New SpaceX Falcon Heavy Launch CG
- Thread starter Mark_Nguyen
- Start date
SpaceX have already confirmed that it failed due to delayed valve response times. I am not sure larger landing area would have necessarily removed that as a problem (although the water landing were vertical, so you might have a point). OTOH, they are going to fix the valve response delay in a couple of months and the size of the platform wouldn't be an issue. They can hit the target, as we can obviously see.
Just a little bump here--
http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/05/spacex-gets-certified-for-national.html
If you listen real close, you can hear ULA screaming in its casket as Elon Musk drives the stake in.
In terms of new means of propulsion: http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/05/graphene-sponge-can-absorb-light-and.html
http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/05/spacex-gets-certified-for-national.html
If you listen real close, you can hear ULA screaming in its casket as Elon Musk drives the stake in.
In terms of new means of propulsion: http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/05/graphene-sponge-can-absorb-light-and.html
Congratulations to SpaceX for winning over this rather unfair policy. But as much as I hate ULA, let's hold our horses. If instead of SpaceX we had Microsoft, and instead of ULA we had IBM, we would be liking ULA in two decades. As much as I am confident SpaceX won't go in such direction, ULA might still become a healthy competitor and bring some good launch hardware and spacecraft one day. I hope for SpaceX to resurrect (and give birth to) the space industry, not take over it.
Fair points
Looks like the Wamphyri turned to mist at the last moment and escaped:
http://www.universetoday.com/120523...ercial-human-spaceflight-mission-from-boeing/
Oh well...score one for Boeing...hiss
Looks like the Wamphyri turned to mist at the last moment and escaped:
http://www.universetoday.com/120523...ercial-human-spaceflight-mission-from-boeing/
Oh well...score one for Boeing...hiss
Yeah I get a little annoyed by that kind of shit.
The reality is Spacex got billions of dollars of funding from nasa. At the moment the government is charged about twice the amount that private satelite companies are charged.
That being said if they can make reusable launch the real problem will be finding customers.
Even if the cost to launch was free, space is still a very expensive envronment to work in.
I think asteroid mining is a much more serious usage of these launch capabilities.
Preparing for a third uncertain attempt to make history on Sunday, SpaceX has published an article describing their descent system and how it failed so far. Reading the article, I disagree with their own conclusion that it is uncertain if they would succeed – I think the things to go wrong have been exhausted, and we're landing.
But I also disagreed the previous two times and I was wrong.
Yet since today shows that good but hard things can happen, I am willing to be too optimistic for no reason. We're landing this time, period.
But I also disagreed the previous two times and I was wrong.
Yet since today shows that good but hard things can happen, I am willing to be too optimistic for no reason. We're landing this time, period.
The EELV lobby isn't standing still:
http://spacenews.com/lawmaker-wants-u-s-air-force-to-focus-on-new-engine-period/
...the Air Force, wary of investing in an engine that none of its certified launch service providers — currently ULA and newcomer SpaceX — wants, has proposed spending that money more broadly on launch vehicle technology
I wanted F-1 brought back for Pyrios myself.
Then too, Jeffrey Thornburg, senior director of propulsion technology at Hawthorne, California-based SpaceX, told the subcommittee the company is open to selling its Merlin engines to industry and government.
Now wouldn't that be a hoot--Atlas 5 flying Merlins/Raptors
http://spacenews.com/lawmaker-wants-u-s-air-force-to-focus-on-new-engine-period/
...the Air Force, wary of investing in an engine that none of its certified launch service providers — currently ULA and newcomer SpaceX — wants, has proposed spending that money more broadly on launch vehicle technology
I wanted F-1 brought back for Pyrios myself.
Then too, Jeffrey Thornburg, senior director of propulsion technology at Hawthorne, California-based SpaceX, told the subcommittee the company is open to selling its Merlin engines to industry and government.
Now wouldn't that be a hoot--Atlas 5 flying Merlins/Raptors
That was explosive.
I am reading that wrong, or is Elon Musk's new tweet suggesting it was the second stage that blew the whole thing up, while the first stage was flying?
"There was an overpressure event in the upper stage liquid oxygen tank. Data suggests counterintuitive cause."
That sounds weird.
"There was an overpressure event in the upper stage liquid oxygen tank. Data suggests counterintuitive cause."
That sounds weird.
I was watching the SpaceX stream which showed it from a different angle (I think – I might be wrong), and all I saw was one cloud of smoke that suddenly dissipated with debris flying everywhere. Some recording from NASA TV appears to show exactly what you say more clearly.
ETA: While the vehicle was on the launch pad I was wondering – what if the computer aboard the second stage goes awry and launches its engines while still on the pad? I would be so weirded out of if that turns out to be what happened...
ETA: While the vehicle was on the launch pad I was wondering – what if the computer aboard the second stage goes awry and launches its engines while still on the pad? I would be so weirded out of if that turns out to be what happened...
Yeah. But I chose not to make assumptions on whether that's a symptom or cause for the explosion until we get further info.
I mean, for all we know the second stage got angry that it wasn't the one going back, and thought "I think we should land together..." 
Blast!
They're calling the reason counter-intuitive.
It looked more like a rupture than an explosion--lending credence to this blurb, perhaps:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37476.msg1396226#msg1396226
https://twitter.com/AmericaSpace/status/615220822345674752
"2 inside sources say @SpaceX
F9 upper stage LOX tank has had liner cracking problems where the dome attaches, an issue @NASA has known about"
Links
http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=29267
http://www.space.com/29789-spacex-rocket-failure-cargo-launch.html
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/SpaceX_rocket_explodes_after_launch_999.html
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/06/falcon-9-crs-7-dragon-commute-orbit/
Discussion http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37476.160
In other news, ULA welcomes its latest partner, Dr. No
--What with this history: http://www.staynehoff.net/boeing-eelv-punished.htm
Musk Security Guard: So you want to see the latest Falcon launch. What were your names again? Was it Mr. Branch and Mr. Erskine?
A joke people--
They're calling the reason counter-intuitive.
It looked more like a rupture than an explosion--lending credence to this blurb, perhaps:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37476.msg1396226#msg1396226
https://twitter.com/AmericaSpace/status/615220822345674752
"2 inside sources say @SpaceX
F9 upper stage LOX tank has had liner cracking problems where the dome attaches, an issue @NASA has known about"
Links
http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=29267
http://www.space.com/29789-spacex-rocket-failure-cargo-launch.html
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/SpaceX_rocket_explodes_after_launch_999.html
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/06/falcon-9-crs-7-dragon-commute-orbit/
Discussion http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37476.160
In other news, ULA welcomes its latest partner, Dr. No
--What with this history: http://www.staynehoff.net/boeing-eelv-punished.htm
Musk Security Guard: So you want to see the latest Falcon launch. What were your names again? Was it Mr. Branch and Mr. Erskine?
A joke people--
What in those three dozen links to ten dozen pages threads is worth checking out?
Meanwhile, Buzz Aldrin giving the failure the thumbs up is worth more than some "insider" speculations. I love him.
