SpaceX's Falcon Rocket Explodes Catastrophically En Route to ISS

PatrickJS

New member
Jun 8, 2015
409
0
0
SpaceX's Falcon Rocket Explodes Catastrophically En Route to ISS



SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket stands ready to launch much-needed supplies to the International Space Station this weekend. That is no easy task, yet its real challenge will be trying to stick the landing.

EDIT June 28th: Unfortunately, the unmanned rocket exploded shortly after launch. The rocket begins to disintegrate about 3 minutes into this video:


Original: After a supply run by Russia failed earlier this month, SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket is preparing to bring much-needed food, tools, experiments and a new docking port to the ISS.

A private company making supply runs on to the space station is already the realm of science fiction - but if SpaceX succeeds in safely landing the first stage of its rocket this weekend, then they will truly make history.

SpaceX's [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/tag/view/spacex] Falcon 9 rocket's first goal is getting a Dragon spacecraft - loaded with the supplies - into orbit. From there, the Falcon separates, pushing the Dragon on towards its goal, while the rocket itself drifts down to Earth. The hope is that the Falcon can land safely on a barge set up at sea, using a combination of parachutes and thrusters to keep it balanced.

SpaceX's previous two attempts did not go well, but their failures taught their engineers a great deal. Elon Musk, owner of SpaceX, not to mention Tesla Motors, [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/141189-Elon-Musk-SpaceX-start-contest-for-sci-fi-Hyperloop-designs] had given their most recent attempt a "50-50 chance."


"This is an experimental trial to some extent," says SpaceX's Hans Koenigsmann. "You look at the data, you evaluate this, and then you make corrections, and that's ultimately how you succeed."

If the Falcon 9 survives its landing, it will prove to be another momentous step in human space flight. SpaceX and companies like it have already begun to succeed in areas usually reserved for government agencies. Having a re-usable rocket like the Falcon 9 would hugely improve the efficiency of space missions like these.

It certainly brings many sci-fi dreams to the fore. Space tourism is rapidly approaching feasibility; companies are ready to start mining asteroids for precious ores.

What do you think? Is privatized space flight the way forward? Or should space remain the domain of government agencies?



Source: NBC [http://www.nbcnews.com/science/space/spacex-odds-successful-falcon-9-landing-are-uncertain-n382011]


Permalink
 

FalloutJack

Bah weep grah nah neep ninny bom
Nov 20, 2008
15,489
0
0
I think that if the private sector irons out all of the kinks in its design and procedure, it will yield a great benefit by being able to put flights into space on their bill instead of a government's. Spread the wealth a little, delegate some tasks.

Captcha: Moon cheese

Hah!
 

Alleged_Alec

New member
Sep 2, 2008
796
0
0
Would like to see which design will be the eventual winner; Musk's powered lander or Airbus' flying engine pod.
 

lancar

New member
Aug 11, 2009
428
0
0
If we won't have corporations taking us into space, then no-one will. Governments already think it's too expensive, so if the private sector won't do it we'll probably never get to colonize other planets.
 

The Rogue Wolf

Stealthy Carnivore
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
13,205
3,684
118
Stalking the Digital Tundra
Gender
✅
One of the tough things about science is learning as much from the failures as from the successes.

Me, I'm perfectly fine with public and private enterprises sharing the load. What worries me is the idea of private monopoly over space travel; private monopoly over anything tends to end up being a bad thing. Not to mention that private enterprise tends to be most effective when it piggybacks on governmental experimentation and research.
 

CrystalShadow

don't upset the insane catgirl
Apr 11, 2009
3,829
0
0
Alleged_Alec said:
Would like to see which design will be the eventual winner; Musk's powered lander or Airbus' flying engine pod.
Still crossing my fingers and hoping the spaceplanes using SABRE air-breathing hybrid rockets makes it into at least full-scale testing at some point.

Can anyone say 'single-stage-to orbit'? XD
 

Kenjitsuka

New member
Sep 10, 2009
3,051
0
0
"It certainly brings many sci-fi dreams to the fore. "

You might want to check out Buran, the vastly, vastly superior Russian Space shuttle they just let rot because the Cold War ended when the USSR ran out of money for weapons and the Spacerace before the USA did. Think Ars Technica recently did a photo article about it?
 

McKitten

New member
Apr 20, 2013
74
0
0
It's pretty funny how news about SpaceX keeps harping on about them being "private sector". There's nothing private about them, SpaceX is a government contractor, every contract they get is from the government and every cent they earn comes from tax money. It's not even new. NASA has had external contractors since the fifties. It's damn impressive what they do, but it's a victory for brilliant engineering, not some open-market business-magic bullshit.
 

Idlemessiah

Zombie Steve Irwin
Feb 22, 2009
1,050
0
0
Considering their first 2 attempts were so damn close, I recon they could actually land it this time. I don't really give a damn about the supplies to the ISS (well I do since they're needed), but for me the most important thing is to me is for SpaceX to nail that landing. They touch that rocket down nice and gentle-like and the cost of space flight will tumble.
 

Wiggum Esquilax

New member
Apr 22, 2015
118
0
0
Don't know why people think that government sponsored space agencies are a waste of money compared to the private sector. True, they haven't done much actual manned exploration. That's because unmanned exploration has been doing just fine, and because they've first had to develop the underlying technologies to send people into space, safely.

https://spinoff.nasa.gov/Spinoff2008/tech_benefits.html

Technologies many of which we are using on Earth, right now.
 

PatrickJS

New member
Jun 8, 2015
409
0
0
Kenjitsuka said:
You might want to check out Buran, the vastly, vastly superior Russian Space shuttle they just let rot because the Cold War ended when the USSR ran out of money for weapons and the Spacerace before the USA did. Think Ars Technica recently did a photo article about it?
Interesting - I had not heard of this before. Very cool!

Idlemessiah said:
Considering their first 2 attempts were so damn close, I recon they could actually land it this time.
Yeah, especially that second attempt - watching that video I posted, it's like a roller-coaster of emotion. "They're coming in at an angle! Oh, they're going to make it! OH NO IT'S TIPPING AWWW MAN"
 

Muspelheim

New member
Apr 7, 2011
2,023
0
0
McKitten said:
It's pretty funny how news about SpaceX keeps harping on about them being "private sector". There's nothing private about them, SpaceX is a government contractor, every contract they get is from the government and every cent they earn comes from tax money. It's not even new. NASA has had external contractors since the fifties. It's damn impressive what they do, but it's a victory for brilliant engineering, not some open-market business-magic bullshit.
But Glorious Market make anything possible! Genious Job Creators take us to very stars themselves! All with aid of the Hand of the Market! They never would accept money from evil and corrupt government, would they?
 

Nurb

Cynical bastard
Dec 9, 2008
3,078
0
0
It's a shame we couldn't even get past the moon before the corporate age of space exploration started.
 

Alleged_Alec

New member
Sep 2, 2008
796
0
0
CrystalShadow said:
Alleged_Alec said:
Would like to see which design will be the eventual winner; Musk's powered lander or Airbus' flying engine pod.
Still crossing my fingers and hoping the spaceplanes using SABRE air-breathing hybrid rockets makes it into at least full-scale testing at some point.

Can anyone say 'single-stage-to orbit'? XD
I'd love to see those, but I think that those have a different purpose. SpaceX and it's Airbus competitor are meant as cargo rockets, bringing large-ish payloads to orbit. Most SSTOs proposed so far have quite a limited payload capacity, making them less suitable for that sort of wor, but more attractive for personnel missions.
 

CrystalShadow

don't upset the insane catgirl
Apr 11, 2009
3,829
0
0
Alleged_Alec said:
CrystalShadow said:
Alleged_Alec said:
Would like to see which design will be the eventual winner; Musk's powered lander or Airbus' flying engine pod.
Still crossing my fingers and hoping the spaceplanes using SABRE air-breathing hybrid rockets makes it into at least full-scale testing at some point.

Can anyone say 'single-stage-to orbit'? XD
I'd love to see those, but I think that those have a different purpose. SpaceX and it's Airbus competitor are meant as cargo rockets, bringing large-ish payloads to orbit. Most SSTOs proposed so far have quite a limited payload capacity, making them less suitable for that sort of wor, but more attractive for personnel missions.
The sabre engine is closely associated with the SKYLON SSTO...

This is a single-stage crewless spaceplane with a 15 tonne payload.

While there ARE some plans for optional crew capsules for it, by default it is strictly for Cargo.

The point of the SABRE engine as a concept is that below mach 5 it is an air-breathing engine, meaning it needs considerably less oxidiser.

You have to take such claims with a grain of salt, but they are suggesting it would cause a 95% reduction in the cost of space launches.

(they do however mention a variant of the engine designed not to reach orbit, but to allow a mach 5 aircraft for intercontinental passenger transport)

SpaceX and Airbus are American though, while the SABRE engine is being worked on by a UK company. The plans so far suggest launching SKYLON flights from The ESA facilities in French Guinnea.

Still, it's impossible to say, since they're not talking about even doing full-scale flight tests until 2019 (they have a quarter scale mockup of the spaceplane, and have been doing prototype engine tests for quite some time.)

Anyway, I guess we'll have to wait and see. (but skylon is definitely NOT designed for people. Far from it.)
http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon_tech.html
 

Mr.Mattress

Level 2 Lumberjack
Jul 17, 2009
3,645
0
0
Regardless of the debate of "Is SpaceX Private or a part of the Government?", it doesn't matter, at least not today; because it exploded minutes after launch [http://news.yahoo.com/spacex-rocket-explodes-launch-143243940.html].

SpaceX seems to have problems with their rockets. Back to the drawing board for them.
 

Chessrook44

Senior Member
Legacy
Jul 3, 2020
558
1
23
Country
United States
Mr.Mattress said:
Regardless of the debate of "Is SpaceX Private or a part of the Government?", it doesn't matter, at least not today; because it exploded minutes after launch [http://news.yahoo.com/spacex-rocket-explodes-launch-143243940.html].

SpaceX seems to have problems with their rockets. Back to the drawing board for them.
So much for "third time's the charm". Seriously, I think people are going to be losing faith in the company by now...
 

O maestre

New member
Nov 19, 2008
882
0
0
3 strikes and out? Damn I wish I remembered who I had an argument with in regards to space x lack of ability after the second failure.