Joe Fragola has backed down from his BS FUD:
“Since SpaceX filed its lawsuit … the Parties have been working collaboratively to resolve the matter. Regarding the underlying facts, Dr. [Joseph] Fragola investigated a rumor regarding the performance of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle during its most recent launch. Through email communications with both NASA and SpaceX on June 8, 2011, Dr. Fragola confirmed that the rumor was false in that no Falcon 9 engines failed and the first stage did not explode,” SpaceX and Valador said in a joint statement. “There was independent NASA tracking and video of the flight, and subsequent debriefing with NASA, indicating no such failure, indicating no such failures or explosions.
…Fragola, who is based in New York, makes his living as a safety expert. He was a member of the NASA Exploration Systems Architecture Study team that selected the Ares 1 and Ares 5 rocket concepts for the defunct Constellation Moon-return and Mars landing program.
Emphasis mine.
In a just world, he would be unable to make a living as a “safety expert.”
In a just world… Flogging is what comes to mind. What a worm.
Not knowing the full background of this story, I have a question. Was Fragola investigating the rumor or instigating it? There’s a world of difference. If he heard a rumor about the Falcon 9 flight and just asked some questions, that seems legitimate. If he was the one that started the rumor in the first place, then he deserved to be sued.
AFAIK, he was the only person aware of this ‘rumor’ that had no basis in fact. SpaceX described it as a smear campaign in their lawsuit. Before that he had tried to get SpaceX to hire him for a million dollars. Flogging would actually be too good for this con artist.
http://www.dailybreeze.com/business/ci_18317242
s/safety/protection/
Then it makes sense.
Doesn’t the Falcon 9 have engine out tolerance, or do I have it confused with another vehicle?
SpaceX says, and it seems plausible, that Falcon 9 could lose an engine or two at some point and still make orbit. Just how early in flight the losses could be tolerated and what the implications are for payload margins aren’t clear, at least not to me. Once in a great while engines explode. To reduce the likelihood of an explosion taking out other engines, Falcon 9’s engines are surrounded by Kevlar shields; how effective these would be is another question that I don’t know the answer to.
Ken, flogging went out with square rigged sailing ships. This is the space age. We can “space” people now. Airlocks aren’t just for astronauts doing spacewalks.
Hey, Elon likes Monty Python skits. This remids me of the one about the mob shaking down the British Army.
Dino: My brother and I have got a little proposition for you Colonel.
Luigi: Could save you a lot of bother.
Dino: I mean you’re doing all right here aren’t you, Colonel?
Luigi: Well suppose some of your tanks was to get broken and troops started getting lost, er, fights started breaking out during general inspection, like.
Dino: It wouldn’t be good for business would it, Colonel?
Colonel: Are you threatening me?
Dino: Oh, no, no, no.
Luigi: Whatever made you think that, Colonel?
Dino: The Colonel doesn’t think we’re nice people, Luigi.
Luigi: We’re your buddies, Colonel.
Dino: We want to look after you.
Colonel: Look after me?
Luigi: We can guarantee you that not a single armoured division will get done over for fifteen bob a week.
Colonel: No, no, no.
Luigi: Twelve and six.
Colonel: No, no, no.
Luigi: Eight and six… five bob.
Colonel: No, no this is silly.
The important question is if the terms of the settlement were sufficiently onerous to have the guy straightened up.
SpaceX says, and it seems plausible, that Falcon 9 could lose an engine or two at some point and still make orbit. Just how early in flight the losses could be tolerated and what the implications are for payload margins aren’t clear, at least not to me.
IIRC, the Falcon 9 has sufficient excess thrust that it can lose an engine right at liftoff and keep going. That’s the great advantage of having many relatively small engines instead of a few large ones. It also has to have sufficient control authority to overcome the loss of thrust. At some point in the flight when it has burnt off enough propellant, you might be able to lose an additional engine and still make it to orbit provided you still have adequate control authority.
We can “space” people now. Airlocks aren’t just for astronauts doing spacewalks.
We can do an orbital keel-hauling without pressure suit. How long can you hold your breath?
We could just strap ’em all to the outside of the launch vehicle. Shouldn’t we be doing more max-Q testing?