This is a boring party.
I sent out some invitations and I heard some more guests will be coming soon....
Quote from: mr. mark on 09/02/2013 04:44 amI sent out some invitations and I heard some more guests will be coming soon....Yikes! I will never look at Dragon the same again.
Quote from: Lars_J on 09/02/2013 02:35 amQuote from: Jim on 09/02/2013 01:58 amQuote from: Lars_J on 09/02/2013 01:52 amQuote from: AncientU on 09/02/2013 12:55 amA question from pure inexperience... SpaceX has multiple stages and dozens of engines flowing out of Hawthorne before the first actual flight of v1.1 and M1-D. This seems completely new to me -- parallel development instead of serial, where equipment is test flown, developed some more, test flown, repeat. Is this new? Is SpaceX confident or crazy? Or both?Most new LV developments these days do all-up testing. They don't feel the need to do a suborbital Ares 1 style test, then add the next stage, then payload, and so on.He is not talking about the test philosophy but that they are going into production without first a test flightBut that is also not unique. Atlas V and Delta IV flew their first flights with relatively large payloads from paying customers, right? I'm still not understanding how this argument makes SpaceX look like they are taking more risk than usual for a first flight of a new type. They aren't. They didn't do a stupid thing like scrap an operating LV and Pad; then bet contracts and all on a new untested model.
Quote from: Jim on 09/02/2013 01:58 amQuote from: Lars_J on 09/02/2013 01:52 amQuote from: AncientU on 09/02/2013 12:55 amA question from pure inexperience... SpaceX has multiple stages and dozens of engines flowing out of Hawthorne before the first actual flight of v1.1 and M1-D. This seems completely new to me -- parallel development instead of serial, where equipment is test flown, developed some more, test flown, repeat. Is this new? Is SpaceX confident or crazy? Or both?Most new LV developments these days do all-up testing. They don't feel the need to do a suborbital Ares 1 style test, then add the next stage, then payload, and so on.He is not talking about the test philosophy but that they are going into production without first a test flightBut that is also not unique. Atlas V and Delta IV flew their first flights with relatively large payloads from paying customers, right? I'm still not understanding how this argument makes SpaceX look like they are taking more risk than usual for a first flight of a new type. They aren't.
Quote from: Lars_J on 09/02/2013 01:52 amQuote from: AncientU on 09/02/2013 12:55 amA question from pure inexperience... SpaceX has multiple stages and dozens of engines flowing out of Hawthorne before the first actual flight of v1.1 and M1-D. This seems completely new to me -- parallel development instead of serial, where equipment is test flown, developed some more, test flown, repeat. Is this new? Is SpaceX confident or crazy? Or both?Most new LV developments these days do all-up testing. They don't feel the need to do a suborbital Ares 1 style test, then add the next stage, then payload, and so on.He is not talking about the test philosophy but that they are going into production without first a test flight
Quote from: AncientU on 09/02/2013 12:55 amA question from pure inexperience... SpaceX has multiple stages and dozens of engines flowing out of Hawthorne before the first actual flight of v1.1 and M1-D. This seems completely new to me -- parallel development instead of serial, where equipment is test flown, developed some more, test flown, repeat. Is this new? Is SpaceX confident or crazy? Or both?Most new LV developments these days do all-up testing. They don't feel the need to do a suborbital Ares 1 style test, then add the next stage, then payload, and so on.
A question from pure inexperience... SpaceX has multiple stages and dozens of engines flowing out of Hawthorne before the first actual flight of v1.1 and M1-D. This seems completely new to me -- parallel development instead of serial, where equipment is test flown, developed some more, test flown, repeat. Is this new? Is SpaceX confident or crazy? Or both?
They didn't do a stupid thing like scrap an operating LV and Pad; then bet contracts and all on a new untested model.
Quote from: Prober on 09/02/2013 03:29 amThey didn't do a stupid thing like scrap an operating LV and Pad; then bet contracts and all on a new untested model.It's easy to criticize the course that was taken, but you need to look at the alternative - which was getting stuck with two simultaneous types of redundant vehicles, some customers wanting this, some wanting that, never ending arguments over Jason 3, etc - ESPECIALLY if the first flight fails.This way, it is cut and dry. That's a good CEO move. Here. Done. Move on.They obviously have confidence that even if the first flight fails, it's nothing they can't fix quickly.It also signals that they don't have time to waste. Get on board or stay at the station - but the train is leaving.I think it was a very smart strategic decision.
I sent out some invitations and I heard some more guests will be coming soon....http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=32683.0;attach=541009;image
Quote from: Robotbeat on 09/02/2013 03:43 amThis is a boring party.The guest of honor hasn't shown up yet. NET Sep
