Transterrestrial Musings

Comments

Go Musk! Go!

Riddle me this, though, whose bright idea was it to launch from the Isle of Corrosion? Isn't that why they had problems last time.

Posted by Greg at March 20, 2007 11:51 AM

This article explains it.

It boils down to several things:

1. You can launch into any orbit from Kwajalein, equatorial or polar. there aren't too many friendly launch sites where you can do that.

2. They spent millions updating facilities at Vandenberg AFB only to get constantly delayed by military launches and ultimately kicked out. It was very shabby treatment.

There are advantages and disadvantages regarding launch operations from Kwajalein, Musk said.

First of all, there are no population centers nearby, making range safety easier and, hopefully, a little cheaper, Musk said. Also, any orbit is achievable from Kwajalein, with being close to the equator an advantage too, he said.

The logistics of transporting equipment and hardware to the island launch locale is the biggest issue the firm is now dealing with in readying the Kwajalein site for Falcon 1 operations.

A downside is high corrosion at Kwajalein, Musk pointed out. “I don’t think there’s a place in the world with more corrosion. It’s the perfect environment of right temperature, humidity and salt spray,” he said, with conditions being combated in ways similar to precautions taken with Florida-based rocket infrastructure.

Contrasted to Vandenberg, Musk said that the Kwajalein work is being done to satisfy one entity, the Environmental Protection Agency. In California, multiple federal agencies had to be engaged, along with state and county entities.

“Although, ultimately, we do satisfy all of them, it just takes a lot of time when there are so many cooks in the kitchen,” Musk explained.

Posted by Larry J at March 20, 2007 12:30 PM

Damn you, Larry J, for a well thought-out reply to my flippant remark. Thanks.

My original sentiment remains: Go Musk! Go!

Between this and TeslaMotors, he has my dreams. I only wish I had his checkbook...

Posted by Greg at March 20, 2007 12:40 PM

Just for the sake of coolness, Musk should come up with better names for his hardware. "Falcon" and "Dragon" are trite, hackneyed, and thoroughly inappropriate to the desired impression of upward soaring, seeking, celestial beauty and wonder. I am of the firm belief that coolness, once embodied in actual hardware, does provide some level of protection against failure.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at March 20, 2007 12:56 PM

Maybe their timing glitch is because they didn't get the Daylight Savings patch installed right.

Posted by Steve at March 20, 2007 01:10 PM

Brian, what are you planning to name your rockets?

(I'm going with Thunderbucket.)

To be fair, given Musk's clientele, I think he made some safe, albeit dull, choices. I don't NASA would want to hire out a "Starfury" to launch its hardware.

Besides, he named his electric car company after Nikola Tesla, Musk gets break from then on out.

Posted by Greg at March 20, 2007 01:32 PM

I think an orbital expendable should be called
"cheapshot"

An orbital RLV should be called "truck","bus" or "taxi" depending on configuration.

"limo" is not bad either....

(I'll crawl back into my hole now)

Go Spacex lets hope for a 100% successful launch.

Posted by Paul Breed at March 20, 2007 02:15 PM

Of course, even NASA cut crews some slack in the early Apollo days (Apollo 9: Gumdrop and Spider, Apollo 10: Charlie Brown and Snoopy), but from the first landing on, they tightened up and got serious...

Then there are all the names that get recycled. Even in Europe (Galileo [navigation] and Viking [rocket engine], for example)

However, maybe the new commercial guys could maybe follow the Apple/Microsoft model of interesting, if not marketable* internal working names for computers/operating systems under development, until it's time to actually sell the thing.

* Though Apple's 'Lisa' managed to keep its name up to release time...

Posted by Frank Glover at March 20, 2007 02:24 PM

Meh. Pushed back an hour now. Shame, really, because I wanted to watch the webcast.

Posted by John Breen III at March 20, 2007 02:56 PM

Well that was nerve racking.

Posted by Cecil Trotter at March 20, 2007 04:37 PM

I can't take this anymore. Someone let me know when they eventually fly.

As a side note, I very much enjoyed the comments from the guy who didn't realize his mic was on...

Posted by Grant Bonin at March 20, 2007 04:39 PM

Whoa, sounds like they're starting over at t-minus 11 minutes! Don't know the launch time though.

Posted by Patrick at March 20, 2007 04:49 PM

As a side note, I very much enjoyed the comments from the guy who didn't realize his mic was on...

Yeah, hot mikes can be embarassing. It sounds like they're offloading the fuel. However, I hear some discussion about restarting the count at T-16 and refueling. Pretty gutsy. The abort must have been something minor and obvious.

Posted by Larry J at March 20, 2007 05:09 PM

"Brian, what are you planning to name your rockets?"

My sounder will be called Midgetaur, my small orbital launcher Kerplunk, and my heavy-lift behemoth "Jack Daniels, the Ride." My manned capsule series would be called the Horrific Death Can (HDC), and the first capsule would be christened the HDC Liability Waiver.

"(I'm going with Thunderbucket.)"

Toothpick of God

"I don't NASA would want to hire out a "Starfury" to launch its hardware."

But they'd hire out a bird of prey with entrails hanging off its beak? Starfury is way cooler, or maybe they could call it Skylight, or Cloudspire, or Golden Path, or Eon, or Far Tide.

"Besides, he named his electric car company after Nikola Tesla, Musk gets break from then on out."

Tesla does sound like a cool car name, but cars can get away with having bad names--Bugatti, for instance, sounds like an Italian expletive. A rocket name has to inspire people, it's an appeal to dreams every time it flies. I think my idea of Far Tide would be best: Two syllables, conveys the images of distance and being pulled somewhere unknown, and goes well in press releases. Doesn't this just sound perfect: "At 5pm today, the Far Tide rocket lifted off on a glorious plume of golden fire, soaring into the heavens..." and so on.

So that's my serious rocket name: Far Tide. Anybody top that?

Posted by Brian Swiderski at March 20, 2007 05:13 PM

Recycling to try again at 2110 EDT. Cool and very un-NASA like.

Posted by Cecil Trotter at March 20, 2007 05:20 PM

ARRRRRGH!

Posted by Brian Swiderski at March 20, 2007 05:52 PM

Telemetry lost around 300 sec, give or take. Launch log says they say oscillations before it disappeared at T+5 min. Sounds like a second stage engine problem. Maybe that ablative engine didn't cool the way it was supposed to in a vacuum?

Posted by Tom at March 20, 2007 05:56 PM

Stage separation was beautiful from a visual standpoint but it looked as if there was some unwanted contact between the 1st stage and the krestal engine bell. And the oscillation just before signal loss didn't look good. But they did get it off the ground and into space, so regardless I would say it was at least a partial success.

Posted by Cecil Trotter at March 20, 2007 05:59 PM

I distinctly thought I saw a ring of discoloration develop around the engine as it heated up and reddened, and I was afraid the engine was going to breakup or something. Anyone else see that?

Posted by Brian Swiderski at March 20, 2007 06:03 PM

I thought the 1st stage did hit the kestrel as it fell away. I also saw some rings fall off the end of the bell--maybe that was intentional, I don't know, but it didn't look good. And yes, the bell was starting to glow orange in places.

But jeez, what an accomplishment.

Posted by Patrick at March 20, 2007 06:06 PM

Yeah, it didn't appear the nozzle was the same color all around. When I saw the oscillations, I started getting worried. Then the video feed cut out and they ended the webcast. I wish they wouldn't do that but understand they may not want to air their proprietary laundry in public, hot mikes and all that.

Posted by Larry J at March 20, 2007 06:06 PM

I was worried about that engine bell too - thought in addition to the ring there was a spot that looked like it was about to burn through.

Posted by mike at March 20, 2007 06:06 PM

Looked like th eTVC was struggling and about to lose its fight.

Still, this is undoubtedly a significant partial success.

Posted by Mike Puckett at March 20, 2007 06:08 PM

Well, I'll take Musk at his pre-launch word that any sort of failure won't lead to long delays for the next mission. Although, hopefully this didn't expose some kind of inherent design flaw, because if those rings that flew off weren't part of the plan then there may be a big problem. And the engine did look about ready to burn through, so hopefully that kind of ominous red glowing was expected.

We're countin on ya, Elon. Make it work.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at March 20, 2007 06:17 PM

Alan Boyle weighs in:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17695361/

Posted by sam at March 20, 2007 06:24 PM

wow I wish my WMP worked the way it is supposed to. All I ever get is a black screen, I'm not sure why, it says it's playing. So it sounds like maybe the interstage recontacted the second stage?

Posted by tom at March 20, 2007 06:36 PM

wow I wish my WMP worked the way it is supposed to. All I ever get is a black screen, I'm not sure why, it says it's playing. So it sounds like maybe the interstage recontacted the second stage?

Posted by tom at March 20, 2007 06:36 PM

"I think my idea of Far Tide would be best"
Posted by Brian Swiderski at March 20, 2007 05:13 PM

It also sounds like a new brand of Fabric Cleaner.

Or, if your rocket blew up someone could say, "Who FarT-ide?

Posted by Josh Reiter at March 20, 2007 07:30 PM

Well, even if they have lost the rocket, the fact that they aborted after engine start and then still went ahead and launched a couple of hours later is incredible. I don't know of anything comparable having ever been done. That shows a truly significant advance in ease of maintenance amd launch reliability, exactly what they have been promising all along. If they have lost the rocket, well that's the way these things go, that's why you have test flights. They were rather bold last time trying to launch a payload without having ever done even one full test flight, much less a properly designed series of them. I wouldn't worry, third time's the charm.
Brian wrote,
>>My sounder will be called Midgetaur, my small orbital launcher Kerplunk, and my heavy-lift behemoth "Jack Daniels, the Ride." My manned capsule series would be called the Horrific Death Can (HDC), and the first capsule would be christened the HDC Liability Waiver.

"(I'm going with Thunderbucket.)"

Toothpick of God
LOL!!!!

Posted by Michael at March 20, 2007 07:57 PM

This was just posted over at the Space.com web feed.

Elon Musk: "Stage separation also went very well. Separation events are the No. 2 killer of rockets after engine issues. Both the stage separation and fairing separation went flawlessly. Second stage ignition also was perfect, and we achieved steady state burn on the second stage.

"We did encounter late in the second stage burn a roll-control anomaly, which you may have seen on the video webcast. We feel that is something that's pretty straight forward to address. So all in all we feel pretty good about this launch."

Also, it looks like they have added new video of the launch on the SpaceX site.

Posted by Josh Reiter at March 20, 2007 07:58 PM

Not a great day, but a good day. Still flyin'.

Mike

Posted by Mike Borgelt at March 20, 2007 08:11 PM

IMHO, Musk made a very good choice to play with Falcon 1 first. Just think would is going to happen to K-1 if a nut on a fuel pipe falls off because of corrosion in Florida. 500 million down the drain? I shudder to think of it. In other words, I see his attempts to launch as the normal way to do things.

Posted by Pete Zaitcev at March 20, 2007 09:06 PM

I'd call mine the City of Chillicothe.

Posted by triticale at March 20, 2007 09:34 PM

Just watched the low-res vid and damned if I didn't get a little misty. Of course, that could be from the toddler keeping me up all night, but still...

From the SpaceX site:

The second test launch of Falcon 1 took place today at 6:10 pm California time. The launch was not perfect, but certainly pretty good. Given that the primary objectives were demonstrating responsive launch and gathering test data in advance of our first operational satellite launch later this year, the outcome was great. Operationally responsive (ie fast) launch has become an increasingly important national security objective, so demonstrating rapid loading of propellents and launch in less than an hour, as well as a rapid recycle following the first engine ignition are major accomplishments.

We retired almost all of the significant development risk items, in particular:

- 1st stage ascent past max dynamic pressure

- avionics operation in vacuum and under radiation

- stage separation

- 2nd stage ignition

- fairing separation

- 2nd stage nozzle/chamber at steady state temp in vacuum

Falcon flew far beyond the "edge" of space, typically thought of as around 60 miles. Our altitude was approximately 200 miles, which is just 50 miles below the International Space Station. The second stage didn't achieve full orbital velocity, due to a roll excitation late in the burn, but that should be a comparatively easy fix once we examine the flight data. Since it is impossible to ground test the second stage under the same conditions it would see in spaceflight, this anomaly was also something that would have been very hard to determine without a test launch.

All in all, this test has flight proven 95+ percent of the Falcon 1 systems, which bodes really well for our upcoming flights of Falcon 1 and Falcon 9, which uses similar hardware. We do not expect any significant delay in the upcoming flights at this point. The Dept of Defense satellite launch is currently scheduled for late Summer and the Malaysian satellite for the Fall.

I'd like to thank DARPA and the Air Force for buying the two test flights and helping us work through a number of challenges over the past year. I'd also like to express my appreciation for the efforts of the Kwajalein Army Range (Reagan Test Site) and we look forward to many more launches in the future.

Finally, thank you to everyone at SpaceX for working so hard to make this a great test. This is a big leap forward for commercial spaceflight!

--Elon--

Posted by Greg at March 21, 2007 03:21 AM

Josh: "It also sounds like a new brand of Fabric Cleaner."

Only by initial association, but pretty soon the fabric cleaner would sound like a glorious rocket. On the other hand, an expendable chemical rocket probably doesn't deserve a name as grandiose as Far Tide--maybe reserve it for a VASIMR.

Josh: "Or, if your rocket blew up someone could say, "Who FarT-ide?"

Any rocket I'd make would blow up too frequently for that to become a problem, but the learning curve would be so steep as a result that it'd be landing on Mars by the time more prudent companies were just getting workable technology. Assuming that I'm the richest man on Earth and have unlimited resources, naturally.

Michael: "the fact that they aborted after engine start and then still went ahead and launched a couple of hours later is incredible."

Yes, but that's a technical achievement in place of a spiritual one--like a shower where the water's just a little too cold. Had the flight succeeded entirely, we could turn over the little switch in our minds from "Soon" to "NOW" and say "It's Begun!" Rather, we've turned the dial a quarter-degree from "Soon" to "Sooner," and nothing the other NewSpacers are up to in the near future can provide another threshold-crossing event.

Pete: "Just think would is going to happen to K-1 if a nut on a fuel pipe falls off because of corrosion in Florida."

K-1 is already a lost cause, IMHO. It's more ambitious than Falcon because it's an RLV, but at the same time is tied up in contracts to massive Old Space bureaucracies, and still needs to raise very large amounts of outside investment just to be built, nevermind flown. It wouldn't even matter how much had already been invested--if the vehicle is lost even once, the program is over. That's an outrageous fact given how promising the technology is, but it's basically just straw man competition for SpaceX unless some billionaire takes an interest.

triticale: "I'd call mine the City of Chillicothe."

How about the Angry Physicist?

Posted by Brian Swiderski at March 21, 2007 03:52 AM

the launch is on the Youtube now, analyze it to death:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=by-iwbgkaIA

i think its too early to say that stage separation was a success because of that bump. But nevertheless, its a good long step forward. I hope it doesnt take another year to get it finally right.

Posted by kert at March 21, 2007 04:14 AM

disregard the youtube, they have a highres version available:
http://www.spacex.com/video_gallery.php

Posted by kert at March 21, 2007 04:44 AM

Well, we've got a Blue Origin test and Bigelow launch coming up in April, so three cheers for the final frontier.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at March 21, 2007 07:03 AM

Post a comment