ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 268 of 381
« First < 168218258264265266267268 269270271272278318368 > Last »
Nzoner's Game Room>Space Exploration megathread
DaFace 09:40 AM 06-01-2014
Since a number of cool things are happening in space exploration these days, we'll widen the scope of this thread a smidge. Conversation about all things space exploration are welcome, whether it be from NASA, SpaceX, ULA, Blue Origin, or anyone else. Chances are most of the discussion will still be about SpaceX since they love to make things public and fun, but nothing's off limits. I'll eventually get around to modifying the OP to include resources for other companies too, but in the meantime, feel free to post any cool stuff you run across.

Lists of Upcoming Missions

Spoiler!


How to Watch a Live Launch
Spoiler!


Where to Learn More
Spoiler!


Glossary
Spoiler!

[Reply]
unlurking 07:30 AM 02-03-2021
At this point I expect the FAA to fuck the Starship development program. SpaceX likely already knows the problem and could probably launch SN10 this week. Instead, I'm guessing launch operations will be halted for 6 months. Sounds to me like the FAA did expect SpaceX to guarantee a safe landing and that is how they "exceeded" they're launch parameters prior. Ugh.

https://thehill.com/policy/transport...-investigation


Originally Posted by :
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) will take over the investigation into an explosion that destroyed a SpaceX rocket during a test flight on Tuesday, the agency said.
CNN reported that an FAA spokesperson confirmed the investigation and said it would identify the "root cause" of what caused the craft to explode upon landing in Texas.
"The FAA's top priority in regulating commercial space transportation is ensuring that operations are safe, even if there is an anomaly," the agency spokesperson said, according to CNN.
"The FAA will oversee the investigation of today's landing mishap involving the SpaceX Starship SN9 prototype in Boca Chica, Texas. Although this was an uncrewed test flight, the investigation will identify the root cause of today's mishap and possible opportunities to further enhance safety as the program develops," the spokesperson added.
Representatives for SpaceX and the FAA did not immediately return a request for comment. The company has not commented publicly on the explosion but said in a tweet that it was planning future launches.
Now targeting two Falcon 9 launches of Starlink satellites on Thursday, February 4, pending range acceptance and recovery weather conditions. First Falcon 9 launch at 1:19 a.m. EST from SLC-40, followed by another Falcon 9 launch ~4 hours later at 5:36 a.m. EST from LC-39A


— SpaceX (@SpaceX) February 3, 2021
SpaceX owner Elon Musk announced a Twitter break on Tuesday following the crash, and has not commented publicly on the incident.
Last month, he made headlines when he publicly accused competitor Amazon of using federal regulations to hamstring SpaceX in the interest of pursuing its own satellite program.

[Reply]
Molitoth 08:21 AM 02-03-2021
Originally Posted by unlurking:
At this point I expect the FAA to fuck the Starship development program. SpaceX likely already knows the problem and could probably launch SN10 this week. Instead, I'm guessing launch operations will be halted for 6 months. Sounds to me like the FAA did expect SpaceX to guarantee a safe landing and that is how they "exceeded" they're launch parameters prior. Ugh.

https://thehill.com/policy/transport...-investigation
UGHHH, Fucking FAA.
[Reply]
Donger 08:48 AM 02-03-2021

This is a slow motion view tracking the skirt, and you can see after the first piece of debris comes off, the second is bouncing around inside the skirt. pic.twitter.com/1clOe9j9p1

— Scott Manley (@DJSnM) February 2, 2021

[Reply]
MagicHef 08:58 AM 02-03-2021
Originally Posted by unlurking:
At this point I expect the FAA to fuck the Starship development program. SpaceX likely already knows the problem and could probably launch SN10 this week. Instead, I'm guessing launch operations will be halted for 6 months. Sounds to me like the FAA did expect SpaceX to guarantee a safe landing and that is how they "exceeded" they're launch parameters prior. Ugh.

https://thehill.com/policy/transport...-investigation
Was the FAA this involved with Falcon development? It seems to me that failures should be expected when developing and testing new technology.
[Reply]
DaFace 09:00 AM 02-03-2021
Originally Posted by MagicHef:
Was the FAA this involved with Falcon development? It seems to me that failures should be expected when developing and testing new technology.
I was wondering that, too. You'd think the answer would be "yes," but maybe they didn't fly as high? Or maybe they didn't care as much since the F9 testing site was much more remote?

:-)
[Reply]
Hydrae 09:19 AM 02-03-2021
Originally Posted by MagicHef:
Was the FAA this involved with Falcon development? It seems to me that failures should be expected when developing and testing new technology.
Was the Falcon every designed to carry people? That could be a big difference from the FAA perspective.

This could be a good training opportunity for the FAA inspectors. There will come a day that a spaceship crashes with passengers on board and they will need to investigate. Think of this as a training exercise to better understand this new type of vehicle.
[Reply]
Donger 09:27 AM 02-03-2021
Originally Posted by MagicHef:
Was the FAA this involved with Falcon development? It seems to me that failures should be expected when developing and testing new technology.
I remember that the FAA investigated when a Falcon 9 exploded on the pad in Florida (Iridium?), but they ended up accepting SpaceX's explanation for the bang.

No idea about early testing though. Wasn't that carried out in McGregor, Texas?
[Reply]
MagicHef 09:48 AM 02-03-2021
Originally Posted by Hydrae:
Was the Falcon every designed to carry people? That could be a big difference from the FAA perspective.

This could be a good training opportunity for the FAA inspectors. There will come a day that a spaceship crashes with passengers on board and they will need to investigate. Think of this as a training exercise to better understand this new type of vehicle.
Yes, it was designed to carry people. In fact, it already has.
[Reply]
unlurking 09:54 AM 02-03-2021
I believe (but this is many years ago so my memory may be faulty) that they never had land based crashes. Grasshopper had abort explosions mid-air, but never actually crashed. Falcon 9 never actually crashed over land, but crashed many times into the ocean or on a barge.

I'm assuming they would have deferred to NASA in those instances, and NASA probably said "dev program".

I thought NASA led the investigation into the Falcon 9 pre-launch pad explosion?
[Reply]
MagicHef 11:23 AM 02-03-2021
Originally Posted by Donger:
I remember that the FAA investigated when a Falcon 9 exploded on the pad in Florida (Iridium?), but they ended up accepting SpaceX's explanation for the bang.

No idea about early testing though. Wasn't that carried out in McGregor, Texas?
Yes, it was. It looks like the McGregor-Oglesby area is much more populated than Boca Chica.
[Reply]
DaFace 11:23 PM 02-03-2021
Launch in an hour for any night owls. The second one got bumped back a day, sadly.
[Reply]
arrowheadnation 03:07 AM 02-04-2021
Everything went as planned for Falcon 9 Starlink launch #1. Launch 2 is roughly 24 hrs from now.

As for the FAA sticking their nose into the Starship tests, it sounds like they just want to remind people, "hey we're still here." It's not like this is the equivalent of making tweaks to a car engine and throwing the ignition to test fixes.
[Reply]
unlurking 08:01 AM 02-04-2021
I have no problem with FAA being involved (and actually believe they're insight and recommendations would be valuable input to SpaceX), as long they don't start forcing unreasonable new requirements or introducing overly long delays. :fingerscrossed:
[Reply]
treeguy27 09:56 AM 02-04-2021
Originally Posted by unlurking:
I have no problem with FAA being involved (and actually believe they're insight and recommendations would be valuable input to SpaceX), as long they don't start forcing unreasonable new requirements or introducing overly long delays. :fingerscrossed:
Just curious, what FAA recommendations and insight do you think could be valuable on a completely unique prototype spacecraft design?
[Reply]
DaFace 09:59 AM 02-04-2021
One of the cooler shots I've seen.


[Reply]
Page 268 of 381
« First < 168218258264265266267268 269270271272278318368 > Last »
Up