SpaceX Falcon 9/Dragon CRS-2 SpX-2 MISSION GENERAL DISCUSSION

[edkyle99]

I'll tell you when SpaceX tells me.

Frankly, I don't see why they should bother given that...

I personally don't believe the corroded nut explanation, based in part on Elon's own comments right after the launch.  But that's just my own opinion.

... you have just accused them of being liars. Seems to me the only "truth" you will accept is the one you want to hear.

You don't miss an opportunity to complain about how much information they (will) release - like just today - and if/when they do release something, you say "I don't buy it". And they aren't even obliged to tell you anything.

Wow.

There were two  versions of events.  One was Elon's.  The other was a potential possibility from the investigation report, which I believe was not all SpaceX.  Maybe one of these is right, maybe not.  No one has to be lying. 

Ed Kyle

[dmc6960]

Suffice to say that the first Falcon 1 never lifted off.
Ed Kyle

Bull. It was in the air long enough that the impact was at T+41 seconds.

I believe he was referring to the first 1st stage, which was damaged during a detank on the second launch attempt.  The stage was swapped out with the 2nd built flight unit for the next launch attempt which ended with the engine fire.

The second Falcon 1 suffered an engine fire, lost thrust, plummeted, and exploded on impact.  I personally don't believe the corroded nut explanation, based in part on Elon's own comments right after the launch.  But that's just my own opinion.
Ed Kyle

Wrong again.
The rocket reached a final altitude of 289 km (180 mi) and a final velocity of 5.1 km/s.
In other words, it damned near made it to orbit.

This was the 1st flight of the vehicle, but again, I believe he is referring to that 1st stage swapout.  The 2nd flight is what made it partially into the 2nd stage burn.

[Chris Bergin]

It's on topic, so not a lot I can do about this, but it might get to a point where one of you takes the main angle of the disagreement and starts a new thread?

[cleonard]

SpaceX might go public with the cause of the engine failure or they might not.  However, by not going public they still convey a message.  It would seem to me that the message silence sends is worse that telling the truth. 

[ChefPat]

From my POV SpaceX has done an excellent job of disseminating what went wrong on each of the failed Falcon 1 flights. They've even devoted an entire page to each flight on their website. Pictures & videos even. I see no reason they wouldn't do the same thing for SpX-1 as well.

[RocketEconomist327]

I'll tell you when SpaceX tells me.  Suffice to say that the first Falcon 1 never lifted off.  The second Falcon 1 suffered an engine fire, lost thrust, plummeted, and exploded on impact.  I personally don't believe the corroded nut explanation, based in part on Elon's own comments right after the launch.  But that's just my own opinion.

Ed Kyle

Mr. Kyle,

I saw the video of the launch.  It was actually streamed live on some websites.  I also saw what was not streamed.  See the last link below.

Falcon 1, Flight 1 ended up impacting the lagoon like a scud missile.  It was loud and shook the entire complex.  Falcon 1, Flight 1 did in fact leave the pad the pad.

Choose to believe me, or not, but that is the reality of what happened.




This is the onboard cam where you can see the engine malfunction and pitch over ending with the snow screen after LoS.


This is the truncated impact video.  It has been edited not to show the impact but I assure you it was a very violent boom.

To be skeptical of SpaceX (Spacex(for Jim)) is one thing.  To say something completely inaccurate is another.  Moreover, those who really needs to know what happened with any of the Falcon flights, Falcon 1 or Falcon 9, know.

I have a lot of respect for you Mr. Kyle - however - in this rare case you are incorrect.

I know what I am talking about.

VR
RE327

edit: my html FtL

[Chris Bergin]

Ok, I see, that's still sneaking back into the Falcon 1 issue. Let's not.

Besides, none of you paid for more than a five minute argument:



Now back on to this flight please.

[Karloss12]

Space News have an article head line about the reason for the recent engine failure.  Unfortunately I don't have a subscription.  Probably just quoting Elon's tweet.

[woods170]

Space News have an article head line about the reason for the recent engine failure.  Unfortunately I don't have a subscription.  Probably just quoting Elon's tweet.

Correct. They have no further insight either.

[ugordan]

Space News have an article head line about the reason for the recent engine failure.  Unfortunately I don't have a subscription.  Probably just quoting Elon's tweet.

Correct. They have no further insight either.

SpaceX spokeswoman Katherine Nelson said Dec. 12 that Shotwell "was merely stating that she was not going to release any information at yesterday’s Washington Space Business Roundtable luncheon."

"SpaceX has conducted the investigation with the full cooperation of NASA, and results will be made public only after our customers have been fully briefed and everyone agrees with the findings," Nelson said.

[MikeAtkinson]

"SpaceX has conducted the investigation with the full cooperation of NASA, and results will be made public only after our customers have been fully briefed and everyone agrees with the findings," Nelson said.[/i]

That is as it should be. Customers should be informed before the public, and they should have a chance to comment, get clarification and ask questions.

[edkyle99]

I have a lot of respect for you Mr. Kyle - however - in this rare case you are incorrect.

VR
RE327

edit: my html FtL

Just to clarify then I'm done discussing this aspect.  I was referring to the first Falcon 1, which was damaged during defueling on Omelek and never lifted off.  The second stage also was replaced after it developed a leak.  Thus the first Falcon to fly was really the second flight  vehicle to stand on the pad at Omelek.

 - Ed Kyle

[RocketEconomist327]

I have a lot of respect for you Mr. Kyle - however - in this rare case you are incorrect.

VR
RE327

edit: my html FtL

Just to clarify then I'm done discussing this aspect.  I was referring to the first Falcon 1, which was damaged during defueling on Omelek and never lifted off.  The second stage also was replaced after it developed a leak.  Thus the first Falcon to fly was really the second flight  vehicle to stand on the pad at Omelek.

 - Ed Kyle

Mr. Kyle,

I see your point and I agree with you 100% on the hardware aspect.  I apologize for the misunderstanding.

VR
RE327

[Jason1701]

Picture of Dragon and F9 005 at SLC-40!

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/537695_10152360964895131_383864606_n.jpg

[Chris-A]

Picture of Dragon and F9 005 at SLC-40!

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/537695_10152360964895131_383864606_n.jpg

I'll add the Twitter links. http://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/282938349101150208
http://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/282938349101150208/photo/1/large

[e of pi]

Hey, padrat, you in this one?

[padrat]

Yeah I'm there. That was our gift we unwrapped on friday. Long day/night. I was hoping they would release the pic, pretty cool.

[dunderwood]

Picture of Dragon and F9 005 at SLC-40!

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/537695_10152360964895131_383864606_n.jpg

I'll add the Twitter links. http://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/282938349101150208
http://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/282938349101150208/photo/1/large

[Joffan]

It seems like it's time for a SpX-2 PROCESSING thread...

[woods170]

It seems like it's time for a SpX-2 PROCESSING thread...

HERE you go!