Help End The Obama Era In 2012
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help Keep FR In the Battle!
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
Posted on 05/21/2012 4:47:45 PM PDT by KevinDavis
Good luck again.. I'm sure they will make it..
I used to provide beacon readout for the eastern range at KSC and Canaveral. Sitting in on Space-X’s first launch gave me a detailed education on the problems with 9 motors.
There are certain things government does very well in, such as a standing military.....etc., also space flight.
If cost is the holy grail for you, be prepared for a body count that will prove my point.
I have every hope of success....just not the direction that Space-X has taken it.
Once again, Atlas is probably going to prove the best platform.
I used to provide beacon readout for the eastern range at KSC and Canaveral. Sitting in on Space-X’s first launch gave me a detailed education on the problems with 9 motors.
There are certain things government does very well in, such as a standing military.....etc., also space flight.
If cost is the holy grail for you, be prepared for a body count that will prove my point.
I have every hope of success....just not the direction that Space-X has taken it.
Once again, Atlas is probably going to prove the best platform.
Fingers crossed for a flawless launch and insertion.
Yes they have....not to mention, the rocket clusters are spread out much more than Space-X.
Space-X has there rockets clustered too close to the cum-line of the rocket.
2 or 3 rockets shutdown during the boost phase and bad things happen quicker.
Big girl panties might be useful for making it back to earth if all fails.
Indeed. The Saturn 1B had eight engines in the first stage.
All of their launches had delays....for the same thing...engine sequence.
2 launches is a vision for you?
I was there for the first launch at Canaveral...supporting it for the Eastern Range.
I need no education on when and where.
I’m giving you insight on what and why.
BTW.....”Kevin”????????????
What about using some form of a mag-lev sled to get the space craft moving quickly in a horizontal direction, then slowly ramp it upward and ingite the engines after it's already got a lot of momentum? Wouldn't that be a lot more efficient than using brute force thrust to shove the craft skyward from a dead stop?
I'm obviously no expert, but it seems like the current way is about the least efficient way to launch any space craft. I welcome all responses, even if I'm totally wrong and get schooled for it.
Launch delays are common regardless of who is behind it. It's why this is called a test.
It’s a good idea for smaller rockets. Would be an enormous project to scale it up for heavy-lifters.
Launching small rockets to orbit from a large jet is also a good idea.
If you built a magnetic launcher on the moon you could fling payload packages back to earth...if anything of value was found there.
(The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress)
Maybe you should actually purchase a clue.
/johnny
We’re talking about the Falcon 9 here.
“Launch delays are common regardless of who is behind it. It’s why this is called a test.”
Test of the Dragon, not of the Falcon 9.
Launch delays are predominately weather related.
Not with Space-X.
They will continue to be predominately motor related. They say software issues...yes, software relating to the motors.
Supposedly there is a lot of Helium 3 on the Moon...energy.
Falcon 9 has made two launches before, both successful.
This seems to disturb you.
Deal with it.
Your elan is clouding your desire to know.
The Ares 1-X was said to be a successful launch also....however, Griffith legacy had a fundamental problem they didn't really want to talk about, somewhat like you, in that the Ares developed a buckle.
Successful launch you say because it accomplished what it set out to do.
There was a 3 hertz vibration systemic to the rocket being utilized apart from the original design being strapped to the sides of the ET.
That 3 hertz was a jackhammer vibration up the length to the payload. The fix was to add approximately 1200lbs of tare weight to dampen the effect, which wasn't present on the launch.
As I intimated, 1 or 2 launches don't make for success....we will see if they can hammer out the engineering problems on their sequencing...which I doubt due to too many variables.
It's why you were told thread, it's a test.
Driving rockets into orbit is dangerous and the complexities can routinely cause delays. From weather, to woodpeckers to mechanical issues..Launch delays will always occur.
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.