BREAKING: NASA'S Third Rocket in a Row Blows UP

[Bill]

Just watched it live. This was a SpaceX rocket, destined for the International Space Station.

:sadangel:


Coincidentally, I took some out of town friends to Space Center Houston yesterday.

[StaticCling]

From Space X's Twitter Feed

SpaceXVerified account
‏@SpaceX
The vehicle experienced an anomaly on ascent. Team is investigating. Updates to come.

No shit Sherlock! :Jeff '79:

I'd say blowing up when it isn't suppose to is an anomaly allright. :D

[Bill]

From Space X's Twitter Feed



No shit Sherlock! :Jeff '79:

I'd say blowing up when it isn't suppose to is an anomaly allright. :D

They really couldn't just say, "hey, our shit just blew up....for the third time." They have engineers on staff, not people like me.


#thinkingaboutanewcareerinjournalism

[Kerrmudgeon]

any video of that 'splosion?

[Jeff '79]

They really couldn't just say, "hey, our shit just blew up....for the third time." They have engineers on staff, not people like me.


#thinkingaboutanewcareerinjournalism

:notfunny:

I wonder how much that just cost me:sadangel:

[Czarvette]

The troubling thing is that these three rockets were all different makes and models. Each will be sidelined for 1-2 years while engineers figure out what went wrong and fixes are implemented.

[DukeAllen]

Each will be sidelined for 1-2 years while engineers figure out what went wrong and fixes are implemented.

Sounds like they needed that 2 years of extra development before using the things.

[Bill]

Maybe they should just fuel up some of our existing Saturn V rockets and send them up...we know they work.


Social commentary: in retrospect, probably not a good idea to retire the space shuttle program when you don't have a reliable alternative ready to go. Paying Russia to haul our astronauts? Disgraceful.

Seems like we are heading to a country that "does these things because they are easy, not because they are hard."

[Iron Chef]

Maybe they should just fuel up some of our existing Saturn V rockets and send them up...we know they work.

The upper stage (S-IVB) from Apollo 12's spaceflight is still orbiting the earth. Maybe they could go get it. :D

[Bill]

The upper stage (S-IVB) from Apollo 12's spaceflight is still orbiting the earth. Maybe they could go get it. :D

With what? The only way to do that would be to bring a space shuttle out of retirement.

[StaticCling]

With what? The only way to do that would be to bring a space shuttle out of retirement.

God this country has gotten lame. :Jeff '79:

[Bill]

any video of that 'splosion?

SpaceX launch ends in failure, rocket erupts | abc13.com (http://abc13.com/news/spacex-launch-ends-in-failure-rocket-erupts/811909/)

[ZipZap]

You guys kill me sometimes...

Unless you happened to be in the cleared area in the Atlantic, the sky is not falling.

The Antares failure late last year, and today's Falcon-9 failure used vehicles that represent the newest, cheapest, and inherently riskiest launch vehicles seen since the early days of launching. They have a significantly lower level of assurance than the man-rated programs you mention, by design. We actually expect them to fail from time-to-time and that will need to be figured into any cost savings garnered by using such an approach.

Now, contrast that with the highly reliable Atlas and Delta lines out of ULA. Since 2006, in unprecedented fashion, there have been 96 successful launches in a row. That's where we are currently placing our valuable assets (not food). While Space-X received certification to bid for NSS launches, they don't even plan to use the Falcon-9 to do so. The experience today will make breaking into that side of the business even tougher for Elon and his crew.

So before all you old farts (I resemble that remark) start bashing anybody's ability to get assured access to space, you need to understand today's environment. Space-X, Blue Origin, and parts of OSC/ATK and ULA are engaged in a new space race. They are privateers trying to make a go at profitable launch, at an order of magnitude lower cost. Expect many bumps along the way.

Feel free to go back to your :willy:

[Fasglas]

:notfunny:

I wonder how much that just cost me:sadangel:


Trust me, you don't WANT to know...

[island14]

You guys kill me sometimes...

Unless you happened to be in the cleared area in the Atlantic, the sky is not falling.

The Antares failure late last year, and today's Falcon-9 failure used vehicles that represent the newest, cheapest, and inherently riskiest launch vehicles seen since the early days of launching. They have a significantly lower level of assurance than the man-rated programs you mention, by design. We actually expect them to fail from time-to-time and that will need to be figured into any cost savings garnered by using such an approach.

Now, contrast that with the highly reliable Atlas and Delta lines out of ULA. Since 2006, in unprecedented fashion, there have been 96 successful launches in a row. That's where we are currently placing our valuable assets (not food). While Space-X received certification to bid for NSS launches, they don't even plan to use the Falcon-9 to do so. The experience today will make breaking into that side of the business even tougher for Elon and his crew.

So before all you old farts (I resemble that remark) start bashing anybody's ability to get assured access to space, you need to understand today's environment. Space-X, Blue Origin, and parts of OSC/ATK and ULA are engaged in a new space race. They are privateers trying to make a go at profitable launch, at an order of magnitude lower cost. Expect many bumps along the way.

Feel free to go back to your :willy:

Still....

I've better success with Chinese made bottle rockets.. just sayin.. :datawiz:

:D

[ZipZap]

Still....

I've better success with Chinese made bottle rockets.. just sayin.. :datawiz:

:D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F17ogimhUmc

[island14]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F17ogimhUmc


I bet that burned his ass

:rofl:

[Iron Chef]

With what? The only way to do that would be to bring a space shuttle out of retirement.

fa-ce-tious: treating serious issues with deliberately inappropriate humor; flippant.

[Bill]

You guys kill me sometimes...

Unless you happened to be in the cleared area in the Atlantic, the sky is not falling.

The Antares failure late last year, and today's Falcon-9 failure used vehicles that represent the newest, cheapest, and inherently riskiest launch vehicles seen since the early days of launching. They have a significantly lower level of assurance than the man-rated programs you mention, by design. We actually expect them to fail from time-to-time and that will need to be figured into any cost savings garnered by using such an approach.

Now, contrast that with the highly reliable Atlas and Delta lines out of ULA. Since 2006, in unprecedented fashion, there have been 96 successful launches in a row. That's where we are currently placing our valuable assets (not food). While Space-X received certification to bid for NSS launches, they don't even plan to use the Falcon-9 to do so. The experience today will make breaking into that side of the business even tougher for Elon and his crew.

So before all you old farts (I resemble that remark) start bashing anybody's ability to get assured access to space, you need to understand today's environment. Space-X, Blue Origin, and parts of OSC/ATK and ULA are engaged in a new space race. They are privateers trying to make a go at profitable launch, at an order of magnitude lower cost. Expect many bumps along the way.

Feel free to go back to your :willy:

The point remains that we have no means to send men into orbit, or to bring them home....that is leading from behind.

[Bill]

fa-ce-tious: treating serious issues with deliberately inappropriate humor; flippant.

I am too lazy to look up the definition of irony, or quid pro quo.

[Dave]

The point remains that we have no means to send men into orbit, or to bring them home....that is leading from behind.

:iagree:
But no big deal having to rely on one's enemies for such trivial tasks, right? After all, what did we ever gain as a nation from such silly endeavours as a space program?


On a side note, I wonder what will happen to Tesla stock tomorrow. Any connection? Hmmm...

[erickpl]

ULA has had pretty good success with their rockets.

I agree that the shuttle fleet was retired too early. But good luck getting any Saturn V's out of retirement - there really aren't any. The ones that exist are museum pieces. Huntsville's US Space and Rocket Center has 2. One is the vertical rocket outside and is mainly a mockup - no real working parts. The other one is in the Davidson center suspended over your head so you can walk underneath it. Valid rocket, but lots of parts are already removed and a good portion is probably unusable after being outside so for so many years exposed to the elements.

Another one at KSC is probably in similar shape.

And the engineers of today would be stupified to try and figure out how they launched those behemoths with the computing power of a broken TRS-80 computer or a calculator wrist watch.

[Madmikeee]

You know we're sitting on four million pounds of fuel, one nuclear weapon and a thing that has 270,000 moving parts built by the lowest bidder.

[Ol Timer]

fa-ce-tious: treating serious issues with deliberately inappropriate humor; flippant.

Did you know that facetious is one of only 2 words in the English Language that contains all the vowels, in order?

I don't remember the other one. :confused5:

[Datawiz]

Did you know that facetious is one of only 2 words in the English Language that contains all the vowels, in order?

I don't remember the other one. :confused5:

Words with the vowels a-e-i-o-u in order (and no other of these letters before, after, or in between):

From the Official Scrabble Dictionary:
cat 113809_official_crosswords 4160_official_crossword_delta | sort | egrep -i '^[^aeiou]*a[^aeiou]*e[^aeiou]*i[^aeiou]*o[^aeiou]*u[^aeiou]*$'

abstemious
abstemiously
arsenious
facetious
facetiously

From the "Moby Words" 354984 dictionary of single words:
egrep -i '^[^aeiou]*a[^aeiou]*e[^aeiou]*i[^aeiou]*o[^aeiou]*u[^aeiou]*$' 354984_single_words

abstemious
abstemiously
abstentious
acheilous
acheirous
acleistous
affectious
aleikoum
anemious
annelidous
arsenious
arterious
bacterious
caesious
facetious
facetiously
fracedinous
majestious
parecious
pareciously
tragedious

Words with the vowels a-e-i-o-u-y in order (and no other of these letters before, after, or in between):

From the Official Scrabble Dictionary:
cat 113809_official_crosswords 4160_official_crossword_delta | sort | egrep -i '^[^aeiouy]*a[^aeiouy]*e[^aeiouy]*i[^aeiouy]*o[^aeiouy]*u[^aeiouy]*y[^aeiouy]*$'

abstemiously
facetiously

From the "Moby Words" 354984 dictionary of single words:
egrep -i '^[^aeiouy]*a[^aeiouy]*e[^aeiouy]*i[^aeiouy]*o[^aeiouy]*u[^aeiouy]*y[^aeiouy]*$' 354984_single_words

abstemiously
facetiously
pareciously

[Mike Mercury]

And the engineers of today would be stupified to try and figure out how they launched those behemoths with the computing power of a broken TRS-80 computer or a calculator wrist watch.

I place 21st century NASA and its sub-contractors with the likes of Airbus; too heavily dependant on electronic systems.

[Ol Timer]

Words with the vowels a-e-i-o-u in order (and no other of these letters before, after, or in between):

From the Official Scrabble Dictionary:
cat 113809_official_crosswords 4160_official_crossword_delta | sort | egrep -i '^[^aeiou]*a[^aeiou]*e[^aeiou]*i[^aeiou]*o[^aeiou]*u[^aeiou]*$'

abstemious
abstemiously
arsenious
facetious
facetiously

From the "Moby Words" 354984 dictionary of single words:
egrep -i '^[^aeiou]*a[^aeiou]*e[^aeiou]*i[^aeiou]*o[^aeiou]*u[^aeiou]*$' 354984_single_words

abstemious
abstemiously
abstentious
acheilous
acheirous
acleistous
affectious
aleikoum
anemious
annelidous
arsenious
arterious
bacterious
caesious
facetious
facetiously
fracedinous
majestious
parecious
pareciously
tragedious

Words with the vowels a-e-i-o-u-y in order (and no other of these letters before, after, or in between):

From the Official Scrabble Dictionary:
cat 113809_official_crosswords 4160_official_crossword_delta | sort | egrep -i '^[^aeiouy]*a[^aeiouy]*e[^aeiouy]*i[^aeiouy]*o[^aeiouy]*u[^aeiouy]*y[^aeiouy]*$'

abstemiously
facetiously

From the "Moby Words" 354984 dictionary of single words:
egrep -i '^[^aeiouy]*a[^aeiouy]*e[^aeiouy]*i[^aeiouy]*o[^aeiouy]*u[^aeiouy]*y[^aeiouy]*$' 354984_single_words

abstemiously
facetiously
pareciously

I meant real words. I ain't never heard of most of those.

[MrPeabody]

I place 21st century NASA and its sub-contractors with the likes of Airbus; too heavily dependant on electronic systems.

The crew for the first Apollo moon landing actually used a sextant for some of their navigation calculations.:yesnod:

[6spdC6]

Well at one time we used to have a viable space program, but our know it all president put a stop to that. Guess he needed the money so he could give away free cell phones and air time.