-
#520
by
Flying Beaver
on 29 Mar, 2017 17:01
-
-
#521
by
Comga
on 29 Mar, 2017 18:17
-
Since this launch will probably represent the start of a totally new chapter in spaceflight, or at least we hope, here are twenty things off the top of my head that have been learned through blood sweat and tears up to this point:
1. Space is hard. Space will always be hard.
2.
.
.13. Rockets are not LEGO elements.
14.
.
.
.
Edit/Lar: "13. Rockets are not legos." is fixed. That's my pet peeve, people. Get it right. 
A great benefit of this launch going well will be the reduction of this incessant talk.
One can't tell when new chapters of history open until much later.
We (almost) all believe, but that's what it is and will remain for a while.
And: Go Lar!
-
#522
by
ChrisC
on 29 Mar, 2017 18:29
-
Yesterday's SES press briefing
https://youtube.com/watch?v=BZqFCaaLEBc
Thank you
Space News 360 for the video! (And thanks FutureSpaceTourist for finding it).
For those
on L2, a couple hours after the event yesterday, Chris Gebhardt also provided higher quality audio that including the Q+A that followed the official press event. I believe the video above includes that Q+A session.
-
#523
by
Mader Levap
on 29 Mar, 2017 18:39
-
Because it's hard to believe the CEO of a launch provider is putting a historic flight (or any flight) in the hands of fate.
It is something called "figure of speech". Maybe you heard about it? It basically means "we did everything humanly possible for that mission to succeed. Now light that candle."
I am pretty sure the fate comment is about the first stage reuse. (...)
This
very short discussion said nothing about first stage reuse. Question was about
SES launch and answer was about
SES launch. Simple.
8. Government should provide the means and support to lead but cannot be the source of exploration.
Not true. There is no money in exploration. How many companies you see launching probes to say Jupiter for commercial purpose (like, I dunno, selling Jupiter photos or something)?
-
#524
by
Chris Bergin
on 29 Mar, 2017 18:48
-
According to SFN update, currently still on track for launch Thursday:
Just about, but it's very tight. Our understanding is there's a long period of checkouts *when vertical on the pad* so they need to get out there before a certain time this evening to keep to that timeline.
Everyone keep one eye on 39A.
-
#525
by
donaldp
on 29 Mar, 2017 18:53
-
1. Space is hard. Space will always be hard.
...
19. We have alot more to learn.
Edit/Lar: "13. Rockets are not legos." is fixed. That's my pet peeve, people. Get it right.
Well done Lar, but one of my pet peeves is the non-word alot. It's "a lot". You don't say alittle so why do people insist on writing alot?
-
#526
by
georgegassaway
on 29 Mar, 2017 19:21
-
This very short discussion said nothing about first stage reuse. Question was about SES launch and answer was about SES launch. Simple.
Let's review the actual discussion:
Steven Bowles @BlueBowles Mar 24
@elonmusk how excited are you about the SES launch next week?! I don't know how you're focused on model 3 with that ahead! #makinghistory
So, do you really think the question was about SES-10 making history as the first ever satellite to be named SES-10? And not because the launch will be making history as the first re-use of a first stage to put a satellite in orbit?
Elon MuskVerified account @elonmusk
@BlueBowles If fate is on our side, it will be amazing. Will talk about that in detail next week.
And do you think that Musk would say that a routine Falcon-9 launch will be "amazing" like all the other ones, because it is launching the one and only "historic" SES-10 satellite?
You really think he plans to be there to see it launch because it's all about the historic SES-10 satellite and not the reflight of booster 1021?
C'mon, it was about making history with the first re-used booster, to which Musk replied as he did. And it's not like Twitter encourages detailed questions or replies, both know what the history is about.
He likely mentioned "fate" in part to not jinx things by assuming it will all go perfectly.
And at least for the landing part, there is reason for concern about fate. Another high-risk "hot" re-entry and 3-engine landing burn (maybe 1-3-1). So the booster may be 100% successful in being the first reused first stage to launch a payload into orbit, but possibly not survive the landing. So, not as much reason to be confident about a safe landing as for the flights that can do a normal reentry burn.
Given that the two previous "hot" re-entry Falcons that landed safely, got so toasted that they apparently will not fly again, then #1021 probably won't fly again either. But if it lands safely, that will add massively to the positive story about successful re-launch, and more R&D they can get out of studying it later. And if any Falcon is "fated" to make it to the Smithsonian, this would be the top choice.
-
#527
by
Lar
on 29 Mar, 2017 19:29
-
1. Space is hard. Space will always be hard.
...
19. We have alot more to learn.
Edit/Lar: "13. Rockets are not legos." is fixed. That's my pet peeve, people. Get it right.
Well done Lar, but one of my pet peeves is the non-word alot. It's "a lot". You don't say alittle so why do people insist on writing alot?
OK that's too far off topic. I could have edited all of my peeves.... but that'd be mean. I just fixed the one I rant about EACH AND EVERY TIME IT HAPPENS. Don't make me do that!
Now back to SES-10 please
-
#528
by
stcks
on 29 Mar, 2017 19:32
-
Is it just me or does SpaceX seems strangely quiet about this launch? I would have thought we would have seen at least a press release by now, possibly a teaser video or something... Surely I'm not the only one.
-
#529
by
Lar
on 29 Mar, 2017 19:34
-
Is it just me or does SpaceX seems strangely quiet about this launch? I would have thought we would have seen at least a press release by now, possibly a teaser video or something... Surely I'm not the only one.
As we have been discussing, maybe they just don't want to jinx it. Eventually this all will be routine and there won't be thousands of fans watching (although I may never tire of watching hoverslam landings...) but for now this is a historic first reuse of a booster stage and... you can't have too many good luck charms!
-
#530
by
stcks
on 29 Mar, 2017 19:45
-
Is it just me or does SpaceX seems strangely quiet about this launch? I would have thought we would have seen at least a press release by now, possibly a teaser video or something... Surely I'm not the only one.
As we have been discussing, maybe they just don't want to jinx it. Eventually this all will be routine and there won't be thousands of fans watching (although I may never tire of watching hoverslam landings...) but for now this is a historic first reuse of a booster stage and... you can't have too many good luck charms!
I feel like SpaceX is missing a huge PR opportunity, but maybe thats coming tomorrow. Or maybe they are waiting for 1021's return.... I just can't believe Elon isn't out at the pad with a cadre of reporters asking him questions.
-
#531
by
Barrie
on 29 Mar, 2017 19:51
-
SpaceX know exactly what they are doing and this launch is just as likely to succeed as any other. OTOH they are only human, and they are bricking it ie very nervous.
-
#532
by
Johnnyhinbos
on 29 Mar, 2017 19:56
-
I might add that I find it amazing that's there's been almost a deafening silence lately when it comes to the spreadsheet created by Tory Bruno (or at least touted by him) and then vigorously debated on this forum on the cost benefit of reuse. I would think, on the eve of a, I might say, historic flight of a used (sorry, flight proven) booster that there would be reignited the same hot debate. I would think that nothing materially has changed since that spreadsheet was presented.
Point being, I personally think Musk's "fate" relates to a successful reflight of a booster - something that was, at least at one point, speculative at best according to many. Isn't that, therefore, enough?
I mean, we're at a potentially historic turning point in space flight. Isn't that enough?
-
#533
by
Mike_1179
on 29 Mar, 2017 20:02
-
I mean, we're at a potentially historic turning point in space flight. Isn't that enough?
To be fair, we're a pretty narrow subset of the population here - those who would get excited about a booster re-use.
Re-use is only historic if you can demonstrate it is quick and with limited re-work between flights. Again, that's a discussion we've beaten to death on this place.
The general public (or at least those outside of this forum) paid attention for a few minutes when SpaceX landed a booster at CCAFS - that was something that seemed neat and it looked like an old sci-fi movie. Using the bottom part of a rocket a second time is an important next step, but it's not a moonshot.
-
#534
by
Space Ghost 1962
on 29 Mar, 2017 20:10
-
They toasted AMOS 6 on a static fire because of what they didn't know. They don't want to toast another because they don't know something else.
Quite understandable. I wish them and SES the best. Because sometimes after you've done all you can, you still have to go ahead and take the gamble. Like they need to do now.
-
#535
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 29 Mar, 2017 20:12
-
Also SpaceX are rather busy right now trying to keep to a tight schedule. I'm sure the customer and the launch are rightly their focus right now. Plenty of time for a press conference etc after a successful launch.
-
#536
by
envy887
on 29 Mar, 2017 20:12
-
The debate will re-ignite if this flight is successful. Until then, everyone is either ignoring it or holding their breath.
-
#537
by
Nomadd
on 29 Mar, 2017 20:18
-
I'm a little surprised this didn't raise the insurance rate. There are a whole lot of factors you can't test on a stand.
If they get this worked out in the next year, maybe they'll only need to build one booster for Boca Chica until they move up from one a month. Maybe two boosters in case Home Depot is closed the day they need to buy parts for refurbishment.
-
#538
by
matthewkantar
on 29 Mar, 2017 20:41
-
Is it possible the insurance is already so high, any increase would lead the sat owner to self insure?
Matthew
-
#539
by
Elmar Moelzer
on 29 Mar, 2017 20:59
-
I'm a little surprised this didn't raise the insurance rate. There are a whole lot of factors you can't test on a stand.
If they get this worked out in the next year, maybe they'll only need to build one booster for Boca Chica until they move up from one a month. Maybe two boosters in case Home Depot is closed the day they need to buy parts for refurbishment.
But then, who says that this booster is LESS safe than a never before flown booster? I think the risk about evens out.
