Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Has science taken a wrong turn? If so, what corrections are needed? Chronicles of scientific misbehavior. The role of heretic-pioneers and forbidden questions in the sciences. Is peer review working? The perverse "consensus of leading scientists." Good public relations versus good science.
User avatar
Brigit
Posts: 1166
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:37 pm

Re: Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Unread post by Brigit » Tue May 11, 2021 8:09 pm

jackokie says, "It seems to me that our top goal must be coverage - like temperatures in our atmosphere, we can extrapolate (i.e., make guesses) between two widely separated points, but experience has shown that there can be wide fluctuations between nearby locations. The more measurements from different locations the better our picture of the solar circuit will be."

So much so. Spatial coverage with smaller instruments, along with simultaneity is the highest objective we could reach. For example, suppose we had twin or triplet coverage of the polar regions of at least three bodies in the solar system, including the sun. It may be efficient, on the way to the sun, to insert two CATs to watch Mercury. So in this case, we would have simultaneous sight of the southern poles of two planets and a star.

While reading Stephen Smith's potd about the x-rays and soft x-rays emitted by Saturn, I realized that the spacecraft also must include the instrumentation to detect the entire em spectrum above visible light, even from planets. No, especially from planets. We'll take the blinders off. So I will go find a few gamma detectors that are relatively simple.

Please feel free to share more about your recent reading on Ben Longmier's Ambipolar Thrusters. On the kickstarter page, it appears that solar panels practically come with it, which will please some more than others! (: Ambipolar is another name for plasma double layers, iirc?
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer

User avatar
Brigit
Posts: 1166
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:37 pm

Re: Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Unread post by Brigit » Wed May 19, 2021 3:56 pm

jackokie says, "I think solar power works for our initial probes because we can get off the ground quickly. If we can afford twenty circuitsat v.2s using solar power for every v.2 using nuclear power, my vote has to go for solar. As they say, quality trumps quantity, but quantity has a quality all its own."

It is true that solar provides enough power for the Cubesat Ambipolar Thruster to use the water propellant. So even though the force generated by this thruster is only micro-newtons, the craft still reaches higher velocities because the engine remains on for much longer.

Whatever paltry watts are left can be used for instruments. But I brought up plutonium oxide because you need some real power to put more detectors and instrumentation on it. Now: before someone smiles patiently and takes me aside to explain the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to me, I just want to say that first, in the Electric Universe, it may not be as difficult to create the fuel, and second, we need some real power. I assume the solar is limiting and CATs could even achieve a couple of newtons and carry more electronics with some real power.

That's all I want to say in favor of Team Plutonium. Not only will we not need any gravity assist maneuvers, but we would be able to support whatever detectors and communications we wanted, for as long as we wanted. Where we are going is so remote, even from other satellites, that it poses no threat to any life or to the environment.

With that, I will drop it! (:
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer

User avatar
Brigit
Posts: 1166
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:37 pm

Re: Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Unread post by Brigit » Fri Jun 25, 2021 10:07 pm

In fact jackokie, why not replicate the Voyagers altogether?

It has some advantages. Building miniature Voyagers would be an excellent educational program, don't you think?
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer

User avatar
Brigit
Posts: 1166
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:37 pm

Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Unread post by Brigit » Wed Aug 18, 2021 7:02 pm

by jackokie » Sat Apr 03, 2021 4:10 pm
"Except that it must be cheap!"

I will write that on a blackboard 100 times.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer

jackokie
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2020 1:10 am

Re: Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Unread post by jackokie » Wed Jan 05, 2022 8:06 pm

First, my apologies to Brigit for failing to continue our discussion of a survey of the solar circuit. The sheer volume of ungrounded reports from the consensus astrologers (ht Michael Mozina) put me in a months-long funk. Thanks to BeAChooser’s yeoman work on exposing the most egregious gnomes, I have been shamed as a summer soldier; I am returning to the quest with renewed resolve.

Because the standard model rests on untestable speculations, I intend to avoid any untestable ideas around EU theory and stick to measurable results. I am more convinced than ever that stars are a plasma phenomenon fed by circuits, because the observed cosmic phenomena line up so well with plasma’s properties as demonstrated in the lab. Points in favor the sun (and star) circuit:

* It accounts for variations in radiance, as seen with Betelguese.
* Supernovas are caused by z-pinches. This explains why some “supernovas” mysteriously healed up.
* Pulsars as oscillating resonant circuits.
* No exotic physics or matter required.
* There’s a heck of a lot of electrical activity already observed, from craters, to comets, to auroras, to the “solar wind”, to nebular phenomena, to intergalactic circuits.
* Occam’s Razor.

If the main objection to plasma stars is lack of verification of the solar circuit, then if we find it we can resume the discussion about an anode vs cathode sun. So my position is, until the solar circuit is disproved it exists and when it’s confirmed we’ll find it conveys enough energy to power the sun.

All of the probes that have flown around the solar system so far are a mere pittance of what is needed to understand the system’s electrical environment, and some of them weren’t designed to measure what we need. If it exists the solar circuit must operate somewhere roughly in a sphere centered on the sun and extending to the heliopause. That’s a lot of real estate. And most of our probe activity has been centered on or around the plane of the ecliptic.

Perhaps we can confirm the solar circuit through observation. Some thoughts:
* Does dark mode plasma radiate at all in non-visible frequencies? I have to think that glow mode doesn’t just start up like flipping a switch. If dark mode plasma does radiate, if we can image that radiation we might find parts of the solar circuit.
* While the intersection of the heliopause and the interstellar medium is no longer considered a “bow shock”, I would expect a charge differential between them to be more likely than not. What kind of scattering or blow back might be occurring there that might make it’s way back to the sun?
* It’s pretty clear that circuits exist between the sun and several planets. Could circuits exist between the planets, and could those circuits account for at least part of the overall solar circuit?

The prototype probe would cost around $3,000 - $3,500. This includes the necessary sensors and software to capture the coordinates of the samples taken. The cheapest way to have them assembled would be to enlist high school and college students to do the work in exchange for the experience, and hopefully class credit. My idea is to launch several on paths above and below the ecliptic plane, with trajectories that would let them rendezvous with Earth at later points in its orbit, at which time they would transmit their collected data back to the collection point we would set up. There’s just no practical way to equip the probes with the necessary power to transmit back to Earth in mid-flight. There are a few affordable options to get our probes into LEO, but I have not found a way within any feasible budget to give them the necessary delta-V to accomplish their task. But perhaps there is a way and I just haven’t found it. As for NASA, not only do I think they would have no interest in our survey, I think they would be actively hostile to it.

I have some more thoughts about EU and the JWT I'll post elsewhere, probably in the Electric Universe topic.
Time is what prevents everything from happening all at once.

Cargo
Posts: 698
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:02 am

Re: Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Unread post by Cargo » Thu Jan 06, 2022 5:36 am

If I could be so bold, I would say that for a V1 EU Probe launch, we should limit it to the Earth Moon. That alone, if the concept proves, would literally kick the door wide open. And then other options would be become available for a better and farther solar probe sweep.

The store-and-dump feature should become a rule. Mid-flight data outside LEO is a treat but not worth it at this stage.
All effort must be on the data collection first. And keep it Open. NASA can just be surprised at what we find.

So, if you can get a swarm to at least scan the Earth/Move connection, I would personally sponsor a single probe myself at that price.

V1 Earth/Moon, V2 Earth/Sun, V3 Sun/SolarSphere

Welcome to 2022! Cheers!
interstellar filaments conducted electricity having currents as high as 10 thousand billion amperes
"You know not what. .. Perhaps you no longer trust your feelings,." Michael Clarage
"Charge separation prevents the collapse of stars." Wal Thornhill

jackokie
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2020 1:10 am

Re: Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Unread post by jackokie » Thu Jan 06, 2022 5:46 pm

@cargo: Thanks for your response and commitment! Earth - Moon would certainly be a good way to validate probe performance and data collection. Do you have any predictions of what the probe might detect in that volume of space?

Several years ago I donated to the crowd-funded effort to reboot the ISSE-3 solar probe. The probe ultimately was unsalvageable, but it was a fun thing to be involved in, and I did get a nifty patch. I believe there are a lot of people who would happily participate in our survey effort - high school and college science clubs, stem classes, and just people interested in space. Both Purdue and U. of Michigan had teams of students assembling water-based thrusters, the concept being later commercialized in the Maxwell thruster by Phase 4.

Incidentally, Ben Longmeir, mentioned by Brigit in this thread, has been a major force in the development of small plasma thrusters and other pioneering technologies. He has been chief research scientist at Vasimr; co-founder of Phase 4; co-founder of Swarm, which launched a constellation of satellites. Swarm was acquired by SpaceX in November, 2021; Longmeir is now Sr. Director, Satellite Engineering at SpaceX (sorry, Brigit), so I imagine he will be helping out with StarLink. If I might add, from what I've seen Elon Musk is a pretty capable engineer, and an even more capable judge of talent.
Time is what prevents everything from happening all at once.

User avatar
Brigit
Posts: 1166
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:37 pm

Re: Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Unread post by Brigit » Fri Jan 07, 2022 12:01 am

by jackokie » Thu Jan 06, 2022 10:46 am
"Incidentally, Ben Longmeir, mentioned by Brigit in this thread, has been a major force in the development of small plasma thrusters and other pioneering technologies. He has been chief research scientist at Vasimr; co-founder of Phase 4; co-founder of Swarm, which launched a constellation of satellites. Swarm was acquired by SpaceX in November, 2021; Longmeir is now Sr. Director, Satellite Engineering at SpaceX (sorry, Brigit), so I imagine he will be helping out with StarLink."

Hi jackokie and a happy new year to all!

I appreciate very much your condolences, where you say "sorry Brigit." That's so nice of you. It's not the best news about SpaceXs acquisition of Ben Longmeir but I wish him happiness in his life of course. :cry:

"Sorry Brigit" -- it's the story of my life... The small freewheeling competition and innovators are first fined, then taxed, then regulated by the monopolies and 3-letter-agencies, then disappeared by being purchased or made illegal in some way. I personally believe that we all lose when there is no free, fair, and genuine competition. The same must apply to space. And I cannot help but think that the enormous and unfair fine of $900,000 placed on Ben Longmier may be in part responsible for his professional decisions after that. In other words, the regulatory agencies made an example of him and made sure that not so much as a sandwich sized satellite by an independent company would ever, ever see space.

And on the topic of SpaceX, may I ask why on earth would any one want 42,000 satellites in the sky all operated the same (alleged) company?

That is a sincere question. Consider the power to track or switch on and off any electronic device (including transportation) that is connected to the internet. And if that is of no concern to any one here as it is to me, then what about the possibility of 42,000 satellites blocking out the stars in the night sky, and the problems that would cause for amateur astronomy?
  • Fig. 2 https://video.newsserve.net/700/v/20200 ... -night.jpg
    "Starlink is a venture by SpaceX. The idea is to launch 12,000 or more satellites into Earth orbit, surrounding our planet and providing global internet coverage even to people in remote areas. The first batch of 60 Starlink satellites launched in May 2019 surprised astronomers and prompted the International Astronomical Union to issue a statement of concern. Filling the sky with thousands of artificial stars might not be good for astronomy, they suggested.

    The satellites Conrad recorded were from the 2nd batch of 60 launched in Nov. 2019. They are fading somewhat as the ascend to their operational orbits more than 500 km high. Even at that altitude, however, satellites from the first Starlink launch in May remain visible at magnitudes ranging from +4 (naked-eye) to +7 (easy for telescopes). The 2nd batch will remain visible as well." ~spaceweather
Good to see you back, jackokie, and hello cargo (:
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer

Cargo
Posts: 698
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:02 am

Re: Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Unread post by Cargo » Fri Jan 07, 2022 6:22 am

If the world is shut out from the night sky, all the more reason to get your data from outside that shell. Not to deflect into global network control structures, but that's kind besides the point beyond maybe having to deal with unsavory partners for the parts and labor to get the EU Swarm in Space.

Screw them if they want to cloud the world in 5G broadband and microchips, carry the flag beyond the border, and show them the light.
interstellar filaments conducted electricity having currents as high as 10 thousand billion amperes
"You know not what. .. Perhaps you no longer trust your feelings,." Michael Clarage
"Charge separation prevents the collapse of stars." Wal Thornhill

User avatar
Brigit
Posts: 1166
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:37 pm

Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Unread post by Brigit » Fri Jan 07, 2022 8:46 pm

Yes Cargo, it's absolutely beside the point.

Jackokie and I were just finishing a previous chat about SpaceX. All good (:
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer

jackokie
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2020 1:10 am

Re: Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Unread post by jackokie » Fri Jan 07, 2022 9:23 pm

And a Happy New Year to you Brigit! I agree, the $900,000 fine was way out-of-line. I have a feeling, though, that Ben will land on his feet; he's much too talented to languish on the sidelines. I'm thinking the fine was the reason Swarm was for sale, and that SpaceX took care of the fine when they bought the company (probably to secure Ben’s services).

In Elon's defense, it's not his fault there is currently no real competition. He's not the one filing lawsuits instead of developing hardware Here is a December, 2021 report from Behind the Black:
Blue Origin is unlikely to deliver two flight-ready versions of the BE-4 rocket engine to United Launch Alliance (ULA) before at least the second quarter of 2022, two sources say. This increases the possibility that the debut flight of ULA’s much-anticipated new rocket, Vulcan, could slip into 2023.
ULA threatened earlier in 2021 to drop the BE-4 in favor of a Rocketdyne engine. Maybe now they'll go ahead and do it. And lets not forget SLS, Orion, and the Lunar Gateway, this last only being necessary due to the limitations of SLS Orion. And remember the lunar astronauts are supposed to ride to lunar orbit in Orion and then transfer to the Starship lunar lander for landing. Give me a break. Starship with the planned extra tankage and Raptor v2 engines should be able to make it all the way from LEO to moon landing. So why are we planning to spend $2 billion per SLS launch on an expendable rocket? With a launch tempo of one per year?

When I got out of the Army I returned to college and changed my major to physics. A friend from my high school graduating class had continued with his education at the same university and was now a PhD candidate in physics. In catching up with each other he related an experience he and a few other grad students had on a remote sensing project for a major oil company – riding around in a DC-3 with whatever gadgets they had built. He said it was the most horrible, stressful experience he’d ever had; the pressure for results was enormous. He swore he’d never put himself in a position like that again.

Later in life, as a software developer in factory automation, I've been involved in some high stakes projects, like project manager for Maytag Corporation's Y2K mitigation (new systems, in a union shop). In those kind of projects, results are everything; no excuses. You'd better be on top of your craft. Had the project failed I'd have been a skin on the wall. But that’s how progress is made. If you want to make things happen it starts with attitude and determination – to go around, over, or through obstacles, to be convinced there’s always a way, to refuse to accept less than success. It’s not for the faint at heart, nor the dilettante. I guess it’s part of my makeup – I want to make things happen, not just stand there while needful things go unaddressed.

Things change – in my career I’ve had to master several programming languages: BAL, Autocoder, COBOL, PL/1, Burroughs SDL, Pascal, Modula 2, C, Visual Basic (ugh); in the past twenty years it’s been C#, Python, and now Rust (which is now my favorite). The buggy manufacturers fell on hard times thanks to Henry Ford, and now Tesla, Rivian, Lucid, and others are coming for the old line auto makers. Several aircraft manufacturers fell out or were bought because they could not master the different technologies of jet aircraft. SpaceX, Tesla, The Boring Company, Starlink – are all technologies needed for a successful Mars colony, and are a new paradigm. Every advance has potential hazards – the “Internet of Things” is a catastrophe-in-waiting; hackers make mischief without needing StarLink. Until things like the Morpheus chip and unhackable networks are widespread we’re going to be vulnerable.

SpaceX just stuck their 101st (!) recovery of the Falcon 9 first stage. They now have a ton of experience - far more than anyone else - in launch operations. SpaceX is setting an aggressive pace for development and is not reluctant to scrap one idea and try another. They have no trouble attracting investors and talent, so they're secure in those areas. Starship demonstrates just how limited the other major players’ vision has been. Given how open Musk is to new ideas - stainless steel rocket body? - Ben may have finally found a position where he can pull out all the stops; I sure hope so. We’re finally going into space in a big way, and this time I don’t think we’ll stop. Once manufacturing and other activities are established in space NASA can get out of the space transportation business and revert to scientific exploration. And get the heck out of the way. This is why I believe the EU is so important; we’ve got to know the solar system’s electrical environment and it’s effects and hazards because people are going to be out there in it. Until recently Casey Handmer worked for Caltech/JPL/NASA. The links below explore the revolutionary nature of Starship and the possibilities it opens up. I believe his admonition from the first link should be our watchwords: Think bigger. Much bigger.

"https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2019 ... -big-deal/"

https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2021 ... nderstood/

https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2021 ... -starship/

Given a choice between preserving the amateur astronomers’ night sky and providing the benefits of internet access to under served students in Africa, it’s a no brainer. If the amateur astronomers want my help they can call BS on the excrescences of the consensus crowd – show some integrity, show some courage. Otherwise I’m with Cargo: Screw ‘em. The third link includes a concept for a VERY large telescope made feasible by the cargo capacity of Starship.
Time is what prevents everything from happening all at once.

User avatar
Brigit
Posts: 1166
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:37 pm

Re: Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Unread post by Brigit » Sun Jan 09, 2022 2:16 am

by jackokie
"Things change – in my career I’ve had to master several programming languages: BAL, Autocoder, COBOL, PL/1, Burroughs SDL, Pascal, Modula 2, C, Visual Basic (ugh); in the past twenty years it’s been C#, Python, and now Rust (which is now my favorite).
The buggy manufacturers fell on hard times thanks to Henry Ford, and now Tesla, Rivian, Lucid, and others are coming for the old line auto makers."

A wonderful point, very timely and sustained with a bit of personal history, very much enjoyed that.

In the spirit of sitting by the fire chatting, I have a little personal experience of my own to add.
Ah, the years have been good to me. Among other things, I have owned a beautiful half-ton for many years, and traveled the United States with it. It is the perfect marriage of form, function, and aesthetic enjoyment. With a towing capacity of just about 8,000 lbs and a payload of around 3500, I have been satisfied with limiting myself to a 26' camper which still nevertheless has most of the comforts of home, and I have also picked up my fair share of antiques, furniture -- besides many many loads of straw, dirt, rock and mulch.

Although I do admire the horse and buggy as much as anyone else, especially the Clydesdale teams, still I think it would not quite have the range that my pickup truck does, nor would it maintain the speeds through the mountains that I require. ("I need it for science." (; )
But I do agree very much with what jackokie said, that T*sla and others "are coming for the old line auto makers."
The auto makers that built my functional, beautiful, pleasurable and affordable pickup truck are required to purchase Regulatory Credits directly from...none other than Elon Musk.
  • "Based on the 2020 annual report, Tesla generated sales that totaled as much as $1.58 billion, $594 million and $419 million for the years ended on December 2020, 2019 and 2018 respectively from selling regulatory credits alone."
To be more precise, it's not that pick up trucks are horse and buggies, but that by taxing pickup truck owners like me and sending the money directly to Musk, someone is trying to make them "go the way of the horse." I think we can at least agree about that.
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer

User avatar
Brigit
Posts: 1166
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:37 pm

Re: Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Unread post by Brigit » Sun Jan 09, 2022 2:18 am

But couldn't we just set up a Patreon account for him instead?
“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”
~Homer

jackokie
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2020 1:10 am

Re: Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Unread post by jackokie » Sun Jan 09, 2022 8:14 pm

@Brigit I think regulatory credits are a big mistake, but Tesla is far from the only business taking advantage of them.
"Based on the 2020 annual report, Tesla generated sales that totaled as much as $1.58 billion, $594 million and $419 million for the years ended on December 2020, 2019 and 2018 respectively from selling regulatory credits alone."
The credits go to the Tesla company, not Musk. Blame the politicians who enacted the credits. You're correct that quite a few politicians have bought into the zero carbon "Climate Change" fairy tale and want to kill the internal combustion engine. And BTW, my problem with the IPCC's goals is that they're based on even crappier "research" than that of consensus astrophysics. Musk's fortune is almost entirely stock, which you might have noticed he's been selling off lately. Financial website estimates of his ultimate tax bill for the stock sale range from $10 billion all the way to $18 billion, so it looks like his taxes will cover Tesla's and quite a few others' credits.

I don't understand your antipathy for SpaceX and Musk. The recoverable Falcon 9 booster has already dramatically lowered the cost of getting to LEO. Nobody else in the 21st century has had 1/10th of the impact he has had on space flight, and it's been done by innovation and taking risks. Nobody else has had the moxy to commit to stainless steel rocket bodies, or to take the leap to handling 120 ton payloads with completely reusable rockets. A lot of the innovation is in production design, i.e., how to manufacture many Raptor engines, or make one Starship per week. SpaceX has only received money from the government as a contractor, like many, many other companies, and if you compare SpaceX's compensation with Boeing, Lockheed, ULA, etc. you will see that SpaceX is on the low end.

The link below reports on the kind of innovations Musk creates (of course, it is mostly the people he has hired, but he is apparently truly the chief engineer):

"https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmani ... x-machines"

From the article:
SpaceX engineers developed new machines to aid in the construction of Starship prototypes. Engineers made a new welding tool called a "knuckle seamer" with the purpose to speed up Starship dome tank production and improve weld quality.
I'd sure like to know what Ben Longmeir is working on now. Wouldn't it be cool if it was a way to hook a ship into a Birkeland current to really get somewhere fast?

Shifting gears. Motor Trend selected the Rivian R1T as Truck of the Year. Links below are to the article and to a 5,000 mile traverse of the United States via the off-road Trans-America Trail. I have felt the hype for EVs far exceeded what energy storage technology could deliver, but with so many companies now pursuing EVs, while we're not quite there yet it looks like the additional R & D is starting to pay off. I like the engineering of the R1T (and the companion SUV R1S) that leverages the potential of electric motors (one in each wheel) coupled with sophisticated software. I hope you'll read the Trans-America Trail article; I'd really like to see how you evaluate the R1T vs your current ride, and what Rivian would have to do to the R1T before you would consider acquiring one.

"https://www.motortrend.com/news/rivian- ... -the-year/"

"https://www.motortrend.com/features/202 ... -off-road/"

"https://www.motortrend.com/features/202 ... ad-part-2/"

"https://www.motortrend.com/features/202 ... r-support/"
Time is what prevents everything from happening all at once.

jackokie
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2020 1:10 am

Re: Thunderbolts Fleet of Miniature Spacecraft

Unread post by jackokie » Sun Jan 09, 2022 8:55 pm

@Brigit To follow up on SpaceX. here is an article about the launch of several small satellites as part of SpaceX' Rideshare program:
One week after SpaceX and the world’s first orbital launch of 2022, the company is a few days out from its second launch of the year – this time carrying dozens of small satellites for a variety of rideshare customers.

Aside from potentially being the world’s second orbital launch of the year, the mission – known as Transporter-3 – will be the third Falcon 9 launch dedicated to SpaceX’s Smallsat Rideshare Program, which offers what is likely the world’s most affordable ticket to orbit.
"https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-transp ... unch-prep/"
Time is what prevents everything from happening all at once.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest