SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A classified satellite launched by SpaceX on Sunday may be experiencing a classified failure:
Later on Monday afternoon another space reporter, Peter B. de Selding, reported on Twitter that he too had been hearing about problems with the satellite. "Zuma satellite from @northropgrumman may be dead in orbit after separation from @SpaceX Falcon 9, sources say," de Selding tweeted. "Info blackout renders any conclusion - launcher issue? Satellite-only issue? — impossible to draw."
Update: SpaceX said the Falcon 9 rocket performed nominally, but unnamed sources reportedly told the Wall Street Journal that the payload did not separate from the Falcon 9 second stage and that both fell into the ocean:
An expensive, highly classified U.S. spy satellite is presumed to be a total loss after it failed to reach orbit atop a Space Exploration Technologies Corp. rocket on Sunday, according to industry and government officials. Lawmakers and congressional staffers from the Senate and the House have been briefed about the botched mission, some of the officials said. The secret payload—code-named Zuma and launched from Florida on board a Falcon 9 rocket—is believed to have plummeted back into the atmosphere, they said, because it didn't separate as planned from the upper part of the rocket.
The WSJ report has been disputed. Space-Track has catalogued the Zuma payload as USA 280, international designation 2018-001A, catalog number 43098, but that doesn't necessarily mean Zuma survived. CelesTrak lists the status as operational (search 43098 in NORAD Catalog Number field).
If the mission did fail, SpaceX could also blame Northrup Grumman for using their own payload adapter.
Also at CBS News, SpaceFlight Insider, Bloomberg, Popular Mechanics, CNBC, and USA Today.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday January 09 2018, @04:50PM (7 children)
It did not separate and fell into the ocean? Maybe it did. Or maybe that's what they want you to think. Or maybe they were deliberately vague (or deceptive) on when the payload fairing separated. Maybe it separated later and they put it into a different orbit than anyone thinks. This is a friggin' spy satellite. It is unclear which branch of government is actually launching it. Maybe there was a real satellite and a dummy, the dummy didn't separate and fell to the ocean along with 2nd stage, but the real satellite is in some classified orbit. Maybe such a dummy that didn't separate is why there were so many delays of this launch -- apparently related to, of all things, the payload fairing!
In fact, you can't be sure what to believe. Do you think a satellite by a yet unknown TLA is going to tell you anything resembling the truth about it?
The story is funny because they don't want to put egg on SpaceX's face. So it has to 'fail' somehow late into the launch.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by takyon on Tuesday January 09 2018, @05:11PM
Spy satellite != stealth satellite. Unless it does.
In updating the story I came to the conclusion that Northrup Grumman is probably at fault (if there is in fact a fault) for a few reasons:
1. SpaceX is acting like everything went fine (on their end) and is now preparing for Falcon Heavy instead of going into "How did this happen?" mode.
2. SpaceX said that the rocket performed nominally. This could be their coded way of saying "We did everything right, someone else fucked up".
3. Northrup Grumman integrated their own payload adapter (instead of using SpaceX's) at a separate location. SpaceX didn't get to look at the satellite at all?
4. The mission was already delayed once due to a problem with the adapter/fairing?
That said, there are a lot of Musky apologists online, including me. So who knows? I didn't see any significant updates to the story when I checked a few minutes ago.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Tuesday January 09 2018, @05:18PM (5 children)
Could you launch a satellite without anyone knowing? Like from Area 51? Just wondering if the US or China could do something like that without it being known.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Tuesday January 09 2018, @05:55PM (3 children)
Unlikely, but not necessarily impossible. Rockets are loud and bright, and launches tend to show up on seismic sensors.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 09 2018, @07:23PM
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday January 09 2018, @07:27PM (1 child)
The whole argument about nuclear war with Kim is a cover-up so that the US can test nuclear weapons, and launch spy satellites, without domestic consequences.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 10 2018, @03:07PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 10 2018, @09:07AM
Can you launch a rocket without anyone noticing? No. And if you can, that rocket will not be used to launch satellites, it will be sitting in a nuclear silo somewhere. Once you start using it, you give the enemy every chance of learning to detect it.
Can you launch a satellite without anyone noticing? Yes. Just launch it on the same rocket as another bigger satellite. Then pick the optimal time to have the the two satellites separate, long after the launch, so nobody is expecting anything (it's always harder to hide things from people who are actively trying to find something).