back

by swyx·8y ago·view on hn ↗
ok and more stupid questions please:

- the proving launch mass is only the mass of a Tesla? i mean thats great but i would have expected a much bigger mass for a fully functional satellite. but then again I dont know anything about satellites. how big are those? its definitely not space shuttle big. is the Falcon Heavy able to carry something as big as the space shuttle?

- i thought starman was orbiting mars. how does orbital decay look for something small like starman since it really can just get pulled in or out by basically any nearby planet?

4 comments
The Space Shuttle had a low earth orbit payload capacity of 27,500 kg. Falcon Heavy can launch 63,800 kg to orbit (in fully expendable mode, where they don't recover the stages).

The Shuttle could have carried more payload if it hadn't had to dedicate a lot of capacity to supporting the human being on board.

With rockets, the further you push something, the more energy it takes. Pushing something the size of a car past the orbit of Mars takes a lot more energy than putting a larger satellite in a lower orbit.

- According to wikipedia, the launch mass of the Falcon Heavy is about 26 tons for a geostationnary launch, which is quite a lot and definitely enough for ISS like launches. I guess either the launch mass is way lower for leaving earth's orbit, or either they just wanted to prove they could ship in something of significant mass without having to pay for all the required fuel.

- For Roadster's orbit, most of the time it will be fine, however some have predicted that it will end up crashing on Venus in a few million years [0]. And that makes me wonder whether the Roadster has been properly disinfected (I very much doubt so).

Also, for one of your original questions, the car is completely alone on its orbit, not enclosed in anything. From what I understand [1] the last booster separated itself from the car before burning during re-entry. You can see clear and beautiful pictures of the car around Earth [2]. Edit : I was wrong, the car is still attached to the last booster. See [3]

[0]: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/02/15/orbital_calculation...

[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/07/space-oddity...

[2]: https://www.mercurynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/falco...

[3]: https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/25016/what-all-is-...

A million years in a heliocentric orbit without any kind of shielding before crashing on Venus could be an effective disinfecting technique.
Not to mention the searing heat of re-entry, which, if you survive it, dunks you in Venus's atmosphere: a scalding hot steam bath of sulphuric acid.

If there are any tardigrades in the Tesla they'll probably be fine :)

Orbit is an eccentric one around the Sun. Perigee (innermost point of orbit) is about Earth's orbit, apogee (outermost point) was hoped for at least Mars' orbit, ended up out in the asteroid belt well past Mars.
> i mean thats great but i would have expected a much bigger mass for a fully functional satellite.

Iridium sats are 700kg each, GEOsats are also less than that.

The upcoming James Webb Space Telescope's launch/payload mass is 6 200 kg.

The Falcon Heavy can push 1 400 000 kg, and 16 800 kg of that can be payload. To Mars.

According to google, the Tesla roadster is 1235 kg.

I don't know whether weight was added (probably) or removed (very likely the stock batteries were removed) in preparation for its launch.

Update: According to Wikipedia, launch weight was 1,200 kg

Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk's_Tesla_Roadster

Geostationary satellites are way more than 700kg. Most are >5,000kg.
5,000 kg is the higher end. They are typically way more than 700 kg as you note.

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

Echostar 1: 3,287 kg

Americom 7: 1,983 kg

Yamal 300k: 1,870 kg

Ciel-2: 5,561 kg

Horizons-1: 4,060 kg

EchoStar X: 4,333 kg

Amos 2: 1,370 kg

NSS-7: 4,692 kg

Star One B4: 2,495 kg

Yeah, 5,000 was a typo (meant 4,000, but even that it is a little high, I suppose)