Falcon 9 launch poll

Yes, it's that time of the year again! SpaceX is launching another rocket and so it's time for another spin of the wheel in the SFS Casino! We've had three successful launches of Falcon 9 so far and a successful visit to the ISS. But SpaceX is ramping up production, so who knows if haste could spoil their fun? Ladies and gentlemen armchair astronauts, place your bets!

ahaha, your options always crack me up Lourens

I vote for a postponed launch (due to bad weather)

That's hilarious!
I think they have all the kinks worked out. Unless there is bad weather, or some similar external problem, I think that it will get there and back OK. With Elon Musk, and cheese!

I also like Lourens sense of humour watch it live to see which option is correct :-


http://new.livestream.com/spacex/CRS1

picture perfect launch!
Guess my "inverse logic" to bet on a weather related delay just so that it won't happen paid of!

Looks like it wasn't "picture perfect" after all:
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2012/10/07/ ... e-anomoly/

But to me this is an indication of a very robust design if your launcher can complete the mission after such an "anomaly".

Jonathan Amos of the BBC posted the following message this morning:

Falcon 9 did not make its second upper stage burn, and the Orbcomm satellite is being tracked in low orbit instead of its elliptical target orbit.

update on the first stage anomaly:
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2012/10/08/ ... -shutdown/

@ Rob

Interesting, Gwynne Shotwell said in the post launch news conference, that the Orbcomm payload separated as planned as far as she knew at the time.

It's from the Spacex website:
http://www.spacex.com/press.php?page=20121008

All that went wrong was a loss of pressure in an engine. The protective stuff was supposed to be ejected, and wasn't a result of a problem.

It looks like the sat was dropped in a low orbit

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/09 ... s_sat_low/

Oh, I didn't notice the thing about the secondary satellite payload. The Dragon is ok, though.

I guess this isnt a completely successful flight then, partial success at best.

Yeah. I wonder if they couldn't have been a bit more flexible with the safety zone though, perhaps they could have restarted the second stage a bit later to get out of the way of ISS, or done two burns to take a different route, or something. On the other hand, if there's 100 billion dollars worth of stuff and three human lives on the line...

Conclusion, being a secondary payload on a SpaceX ISS mission is riskier than on other missions, because you need a completely nominal launch. On the other hand, the price may compensate for that. Orbcomm will launch the rest of their constellation as primary payloads on two F9's, so they'll be fine then even with an engine out.

What's encouraging about SpaceX's rockets so far is that they seem to fail fairly gracefully. The beginning was a bit rocky with a corroded nut leading to engine failure and some stage separation issues related to GNC and a new engine, but after that it has been small issues and things that were compensated for by the robust design. Also, it seems to me that all of these types of errors except perhaps the one on the first F1 would have been survivable even without an escape system but with the ability to disconnect the capsule from the rocket, as there have not been any major explosions. By the looks of the launch video, if they manage to make these things reusable then one with a failed engine like this could probably be refurbished and reused.

yep it was dropped low

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/ ... ce+News%29

Since Dragon is safely back down to Earth now, I guess a certain indicated lawsuit is imminent

Congratulations SpaceX! Job well done!