Posted on 06/28/2015 7:26:31 AM PDT by Vaquero
Edited on 06/28/2015 10:02:44 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
That is was I saw too, first stage working fine, but something above the first stage was not. Damn, I really like spaceX.
I missed the pareidolia. Where’d you see it?
This appears to me to be a problem with a simpler and easier to fix subsystem than would be the case if it involves one of the engines. Space-X has a track record of identifying and fixing lesser problems very quickly. It may take a while to regain the full confidence of all of their customers. This is particularly the case for their goal of having NASA certify their manned version of the Dragon capsule.
Other positives are that the first stage and all nine engines continued to function in a controlled manner even well after the upper stage and capsule had started to come apart. Also, the capsule appeared to survive the breakup with telemetry still intact. Space-X may be able to argue this shows the robustness of their hardware. They may be able argue that if the capsule had been configured with the Draco thrusters as is the case with the manner version, that it would have escaped the breakup and landed safely.
All this said, their still seems to be a tangible gap between the reliability of the Ariane and the ULA rockets and those of Space-X.
Quick!
Change direction!
The day Musk climbs aboard with them is the day I'll tune in.
Well; I learned a new word today and saw a lot of examples.
I’ll keep my eyes open for these things!
lol
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.