Dragons for everyone! It's another SpaceX Party Thread (CRS-1)

[tigerade]

2 flights is not substance

What about 3?  How many flights to the ISS is substance? 

[Jim]

The ISS has nothing to do with it.

ULA has how many launches in the last 5 years?
Boeing has twice launched and landed an unpiloted winged vehicle and will soon do it again. It has performed auto docking and propellant transfer with unmanned vehicle.

So tell me how two flights to the ISS qualify as "They are head and shoulders above the competition"?

[kevin-rf]

So tell me how two flights to the ISS qualify as "They are head and shoulders above the competition"?

They have this cool little X at the end of the name

[Garrett]

There is nothing to be lost in honesty.

Precious intellectual property?

This is a Party thread, so I should probably try to get it back on topic: Congrats SpaceX and NASA CCP!

[wolfpack]

The ISS has nothing to do with it.

ULA has how many launches in the last 5 years?
Boeing has twice launched and landed an unpiloted winged vehicle and will soon do it again. It has performed auto docking and propellant transfer with unmanned vehicle.

So tell me how two flights to the ISS qualify as "They are head and shoulders above the competition"?

In terms of CRS and CCiCap, they are. Boeing is already moaning about the business case for CST-100, Antares hasn't launched yet, and DC isn't funded with the intent of flying. SpX is clearly in the lead here.

How many commercial payloads has ULA launched in the last 5 years? Isn't SpX locked out of USAF bids for a few more years? So I think a ULA/SpX comparison is not really useful at this point in time. Post-2016 it will be.

[wolfpack]

They have this cool little X at the end of the name

They should have copied the Apple meme and pre-pended their name with a lowercase letter. xSpace!

[Jim]

1.  In terms of CRS and CCiCap, they are. Boeing is already moaning about the business case for CST-100, Antares hasn't launched yet, and DC isn't funded with the intent of flying. SpX is clearly in the lead here.

2.  How many commercial payloads has ULA launched in the last 5 years?

3. Isn't SpX locked out of USAF bids for a few more years? So I think a ULA/SpX comparison is not really useful at this point in time. Post-2016 it will be.

1.  ULA/Boeing are not part of CRS, so that doesn't mean squat.  As for Boeing is already moaning about the business case for CST-100, it has nothing to do with being ahead or behind.  So you point hold no water.

2.  More than Spacex.

3.  And that is my point.  After two flights, your statement is unsubstantiated.

[kevin-rf]

One of the fox talking heads just mentioned that giant blue eye found on a Florida beach shortly after launch was not a Dragon Eye left over from the party thread, but came from a Sword Fish.

So to all those who claimed that they told Elon that he would poke an eye out if he continued playing with Falcons and Dragons; Phbbb!!!!

[Retired Downrange]

...somebody is wrong on the Internet

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png

(remind you of somebody?)

[Robotbeat]

...somebody is wrong on the Internet

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png

(remind you of somebody?)

SHHH! Don't tell him! I'm learning!

(The best way to get an engineer to volunteer information is to challenge him: "Heh, well /obviously/ your $device can't do $function. It is only capable of $lownumber $performancemeasure." Or alternatively, just squeal something obviously false, and you'll often be corrected... a good way to get a free education, the very basis of this web forum!)

[Lars_J]

...somebody is wrong on the Internet

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png

I think that applies to everyone on this forum... myself included.

[wolfpack]

1.  ULA/Boeing are not part of CRS, so that doesn't mean squat.  As for Boeing is already moaning about the business case for CST-100, it has nothing to do with being ahead or behind.  So you point hold no water.

2.  More than Spacex.

3.  And that is my point.  After two flights, your statement is unsubstantiated.

1. My point was that SpX is ahead in CRS/CCiCap. Perhaps I should have qualified that in the original post. SpX is NOT ahead in any other area of the launch services market.

2. Correct my count, then. I see 2 commercial sat launches on A5 in the last 5 years (ICO G1, Intelsat14), and zero on D4. SpX has ATSB (F1) and Orbcomm (F9).

3. Opinion.

[Jim]

1.  ULA/Boeing are not part of CRS, so that doesn't mean squat.  As for Boeing is already moaning about the business case for CST-100, it has nothing to do with being ahead or behind.  So you point hold no water.

2.  More than Spacex.

3.  And that is my point.  After two flights, your statement is unsubstantiated.

1. My point was that SpX is ahead in CRS/CCiCap. Perhaps I should have qualified that in the original post. SpX is NOT ahead in any other area of the launch services market.

2. Correct my count, then. I see 2 commercial sat launches on A5 in the last 5 years (ICO G1, Intelsat14), and zero on D4. SpX has ATSB (F1) and Orbcomm (F9).

3. Opinion.

2.  secondaries don't count

3.  No, fact.  Two flights is far from making any rational statement

[Prober]

...somebody is wrong on the Internet

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png

(remind you of somebody?)

SHHH! Don't tell him! I'm learning!

(The best way to get an engineer to volunteer information is to challenge him: "Heh, well /obviously/ your $device can't do $function. It is only capable of $lownumber $performancemeasure." Or alternatively, just squeal something obviously false, and you'll often be corrected... a good way to get a free education, the very basis of this web forum!)

now the secret is out...

[Robotbeat]

1.  ULA/Boeing are not part of CRS, so that doesn't mean squat.  As for Boeing is already moaning about the business case for CST-100, it has nothing to do with being ahead or behind.  So you point hold no water.

2.  More than Spacex.

3.  And that is my point.  After two flights, your statement is unsubstantiated.

1. My point was that SpX is ahead in CRS/CCiCap. Perhaps I should have qualified that in the original post. SpX is NOT ahead in any other area of the launch services market.

2. Correct my count, then. I see 2 commercial sat launches on A5 in the last 5 years (ICO G1, Intelsat14), and zero on D4. SpX has ATSB (F1) and Orbcomm (F9).

3. Opinion.

2.  secondaries don't count
...

Tell that to Ed. 

[wolfpack]

2.  secondaries don't count

Neither do calories if you’re standing up.

3.  No, fact.  Two flights is far from making any rational statement

Apollo 8 took humans around the moon after 2 flights of Saturn V.

Enough, though. Party on, SpaceX!

[Jason1701]

They have this cool little X at the end of the name

They should have copied the Apple meme and pre-pended their name with a lowercase letter. xSpace!

"Better SpaceX than ex-space"

[rickl]

I received my order from the SpaceX store today.  I got the "X" baseball cap, a couple of rocket-shaped pens, and the flying model of the Falcon 9.

On the back of the Falcon 9 box, there is a paragraph describing the COTS 1 flight:

The Falcon 9 rocket delivered the Dragon spacecraft to orbit where it circled the Earth at speeds greater than 7,600 meters per second (17,000 miles per hour).  After nearly two orbits, Dragon fired its thrusters to begin reentry and splashed down in the Pacific Ocean 3 hours, 19 minutes and 52 seconds after liftoff.*

Towards the bottom of the box is the following disclaimer, in fine print:

*Model in this box will not reach speeds of the magnitude described above.  It will however return to you in much less time.

[Chris Bergin]

It's a party thread! Gentlemen, for pity's sake, don't argue! We need a public information film for that!

[robertross]

It's a party thread! Gentlemen, for pity's sake, don't argue! We need a public information film for that!

You had me convinced when she got in on the WRONG SIDE!  LOL
(j/k ladies)