Falcon 9 at Cape Canaveral

[zerofay32]

Then clearly the Probe did not bestow its Divine Providence on the Falcon 9. This would suggest more sacrifices (in the form of burned rocket fuels) are necessary. :lol:

:thumbup:

 

[SiberianTiger]

http://www.spacenews.com/launch/100403-spacex-slips-falcon-launch-may.html

"SpaceX is working closely with Ensign Bickford Aerospace & Defense Co., supplier of key components of the Flight Termination System (FTS) that will be used on Falcon 9, to complete testing of the FTS hardware and provide final data to SpaceX and Air Force Range safety officials for review and acceptance," SpaceX said in a statement sent to reporters. "Certification of the Falcon 9 FTS and subsequent range availability will put the first Falcon 9 test launch towards the latter half of the anticipated March-May window, with the first attempt no earlier than May 8, 2010."

:zzz:

 

[Andy44]

So...they spent so much effort trying to figure out how to make it fly that they forget to figure out how to make it blow up!

At least they've got their priorities straight.

 

[orb]

SpaceX completed another Falcon rocket tanking test on Friday.

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

Per NASASpaceFlight, Falcon 9's launch has slipped to 16th May, resulting in a likely slip to 23rd May due to STS-132 and EELV conflicts.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

Dang, I'll be on vacation. Whenever it is I'll get to watch the replays on Youtube.
Wish them all the best that's for sure.

 

[SiberianTiger]

Am I the only one who puts most hope for COTS ISS supply in Taurus II / Cygnus?

 

[PhantomCruiser]

Am I the only one who puts most hope for COTS ISS supply in Taurus II / Cygnus?

It's all good to me, the more craft we can put into space successfully may eventually lead to a cheaper method for me to be a space tourist.

 

[anemazoso]

Am I the only one who puts most hope for COTS ISS supply in Taurus II / Cygnus?

I think they will be successful. I think it will be harder though for a Taurus II/Cygnus to be man rated. SpaceX has the best chance to provide affordable crew transport to reality in a timely fashion. Provided they can get the F9 working reliably.

 

[Andy44]

I'm pretty sure that the Taurus, with it's ICBM acceleration and solid rocket stages, would be a very rough ride for a human.

 

[Sky Captain]

I'm pretty sure that the Taurus, with it's ICBM acceleration and solid rocket stages, would be a very rough ride for a human.

Also solid rockets when fail usually go BOOM making it harder for launch escape system to save astronauts.

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

SpaceX is planning to launch their first Falcon 9 rocket no earlier than May 11, but the flight could slip until at least late May as the Air Force continues reviewing the private booster's destruct package.

The launch window for the flight has also changed. The 15-story rocket can lift off between 1 PM and 5 PM EDT each day, according to Air Force officials.

SpaceX officials will not confirm target launch dates for the high-stakes test flight. The Air Force Eastern Range, which oversees launches from Cape Canaveral, has not approved the rocket's Flight Termination System that would destroy the Falcon 9 if it flew off course after liftoff.

"There is not much point in stating a date until uncertainties around the FTS qualification are resolved," Elon Musk, SpaceX's founder and CEO, wrote in an email this week. "It would imply a greater degree of accuracy than is possible."

"The range does make us come up with a date, but that is simply an 'earliest possible' guess," Musk said.

The earliest the Falcon 9 could launch is now May 11, but that is only a planning date and has not been approved by the range.

If SpaceX is unable to launch by around May 12, there are only a handful of launch opportunities during the rest of the month.

The shuttle Atlantis is scheduled to launch May 14, a Delta 4 rocket is booked on the range for May 20, and Atlantis is due to return to the Kennedy Space Center around May 26.

It takes about 48 hours to reconfigure the range's communications and tracking assets between launches and landings, leaving few openings in the Florida launch manifest for the Falcon 9 unless other missions are postponed.

www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/status.html

 

[Andy44]

Maybe they need a Falcon 9 pad at Wallops...

 

[Hielor]

Also solid rockets when fail usually go BOOM making it harder for launch escape system to save astronauts.

Source?

The big one I can think of (Challenger) where an SRB failed, it didn't go BOOM.

 

[Urwumpe]

I'm pretty sure that the Taurus, with it's ICBM acceleration and solid rocket stages, would be a very rough ride for a human.

Taurus II is not the same as Taurus I. The Taurus II uses kerosene+Oxygen with a NK-33 derived rocket engine.

---------- Post added at 12:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:44 AM ----------

Source?

The big one I can think of (Challenger) where an SRB failed, it didn't go BOOM.

There are some examples of case bursts in history, which produce just that. but launch escape systems can still pull the spacecraft away then, especially at altitude.

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KApLcKQ3Pu0"]YouTube- Delta Launch Accident[/nomedia]

 

[Andy44]

Source?

The big one I can think of (Challenger) where an SRB failed, it didn't go BOOM.

Here's one I remember vividly, in which the solid motor casing failed on a Delta II launch, resulting in a spectacular explosion:

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KApLcKQ3Pu0"]YouTube- Delta Launch Accident[/nomedia]

 

[Zatnikitelman]

But wasn't the explosion more the disintegration of the core stage and remaining solids rather than just that solid exploding? I've never read a report like STS-51L has for that Delta II launch.

 

[Urwumpe]

But wasn't the explosion more the disintegration of the core stage and remaining solids rather than just that solid exploding? I've never read a report like STS-51L has for that Delta II launch.

Delta II is unmanned, there is no such accident board as for the Space Shuttle. Only a contractor investigation by Boeing, which analyzed the telemetry and debris, and found the long crack as source of the accident.

 

[Hielor]

Here's one I remember vividly, in which the solid motor casing failed on a Delta II launch, resulting in a spectacular explosion:

YouTube- Delta Launch Accident

Right, but that didn't come from the SRB itself--it came from the effect the failed casing had on the rest of the launch vehicle.

 

[Urwumpe]

Right, but that didn't come from the SRB itself--it came from the effect the failed casing had on the rest of the launch vehicle.

Yes, such effects are common for explosions. If a graphite case cracks over a long distance, while being under 50 bar pressure inside, the result is simply a huge explosion - by the definition of explosion.