Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
UM-Bot

Falcon Heavy set to launch on February 6th

92 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

seanjo
On 2/7/2018 at 10:42 PM, toast said:

Thats the written proof that your understanding of the complexity of an advanced spacecraft is very low. Just for your info, it requires a brand new software for the synchronisation and control of a pack of 9 main engines because you cannot run 9 separate engines with 9 separate software sets on one spacecraft.

I believe you have no clue.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Nzo

I seen the full launch and it was fantastic. The boosters landed perfectly. Hopefully it will usher in more space missions. My only problem with the whole thing is that they missed the orbit they were aiming for. And my mind being what it is, cannot help to think that somehow the car will start a chain reaction by hitting an asteroid in the asteroid belt. This could eventually send an asteroid towards earth.  Yes, I agree to paranoid but anything is possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
9 hours ago, internetperson said:

When was this? You mean launches in general? Regardless yeah it's fun to see the news play it live; the rocket goes off, you run outside and can't see anything for about a minute then you see the rocket streaking in the sky. Looks like it's going the wrong way.

Late 90's, early 2000's.  Everything is teleconferencing now so rarely get down there today.

7 hours ago, Nzo said:

I seen the full launch and it was fantastic. The boosters landed perfectly. Hopefully it will usher in more space missions. My only problem with the whole thing is that they missed the orbit they were aiming for. And my mind being what it is, cannot help to think that somehow the car will start a chain reaction by hitting an asteroid in the asteroid belt. This could eventually send an asteroid towards earth.  Yes, I agree to paranoid but anything is possible.

The first stage (center booster) crashed into the ocean but it was the first of its kind so I am sure they will learn a great deal from the crash. Regardless, safely landing the boosters was a peripheral thing compared to actually successfully launching the Heavy and that went off great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
16 hours ago, Nzo said:

 my mind being what it is, cannot help to think that somehow the car will start a chain reaction by hitting an asteroid in the asteroid belt. This could eventually send an asteroid towards earth.

No, I think any chance of an asteroid hurtling towards earth because the car collided with one would be extremely unlikely.

I would imagine the car would come off second best though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Derek Willis
53 minutes ago, Astra. said:

No, I think any chance of an asteroid hurtling towards earth because the car collided with one would be extremely unlikely.

I agree. There are many rocket stages in orbit around the Sun after being fired to send probes to the planets over the last fifty-odd years. As far as I know, none have collided with an asteroid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
31 minutes ago, Derek Willis said:

I agree. There are many rocket stages in orbit around the Sun after being fired to send probes to the planets over the last fifty-odd years. As far as I know, none have collided with an asteroid.

Yes, Iv'e never heard of any type of rocket, probe etc....that man has sent into space (or deeper space) that was known to collide with an asteroid. I think people forget sometimes in just how vast and empty space really is. It's SO empty that the risk of a collision between a spacecraft and an asteroid...(even in the asteroid belt) is extremely minuscule. 
 

   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
On 10.2.2018 at 7:25 PM, seanjo said:

I believe you have no clue.

And your "judgement" is based on which of my comments exactly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
internetperson
On 2/11/2018 at 7:40 AM, Derek Willis said:

I agree. There are many rocket stages in orbit around the Sun after being fired to send probes to the planets over the last fifty-odd years. As far as I know, none have collided with an asteroid.

Got a link? That doesn't sound right but I don't know much about this stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Derek Willis
58 minutes ago, internetperson said:

Got a link? That doesn't sound right but I don't know much about this stuff.

What doesn't sound right? That there are many rocket stages in orbit around the Sun? Every probe that travels to a planet, comet etc. needs to be accelerated to beyond Earth's escape velocity using a rocket stage. These stages go into orbit around the Sun.

Here is a link to a Wiki page which gives some idea of how many have been launched during the last fifty-odd years.

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

You can count them yourself!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
internetperson

I think we have the definition of orbit mixed up, that being said I'm looking to learn not argue so exclamation points are not necessary.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Noteverythingisaconspiracy
9 minutes ago, internetperson said:

I think we have the definition of orbit mixed up, that being said I'm looking to learn not argue so exclamation points are not necessary.

How do you define orbit ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Derek Willis
17 minutes ago, internetperson said:

I think we have the definition of orbit mixed up, that being said I'm looking to learn not argue so exclamation points are not necessary.

I meant no offence: I was simply meaning that if you want to know how many rocket stages, probes, and other human-made objects are in orbit around the Sun, you can count them yourself.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
22 minutes ago, internetperson said:

I think we have the definition of orbit mixed up, that being said I'm looking to learn not argue so exclamation points are not necessary.

If you are looking to learn then you'd tell us how you define orbit because no one knows what you are talking about here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
internetperson
21 hours ago, Derek Willis said:

I meant no offence: I was simply meaning that if you want to know how many rocket stages, probes, and other human-made objects are in orbit around the Sun, you can count them yourself.

No worries. I definitely need to read up on how the rockets work, stages during the flight, etc at some point in time. Most of my knowledge comes from watching Apollo 13.

Oh and regarding the orbit thing: Something has to be specifically 'set' in orbit, right? So it didn't make sense to me that rocket stages or probes would consistently drop into orbit solely around the sun. But after checking out mercs link I see how heliocentric is different from what I was thinking. If heliocentric is redundant in this context then my bad.

Edited by internetperson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Derek Willis
3 hours ago, internetperson said:

No worries. I definitely need to read up on how the rockets work, stages during the flight, etc at some point in time. Most of my knowledge comes from watching Apollo 13.

Oh and regarding the orbit thing: Something has to be specifically 'set' in orbit, right? So it didn't make sense to me that rocket stages or probes would consistently drop into orbit solely around the sun. But after checking out mercs link I see how heliocentric is different from what I was thinking. If heliocentric is redundant in this context then my bad.

An orbit is simply the path an object follows under the influence of a gravitational field. We tend to think of orbits as being "closed", as in an ellipse or a circle (which is really just a special case of an ellipse). This is because the word "orbit" is derived from "orb" - ancient people used to think that the Sun, Moon, planets and stars were embedded on a series of moving glass orbs (spheres) all centered on the Earth. There are also "open" orbits, which are parabolic or hyperbolic. Whether an orbit is closed or open depends on the velocity of the object in question, and the strength of the gravitational field. So, for example, if an object in a closed orbit around the Earth is accelerated with a rocket stage, it will reach a speed where it will no longer loop back round the Earth, and will "escape" from the Earth in a parabolic/hyperbolic orbit (which it is depends on the actual velocity).

All the satellites orbiting the Earth are of course also orbiting the Sun, together with the Earth. So to reach another planet - for example, Mars - the probe has to be put into the orbit Mars follows around the Sun. This is done by accelerating the probe into its own orbit around the Sun. The launch of the probe is timed so that it will arrive at Mars's orbit exactly at the point where the planet is. The probe is then decelerated and is "captured" by the gravity of Mars, and enters an orbit around Mars. In the past the early probes weren't able to decelerate, and simply "flew" past Mars and into their own heliocentric orbits.

So you can see that each time a probe is launched to a planet, the rocket stage used to accelerate away from the Earth ends up in its own orbit around the Sun - a heliocentric orbit.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Waspie_Dwarf

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.