LIVE: SpaceX Falcon 1 Launch 5 (RazakSat) - July 13/14

[Jim]

Which would you rather be around, the bubbly positive girl who works her way through school and pays her own way, or the bitchy snobby girl who expects you to pay for everything?

The one that gets you .....................   

Which basically means the one who gets you to orbit.

As for "paying" the way, Spacex has received more money from NASA than Musk has put in.  This is the opposite of the EELV development.

[Antares]

When they were assembling Falcon 9 at the Cape early this year, the updates seemed nearly continuous - and it was great.

The contrast with this, where they have only their second successful flight (and by no means a foregone conclusion that it would succeed IMO) is astonishing - hard to believe it's the same company.

I'm sorry.  Are y'all illiterate?  51D told us why SpaceX didn't go crazy with PR's early in the week: the customer, Malaysian ATSB, wanted to be the first to the press.  It did seem out of character before that nugget was shared with us, but that explained it.  Stop being blind and use this valuable forum for its insider info.

Therefore, I can understand why someone might be a bit of SpaceX pollyanna. It's refreshing to see someone (Musk) with deep pockets and a vision and the chutzpah to back up his words with REAL action.  Yes, SpaceX has made some mistakes and they'll make more.

The problem is they are making the same mistakes others have made when the lessons learned are widely available.  This is largely due to a lack of systems engineering in their approach, though it's increasing.  Because Elon said he thinks/thought systems engineering is an unwarranted artifact of the government approach to development, I blame his ego.  He and his company are learning, though, evidenced by the last 2 Falcon 1's.  The question is how many IFA's buried themselves in the design of F9 and Dragon before the robustness was institutionalized.

[nooneofconsequence]

As for "paying" the way, Spacex has received more money from NASA than Musk has put in.  This is the opposite of the EELV development.

Different times & history. Different objectives & scope. Way different risks - as you know.

Required a different approach. So far its working.

[Comga]

<snip> The question is how many FA's buried themselves in the design of F9 and Dragon before the robustness was institutionalized.

Pardon me but "FA's"?  Flight Anomalies? Faulty Analysis? Foolish Answers? Failed Anachronisms?

[Antares]

Failed acronym on my part I suppose Flight Anomaly.

[ugordan]

Failed acronym on my part I suppose Flight Anomaly.

That certainly makes more sense in the above sentence than Failure Analysis!

[cixelsyD]

I'm sorry.  Are y'all illiterate?  51D told us why SpaceX didn't go crazy with PR's early in the week: the customer, Malaysian ATSB, wanted to be the first to the press.  It did seem out of character before that nugget was shared with us, but that explained it.  Stop being blind and use this valuable forum for its insider info.

Well I'm fine with no updates on the F1 flt 5, I didn't complain about that. I was saying that the F9 could use more updates. The last one was a month ago, and the one before that I believe many months prior. I'm just saying I wouldn't mind seeing a blog on their progress or something of the sort.

[NUAETIUS]

Well I'm fine with no updates on the F1 flt 5, I didn't complain about that. I was saying that the F9 could use more updates. The last one was a month ago, and the one before that I believe many months prior. I'm just saying I wouldn't mind seeing a blog on their progress or something of the sort.

Prior to the end of the year last year, SpaceX's updates came at a pace of one every 1 or 2 months.  I expect that pace to continue right up until October, then a flurry before launch.  If you read the last update they will have a lot to brag about around August 1st, if all goes according to plan.

Keep checking the updates forum on the forum, because SpaceX is great about giving the watchers information at conferences like the one happening this weekend.

[jhoblik]

It seems strangely out-of-character for them not to make more of a noise about their first successful full mission.

By the way it their second successfully launch not first one, as you mention.

No, they didn't operate the payload separation system on the first mission, which was otherwise successful but therefore not "full".

If I follow your logic of successfully mission,
Apollo 7,8,9,10 were not successful full missions because they didn't land on the Moon? Are you kidding me?
In my opinion full successfully mission if I achieve my objectives. falcon I flight 1,2,3 were not successfully missions, they plan to achieve orbit.But flight 4 and 5 was it.

[jhoblik]

Did you predicted same fate for flight 4 and 5. If you check flight compare with rocket it was perfect. The only more stable is Space shuttle, if you check pictures. But it cost 1 billion one flight ouch.

First off, figure out which user you're replying to- I'm a different Jim than the fellow you're thinking of.  And I've been generally very supportive of SpaceX.  When they do well, I call it, and if I see otherwise I call that too.

Second, this launch was not perfect, nor was this launch campaign perfict (vibration isolators, microsat removal, anyone?)

Third, regarding

The only more stable is Space shuttle, if you check pictures.

I have friends working on other launch vehicles whom would not agree with that assessment.  We'll have to agree to disagree.

SpaceX did put a customer spacecraft in orbit, and I welcome the arrival of another company that can provide launch services.  It's good for me, we only build spacecraft, instruments, and subsystems.  Affordable launch is great for me, it means more opportunities for customers to spend their dollars on my hardware rather than send those very dollars to a launch services provider. 

Regarding the shuttle, that's just sour grapes.  I'm in the camp of the folks wanting a new exploration system that is affordable, but will tip my hat to the STS- when they're retired and in museums, there may not be anything like them for generations to come.

Please let me know what give them this conclusion. Do they have flight data for Falcon I flight 5. what i did it I watch all available launch on youtube and try to compare them. My conclusion about instability of Falcon are nonsense, other rocket mostly more unstable too and more violently.

[jhoblik]

If my memory serves me correctly I believe Elon stated that he would probably never see profitability from the Falcon 1.  Setting aside the obvious discussion on accounting methods I would venture to say the "1" is almost profit free at the current price they offer or priced with a margin but not expecting the volume needed to put to rest the large r & d budget incured when they were putting the company together.  I would bet against an earlier comment that it is a "loss leader" such as some stores provide to get customers in the door though that is certainly a possibility.

I will be not so sure. They have almost total control over production cost 90% items build in house. And if they will able to recover 1 stage, they will be almost no limit lower cost. They could learn how change to survive better in ocean and how to refurbish faster.

[Jim]

other rocket mostly more unstable too and more violently.

Huh?  Where is your data for this?

[jhoblik]

If you're on this website, you're likely one to want ANYTHING to do with spaceflight to succeed as efficiently as possible, ULA, Orbital, Russians, Chinese, ESA etc. Spacex gets such "amazing peoples" likely from people like me, who want anything space to succeed, it doesn't matter really where it comes from. Having a successful spacex is not mutually exclusive to having success for everyone else. Can't people just be happy when they see good news about spaceflight, why should they get sneered at?

SpaceX is also a lot more ambitious, or at least open about it, which means it's very easy to get behind them and want them to succeed. Wouldn't it be a great thing if they could launch 7 people to the ISS on a rocket in the future? If that is successful, wouldn't it change spaceflight for the better? The way I see it, the more ambitious something is, the more people will want to see it work. That doesn't mean people are blind to failure, it just means they hope for the best.

I guess I just don't understand why wanting SpaceX to succeed is a bad thing...

The only gripes I have with spacex's media coverage is that they don't provide enough status updates on their progress. Is this due to a lack of transparancy due to being a private company? I'm not so sure. It feels like everyone in the space industry keeps very tight lipped.

nicely express, this is reason I fan of  spacex for 6 years.

[jhoblik]

other rocket mostly more unstable too and more violently.

Huh?  Where is your data for this?

where are your data. I watch 20 launch videos of different rockets and compare them.

[edkyle99]

other rocket mostly more unstable too and more violently.

Huh?  Where is your data for this?

where are your data. I watch 20 launch videos of different rockets and compare them.

Oh boy.  This is going to be fun.

 - Ed Kyle

[Paul Adams]

Let the games begin!

[Jim]

other rocket mostly more unstable too and more violently.

Huh?  Where is your data for this?

where are your data. I watch 20 launch videos of different rockets and compare them.

this is too easy.  I will let some one else step in

[nomadd22]

other rocket mostly more unstable too and more violently.

Huh?  Where is your data for this?

where are your data. I watch 20 launch videos of different rockets and compare them.

this is too easy.  I will let some one else step in

 You might want to spend a little more time browsing the forum. Although you're not likely to find me and Jim going to see Brokeback Mountain any time soon, I and anybody else who frequents this place will admit that he knows more about the launch systems of the last fifty years and their performance than any other four people combined.
 You best pick another battle.

[Art LeBrun]

Hey, hey (facetiously)) - where is the video for Atlas 179D in launching Mariner II? Supposedly 36 rolls before stabilizing (vernier lockover).

[Danderman]

Hey, hey (facetiously)) - where is the video for Atlas 179D in launching Mariner II? Supposedly 36 rolls before stabilizing (vernier lockover).

I knew an engineer involved in that launch, and he told me that the rolls actually secured some loose part that generated the rolls in the first place.