Will the SpaceX shuttle be visible in the sky if you're on the east coast? Also are you excited for this launch or are you joyless?

File: 21 KB, 600x400, 0518-spacesx_full_600.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sat May 19 01:16:27 2012 No.4696129 [Reply] [Original]

Will the SpaceX shuttle be visible in the sky if you're on the east coast?

Also are you excited for this launch or are you joyless?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 01:19:56 2012 No.4696138 no, it's tiny. the sky is huge can you see the ISS with your bare eyes? didn't think so also, it's neat that a commercial rocket is going to interact with the iss, but this isn't some kind of momentous breakthrough. it means very little.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 01:20:11 2012 No.4696140 >>4696138 >can you see the ISS with your bare eyes? Yes, actually.

Anonymous Sat May 19 01:20:26 2012 No.4696144
File: 114 KB, 640x480, falcon9.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>4696129
I'm fucking pumped! Staying up until 1:55 PST for the launch. There is also a thread in /n/, which is appropriate since it is all about commercial transport to the ISS, rather than scientific discovery.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 01:20:41 2012 No.4696146 >>4696138 > this isn't some kind of momentous breakthrough. it means very little. >proof the private sector is capable of orbital flight

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 01:23:56 2012 No.4696153 >>4696146 this isn't proof, they proved that before you ignoramus, there are several commercial companies with successful rockets and satellites, it's not that hard. >>4696140 you. you dick with your super eyes. you just keep that one to yourself

Anonymous Sat May 19 01:26:57 2012 No.4696160

>>4696153
...You don't need super eyes to see the station. NASA tells you when you can see it, for fuck's sake.

And flying a cargo ship to the ISS' orbit, docking, and returning it safely is something that has never been successfully attempted by the commercial industry.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 01:45:41 2012 No.4696217 >>4696160 yeah, it hasn't. but this is also in no way any sort of breakthrough its just nasa cutting costs OOH SO IMPORTANT!?!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 01:53:41 2012 No.4696243 >>4696217 >Private space flight opening up the frontier >Just NASA cutting costs >Not important Are you serious?

Anonymous Sat May 19 01:57:42 2012 No.4696252

>>4696243

From the CEO of spacex

"this is not momentous, whether we fail or succeed will not affect the future of commercial space industry"

also
there are several much more successful commercial industries already operating in space.

no, this is not momentous in any way.
yes, it is just cutting costs.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 02:00:57 2012 No.4696263 >>4696243 >>4696243 you're attributing all your hope for future space flight into one uneventful launch for one company. Don't you think that's putting a little too much importance in them?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 02:02:56 2012 No.4696269 It's getting a lot of hype because it's the first time a non governmental source is rendezvousing with the ISS. other than that, nothing new in the technology or even in the commercial space industry.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 02:07:56 2012 No.4696286 >>4696252 >>4696263 The Moon Landing didn't affect the future of space flight either. It didn't demonstrate any new technology. Would you argue they were not momentous?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 02:10:56 2012 No.4696290 >>4696286 but the moon landing did and did, that was an amazing breakthrough and the apollo program led to many new technologies spacex HAS NOT DONE THAT AT ALL quit being so ridiculous.

Anonymous Sat May 19 02:16:56 2012 No.4696303

>>4696290
Apollo capsules were already designed and tested. We already understood and tested the Saturn V rockets and lunar orbits. Landers introduced no new technology. Trickle down from the space program had already begun.

There were no new technologies brought about by the actual landing.

You're holding a double standard.

Anonymous Sat May 19 02:20:41 2012 No.4696312

>>4696303

>rockets built for apollo program
>used for apollo program
>many other technologies result
>lol not a breakthrough

>rockets designed by nasa
>used by one company out of dozens
>no other technologies result
>lol major breakthrough!

do you hear yourself?

Anonymous Sat May 19 02:37:26 2012 No.4696337

>>4696138
You have to look at the right time... shortly after sunset or shortly before sunrise. There are utilities online that can plot the precise path it (or any other satellite in the database) will follow, their apparent magnitude, etc.

The ISS is bright enough that it can even be seen in large cities, if it climbs far enough above the horizon.

http://science.nasa.gov/realtime/jtrack/3d/JTrack3D.html/

As for SpaceX, you won't be able to see it from very far away. If it were a night launch on the other hand, you'd be able to see it most likely up to the Outer Banks of NC.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 02:40:31 2012 No.4696344 >>4696303 One of the biggest things to come out of that was to draw young people to STEM in general.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 02:43:56 2012 No.4696353 File: 26 KB, 539x422, neil-degrasse-tyson-agrees.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4696344 I was just about to say that. Neil deGrasse Tyson agrees.

Anonymous Sat May 19 02:52:57 2012 No.4696370

The bigger issue at stake here is NASA's commercial programs in general.

Right now programs like COTS and CCDev are facing not only massive cuts from Congress, but the threat of a forced down-select to a single provider (which would defeat the entire purpose of the program).

What many of us are hoping is that if this mission is a resounding success it may help to win some hearts and minds in Congress and show them that these programs are worth continuing as originally planned.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 02:57:26 2012 No.4696383 They're taking questions now: http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/commercial/cargo/cots_tv_schedule.html

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:02:11 2012 No.4696390 >>4696383 ...or, were...Now they're talking about colliding asteroids.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:03:26 2012 No.4696391 >>4696383 >>4696390 You guys tuned in right at the end of the Q&A, sorry

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:04:11 2012 No.4696393 So we should be an hour or so from launch? I'm in UTC+2

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:09:11 2012 No.4696402 there gonna be a stream of the launch anywhere? I wanna see if this thing goes up in flames or not

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:09:11 2012 No.4696403 >>4696393 I think coverage starts in 20 minutes and the launch is in about 40

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:12:57 2012 No.4696409 >>4696402 link to live stream (starts at 3:30 eastern, 12:30 pacific) (click 'watch NASA TV' ) http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/commercial/cargo/cots_tv_schedule.html

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:13:11 2012 No.4696412 >>4696402 http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:14:11 2012 No.4696415 >>4696412 >>4696409 thankee kindly

Anonymous Sat May 19 03:29:41 2012 No.4696431
File: 50 KB, 1024x683, An6Og-FCEAEsgJh..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

‏@SpaceX
One hour until the official SpaceX launch webcast. Watch at http://www.spacex.com #DragonLaunch
>posted 6 min ago.

http://www.spacex.com/webcast/
the webcast starts in 46 min

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html
also on NASA TV

Pic related, what we're going to see.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:30:41 2012 No.4696433 live coverage has started.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:31:41 2012 No.4696436 File: 103 KB, 509x318, Screen shot 2012-05-19 at 12.30.55 AM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] we have video.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:33:27 2012 No.4696439 T minus 1 hour 22 minutes. At this time, everything seems like it will go forward as planned.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:42:11 2012 No.4696455 File: 18 KB, 303x359, falcon-9.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:45:11 2012 No.4696461 so is this now the dedicated launch thread or something? nice timing op

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:45:42 2012 No.4696462 They just had an interview about the mission procedure. Apparently, Dragon will get into orbit today, then will take a couple of days to approach the station before docking, will be docked for about a week, and should come back at the end of the month.

Anonymous Sat May 19 03:49:12 2012 No.4696475

>>4696462
Watching this got me wondering what happens with all the stages that are disconnected from the capsule during the flight.

Stage one (big one) that is detached first: does it land with a parachute and gets reused?

How about stage two (small one)?

The ring attached to the heat shield side of the capsule, with the solar arrays attached, wouldn't it get burned up in the atmosphere upon reentry?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:49:26 2012 No.4696477 this is a stupid question but are there going to be people on it? what are they pay-loading?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:50:56 2012 No.4696481 >>4696477 No people, only cargo going up the the station and spent stuff getting returned

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:51:26 2012 No.4696483 >>4696481 that's cool Have they done a remote operated thing like this before?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:54:27 2012 No.4696490 File: 53 KB, 550x413, falcon-legs.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4696475 I think stage 1 is supposed to land vertically, if not today, then in some future launch. Apparently that's what these legs are for.

Anonymous Sat May 19 03:55:12 2012 No.4696493

>>4696475
They eventually intend to re-use both the first and second stages, but they have not yet done so. The final piece you see come off I think is fairing. If it is, then it is just dumb material and probably won't be recovered.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_9#Reusability

>>4696477
They will not have any people on this launch. There is food and some other supplies for the station but nothing mission-critical (this launch is still considered a test).

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:55:41 2012 No.4696496 >>4696483 yeah, it's common procedure

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:56:41 2012 No.4696499 >>4696493 Actually I heard they're using this as an opportunity to ship up a bunch of the low priority experiments

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:56:56 2012 No.4696497 >>4696477 Up: food, clothing, laptop batteries, etc., and student missions that will go down on Soyuz Down: "trash"

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:57:27 2012 No.4696500 File: 85 KB, 580x345, space-station-10-years-thinkpad-1..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4696497 >laptop batteries Gotta keep those A31 thinkpads running.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:58:41 2012 No.4696503 >>4696493 How do the costs compare to a Soyuz launch?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:58:56 2012 No.4696505 >>4696493 Also not to be recovered is the section behind the capsule with the solar cells, the so-called "trunk". It reaches orbit, so there's no way to get it back down without a heat shield specifically for it.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:59:41 2012 No.4696507 >>4696500 Just how many laptops does one astronaut need?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 03:59:56 2012 No.4696508 >>4696503 Soyuz, about $60M/seat for 3 seats Dragon crew version, about $140M total for 7 seats

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:00:56 2012 No.4696511 >>4696500 Damn, I hope they're sending up a few economy size rolls of Velcro.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:01:11 2012 No.4696513 Go to the NASA link They're talking now

Anonymous Sat May 19 04:04:41 2012 No.4696526

Allright, i'll defile this thread with a bit of actual information.
Lox tank loaded, into continious topping and venting. Rp-1 loaded.
around 20% chance of weather violating, high cumulus clouds.
any questions? i'll do my best to answer some of them. Yes, I know what i'm talking about.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:06:41 2012 No.4696532 >>4696503 Too early to judge. But I read somewhere that the whole Falcon and Dragon combo cost 800 million or so. That is VERY low price in aerospace business.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:06:57 2012 No.4696533 >>4696526 That's good, in the earlier press conference they predicted a 30% chance of weather violation.

Anonymous Sat May 19 04:07:41 2012 No.4696538
File: 115 KB, 720x483, My god, it's full of thinkpads..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>4696507
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ThinkPad#Use_in_space
"As of 2010, the Space Station was equipped with 68 ThinkPad A31 computers along with 32 new Lenovo ThinkPad T61p laptops..."

aaprox. 100 laptops devided among 6 current ISS crew members.

>Just how many laptops does one astronaut need?
16 or 17

Anonymous Sat May 19 04:08:11 2012 No.4696540

>>4696532
that's a wrong question to quote. That's development - and yes, it's low. Prices for just the rocket should be somewhere below 70 million, but they might rise as SpaceX bumps into QA problems, manufacturing errors, and needs to turn around high volumes of parts.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:08:26 2012 No.4696541 >>4696526 >weather violating What kind of weather we talking about? Rain/snow, strong wind?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:09:56 2012 No.4696543 >>4696538 most laptops on the ISS are loaded with their specific programs and experiments. Various computers also get flow down on soyuz, discarded. Hell, I know a guy who bought one on ebay, flown and all.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:10:26 2012 No.4696545 >>4696538 Hahaha, wow, that's awesome. You'd think they'd be a little more interested in minimising weight though

herpio Sat May 19 04:11:41 2012 No.4696551

>>4696541
no chance of those on this flight.
High cumulus clouds, which could have parts of them that are below zero and still contain moisture - this can stick to missions. Also, for test flights they want to have good visibility for ascent tracking, ie camera's pointing at it so you can track easily and even find some stuff out if it explodes / shuts down / has an engine failure. Clouds prevent some sorts of tracking.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:12:26 2012 No.4696552 In case anyone is watching on the main NASA TV page, click on the UStream HD page link. The main page video was constantly pausing and going double speed to catch up and it was going to drive me nuts.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:12:41 2012 No.4696555 >>4696551 Engine failure is irrelevant, it has multiple engine out capability

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:14:57 2012 No.4696557 File: 138 KB, 640x480, Arm8T52CEAAVs1X..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4696543 >IBM Thinkpad T61p that was in space you have no idea how much I want that. Image is the spacex ground control.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:15:26 2012 No.4696566 File: 1.00 MB, 2415x3000, S-IC_engines_and_Von_Braun.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4696144 Motherfucker is able to copy Wehrner's photo. So god damn jelly

herpio Sat May 19 04:15:26 2012 No.4696567

>>4696545
why? if it's up there, you don't care about weight. The big problem once you get up there is not weight, but waste that needs to get out.
If you need a new laptop, you have to fly it up anyway - why not keep the old one up there?

being in orbit requires no fuel and all that.
>>4696555
wrong.
On this mission a single engine failure would perhaps doom the mission, it might fly on. Catching up to the ISS would require more fuel, though. 2 engine failures on any mission would make a rendez-vous impossible or VERY fuel ineffecient.
Multiple engine out is a planned feature for falcon 9 version 1.1, which has around a 50% tank stretch due to uprated Merlin 1D engines and can carry more fuel. It is currently slated to be flown on falcon 9 flight 6. - the one being launched today is number 3.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:15:26 2012 No.4696568 >>4696552 Agreed. The official NASA stream had issues for me as well. Use the Ustream if you have trouble.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:16:42 2012 No.4696572 T-40m

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:17:12 2012 No.4696576 C'mon SpaceX, don't let us down, the world could really use your success right now.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:18:27 2012 No.4696577 Live feed from SpaceX in OP. http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28918.0;all

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:19:27 2012 No.4696581 >>4696577 http://www.spacex.com/webcast/ this link works too.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:19:41 2012 No.4696583 >>4696577 Use this one http://www.spacex.com/webcast/

herpio Sat May 19 04:22:11 2012 No.4696589

>>4696577
NSF is THE prime internet resource for smart questions and answers - none of the "herp is there people on board.

I recommend EVERYONE to read their SpaceX C2+ mission article - this one.

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/spacex-falcon-9-send-dragon-to-iss/

It has actual technical information and the correct terms, looks a bit to the future and is pretty complete.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:22:41 2012 No.4696593 >>4696581 >>4696583 Thanks samefag.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:23:41 2012 No.4696596 >>4696583 Mmmmmm... watching both NASA ans SpaceX feeds at the same time.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:24:11 2012 No.4696599 File: 146 KB, 1366x768, 287302_1930265426236_1530240342_31538294_3812565_o.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] ITS HAPPENING!!!!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:24:26 2012 No.4696600 t - 0:31:00

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:24:57 2012 No.4696598 Balloon data says weather is go

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:25:12 2012 No.4696601 DICK: HARD

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:28:56 2012 No.4696609 File: 240 KB, 391x474, Screen shot 2012-05-19 at 1.26.39 AM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4696601 Are you getting hard from all the lawyer chic chicks or is it the building sied steaming dildo?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:30:11 2012 No.4696612 >>4696508 Where did you get that Soyuz manned figure? I know a satellite launch is somewhere around $40M with Soyuz. But then that is avoiding the complications involved in a manned launch.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:30:11 2012 No.4696614 I want to have Elons babies

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:30:26 2012 No.4696616 remember, it can still be scrubbed, and that won't be a big deal. We might even get ignition and then an abort on the pad.

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:31:56 2012 No.4696619 >>4696612 You pay for the Soyuz aswell, instead of just the launch vehicle for a satellite launch of a sat you already paid for somewhere else. Also, mission control moscow, tracking assets, and yes, manned adds a lot of quality assurance etc.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:31:56 2012 No.4696620 >>4696616 >>4696616 Nooo shhh dont say things like that!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:33:11 2012 No.4696622 File: 50 KB, 640x480, 1330932094801.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >dat stache'

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:33:26 2012 No.4696624 no issues being worked - weather green. everything looks good so far.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:33:26 2012 No.4696625 They said weather was green, so hopefully no delays due to that.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:33:41 2012 No.4696627 >>4696609 Both. I'm bi.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:34:26 2012 No.4696630 >>4696625 Pffft. Who the fuck do you think they are, NASA?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:35:11 2012 No.4696633 is this guy's mustache certified?

Anonymous Sat May 19 04:35:26 2012 No.4696634

>>4696612
That's the number I've been constantly hearing the past couple of days. It may be a tad more than that. But yeah, a manned launch WITH RETURN CAPABILITY is going to cost a bit more than a satellite launch. And are you sure they're using Soyuz (or even Progress) to launch sats?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:36:26 2012 No.4696641 >>4696633 I believe he got a Class B rating for it

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:36:41 2012 No.4696643 about the soyuz - remember, there is a soyuz rocket ( which is used to launch sats ) and there is the soyuz spacecraft with its solar panels, return capsule, etc etc

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:36:56 2012 No.4696638 that chick's voice is sexy.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:37:26 2012 No.4696645 >How fast wine can ferment in space Shit nigger have we tested everything else?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:37:26 2012 No.4696646 File: 25 KB, 600x400, ron-burgundy-615x400.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4696609 Any chance of a boner is kept in check by that 'stache.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:37:41 2012 No.4696649 >tfw if you sneeze on one of those cargo boxes you could fuck everything up

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:37:56 2012 No.4696644 Houston has given a 'go'.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:38:12 2012 No.4696652 >>4696567 It should still be able to complete this C2+ mission even with one engine out. They just throttle up the remaining engines.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:38:12 2012 No.4696653 just said t-48 for me... u guys are posting earlier times... can I get a link to the stream ur watching?

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:38:41 2012 No.4696656 >>4696653 http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/ustream.html and spacex.com

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:39:11 2012 No.4696657 >>4696656 >spacex.com sorry, http://www.spacex.com/webcast/

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:39:26 2012 No.4696660 >>4696649 Not really, they do it in a clean room so it doesn't get covered in metal shavings or other shit that could float around and be breathed in.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:39:42 2012 No.4696661 File: 500 KB, 1440x900, d.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4696609 dat supersonic

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:40:11 2012 No.4696663 T- 15!!!!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:40:11 2012 No.4696664 File: 306 KB, 975x714, circlerouand.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >FUCK <FUCK >FUCK <FUCK >FUCK <FUCK >FUCK <FUCK >FUCK <FUCK >FUCK <FUCK >FUCK <FUCK >FUCK <FUCK >FUCK <FUCK >FUCK <FUCK >FUCK <FUCK >FUCK <FUCK >FUCK <FUCK

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:40:11 2012 No.4696666 >>4696652 engines are at 100% throttle. They'll fire longer and gimbal, though.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:40:42 2012 No.4696667 >>4696653 im watching at http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28918.0;all http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html launch is at 10:55 GMT+1 (so i think that's 4:55 eastern time? or 3:55?) t - 15 minutes

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:41:11 2012 No.4696670 >>4696660 low quality clean room, though. Notice they aren't even wearing face masks.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:41:26 2012 No.4696672 >>4696656 >>4696657 FYI, both streams are different. I'm watching both, but I have spacex's volume down lower right now while they're doing Viewer Mail.

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:41:41 2012 No.4696675 Spacex has polled their MCC ( mission control centre ) and has given a preliminary go for launch - same as weather.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:41:56 2012 No.4696668 >>4696661 Shit nigger you're 10 minutes behind

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:41:56 2012 No.4696676 File: 289 KB, 1920x1080, Untitled.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:42:26 2012 No.4696678 2 minutes to go for final poll.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:42:57 2012 No.4696682 >>4696676 fuck that hair and stache combo is amazing

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:43:11 2012 No.4696686 So who has the main mission control here? NASA or SpaceX?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:43:11 2012 No.4696687 Dat OSM hesitation

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:43:26 2012 No.4696688 shit, OSM get it together. All go so far. terminal count started

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:43:26 2012 No.4696689 OSM WHERE ARE YOU?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:43:42 2012 No.4696691 >>4696686 Launch is SpaceX, NASA takes over when they get near the ISS

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:44:11 2012 No.4696695 >>4696686 launch ; SpaceX. dragon: SpaceX, supervised by nasa. Nasa gives final go-nogo for approach, controlled by spacex. once berthed; nasa. once freeflying again: spacex

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:44:27 2012 No.4696696 >>4696664 What, you didn't know? That's why they have that "instantaneous window". They need every drop of capsule fuel for mission maneuvers. (Also, turnaround from launch abort is like half an hour or so.)

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:44:56 2012 No.4696699 >Dat OSM spaghetti

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:44:56 2012 No.4696700 >inb4 the spaceshuttle knocks the ISS out of orbit, making a laughing stock of private space ventures

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:45:27 2012 No.4696703 Why doesn't this shitty 4chan extension auto update? (no F5) What do you guys use?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:45:41 2012 No.4696705 TEN MINUTES

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:45:41 2012 No.4696706 >>4696676 thank you for my new wallpaper

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:45:41 2012 No.4696707 >>4696703 4chan x

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:45:41 2012 No.4696708 >>4696703 4chan X, set to update every second. Works flawlessly. Also T-minus 10 minutes

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:45:56 2012 No.4696709 File: 674 KB, 714x962, smoke_fire_adv.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] just a reminder spacex is a neoliberal pipe dream, public circus for bureaucrats.

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:45:56 2012 No.4696710 >>4696696 turnaround depends on time of hold/abort - but yes, this will be instantanious - dragon will do something like 3 ISS abort manouvers.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:46:26 2012 No.4696714 >>4696706 lol, anytime!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:46:26 2012 No.4696715 File: 19 KB, 519x92, Capture.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:46:41 2012 No.4696716 9 MINUTES gentlemen come over to synchtube room: drrichard

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:46:56 2012 No.4696711 >>4696703 4chan x, you boob

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:46:57 2012 No.4696718 >>4696700 >the spaceshuttle

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:46:57 2012 No.4696719 File: 333 KB, 918x693, 10m.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4696667 10:45 GMT+1 0945 GMT 10 minutes TERMINAL COUNT STARTED >We are not showing any engines wat Oh god my balls

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:48:11 2012 No.4696723 T-8 minutes, Nice view of engines being precooled and lox being vented.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:48:11 2012 No.4696724 >>4696707 >>4696708 >>4696711 Thanks

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:48:11 2012 No.4696725 >yfw Sonic jumps onto the rocket at the last second

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:48:11 2012 No.4696726 >>4696709 >dat free market competition finally

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:48:11 2012 No.4696728 >sorry guys, we forgot to attach the engines everyone go home

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:48:42 2012 No.4696730 Its leaking gas. Someone should tell them before its too late.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:48:42 2012 No.4696731 Oh shit 7 minutes. Already preparing for sudden disappointment

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:48:56 2012 No.4696732 File: 183 KB, 400x533, sonic walk.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4696725

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:49:41 2012 No.4696735 ok place your berts explode or not explode?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:49:41 2012 No.4696736 Hmm, my NASA stream is like 8 seconds ahead of the spacex stream. Oh yeah, I get to watch it launch twice!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:49:56 2012 No.4696737 File: 413 KB, 912x693, spacex13.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Hey Anon, your mom's dildo is ready.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:49:56 2012 No.4696738 >>4696735 IMO, scrub.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:49:56 2012 No.4696739 What does an "instantaneous window" imply/mean?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:50:26 2012 No.4696740 >>4696735 It'll be fine

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:50:26 2012 No.4696741 File: 48 KB, 590x350, pvIgs..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] so where do i sign?

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:50:26 2012 No.4696742 >>4696735 no explode. might scrub just a second after engine ignition, or anywhere at t minus 90 till launch. It'll go up, I hope.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:50:42 2012 No.4696746 spacex stream where

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:50:42 2012 No.4696747 >>4696735 call me optimistic, but I think not explode these guys are so excited for it although, you can tell they're nervous in front of cameras true engineers

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:51:12 2012 No.4696748 >>4696739 1 second where it has to go off. Nothing can go wrong or be needing to be fixed. internal power.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:51:12 2012 No.4696749 >>4696735 they were saying something about 3 other flights, is this the first launch for the Falcon 9??

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:51:12 2012 No.4696750 So what are you guys playing as background music for the launch?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:51:27 2012 No.4696751 >>4696735 My money's on not explode. I suspect any failures will be stuff like software failures.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:51:41 2012 No.4696752 Oh fuck, 4 minutes

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:51:41 2012 No.4696753 >>4696728 i just saw some nozzles! do you think there were engines inside?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:51:41 2012 No.4696754 File: 3 KB, 128x128, 1316326155196.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4696735 $10 for explode

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:52:42 2012 No.4696760 >lolterrorism

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:52:42 2012 No.4696761 >>4696749 3rd. first carried mass simulator ( some steel bars, basically ) 2nd was dragon capsule without solar panels/ trunk - 2 orbits, reentered succesfully. this is the first full dragon + trunk falcon 9

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:52:42 2012 No.4696762 File: 17 KB, 250x250, 1300044776986..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] i need to take a shit

>>	resident /sci/ economist !!0CqB7P/574e Sat May 19 04:52:42 2012 No.4696763 Not only will it not explode, but it will swirl rainbows around the world bringing us all to together in harmony. Calling it.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:52:56 2012 No.4696767 >>4696749 This is the third flight of the Falcon 9

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:53:11 2012 No.4696769 File: 74 KB, 981x757, Falcon 1_1337417546386.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4696735

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:53:27 2012 No.4696770 GO FOR LAUNCH 2 MINUTES FUCK YEAH

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:53:27 2012 No.4696771 gona focus on the stream now see you guys starside

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:53:27 2012 No.4696772 >launching in the dark L-D IS GO FOR LAUNCH

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:53:42 2012 No.4696773 >tfw need to take a shit

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:53:42 2012 No.4696774 3 minutes

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:54:12 2012 No.4696776 >>4696762 my interwebs are going in and out, haha, with my luck, ill miss it.

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:54:12 2012 No.4696777 stopped Lox venting. stage pressurizing. Final prechill of engines

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:54:27 2012 No.4696778 >>4696749 Third Falcon 9 flight, second Dragon flight, first mission to ISS We're just shy of T -60 seconds

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:54:41 2012 No.4696780 One goddamn minute. Let's do this.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:54:56 2012 No.4696781 T-1 MINUTE

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:54:56 2012 No.4696782 1 MINUTE NIGGERS

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:54:56 2012 No.4696783 Oh snap, boys! Here we go!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:55:11 2012 No.4696785 30 SECONDS

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:55:27 2012 No.4696786 my body is ready! 30 seconds!!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:55:27 2012 No.4696787 TO INFINITY AND BEYOND!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:55:56 2012 No.4696788 FUCK YEAH IT FAILED LOL.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:13 2012 No.4696790 aw snap

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:13 2012 No.4696791 shiiit nigggaaaa

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:56:13 2012 No.4696792 terminal count abort after engines start, as i said, probably another redline abort,

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:13 2012 No.4696793 FUCK

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:13 2012 No.4696794 ABORTED

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:13 2012 No.4696795 fuck wtf

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:13 2012 No.4696796 Oh, shit. What happened?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:26 2012 No.4696797 fucking damnit

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:26 2012 No.4696798 Oh shit oh shit oh shit oh shit oh shit oh shit oh shit oh shit oh shit oh shit oh shit oh shit oh shit

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:26 2012 No.4696800 Shit, cutoff and launch aborted.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:26 2012 No.4696801 File: 24 KB, 299x419, abortabortabort.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] WAAAAAAAAGH

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:26 2012 No.4696802 File: 41 KB, 625x400, ron paul we had a chance.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] ABORT

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:42 2012 No.4696804 File: 27 KB, 460x453, 1308267640024.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] FAIL

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:42 2012 No.4696805 cutoff. launch abort. D: Computer didn't start up.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:42 2012 No.4696806 File: 55 KB, 452x604, house-facepalm.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Oops. Try again Tuesday.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:42 2012 No.4696807 FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLLLLLL

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:42 2012 No.4696809 well that sucked

>>	resident /sci/ economist !!0CqB7P/574e Sat May 19 04:56:42 2012 No.4696810 Well fuck now those astronauts are going to starve to death. Thanks a lot SpaceX. >Did I hear that guy crying?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:42 2012 No.4696811 >>4696616 >remember, it can still be scrubbed, and that won't be a big deal. We might even get ignition and then an abort on the pad. LOOOL CALLED IT

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:56 2012 No.4696789 NO

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:57 2012 No.4696812 look at it go!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:57 2012 No.4696813 FLIGHT COMPUTER NOT START UP ABORT ABORT ABORT

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:56:57 2012 No.4696814 see you all in 2-3 days guys.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:56:57 2012 No.4696816 MUH FREE MARKET!!!! NOO!!!!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:57:11 2012 No.4696817 Well, that was anticlimactic.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:57:11 2012 No.4696818 >flight computer did not start up Almost just shot a few million dollars randomly into space.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:57:26 2012 No.4696819 it could have failed catastrophicly at least they can try again

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:57:26 2012 No.4696820 I came back from a shower and tuned in at t-4seconds. Why did it fizzle out like that?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:57:26 2012 No.4696822 >>4696806 Not necessarily, they've got a pretty quick turnaround on these Falcon launches. They could try again within ~30-60 minutes if it's not serious.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:58:26 2012 No.4696827 Great, and now they practically have 300 metric tonnes of unexploded ordnance in their hands.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:58:26 2012 No.4696829 anyone else see Diablo 3 on those computers?

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:58:42 2012 No.4696830 >>4696822 except they have an 1 second launch window for this launch.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:58:42 2012 No.4696832 >>4696822 You haven't been paying attention to all that shit about launch windows, have you? The next scheduled try is Tuesday.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:58:42 2012 No.4696833 blue balls like a mofo now >=[

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:58:42 2012 No.4696834 Will they get another chance to launch tonight?

>>	herpio Sat May 19 04:58:56 2012 No.4696825 >>4696820 falcon 9 computer said stuff wasn't ready, so it didn't launched.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:58:56 2012 No.4696826 Well, that was embarrassing.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:59:11 2012 No.4696840 Giant phallic structure can't get it up

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:59:27 2012 No.4696841 >>4696827 >rocket fuel >unexploded ordinance they're going to cycle it out of the tank, then refuel the vehicle

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:59:41 2012 No.4696843 >>4696822 apparently not, according to glasses guy

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:59:41 2012 No.4696845 File: 136 KB, 456x337, 133346542236.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >Stayed up really late for this shit >mfw

Anonymous Sat May 19 04:59:56 2012 No.4696836
File: 3 KB, 126x85, 1311016639720s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I was humping the air like a madman while it was going to launch.

It was that sole act that made the computers fail.
"I wanna do something retarded while something to advance humanity occurs"

a "What was I doing when" moment to keep for the ages.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:59:56 2012 No.4696837 >WE WILL NOT BE LAUNCHING TODAY FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:59:56 2012 No.4696838 most expensive -and late- april fool's?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:59:57 2012 No.4696846 next oppertunity on the 22nd, damn

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 04:59:57 2012 No.4696847 I thought NASA's budget was obliterated in favor of a couple more Predators for our oil war? Or is this that civilian rocket I've been hearing so much about?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:00:11 2012 No.4696849 PRIVATE ENTERPRISE IN ACTION.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:00:26 2012 No.4696851 >>4696836 Dammit, Anonymous, you always do that.

>>	herpio Sat May 19 05:00:26 2012 No.4696852 engine 5 chamber pressure abort checked by computer and wasn't correct. Now in detanking and scrub. Wonder what that error was.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:00:26 2012 No.4696854 I want my money back.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:00:42 2012 No.4696855 "Chamber overpressure on engine 5" caused the abort

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:00:56 2012 No.4696856 Now I know how a woman feels when I prematurely ejaculate.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:00:56 2012 No.4696858 >>4696830 Why the hell was the window so short?

>>	resident /sci/ economist !!0CqB7P/574e Sat May 19 05:01:11 2012 No.4696860 If only we didnt elect Obama, the free market could have fixed it! >oh wait

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:01:27 2012 No.4696861 >>4696854 just enjoy the show

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:01:27 2012 No.4696862 >>4696849 So what? When NASA fucks up people die. These guys sustained no casualties

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:01:41 2012 No.4696863 engine 5 chamber pressure high

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:01:56 2012 No.4696859 >>4696847 both are true, NASA's been gutted to shoot more sand mexicans and this in the private launch.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:02:12 2012 No.4696865 >>4696862 there was no one in the fucking thing

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:02:26 2012 No.4696866 >>4696847 Well... technically NASA's budget is the highest its been in years... it's just not as high as it ought to be and Congress has been forcing NASA to dump a lot of its funding into a shitty rocket that's never going to be built (SLS)

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:02:41 2012 No.4696867 >>4696858 Because they're trying to reach something that's already in orbit. It takes extra fuel to catch up, and they need all the capsule fuel for the mission maneuvers.

>>	herpio Sat May 19 05:02:41 2012 No.4696868 >>4696858 maximising propload for all the manouvers ( 3 ISS safety aborts, 3 times backing up, getting closer, moving away, etc etc etc, ) gives you an ideal 1 second window.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:03:11 2012 No.4696869 >>4696841 Yes, but until they do recycle it, it's an unexploded bomb. A very safetied bomb, but a bomb nonetheless. Hope nothing else goes wrong before it's empty.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:03:26 2012 No.4696871 well, the 20th we have that eclipse, then on the 22nd a rocket launch could be a couple cool days ahead

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:04:11 2012 No.4696873 You can hear the sadness in their voices. it's like 4000 middle aged men just got turned down to prom and they're keeping a straight face about it.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:04:11 2012 No.4696874 >>4696869 Its been sitting on the launch pad full of Rocket fuel for the past 2 hours

>>	herpio Sat May 19 05:04:26 2012 No.4696875 >>4696867 >>4696858 real falcon 9 resupply missions will indeed have 5-6 minute windows. They just want to be sure that they can get to the ISS after getting into orbit. A pad abort is WAY less annoying then not having enough fuel for getting to the ISS.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:04:26 2012 No.4696876 SpaceX, are you even trying?!?

>>	resident /sci/ economist !!0CqB7P/574e Sat May 19 05:04:41 2012 No.4696877 >>4696871 They ought to send a man to that eclipse. Its something that has never been done before.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:04:41 2012 No.4696878 Well shit... this sucks. 50 bucks says some asshole in Congress uses this as "indisputable proof" that the NASA-commercial partnership programs "can't cut it".

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:04:41 2012 No.4696879 >Next launch opportunity: Tuesday May 22

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:04:57 2012 No.4696880 >>4696153 The ISS looks a bit bigger than mars and moves much much faster than everything else when you can see it

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:04:57 2012 No.4696881 3:44AM Tuesday is the next launch opportunity. Till then, guys.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:04:57 2012 No.4696883 It's over; the free market is finished!!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:05:26 2012 No.4696885 I bet the LIBERALS did this.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:05:42 2012 No.4696888 >>4696878 It will take a congressman longer than 3 days to capitulate on this.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:05:42 2012 No.4696889 File: 16 KB, 210x300, chong-3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4696863 >engine 5 chamber pressure high More like engine 420, amirite?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:05:56 2012 No.4696891 >>4696883 NOOOOOOOOO WHY BASED PAUL

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:05:57 2012 No.4696884 Holy shit, it just exploded this can't be real

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:06:11 2012 No.4696892 New Scientist ‏@newscientist #SpaceX says the problem causing the #DragonLaunch abort was a high chamber pressure in Engine No. 5 on first stage

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:06:11 2012 No.4696893 >>4696884 fun is temporarily prohibited

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:06:56 2012 No.4696894 File: 10 KB, 250x202, 250px-Challenger_explosion.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4696876 better to abort the launch than to explode

>>	resident /sci/ economist !!0CqB7P/574e Sat May 19 05:07:26 2012 No.4696897 >>4696895 It didnt fly into space.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:07:26 2012 No.4696899 >>4696873 nah, aborted launches are no big deal, they happen all the time catastrophic falures on the other hand, that shit gets plastered all over the news

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:07:26 2012 No.4696901 File: 265 KB, 750x781, stars_y_u_no.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Gods fucking dammit.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:07:56 2012 No.4696895 Wait, so what the fuck went wrong?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:07:56 2012 No.4696902 >>4696895 An astronaut wasn't on board.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:07:56 2012 No.4696903 >>4696895 streaker ran across the launch pad

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:08:11 2012 No.4696904 >>4696892 WTF it's supposed to be able to take off with one engine off-line.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:08:11 2012 No.4696905 >>4696895 The computer monitoring all the parameters said that one of the engines had some parameter outside normal bounds, and aborted the launch. They'll go over the data to see exactly what it was and fix anything that needs fixing before Tuesday.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:08:26 2012 No.4696906 >>4696873 You think this is bad? You should have seen the press conference after Orbital's Taurus failed to jettison the nosecone for the second time in a row. They looked like they were attending their own funeral!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:09:11 2012 No.4696907 >>4696904 Overpressure is different, and they want the 1-3 engine failure as backup not as a main plan.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:09:11 2012 No.4696908 >>4696895 chamber overpressure on one of the engines triggered auto-shutdown

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:09:11 2012 No.4696909 File: 189 KB, 510x531, ron paul it's hopeless.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:09:11 2012 No.4696910 >>4696904 Maybe take off, yeah, but I doubt they'd make the rendezvous with the ISS if they had a 1-second ideal window in the first place.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:09:42 2012 No.4696912 >>4696904 That doesn't mean they'll do it. Especially not before building some confidence through many successful launches

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:09:42 2012 No.4696913 File: 39 KB, 400x560, 1336786411801.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] FUCK. I BLAME THE NIGGERS FOR THIS ONE

herpio Sat May 19 05:10:11 2012 No.4696914

>>4696904
jesus fucking christ did you even read the thread.
do you even think

Holy shit

you're still on the launch pad. one engine approaches an abort limit. Do you say "hey, i'll launch anyway!" or just think for a second with your multi-million launcher and say "nah, i'll try again tuesday".

Also, NO FUCKING ENGINE OUT ON THIS VEHICLE YET

THAT SHIT IS PLANNED. JUST LIKE STAGE RECOVERY

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:11:12 2012 No.4696917 Just out of curiosity, how much does it cost to abort a launch like this?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:11:12 2012 No.4696918 THEY ARE RESETTING THE LAUNCH

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:11:27 2012 No.4696919 >>4696904 >it's supposed to be able to take off with one engine off-line. it is, but why add unnecessary risk? what if they started with one engine offline and another failed during boost?

Anonymous Sat May 19 05:12:27 2012 No.4696922
File: 146 KB, 1440x900, 1329285421502.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

"President Obama intervened at the last moment using his executive authority to scrub the launch. When asked for his reasoning behind the call, he pointed to a lack of diversity on the engineering team responsible for the Dragon spacecraft."

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:12:56 2012 No.4696921 It's been a good thread, guys. let's have another one tuesday~

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:12:56 2012 No.4696924 >>4696918 Nope, they missed their window to rendezvous with the ISS, they'll try again Tuesday

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:13:11 2012 No.4696925 HOLY FUCK, THE ROCKET IS LAUNCHING ANYWAY! PATHETIC H-H-HACKER!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:13:41 2012 No.4696927 >>4696925 hurrr

>>	resident /sci/ economist !!0CqB7P/574e Sat May 19 05:14:12 2012 No.4696930 Omg! Guis! Get back to the stream! The rocket just became sentient!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:14:41 2012 No.4696931 File: 52 KB, 500x388, that-really-rustled-my-jimmies..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:14:56 2012 No.4696929 >>4696917 Probably just the fuel/coolant and the wages of all the nasa folks and the rent of the launch pad and etc etc etc.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:14:57 2012 No.4696933 They want to make this perfect guys, the future of the free market space industry is on the line here. One mistake (DEATH AND EXPLOSIONS) and the media will be all over it.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:15:11 2012 No.4696935 >>4696930 OMG it turned into the Stay Puft marshmallow man!

>>	herpio Sat May 19 05:15:57 2012 No.4696934 >>4696919 no it is not. You'll never launch with 1 engine not working - that's why they have hold-down systems. Also, engine out is planned ( let alone multiple engine out ) for the FUTURE ie not here yet.

Anonymous Sat May 19 05:16:42 2012 No.4696940

>>4696874
And when it failed to go, it became a rather bigger problem.
It's not an inert hunk of metal that you can just bang with a hammer without consequences.

Yes, they have the procedures to disarm it safely, but until they do, they're treating it with the proper respect and making sure there's no fun surprises around.

>>	resident /sci/ economist !!0CqB7P/574e Sat May 19 05:16:42 2012 No.4696942 >>4696935 OMG you are right. And now the Falcon 9 is accepting the nobel prize and the academy award for best picture. This is the best thing I ever I saw.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:16:56 2012 No.4696943 >>4696937 Really? For an aborted launch that will be retried Tuesday?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:16:57 2012 No.4696937 MSNBC will be shitting all over this tomorrow.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:17:27 2012 No.4696948 >>4696942 So beautiful. ;_;

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:17:27 2012 No.4696949 >>4696943 They hate the free market. muh freedom!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:19:42 2012 No.4696955 SHH NO TEARS ONLY DREAMS NOW http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07wZiqJlu3U&feature=related this is what's playing throughout the offices over at SpaceX

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:20:26 2012 No.4696960 >>4696955 I laughed.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:21:11 2012 No.4696964 inb4 some engineer forgot to push his button because he was too busy posting in this thread

>>	herpio Sat May 19 05:22:42 2012 No.4696969 Last update - it was the center engine number 5 which hit it's limit for an abort. This limit was set conversative. They could have launched - the fix for next time will be setting the conservative limit higher.

>>	herpio Sat May 19 05:23:11 2012 No.4696971 >>4696969 last update from me, that is. im off for something to eat.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:24:11 2012 No.4696974 >>4696969 >setting the conservative limit higher Wouldn't that be skimming over whatever safety limits they have in place?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:25:12 2012 No.4696979 >>4696974 Not if they were already being really really safe.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:27:56 2012 No.4696985 THE FREE MARKET DIDN'T FIX IT This is what happens when you privatise things.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:30:23 2012 No.4696995 >>4696985 >trolling in an autosaging thread where almost everyone has left You must be so proud of your accomplishment here.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:30:23 2012 No.4697001 File: 38 KB, 400x494, 1337312382194..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4696964 8/10

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:33:23 2012 No.4697008 >>4696995 Sorry, I forgot things autosage here so early. It's still true though. Such a fuckup.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:35:23 2012 No.4697014 >>4697008 Yeah, come back when one of them blows up and kills people. Then it will be the same as NASA!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 05:55:23 2012 No.4697044 File: 5 KB, 274x242, 12.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] to answer OPs question finally and with certainty. not today.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 06:07:28 2012 No.4697057 >>4696904 You absolutely don't continue with the mission if you don't need to. Having one engine down automatically lowers your redundancy.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 06:10:28 2012 No.4697062 File: 179 KB, 603x1232, rockeeeeeeets.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sat May 19 11:54:07 2012 No.4697396 >>4696934 >>4696914 >>4696567 from the presser: "Need all nine engines for lift off. Two engines can fail later for nominal mission." They have always had the engine-out capability, a feature for their later man-rated Dragon flights.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math