in economic growth which it has relied on to stay in power. They seem to be using nationalism to distract the people from the slower economic growth.
China has about 4 times the population of United States, not 10 times. Though United States does seem to worry about your point, since an equal gdp per capita would make China's economy much larger.
You fail to mention Boeing's CST-100 because you know it disproves your entire train of thought, and shows your shill intentions.
NASA is worried that SpaceX might not complete in time? NASA has a backup for just such a predicament. It is why Boeing is getting so much more funding than SpaceX. Boeing has been very careful to avoid the risk of developing new technologies, unlike SpaceX, AND they have been sticking to their milestones carefully.
You further expose yourself by claiming cutting these funds and giving them to SLS/Orion is somehow redirecting money away from Big Business, when SLS/Orion is being built by Big Business, just much more expensively than Commercial Crew. Furthermore, Orion will not be able to go ISS this decade, even with more funding. There is zero chance it will be able to do ISS crew replacement before Dragon. Maybe it could do so before CST-100, if CST-100 is cancelled because Congress stops funding it.
Doctor told me if I got the lasik then in a few years I would require glasses for reading. Whereas now I only need them for reading far away stuff.
He said in a few years the lens (inside my eyes) would naturally harden, as it does for all people. My focal point was 50cm, which is basically perfect for reading. So if I skipped Lasik, then I'd always be able to see/read stuff perfectly near me (monitor, books, etc). If I got the surgery, I could always see far away.
Either way I'd need glasses in a few years. Given my work and play, I'd much rather always have up-close vision available than far-away vision.
Musk developed Falcon Heavy - with essentially no market.
Falcon 9 doesn't use solid boosters like Atlas V, so Falcon Heavy is needed to free the AirForce from being dependent on a single company.
F9 lists as below 5,000kg to GTO. Ariane 5 lifts a few heavier satellites per year. There are a few Atlas V/Delta IV Heavy launches each year too heavy for F9. Falcon Heavy is far better for cis-lunar and interplanetary missions.
Even if it only costs SpaceX 5 launches per year, that's still like $400million in revenue.
But seriously we can find ourselves in a situation with no space station. Like there is no Shuttle, Orion is decades away, we are depended on Musk to make Dragon2 work. After Apollo there was concern at the time if US would have a manned space program in early 1970s when still debating Shuttle, and it could have been no Shuttle meaning Apollo-Soyuz in 1975 could have been the last time US put people in space. Hear Dale Myers talk about this per MIT OC course in 2005
sarcasm?
2005 was before any COTS success, before any SpaceX success, before NASA's Commercial Crew program,...
Now Falcon 9 is launching Dragons to ISS and returning them to Earth, there are 3 different companies funded to build human spaceships, an Orion capsule is built and launching on a Delta IV Heavy within a year, and Bezos' Blue Origin is secretly building rockets and spaceships.
No self-destruct on Protons, but it does have engine cut-off. However, for first 45 seconds the engine cut-off is disabled so the rocket has time to move away from the launch pad before it crashes back down to the ground. It this case it allowed the rocket to go further away from its launch pad than if it was immediately cut-off.
Slashdot Mirror
It means he had better supporters backing him and managed to not screw up too badly. This has allowed some idiots to get into congress.
Sorry. I'm massively unimpressed. Build something, already.
Agreed, Skylon has been mentioned seven times on Slashdot since 2009 and still don't really have anything to show for it.
They built and tested the precooler 3 years ago. It worked. It was technology the USA gave up on several decades ago as impractical if not impossible. Just like oxygen-rich pre-burners, until the Russians showed them the USSR was using them for decades.
They have also been doing rocket engine tests and releasing some of the findings. Big improvements with a better nozzle type they tested.
Anti-Mars people seem to miss that point. If you are on Mars surface, Mars is shielding you from half the constant radiation. Create buildings with a thick roof on top and big windows on the side, like most apartment and office buildings, and you are about as protected as on Earth.
would already have launched their much bigger BA330, but there's currently no rocket powerful enough to loft it.
This is not true. Their website, which you linked to, says "The B330 can be deployed by multiple launch vehicles". It could currently be launched on Ariane 5, Delta IV Heavy, and Proton-M. Bigelow has repeatedly said he is just waiting for a way to transport astronauts, which makes sense for a space station to be crewed.
EM-1 is not actually delayed to 2023 yet. Just expecting it will be eventually because usually these projects have unforeseen delays. Currently they are still working to do 2021.
Cloning an extinct species may be an important technology. We are currently creating a mass extinction event, and may need/want to bring back some species we killed off. It might even be profitable or lifesaving, like producing a cure for an infection or Star Trek IV.
So then "SpaceX is Portugal in the race to the New (Space) World." ?
The first visit of the transport to Mars will not be crewed. If a cycler is used, why not fill it from Mars, which is easier than from Earth, and the infrastructure is already going to be built up on Mars anyway.
If they were born in the last 40 years, all they have seen in China is a continuously rapidly increasing economy, like Japan before the 1990's. It was only possibly because China was so very poor to start and was sponsored by America. They are raised to trust the government will ensure the economy will continually grow much stronger.
At some point there will be a levelling off or crash, but before nearing Japan or USA gdp per capita. It will be very difficult for the government to survive the change in economic growth which it has relied on to stay in power. They seem to be using nationalism to distract the people from the slower economic growth.
China has about 4 times the population of United States, not 10 times. Though United States does seem to worry about your point, since an equal gdp per capita would make China's economy much larger.
You fail to mention Boeing's CST-100 because you know it disproves your entire train of thought, and shows your shill intentions.
NASA is worried that SpaceX might not complete in time? NASA has a backup for just such a predicament. It is why Boeing is getting so much more funding than SpaceX. Boeing has been very careful to avoid the risk of developing new technologies, unlike SpaceX, AND they have been sticking to their milestones carefully.
You further expose yourself by claiming cutting these funds and giving them to SLS/Orion is somehow redirecting money away from Big Business, when SLS/Orion is being built by Big Business, just much more expensively than Commercial Crew. Furthermore, Orion will not be able to go ISS this decade, even with more funding. There is zero chance it will be able to do ISS crew replacement before Dragon. Maybe it could do so before CST-100, if CST-100 is cancelled because Congress stops funding it.
Doctor told me if I got the lasik then in a few years I would require glasses for reading. Whereas now I only need them for reading far away stuff.
He said in a few years the lens (inside my eyes) would naturally harden, as it does for all people. My focal point was 50cm, which is basically perfect for reading. So if I skipped Lasik, then I'd always be able to see/read stuff perfectly near me (monitor, books, etc). If I got the surgery, I could always see far away.
Either way I'd need glasses in a few years. Given my work and play, I'd much rather always have up-close vision available than far-away vision.
Musk developed Falcon Heavy - with essentially no market.
Falcon 9 doesn't use solid boosters like Atlas V, so Falcon Heavy is needed to free the AirForce from being dependent on a single company.
F9 lists as below 5,000kg to GTO. Ariane 5 lifts a few heavier satellites per year. There are a few Atlas V/Delta IV Heavy launches each year too heavy for F9. Falcon Heavy is far better for cis-lunar and interplanetary missions.
Even if it only costs SpaceX 5 launches per year, that's still like $400million in revenue.
But seriously we can find ourselves in a situation with no space station. Like there is no Shuttle, Orion is decades away, we are depended on Musk to make Dragon2 work. After Apollo there was concern at the time if US would have a manned space program in early 1970s when still debating Shuttle, and it could have been no Shuttle meaning Apollo-Soyuz in 1975 could have been the last time US put people in space. Hear Dale Myers talk about this per MIT OC course in 2005
sarcasm?
...
2005 was before any COTS success, before any SpaceX success, before NASA's Commercial Crew program,
Now Falcon 9 is launching Dragons to ISS and returning them to Earth, there are 3 different companies funded to build human spaceships, an Orion capsule is built and launching on a Delta IV Heavy within a year, and Bezos' Blue Origin is secretly building rockets and spaceships.
No self-destruct on Protons, but it does have engine cut-off. However, for first 45 seconds the engine cut-off is disabled so the rocket has time to move away from the launch pad before it crashes back down to the ground. It this case it allowed the rocket to go further away from its launch pad than if it was immediately cut-off.