Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday January 15 2017, @03:25AM   Printer-friendly
from the Up-Up-and-Away...-and-back! dept.

SpaceX is back in business:

SpaceX returned to flight Saturday after a 4½-month hiatus. The private space exploration company headed by Tesla CEO Elon Musk launched a Falcon 9 rocket from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California at 9:54 a.m. PT, taking 10 satellites into space for voice and data company Iridium. It marked the company's first launch since a Falcon 9 rocket exploded at Cape Canaveral, Florida, in September.

The launch's success Saturday was made even sweeter by a smooth return landing for the Falcon 9 rocket's first stage booster. It safely returned from space and glided to a landing on a seafaring platform, known as a drone ship.

The hosted launch coverage is available on YouTube.

Also at NPR, Reuters, and NYT.


Original Submission

Related Stories

How Much has NASA Downplayed SpaceX's Accidents? 12 comments

An editorial by Jason Rhian discusses NASA's handling of the Orb-3 (Orbital Sciences) and CRS-7 (SpaceX) accidents. Both were Commercial Resupply Service missions to the International Space Station. SpaceX intends to fly NASA astronauts using Falcon rockets within the next couple of years:

A recent post appearing on the blog Parabolic Arc noted NASA will not be releasing a public report on the findings of the SpaceX Falcon 9 CRS-7 explosion that resulted in the loss of the launch vehicle, the Dragon spacecraft, and the roughly $118 million in supplies and hardware the spacecraft was carrying. The post also notes that the Orb-3 accident was handled differently by NASA, but were the two accidents so distinct as to warrant two totally dissimilar approaches?

The premise of the Parabolic Arc report was somewhat inaccurate. NASA didn't refuse to issue a public report; the truth is, no public report was ever produced. NASA officials noted on Wednesday, July 19, that, as the agency was not required to create such a report, one was not generated.

When asked about the discrepancy between the two incidents, NASA officials noted that the Orb-3 failure had occurred on a NASA launch pad (at the agency's Wallops Flight Facility Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport's Pad-0A – which is managed by Virginia Space, not NASA). Whereas the Falcon 9 CRS-7 mission had launched from SpaceX's own pad (SLC-40, which is not their pad it was leased to them by the U.S. Air Force) on a commercial flight licensed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Therefore, NASA was not required to produce a report on the CRS-7 accident. However, Orb-3 was also licensed by the FAA, making this distinction tenuous.

The problem submitted by SpaceX as the root cause of the CRS-7 accident was a failed strut in the rocket's second stage. SpaceX stated that it had fixed the problem and, for all intents and purposes, the matter was dropped.

Fast forward 14 months and another Falcon 9, with the $185 million Amos-6 spacecraft, exploded while just sitting on the pad, taking the rocket, its payload, and some of the ground support facilities at Canaveral's Space Launch Complex 40 with it. Since the Amos-6 accident, SpaceX has moved its operations to Kennedy Space Center's historic Launch Complex 39A, under the 20-year lease with NASA that SpaceX entered into in April of 2014.

With limited information made available to the public, conspiracy theories, including those involving it being struck by a drone and snipers hired by SpaceX's competition, sprung up in articles and on comment boards on sites such as NASASpaceFlight.com and elsewhere regarding the cause of the Amos-6 explosion. This demonstrated the need for a transparent accounting of accidents involving public-private efforts such as NASA's Commercial Resupply Services contract.

Extra: Meanwhile, NASA has growing confidence in the test flight schedule for Boeing and SpaceX's crewed flights: http://spacenews.com/nasa-and-companies-express-growing-confidence-in-commercial-crew-schedules/

Related: NASA Advisory Committee Skeptical of SpaceX Manned Refueling Plan
SpaceX Identifies Cause of September Explosion
After Months of Delay Following Explosion, SpaceX Finally Launches More Satellites
Problems With SpaceX Falcon 9 Design Could Delay Manned Missions
Elon Musk Accuses Tesla Employee of Being a Union Agitator
SpaceX Technician says Concerns about Test Results Got Him Fired


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 15 2017, @05:52AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 15 2017, @05:52AM (#454019)

    Attention wireless listeners. Rich person does thing you will never afford. Worship him because has money.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by bob_super on Monday January 16 2017, @06:41PM

      by bob_super (1357) on Monday January 16 2017, @06:41PM (#454453)

      I was missing the launch because I had read a time in the wrong timezone (someone gave EST for a Vandenberg launch).
      Then I heard it because the way it flew south over the ocean, you could hear it from pretty far inland. The amount of power is just astonishing.
      Then it landed back down right where it was supposed to, while the satellites went to the right orbit. The precision is astonishing.

      You can troll about Musk, but he's hired a pretty impressive engineering team.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by charon on Sunday January 15 2017, @07:07AM

    by charon (5660) on Sunday January 15 2017, @07:07AM (#454033) Journal
    I get excited every time this works, and dejected when it does not. I'm sure in time that reaction will wear off, but in my opinion this is the coolest thing happening on the planet. Reusable spaceships! This is the base of science fiction dreams for a century.
    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 15 2017, @08:48AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 15 2017, @08:48AM (#454042)

      You would suck the decomposing cock of John D Rockefeller if there were anything left of him because he was the richest of the billionaires and you love money.

  • (Score: 2) by ticho on Sunday January 15 2017, @08:56AM

    by ticho (89) on Sunday January 15 2017, @08:56AM (#454043) Homepage Journal

    The signal from the camera was also much more reliable this time, only few very short stutters, instead of entire several seconds of no signal. And this time, the camera was even on the landing stage, not stationary on the barge. Yay progress!