User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 12:16:06 PM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What that video does not show is one of the main engines exploding. SpaceX is responding with a "Nothing to see here folks" attitude. Long way to go before that sucker is man rated.  engine exploded, the rocket compensated and kept on trucking. Has any other rocket in history completed its mission after suffering the catastrophic lose of an engine? Seems like even more of a success. Would you launch human cargo in that config ? 2 Apollo missions completed orbit with an engine cut-off after launch. There is a difference between an engine cut-off and an engine explosion. SpaceX got real lucky on this one. we kept launching human cargo on the space shuttle after two of them were lost with all crew, this suffered a partial failure and still got everything where it needed to go. Find the problem, fix it, and move on. We have to put astronauts on the Soyuz now, how many of those have blown up over the decades. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 12:16:10 PM EDT
[#2]
Wish SpaceX was getting the manned vehicle grant instead of boeing...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 12:22:14 PM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What that video does not show is one of the main engines exploding. SpaceX is responding with a "Nothing to see here folks" attitude. Long way to go before that sucker is man rated. engine exploded, the rocket compensated and kept on trucking. Has any other rocket in history completed its mission after suffering the catastrophic lose of an engine? Seems like even more of a success. Would you launch human cargo in that config ? 2 Apollo missions completed orbit with an engine cut-off after launch. There is a difference between an engine cut-off and an engine explosion. SpaceX got real lucky on this one. we kept launching human cargo on the space shuttle after two of them were lost with all crew, this suffered a partial failure and still got everything where it needed to go. Find the problem, fix it, and move on. We have to put astronauts on the Soyuz now, how many of those have blown up over the decades. Point taken, and well stated. But I do think that the Constellaion program that Obama cancelled in favor of his good friend Mr. Musk should be revived. As it stands now, SpaceX has alot of work to do before they have anything close to a man rated low earth orbit delivery system. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 12:25:34 PM EDT
[#4]
Quoted:
Quoted:
What that video does not show is one of the main engines exploding. SpaceX is responding with a "Nothing to see here folks" attitude. Long way to go before that sucker is man rated. I disagree. It still successfully put the cargo in the preplanned orbit, compensating for the #1 engine failure on the first stage. (Resulting in approximately 30 second longer burn) Pretty awesome actually to get to test that at this level, instead of when they are hurdling humans into space. MONDAY, OCTOBER 8, 2012 0245 GMT (10:45 p.m. EDT Sun.) SpaceX says Engine No. 1 on the Falcon 9 rocket's first stage experienced some sort of anomaly about 80 seconds into the launch. Elon Musk, SpaceX's CEO and chief designer, said the engine was shut down by the rocket's on-board computers. "Falcon 9 detected an anomaly on one of the nine engines and shut it down," Musk wrote in an email to Spaceflight Now. "As designed, the flight computer then recomputed a new ascent profile in realtime to reach the target orbit, which is why the burn times were a bit longer." The first stage burned nearly 30 seconds longer than planned. Nine Merlin 1C engines power the Falcon 9's first stage, generating nearly a million pounds of thrust. The kerosene-fueled engines are built by SpaceX at the company's headquarters in Hawthorne, Calif. Engine No. 1, positioned on one of the corners of the tic-tac-toe pattern of first stage engines, was shut down earlier than planned, according to Gwynne Shotwell, SpaceX's president. Shotwell said she was not sure of the cause of the problem, but the engine was turned off. "Like the Saturn 5, which experienced engine loss on two flights, the Falcon 9 is designed to handle an engine flameout and still complete its mission," Musk said. "I believe Falcon 9 is the only rocket flying today that, like a modern airliner, is capable of completing a flight successfully even after losing an engine. There was no effect on Dragon or the space station resupply mission." http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/004/status.html Failsafes worked; didn't have to abort with an engine gone. I find that reassuring, and I'm sure they'll have it figured out by next year. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 12:26:19 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What that video does not show is one of the main engines exploding. SpaceX is responding with a "Nothing to see here folks" attitude. Long way to go before that sucker is man rated. engine exploded, the rocket compensated and kept on trucking. Has any other rocket in history completed its mission after suffering the catastrophic lose of an engine? Seems like even more of a success. Would you launch human cargo in that config ? 2 Apollo missions completed orbit with an engine cut-off after launch. There is a difference between an engine cut-off and an engine explosion. SpaceX got real lucky on this one. we kept launching human cargo on the space shuttle after two of them were lost with all crew, this suffered a partial failure and still got everything where it needed to go. Find the problem, fix it, and move on. We have to put astronauts on the Soyuz now, how many of those have blown up over the decades. Point taken, and well stated. But I do think that the Constellaion program that Obama cancelled in favor of his good friend Mr. Musk should be revived. As it stands now, SpaceX has alot of work to do before they have anything close to a man rated low earth orbit delivery system. I'm not saying SpaceX is good to go right now or the end all be all but they are demonstrating they know what the hell they are doing, give them a couple more years and another dozen+ launches and they could be ready for manned flight. Strapping human beings to the top of tons of propellant and shooting them into vacuum of space at 1000s of mph is never going to be risk free. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 12:29:35 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What that video does not show is one of the main engines exploding. SpaceX is responding with a "Nothing to see here folks" attitude. Long way to go before that sucker is man rated. engine exploded, the rocket compensated and kept on trucking. Has any other rocket in history completed its mission after suffering the catastrophic lose of an engine? Seems like even more of a success. Would you launch human cargo in that config ? 2 Apollo missions completed orbit with an engine cut-off after launch. There is a difference between an engine cut-off and an engine explosion. SpaceX got real lucky on this one. we kept launching human cargo on the space shuttle after two of them were lost with all crew, this suffered a partial failure and still got everything where it needed to go. Find the problem, fix it, and move on. We have to put astronauts on the Soyuz now, how many of those have blown up over the decades. Point taken, and well stated. But I do think that the Constellaion program that Obama cancelled in favor of his good friend Mr. Musk should be revived. As it stands now, SpaceX has alot of work to do before they have anything close to a man rated low earth orbit delivery system. There are two or three other contractors for the supply missions. Orbital is about to launch their test mission soon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 12:31:17 PM EDT
[#7]
I read there was a "rupture" and the engine was shut down but people keep calling it an explosion.
http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-spacex-engine-problem-20121008,0,67936.story There was speculation that the engine exploded, but SpaceX rebuffed those claims.
"We know the engine did not explode, because we continued to receive data from it," the company said. "Our review indicates that the fairing that protects the engine from aerodynamic loads ruptured due to the engine pressure release, and that none of Falcon 9’s other eight engines were impacted by this event." I find it funny how the only people that would know what happened say what happened (rupture and shut down) and other people morph that into a full blown engine explosion.
Person A - "I got a flat tire today and had to pull off the free way." Person B - "HOLY SHIT YOUR TIRE EXPLODED?!" 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 12:37:16 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
I read there was a "rupture" and the engine was shut down but people keep calling it an explosion. Have a look at the video I linked to. Large pieces of the engine bell blowing off at once does not constitute a rupture IMHO. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 12:38:39 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I read there was a "rupture" and the engine was shut down but people keep calling it an explosion. Have a look at the video I linked to. Large pieces of the engine bell blowing off at once does not constitute a rupture IMHO. Read my edit. Are you saying SpaceX is full of shit? They flatly deny that the engine exploded. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 12:40:46 PM EDT
[#10]
I'm glad the engineers at SpaceX are smart enough to realize that things can fail, but plan for the system to compensate for it anyways.
http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/10/that-smooth-spacex-launch-turns-out-one-of-the-engines-exploded/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 12:41:45 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I read there was a "rupture" and the engine was shut down but people keep calling it an explosion. Have a look at the video I linked to. Large pieces of the engine bell blowing off at once does not constitute a rupture IMHO. Read my edit. Are you saying SpaceX is full of shit? They flatly deny that the engine exploded. What do you think an "engine pressure release" is in laymans terms? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 12:42:02 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted:
Wish SpaceX was getting the manned vehicle grant instead of boeing... Boeing, based in Houston, TX, was awarded the largest prize of $460 million in an effort to continue development of its CST-100 capsule. Scientists and engineers have presented numerous planned updates to their CST-100 design. These updates include increased orbital debris protection and changes to the crew module schematics. Engineers also presented comparisons of their current module to the expected NASA defined requirements for commercial crew transportation to/from the ISS. Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), based in Hawthorne, CA, was awarded $440 million to refine their current crew module, Dragon, especially their Launch Abort System (LAS). Their design incorporates the flight proven Falcon 9 launch vehicle and Dragon crew vehicle. Space X has planned this design as a crew vehicle since inception. Sierra Nevada Corp. based in Louisville, CO, was awarded $212.5 million in an effort to advance the companies reusable commercial crew transport vehicle, known as Dream Chaser, through Preliminary Design Review. The Dream Chaser is a piloted lifting body launched on an Atlas V rocket. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 12:42:11 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I read there was a "rupture" and the engine was shut down but people keep calling it an explosion. Have a look at the video I linked to. Large pieces of the engine bell blowing off at once does not constitute a rupture IMHO. Read my edit. Are you saying SpaceX is full of shit? They flatly deny that the engine exploded. Basically yes I am. They have not been very forthcoming with alot of their claims. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 12:43:11 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I read there was a "rupture" and the engine was shut down but people keep calling it an explosion. Have a look at the video I linked to. Large pieces of the engine bell blowing off at once does not constitute a rupture IMHO. Read my edit. Are you saying SpaceX is full of shit? They flatly deny that the engine exploded. What do you think an "engine pressure release" is in laymans terms? I'm only going by what the CEO of the company said. I guess he's full of shit though according to the know it alls here that must have been in launch control and had access to data streaming from the rocket.
I understand that people are going to try and insinuate that they're trying to save face and not look bad by downplaying what happened and say it's not an explosion. It isn't out of the realm of possibility, but when you lie, you will get caught in that lie. They are the ones who would know more than anybody what happened. I'll take the word of the spacecraft company that has up to the second telemetry and spacecraft condition data over the word of some people on the innernets who watched a compressed video of the launch that was at 1000x magnification. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 1:40:37 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: Paging TacticalMOLONLABE to give me a brief on this over Skype.  I only Skype with fiver! We can Yahoo IM tho... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 1:42:35 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Paging TacticalMOLONLABE to give me a brief on this over Skype. I only Skype with fiver! We can Yahoo IM tho... *strips off shirt and douses self with baby oil* 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 1:48:26 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Paging TacticalMOLONLABE to give me a brief on this over Skype. I only Skype with fiver! We can Yahoo IM tho... *strips off shirt and douses self with baby oil* http://i.imgur.com/ARvCB.jpg Why do I keep getting passed up for offers like this now? I thought I was special too. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 1:51:57 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted: Read my edit. Are you saying SpaceX is full of shit? They flatly deny that the engine exploded. Well it must be true. Space companies have never lied in the past about the quality of their products.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 1:59:33 PM EDT
[#19]
Even Especially with the blowout, that is still impressive.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 1:59:55 PM EDT
[#20]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 2:03:54 PM EDT
[#21]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I read there was a "rupture" and the engine was shut down but people keep calling it an explosion. Have a look at the video I linked to. Large pieces of the engine bell blowing off at once does not constitute a rupture IMHO. Read my edit. Are you saying SpaceX is full of shit? They flatly deny that the engine exploded. The engine itself didn't detonate, no. But there certainly was an explosion of some type. Those pieces being propelled laterally at high velocity wasn't the ship shedding pieces as planned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 2:13:31 PM EDT
[#22]
Thanks for posting that. As I stated, they are lucky that the whole booster didn't blow up. Very lucky. Plus it's not the first time SpaceX has put a satellite in the wrong orbit, or lost one completely. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 3:18:18 PM EDT
[#23]
Well seems like a lot of activity in the thread since last night. I had not heard or read anything about the Orbcomm OG2 satellite being placed in the wrong orbit or the engine problem. As others have said there have been manned launches where engines have failed and damn plenty launch vehicles that have been completely destroyed. With such complicated machinery one cannot expect every single part, assembly and system to function flawlessly 100% of the time and that's why failsafes are built into these vehicles.
SpaceX's ultimate goal is to put human crewed Dragon capsules in orbit. In order to do so they must demonstrate sufficient ability to do so safely. Every SpaceX launch builds on the last one and the company continues to improve it's products. They will learn from this and correct anything that needs correcting. I won't downplay this incident but I'm also not going to piss on them either. Let's see how the rest of the mission progresses. Despite this problem, I predict CRS-1 be the first in a series of successful operational Dragon missions to the ISS.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 3:29:00 PM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wish SpaceX was getting the manned vehicle grant instead of boeing... Boeing, based in Houston, TX, was awarded the largest prize of $460 million in an effort to continue development of its CST-100 capsule. Scientists and engineers have presented numerous planned updates to their CST-100 design. These updates include increased orbital debris protection and changes to the crew module schematics. Engineers also presented comparisons of their current module to the expected NASA defined requirements for commercial crew transportation to/from the ISS. Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), based in Hawthorne, CA, was awarded $440 million to refine their current crew module, Dragon, especially their Launch Abort System (LAS). Their design incorporates the flight proven Falcon 9 launch vehicle and Dragon crew vehicle. Space X has planned this design as a crew vehicle since inception. Sierra Nevada Corp. based in Louisville, CO, was awarded $212.5 million in an effort to advance the companies reusable commercial crew transport vehicle, known as Dream Chaser, through Preliminary Design Review. The Dream Chaser is a piloted lifting body launched on an Atlas V rocket. Oops. Didn't realize it was only $20 million difference. Nevermind. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 4:06:01 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
Thanks for posting that. As I stated, they are lucky that the whole booster didn't blow up. Very lucky. Plus it's not the first time SpaceX has put a satellite in the wrong orbit, or lost one completely. Not luck they designed the first stage with the goal of surviving an explosion of an engine. The engines are wrapped in kevlar to protect them. The whole point of SpaceX multiple engine design was for a engine failure not to prevent a successful flight. A NASA approach would of been to spend a lot of money to prevent any engine from having problems SpaceX has decide to be robust and withstand failures, believing that this will be a cheaper way of being reliable. Orbcomm issues was a unfortunate interaction with the main ISS payload. Orbcomm Statement |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 4:14:41 PM EDT
[#26]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 4:53:58 PM EDT
[#27]
Sounds like some want SpaceX to fail
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 5:00:03 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
You do realize that NASA will be all over SpaceX's data for this launch, and will go through it with an electron microscope to find out what happened, right? If SpaceX refuses to play ball or tries to cover up anything in an attempt to get NASA approval for manned missions, NASA will move its focus to Boeing and the gravy train stops.
I'm only going by what the CEO of the company said. I guess he's full of shit though according to the know it alls here that must have been in launch control and had access to data streaming from the rocket.
I understand that people are going to try and insinuate that they're trying to save face and not look bad by downplaying what happened and say it's not an explosion. It isn't out of the realm of possibility, but when you lie, you will get caught in that lie. They are the ones who would know more than anybody what happened. I'll take the word of the spacecraft company that has up to the second telemetry and spacecraft condition data over the word of some people on the innernets who watched a compressed video of the launch that was at 1000x magnification. Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 5:14:59 PM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: Quoted: You do realize that NASA will be all over SpaceX's data for this launch, and will go through it with an electron microscope to find out what happened, right? If SpaceX refuses to play ball or tries to cover up anything in an attempt to get NASA approval for manned missions, NASA will move its focus to Boeing and the gravy train stops.I'm only going by what the CEO of the company said. I guess he's full of shit though according to the know it alls here that must have been in launch control and had access to data streaming from the rocket. I understand that people are going to try and insinuate that they're trying to save face and not look bad by downplaying what happened and say it's not an explosion. It isn't out of the realm of possibility, but when you lie, you will get caught in that lie. They are the ones who would know more than anybody what happened. I'll take the word of the spacecraft company that has up to the second telemetry and spacecraft condition data over the word of some people on the innernets who watched a compressed video of the launch that was at 1000x magnification. Kharn Exactly so what would they have to gain by lying to the public about it being a rupture and engine shut down as opposed to a full blown engine explosion? If something did happen it would be better to keep their mouths shut. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 5:32:04 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You do realize that NASA will be all over SpaceX's data for this launch, and will go through it with an electron microscope to find out what happened, right? If SpaceX refuses to play ball or tries to cover up anything in an attempt to get NASA approval for manned missions, NASA will move its focus to Boeing and the gravy train stops.
I'm only going by what the CEO of the company said. I guess he's full of shit though according to the know it alls here that must have been in launch control and had access to data streaming from the rocket.
I understand that people are going to try and insinuate that they're trying to save face and not look bad by downplaying what happened and say it's not an explosion. It isn't out of the realm of possibility, but when you lie, you will get caught in that lie. They are the ones who would know more than anybody what happened. I'll take the word of the spacecraft company that has up to the second telemetry and spacecraft condition data over the word of some people on the innernets who watched a compressed video of the launch that was at 1000x magnification. Kharn Exactly so what would they have to gain by lying to the public about it being a rupture and engine shut down as opposed to a full blown engine explosion? If something did happen it would be better to keep their mouths shut.
It's not the first time SpaceX has claimed success when the mission turns out to be a successful failure, and they are VERY good at keeping their mouths shut about it AND manipulating data. Have they ever recovered one of their "Reusable Rocket Boosters" yet ? The answer is No. And that was the premise that SpaceX used to get funding for their project. Even Elon Musk admitted that the booster debacle was a pipe dream, but his buddy Obama just keeps funneling cash to him. Your cash. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 5:34:20 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: You do realize that NASA will be all over SpaceX's data for this launch, and will go through it with an electron microscope to find out what happened, right? If SpaceX refuses to play ball or tries to cover up anything in an attempt to get NASA approval for manned missions, NASA will move its focus to Boeing and the gravy train stops.I'm only going by what the CEO of the company said. I guess he's full of shit though according to the know it alls here that must have been in launch control and had access to data streaming from the rocket. I understand that people are going to try and insinuate that they're trying to save face and not look bad by downplaying what happened and say it's not an explosion. It isn't out of the realm of possibility, but when you lie, you will get caught in that lie. They are the ones who would know more than anybody what happened. I'll take the word of the spacecraft company that has up to the second telemetry and spacecraft condition data over the word of some people on the innernets who watched a compressed video of the launch that was at 1000x magnification. Kharn Exactly so what would they have to gain by lying to the public about it being a rupture and engine shut down as opposed to a full blown engine explosion? If something did happen it would be better to keep their mouths shut. It's not the first time SpaceX has claimed success when the mission turns out to be a successful failure, and they are VERY good at keeping their mouths shut about it AND manipulating data. Have they ever recovered one of their "Reusable Rocket Boosters" yet ? The answer is No. And that was the premise that SpaceX used to get funding for their project. Even Elon Musk admitted that the booster debacle was a pipe dream, but his buddy Obama just keeps funneling cash to him. Your cash. Better them and NASA than hoodrats. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 5:43:23 PM EDT
[#32]
NASA's not allowing anyone to fly on a Dragon until SpaceX can absolutely, positively, withoutafrackin' doubt demonstrate the complete reliability and safety of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle. SpaceX's goal is to have the Dragon take astronauts to the ISS and return them safely to Earth. With billions of $$$ at stake does anyone think SpaceX is going to try to cover anything up? I don't. Remember, these 12 Cargo Resupply Missions are not simply to haul cargo back and forth to the ISS but to also give SpaceX the opportunity to continue testing and refining their vehicles.
When the first SpaceX manned Dragon mission lifts off it will be atop one of the most scrutinized and refined rockets in history. No other launch vehicle will have flown so many unmanned missions before their first manned flight than the Falcon 9. I remain confident in the abilities of the SpaceX team and the procedures they are developing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 5:53:02 PM EDT
[#33]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You do realize that NASA will be all over SpaceX's data for this launch, and will go through it with an electron microscope to find out what happened, right? If SpaceX refuses to play ball or tries to cover up anything in an attempt to get NASA approval for manned missions, NASA will move its focus to Boeing and the gravy train stops.
I'm only going by what the CEO of the company said. I guess he's full of shit though according to the know it alls here that must have been in launch control and had access to data streaming from the rocket.
I understand that people are going to try and insinuate that they're trying to save face and not look bad by downplaying what happened and say it's not an explosion. It isn't out of the realm of possibility, but when you lie, you will get caught in that lie. They are the ones who would know more than anybody what happened. I'll take the word of the spacecraft company that has up to the second telemetry and spacecraft condition data over the word of some people on the innernets who watched a compressed video of the launch that was at 1000x magnification. Kharn Exactly so what would they have to gain by lying to the public about it being a rupture and engine shut down as opposed to a full blown engine explosion? If something did happen it would be better to keep their mouths shut.
It's not the first time SpaceX has claimed success when the mission turns out to be a successful failure, and they are VERY good at keeping their mouths shut about it AND manipulating data. Have they ever recovered one of their "Reusable Rocket Boosters" yet ? The answer is No. And that was the premise that SpaceX used to get funding for their project. Even Elon Musk admitted that the booster debacle was a pipe dream, but his buddy Obama just keeps funneling cash to him. Your cash. Actually reusing the booster was never a condition of the funding, it is a goal of SpaceX to be able to do that, and it is goal that SpaceX is still spending it's own money on to accomplish. I would like to see you back up your claim of a relationship between Obama and Musk. I don't think it exists. SpaceX started developing rockets before Obama, the COTS program also existed before the Obama administration. I believe that Obama would like to kill off the space program, and in his foolishness thought that getting NASA out of the rocket business was the way to kill it. Instead it will save it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 6:03:49 PM EDT
[#34]
Quoted:
What do you think a rupture (and subsequent leak of rocket fuel before any shut off valves can automatically close) of any aerospace vehicle component at Mach 3 looks like?
Exactly so what would they have to gain by lying to the public about it being a rupture and engine shut down as opposed to a full blown engine explosion? If something did happen it would be better to keep their mouths shut.
For some reason, in my experiences, they look like explosions.  SpaceX says the aerodynamic fairing blew off, those arent made to be tough, they're designed to be as light as possible and vent over-pressure away from the rest of the vehicle. In the video I saw, all nine engine bells were still attached after the event.
Kharn Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 6:44:01 PM EDT
[#35]
From the orbcomm press release
The OG2 prototype satellite, flying as a
secondary payload on this mission, was separated from the Falcon 9 launch vehicle at approximately 9:00 pm EST. However, due to an anomaly on one of the Falcon 9’s first stage engines, the rocket did not comply with a pre-planned International Space Station (ISS) safety gate to allow it to execute the second burn. For this reason, the OG2 prototype satellite was deployed into an orbit that was lower than intended. What exactly is a safety gate? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 6:52:36 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:
From the orbcomm press release The OG2 prototype satellite, flying as a
secondary payload on this mission, was separated from the Falcon 9 launch vehicle at approximately 9:00 pm EST. However, due to an anomaly on one of the Falcon 9’s first stage engines, the rocket did not comply with a pre-planned International Space Station (ISS) safety gate to allow it to execute the second burn. For this reason, the OG2 prototype satellite was deployed into an orbit that was lower than intended. What exactly is a safety gate? I think it has something to do with the approach speed of the Dragon when it comes to the rendezvous with the ISS. Correct me if I am wrong please. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 7:02:59 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted:
Quoted:
From the orbcomm press release The OG2 prototype satellite, flying as a
secondary payload on this mission, was separated from the Falcon 9 launch vehicle at approximately 9:00 pm EST. However, due to an anomaly on one of the Falcon 9’s first stage engines, the rocket did not comply with a pre-planned International Space Station (ISS) safety gate to allow it to execute the second burn. For this reason, the OG2 prototype satellite was deployed into an orbit that was lower than intended. What exactly is a safety gate? I think it has something to do with the approach speed of the Dragon when it comes to the rendezvous with the ISS. Correct me if I am wrong please. Dragon was already separated from the second stage and in position to make a rendezvous with ISS. However the second stage was going to be used to boost Orbcomm satellite into a higher orbit than the ISS is in. Doing this would of cause the stage to come too close to the space station on it's way to a higher orbit, for NASA to be comfortable with. This happened because the engine failure cause the Falcon to take 30 seconds long to get to ISS orbit than was planned, so it was in a some what different position than planned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 7:05:49 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
From the orbcomm press release The OG2 prototype satellite, flying as a
secondary payload on this mission, was separated from the Falcon 9 launch vehicle at approximately 9:00 pm EST. However, due to an anomaly on one of the Falcon 9’s first stage engines, the rocket did not comply with a pre-planned International Space Station (ISS) safety gate to allow it to execute the second burn. For this reason, the OG2 prototype satellite was deployed into an orbit that was lower than intended. What exactly is a safety gate? I think it has something to do with the approach speed of the Dragon when it comes to the rendezvous with the ISS. Correct me if I am wrong please. Dragon was already separated from the second stage and in position to make a rendezvous with ISS. However the second stage was going to be used to boost Orbcomm satellite into a higher orbit than the ISS is in. Doing this would of cause the stage to come too close to the space station on it's way to a higher orbit, for NASA to be comfortable with. This happened because the engine failure cause the Falcon to take 30 seconds long to get to ISS orbit than was planned, so it was in a some what different position than planned. Ok thanks for posting that, I stand corrected. I knew it had something to do with the extra 30 second burn, just took a WAG. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 7:35:42 PM EDT
[#39]
From Spaceflightnow.com's Mission Status Center
MONDAY, OCTOBER 8, 2012 1735 GMT (1:35 p.m. EDT) "Dragon's GNC bay door, which houses the craft's rendezvous sensors and grapple fixture, successfully opened as planned last night, according to a SpaceX spokesperson. The spacecraft uses thermal and optical sensors to navigate in close proximity to the International Space Station, and the grapple fixture is required for the robot arm to grasp the capsule and move it into position on the lab's Harmony module" Docking at the ISS will occur at 7:32 am EDT Wednesday morning Oct. 10th. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 8:12:19 PM EDT
[#40]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
From the orbcomm press release The OG2 prototype satellite, flying as a
secondary payload on this mission, was separated from the Falcon 9 launch vehicle at approximately 9:00 pm EST. However, due to an anomaly on one of the Falcon 9’s first stage engines, the rocket did not comply with a pre-planned International Space Station (ISS) safety gate to allow it to execute the second burn. For this reason, the OG2 prototype satellite was deployed into an orbit that was lower than intended. What exactly is a safety gate? I think it has something to do with the approach speed of the Dragon when it comes to the rendezvous with the ISS. Correct me if I am wrong please. Dragon was already separated from the second stage and in position to make a rendezvous with ISS. However the second stage was going to be used to boost Orbcomm satellite into a higher orbit than the ISS is in. Doing this would of cause the stage to come too close to the space station on it's way to a higher orbit, for NASA to be comfortable with. This happened because the engine failure cause the Falcon to take 30 seconds long to get to ISS orbit than was planned, so it was in a some what different position than planned. Ok thanks for posting that, I stand corrected. I knew it had something to do with the extra 30 second burn, just took a WAG. That is what happens when you're the secondary payload... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2012 8:16:04 PM EDT
[#41]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
From the orbcomm press release The OG2 prototype satellite, flying as a
secondary payload on this mission, was separated from the Falcon 9 launch vehicle at approximately 9:00 pm EST. However, due to an anomaly on one of the Falcon 9’s first stage engines, the rocket did not comply with a pre-planned International Space Station (ISS) safety gate to allow it to execute the second burn. For this reason, the OG2 prototype satellite was deployed into an orbit that was lower than intended. What exactly is a safety gate? I think it has something to do with the approach speed of the Dragon when it comes to the rendezvous with the ISS. Correct me if I am wrong please. Dragon was already separated from the second stage and in position to make a rendezvous with ISS. However the second stage was going to be used to boost Orbcomm satellite into a higher orbit than the ISS is in. Doing this would of cause the stage to come too close to the space station on it's way to a higher orbit, for NASA to be comfortable with. This happened because the engine failure cause the Falcon to take 30 seconds long to get to ISS orbit than was planned, so it was in a some what different position than planned. Ok thanks for posting that, I stand corrected. I knew it had something to do with the extra 30 second burn, just took a WAG. That is what happens when you're the secondary payload... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2012 6:39:38 AM EDT
[#42]
Why the Engine Failure Could be Good News for SpaceX |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2012 9:09:02 AM EDT
[#43]
I have a very good viewing opportunity tonight at 7:42 PM PDT, weather permitting. I expect the Dragon to be close and approaching. If things look good I'll haul out my 12" Dobbsonian telescope and see if I can track it manually as it goes overhead. I did this once before with a little 90 mm Maksutov-Cassegrain telescope. The solar array panels were clearly visible.
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/realdata/sightings/cities/view.cgi?country=United_States®ion=California&city=San_Diego Find your location here: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/realdata/sightings/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2012 3:32:14 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted: Good deal. ISS with Dragon trailing will be visible for me 6 minutes from now. Going outside to see them. I have a very good viewing opportunity tonight at 7:42 PM PDT, weather permitting. I expect the Dragon to be close and approaching. If things look good I'll haul out my 12" Dobbsonian telescope and see if I can track it manually as it goes overhead. I did this once before with a little 90 mm Maksutov-Cassegrain telescope. The solar array panels were clearly visible. http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/realdata/sightings/cities/view.cgi?country=United_States®ion=California&city=San_Diego Find your location here: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/realdata/sightings/ ETA: I saw the ISS but couldn't see Dragon. I'll have another opportunity an hour and twenty minutes from now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2012 3:35:54 PM EDT
[#45]
Lot of Piss and Blood coming back.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2012 4:18:28 PM EDT
[#46]
No new updates on the Spaceflightnow.com Mission Status Center but NASA's ISS update page posted this:
Crew Preps for Dragon Arrival The Expedition 33 crew of the International Space Station wrapped up preparations Tuesday for Wednesday morning’s arrival of the SpaceX Dragon cargo craft. Commander Suni Williams and Flight Engineer Aki Hoshide spent much of their day reviewing procedures for the robotic grappling and berthing of Dragon. Hoshide will use the 57.7-foot Canadarm2 robotic arm to reach out and grapple the Dragon spacecraft at 7:22 am EDT Wednesday and with the help of Williams guide Dragon to the Earth-facing side of the Harmony module. About two hours after it is grappled, Williams and Hoshide will swap places and Williams will install Dragon to Harmony’s Common Berthing Mechanism, enabling it to be bolted in place for its stay at the International Space Station. NASA TV coverage of the rendezvous and grapple begins at 4 am EDT, followed by berthing coverage at 9:15 am EDT. SpaceX will also be webcasting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2012 4:22:37 PM EDT
[#47]
The libertarian that I am is frightened by the prospect of complete dependency on corporations having control of space.
To me, our space program has always been about national defense and superiority., with magical tech evolution as a by-product. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2012 4:40:24 PM EDT
[#48]
Quoted:
The libertarian that I am is frightened by the prospect of complete dependency on corporations having control of space.
To me, our space program has always been about national defense and superiority., with magical tech evolution as a by-product. And that isn't the reality of NASA anymore. Private ventures into space are the only way to go given the current government status. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2012 4:52:34 PM EDT
[#49]
I just got this from SpaceX facebook
Tonight, Dragon will make its final approach to the station, passing a series of GO/NO-GO points determined by both Mission Control in Houston and the SpaceX team in Hawthorne. It will also establish its close-range guidance systems, comprised of LIDAR and thermal imagers. If all goes according to plan, at approximately 5:30AM ET, Dragon will be permitted to enter the Keep-Out Sphere (KOS), an imaginary circle drawn 200 meters (656 feet) around the station that prevents the risk of collision, and continue its approach to the capture point. Grapple is currently targeted for 7-7:30AM ET; however, this time is variable. Live coverage will begin at 6:30AM ET at spacex.com/webcast
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2012 4:59:50 PM EDT
[#50]
Coming up on another pass over the central US if anyone wants to go take a look.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
