{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by Britton:
4/10/2016 2:16:08 AM
48
Rocket history has been made again
Today spaceX landed a reusable rocket for the second time, but it was the first time one had been landed at sea.
They landed their Falcon9 booster on a barge in the Atlantic today. Quite an impressive feat of engineering.
What does this mean? Well for one it means much faster turn around times between missions, as well as the potential for space tourism farther down the road as this becomes more and more sound.
Interesting stuff I figured I'd share.
Added video for those Interested. [spoiler]thanks get owned.[/spoiler]
-
1 ReplyElon musk is truly a genius and innovator
-
1 ReplyEdited by Promethean241: 4/9/2016 2:35:26 PMBritton, I love you. Your posts are always so fuсking interesting. Thank you for not being an ass like everyone else here
-
2 RepliesElon musk deleted this tweet.... https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lSx4DGBstYA&feature=player_embedded
-
9 RepliesIt's too bad none of the presidential candidates cares about any of this stuff.
-
9 RepliesEdited by The Cellar Door: 4/10/2016 4:26:54 AM[url=http://livestream.com/viewnow/niac2015seattle]Another thing anyone interested in astronomy should look at.[/url] Not Space X, but NASA holds these symposiums for various institutions to offer new ideas for the future. The first video on the page is Phillip Lubin from Univ. of California Santa Barbara, and he's offering a solution to the big problem with space travel... ...The fact that we suck at it. Our ships are too heavy, our fuel is laughably inefficient, and the fastest space craft we've ever launched would still take thousands of years to get to the nearest star. His solution? Lasers. Don't underestimate the power of light, this technology could potentially propel a small ship to 30% the speed of light ([b]90,000,000[/b] meters per second) in the same time (10 minutes) and using the same amount of energy a conventional spacecraft takes to get to orbit. Nearest star? It'll be there in 20 years. It could send a 100kg ship to Mars in [b]three days[/b], laughing at the 6 months it would take current tech.
-
Science>everything
-
The amount of precision required for this stuff is unbelievable. What was controlling it, human or computer? Just curious.
-
Edited by Potato: 4/11/2016 5:16:02 AMI live half an hour from there
-
2 RepliesImpressive! But seen that hit the deck afew times to! Would want way more accident free landings before I'd get in 1
-
2 RepliesWho gives a -blam!-? Is just a landing.
-
3 RepliesAnyone else wonder if SpaceX might turn out to be some kinda James Bond villain?
-
I wish we could switch Nasa and DoD budgets.
-
[b] [/b]
-
3 RepliesI'm not sure why, but when i see things like this happening it makes me happy.
-
Glad to see at least one post on this:)
-
2 RepliesThey need to fund ocean exploration, and as well as other means of getting to space other than rockets. Blue origin also had a similar accomplishment. I can't wait until this technology actually is introduced for commercial use.
-
15 RepliesIndia sent satalite to mars , i believe that is more important and should be written on your post
-
5 Repliesdid we land of the moon
-
7 RepliesThat landing was absolutely astounding and it partially terrifies me
-
1 ReplyThis is exciting. Can't wait to retire to my condo on the moon.
-
5 RepliesEdited by Onion Beetle Fan: 4/9/2016 7:08:45 AMHere's a quick webm of what happened. It was epic and awesome.
-
Yeah NPR was going off about it today lol
-
This is awesome!
-
Cool.
-
11 RepliesI like SpaceX, but how much does fuel does it take to land one of those? Seems like they'd need a lot extra to both take off and land.
-
17 RepliesWow, could this mean we'll be seeing faster than light travel by 2017?
