LIVE: SpaceX Falcon 9 (Flight 2) - COTS-1 - Launch Updates - December 8, 2010

[butters]

Being headblown made him fumble for words and ramble on a bit, but it also made everything he said seem like it was coming straight from the heart without any marketing spin.

Being Elon Musk made him fumble for words and ramble on a bit. Being headblown was only a minor contributing factor. Nobody has ever accused him of being a concise and lucid public speaker. That's pretty much how he talks, even on his best days, but if you wait through all the ums and stutters and tangents, he'll eventually spit out some thoughtful and often strategic ideas.

He's certainly an impressive leader.

I agree. He's one of those visionary-type leaders that sees the future "as it should be" rather than how it is today and who has the strong technical skill to thoroughly understand every detail of the operation. I'm very fortunate to be working for such a man right now, and it just makes everybody really excited to work there and willing to go the extra mile to help bring the vision to reality.

It's pretty important for these kinds of leaders to have a solid right-hand person to keep the books in order and the trains running on time, and Gwynne Shotwell appears to play that role quite well.

[pippin]

I thought the response in which he talked about being both CEO and chief designer was particularly noteworthy.  He said that because as chief designer he knew the nozzle shortening would work, that as CEO he could accept the decision to proceed with it.  There's an awful lot implied by that statement.

I believe this is spin. Every tech-CEO worth his money will put the responsibility for things like this fully on his engineering leader (if it's not himself) and so far managers usually have been more known to have launch fever than for being too careful.

Being chief designer doesn't mean you are the expert for each and every component, that would be _very_ bad, I've seen what happens if the CEO thing he has to go into details even if he's been a very good engineer in the past. You need expert for components to distribute complexity, it's the very meaning of engineering.
So he will have consulted his nozzle-experts on this just as it would have happened in any other organization.

Maybe what he really wants so say here is that this was his idea

[ugordan]

I kind of like the juxtaposition in this view: http://www.flickr.com/photos/herrea/5243702075/

Two birds in one shot.

[Cog_in_the_machine]

I'd like some cites before I'd believe otherwise.

I did some searching of old threads and found several of Jim's posts in question:

This one notes, in point number 3, that because SpaceX integrates payloads horizontally, instead of vertically, they won't be able to get launch contracts for certain payloads - http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=19262.msg497025#msg497025

This one argues that when they switch to regular mission ops, it will affect their prices - http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=21867.msg608063#msg608063

This exchange again states that when they switch from development to ops, their prices will increase - http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=21867.msg608253#msg608253

I guess this is why I remembered what I did.

[William Graham]

As far as I can tell, the CubeSats launched were CAERUS (1U), SMDC-ONE 1 (3U), Colony 1 (x2, 3U), plus two from the Las Alamos National Laboratory. From the size of the others, the LANL satellites were probably both single unit.

Does anyone have any more information?

[Lee Jay]

I just noticed that my Dilbert desk calendar for December 8th 2010 (launch day) had this one on it:

http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2007-12-05/

[yg1968]

I'm very fortunate to be working for such a man right now, and it just makes everybody really excited to work there and willing to go the extra mile to help bring the vision to reality.

You work for SpaceX?

[edkyle99]

@ Ed Kyle,

Remember that Dragon C1 was flying without a trunk and solar arrays, so that would have made it under-mass.  The upper stage's performance would have to also be calculated as to whether the cubesats were still attached when it performed its second burn.

As others have noted, the trunk flew but stayed attached to the second stage.  Of course the lack of solar arrays and, presumably, batteries and power systems associated with them meant that C1 almost certainly weighed less than operational Dragon will weigh.  The Cubesats may have replaced some of the solar array system mass, but only a fraction of that mass I suspect.  Dragon surely did not carry the 3.3 tonne payload it is designed to carry.  Upon reflection, I'm thinking that yesterday's Dragon may have weighed more like 3-4 tonnes. 

Shouldn't we be able to reverse calculate based on the Draco thrust time for the final retro burn?

Drives me a little nuts that I don't know the real numbers. 

The precursor Dragon was a good show yesterday, but to my eyes the most significant event was the successful second stage flight, coast with multiple payload deployments, and restart for a substantial second burn.  This showed that Falcon 9 is ready, or nearly ready, to go GTO.

 - Ed Kyle 

[JohnFornaro]

Check your numbers, look at your margins, make the call, do the repair and fly that sucker.

_That's_ how you reduce spacecraft development costs. Make the call and take a risk. It takes huge amounts of money to virtually eliminate risk. If you can accept some risk, then you can save a lot of time & money.

Bloody well done SpaceX, I am so impressed!

Paul

Hundred percent agree.

[brihath]

@ Ed Kyle,

Remember that Dragon C1 was flying without a trunk and solar arrays, so that would have made it under-mass.  The upper stage's performance would have to also be calculated as to whether the cubesats were still attached when it performed its second burn.

As others have noted, the trunk flew but stayed attached to the second stage.  Of course the lack of solar arrays and, presumably, batteries and power systems associated with them meant that C1 almost certainly weighed less than operational Dragon will weigh.  The Cubesats may have replaced some of the solar array system mass, but only a fraction of that mass I suspect.  Dragon surely did not carry the 3.3 tonne payload it is designed to carry.  Upon reflection, I'm thinking that yesterday's Dragon may have weighed more like 3-4 tonnes. 

Shouldn't we be able to reverse calculate based on the Draco thrust time for the final retro burn?

Drives me a little nuts that I don't know the real numbers. 

The precursor Dragon was a good show yesterday, but to my eyes the most significant event was the successful second stage flight, coast with multiple payload deployments, and restart for a substantial second burn.  This showed that Falcon 9 is ready, or nearly ready, to go GTO.

 - Ed Kyle 

Ed-

I agree.  I also think Elon Musk is sending a strong message to customers and potential customers that they can react to issues quickly and still safely fly a payload on schedule.

Even this early in the development cycle, their ability to turn around from aborts and still fly is impressive.

[Kabloona]

I just noticed that my Dilbert desk calendar for December 8th 2010 (launch day) had this one on it:

http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2007-12-05/

Hah! Very good. Maybe the secret payload was, in fact, a SpaceX intern. Or a blind squirrel.

[Malderi]

Regarding the Dragon mass, the second stage second burn moved the stage from a roughly 300 km orbit to an assumed 300x11,000 km orbit, which would require 1,561 meters/sec delta-v.  With no payload, and assuming a second stage dry mass of 3.3 tonnes, something like 2 tonnes or more (2 to 2.5 tonnes) of propellant would have been needed for the second burn.  As a first estimate, this extra propellant can be assumed to have been carried in lieu of maximum LEO payload.  In other words, Dragon C1 had to have weighed at most 2.5 tonnes less than the reported 9.8 tonne Falcon 9 capacity.  The company would likely have added some extra margin by carrying less than maximum payload.  I would guess 1-2 tonnes at least.  Those assumptions get us down to 5 to 6.5 tonnes for Dragon C1, including the trunk that stayed attached to the second stage.

 - Ed Kyle

Good analysis, Ed, but remember, some of that could be built-in margin for engine outs, multiple-satellite launch orbit adjustments, etc.

Or it could just be that they oversized the second stage due to MVac performance uncertainty.

So, while your analysis can put bounds on the numbers, keep in mind there is still a lot of uncertainty.

[luke strawwalker]

The only real good way to win over detractors is to succeed.

HERE HERE!!!  Amen to that! 

Biggest congrats possible to the entire SPACEX team!!! 

It's also VERY good to hear the NASA COTS liason officer in the presser mention that not only is SpaceX learning from NASA, BUT THAT NASA HAS SOME THINGS TO LEARN FROM SPACEX...

Humility in realizing that NASA DOESN'T have all the answers, and that they CAN learn a few things from "outsiders" would go a LONG way to solving some of the problems that NASA and the HSF program(s) have been facing and that have become systemic over the past few decades. 

The nozzle fix reminded me of some of the stuff I've seen in the historical documentaries on Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo as recounted by some of the "gray beards" who were interviewed recalling those days... One instance in particular where an engineer was recalling a problem with a component on a Mercury Atlas (IIRC) that was likely to fail, where he and a colleague discussed the problem, concurred on the modification or repair to be made, and just went out to the pad and performed the repair themselves so the mission could proceed on schedule the next day... NOWDAYS NOTHING LIKE THAT WOULD *EVER* BE ALLOWED... it would have to go through an entire 'QA' chain, committee discussions on the nature and magnitude of the problem, the possible ramifications and failure modes, the gamut of possible solutions, the possible ramifications of those solutions and their effects on the vehicle, mission, and timeline, costs, and risks, pass that information on to higher management, who would have their own meetings to discuss it before coming to a decision, pass that decision back down the chain of command for implementation, after the appropriate methods and materials were approved for such a repair, and the appropriate testing and verification methodology was approved and in place, before the repairs could be made and verified...
THIS is something that has been SORELY LACKING and has driven NASA to the point of paralysis of progress and pushing costs through the roof...

This willingness to look at the data, take a calculated risk, make the decision, do the fix, and suck it up and light the candle is VERY VERY REFRESHING-- reminds me of the "old days"...  Hopefully some of that will "rub off" on NASA before NASA just completely becomes the "Amtrack of space", surpassed by everything around it...

Congrats SPACEX!!!  Hoorah, hoorah!!!

From a previously quite dubious but now cautiously quite optimistic OL JR

[luke strawwalker]

Watching Musk's interview now, and he makes the point that his business is not about profitability. He says that is also something he has mentioned to shareholders who have invested in his business, just so they're aware.

That speaks volumes to me.

(of course Kevin O'Leary, for those who follow in Canada, would bash that).

Money isn't everything, Kevin.
Musk, and SpaceX is building a capability.

Quite right!!!  We need MORE of this kind of attitude and this caliber of person, both in private enterprise but ESPECIALLY in the government! 

Some things NEED to be done simply because "they're the right thing to do"... not necessarily because it's going to make the most money, or whatever...  Some things need to be done just for "the good of the country", or "for the benefit of mankind"... 

It's like building bridges... when the first bridges were built spanning the rivers and valleys of this country, it wasn't to make the builders rich, or famous, or give them power... (though ultimately bridges create opportunities for commerce and trade and communication and travel that DO create fiduciary gain, and make building more and better bridges a lucrative prospect)   The first bridges were built to allow movement-- trade and communication, travel and ultimately commerce.   SOMEBODY has to step up and build that first bridge for ANYTHING to come after it... and everything that DOES grow out of that ability to travel, trade, and communicate grows from THAT ORIGINAL POINT. 

Kudos to Elon Musk!  This is patriotism, pride, and passion in action! 

Congrats to SPACEX on "building that first private commercial bridge"...

OL JR

[go4mars]

In Paula Berinstein's book, "Making Space Happen", on page 85 she mentions 2 rollercoasters that sustain 6.5 gees on the public for a while... The "Drier Looping" in Germany, and the "Moonsault Scramble" in Japan.

Sustain and SUSTAINED are different things.  For a short, very short period of time people can tolerate 6G or more.  However there are documeted cases when pilots blocked out at sustained acceleration slightly exceeding 3G.  Just do your research.
One major factor is the position of the body in relation to the gravity/acceleration force vector.

Naming title and page number is doing research. 
6.5 G's goes on the general public including elderly and overweight.  Yes periods of sustained loads are different.  But a fit human in a G-suit doing "crunch technique" can handle a lot more sustained G than nominal dragon rides dish out.  It doesn't interest me that a few 85 year old heavy-set pilots with tight waistbands blacked out once upon a time.

[Lee Jay]

This willingness to look at the data, take a calculated risk, make the decision, do the fix, and suck it up and light the candle is VERY VERY REFRESHING-- reminds me of the "old days"...  Hopefully some of that will "rub off" on NASA before NASA just completely becomes the "Amtrack of space", surpassed by everything around it...

One could argue that such is what got both Shuttle crews killed, and that that is why a couple of cracks in the stringers of an external tank are being looked at with such care.

[iamlucky13]

I just noticed that my Dilbert desk calendar for December 8th 2010 (launch day) had this one on it:

http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2007-12-05/

Hah! Very good. Maybe the secret payload was, in fact, a SpaceX intern. Or a blind squirrel.

In fact, the intern with the Dremel was rewarded with an exotic vacation.

Actually, I saw the same series, and thought this one was relevant to the nozzle cracks:

http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2007-12-04/

[Cog_in_the_machine]

Kudos to Elon Musk!  This is patriotism, pride, and passion in action!

Isn't Musk from South Africa? He moved to the USA when he was 17, according to wikipedia. So perhaps it's just passion on his part. He certainly does love space.

edit to correct - that was when he moved out of South Africa, but initially he went to Canada, not the US.

[gladiator1332]

Kudos to Elon Musk!  This is patriotism, pride, and passion in action!

Isn't Musk from South Africa? He moved to the USA when he was 17, according to wikipedia. So perhaps it's just passion on his part. He certainly does love space.

He's an American citizen now, and I believe that gives him the right to have pride / patriotism, etc.

[Cog_in_the_machine]

He's an American citizen now, and I believe that gives him the right to have pride / patriotism, etc.

Never said it doesn't, but if someone can spend his formative years in another country and later adopt another as his own, imo it makes him more of a "citizen of the world".