/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.6841224]

Did anyone just see the Antares failure?

[Anonymous No.6841246]

>>6841224
This is why NASA should have far more budget cuts then it already has. A bunch of retarded nerds , funded billions by the federal government, and failing is an outrage.

The space industry should be free market...not something headed up by politicians.

[Anonymous No.6841254]

Saw it live, went up a little bit, then a gigantic fireball and fell straight down. Any experts in this field have any idea what went wrong judging from the live feed?

[Anonymous No.6841258]

It was awesome! My local news was like here look at this rocket go off live...then it goes "boooom"! The anchors were like...there's obviously some sort of malfunction..

[Anonymous No.6841259]

>>6841246
You DO realize that this is NOT by NASA, but by a company, like you suggested, right?

[Anonymous No.6841260]

>>6841254
I saw it too. I was going to go outside but it's a bit cloudy (Greensboro NC) and decided I'd just watch it on the computer. Thank god I did..

[Anonymous No.6841265]

>>6841258
NBC New York?

[Anonymous No.6841273]

space btfo

[Anonymous No.6841285]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyE1m3uui-A

[Anonymous No.6841291]

Were there people in it?

[Anonymous No.6841305]

>>6841291
Total Cargo: 4,883 pounds

Science investigations: 1,602.8 pounds
Crew supplies: 1,649 pounds

Flight crew equipment: 273.4 pounds
Food: 1,360.3 pounds
Flight procedures books: 15.4 pounds

Vehicle hardware: 1,404.3 pounds
Spacewalk equipment: 145.5 pounds
Computer resources: 81.6 pounds

[Anonymous No.6841312]

1080kek
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U92w8bbLhQU

[Anonymous No.6841316]

>>6841305
>Were there people in it?
>>6841291
>Total Cargo: 4,883 pounds
Truly a tragedy, for America's brave fatstronauts.

Let us pray that they'll be as weightless in the afterlife as they would have been in space.

[Anonymous No.6841323]

>>6841312
The american flag makes it perfect.

[Anonymous No.6841342]

>>6841316
No one dead, but Orbital Sciences is definitely dead for trashing the "classified crypto equipment"

[Anonymous No.6841353]

>>6841224
*sigh* Shit like this makes me cry.

We really need a more reliable way to launch these things, other than, "stick a bunch of explosives on it". Sadly, something like that would take a large scale national investment, and we're just too corrupt to do anything on that scale these days.

>>6841246
>Cygnus CRS Orb-3, also known as Orbital Sciences CRS Flight 3 or Orbital 3 (Orb-3), was the fourth planned flight of the Orbital Sciences' Cygnus automated cargo spacecraft, would have been its fourth flight to the International Space Station and was the fifth launch of the company's Antares launch vehicle. However, the launch was unsuccessful, with the Antares rocket suffering a failure and crashing back to the launch pad.
So much for privatized space flight.

Not that it doesn't help, but really, it's never going to replace the real thing, especially given the risks involved. Granted, the real thing is pretty much dead as well - not hardly done anything non-utilitarian since 1972, and we're decades behind where we thought we'd be then.

[Anonymous No.6841361]

>>6841224
I watched it live

[Anonymous No.6841370]

>>6841361
I watched it die

[Anonymous No.6841371]

>>6841316
It's unmanned

[Anonymous No.6841391]

The free market will fix it.

[Anonymous No.6841423]

>>6841391
Well, yeah.

Orbital fucks up by being expensive and unreliable, SpaceX wins by being cheap and reliable, one goes out of the launch business, the other builds giant Mars rockets.

[Anonymous No.6841431]

>>6841224
It's a Russian NK-33 engine. NASA need to learn how to make engine again.

[Anonymous No.6841476]

>>6841431
Wasn't NASA... FFS...

>>6841391
>>6841423
>>6841342
Well, they may have been alright, since all this shit is secured.

But then they were stupid enough to be publically traded, and well, pic related.

A few other private companies, including Planetary Resources, are going to take major hits too - as they had their expensive shit on there.

[Anonymous No.6841551]

>>6841476
The Cygnus also carried 18 experiments from STEM students ranging from Gr4 to U. I'd hate to be the one telling those kids the shit they built got trashed completely and is now a pile of ash covered in kerosene

[Anonymous No.6841562]

>>6841551
>the shit they built got trashed completely and is now a pile of ash covered in kerosene
This is completely inaccurate.

The kerosene is flammable and would also have burned up, so there wouldn't be any on the ash.

[Anonymous No.6841572]

>>6841562
>So its not as bad

[Anonymous No.6841588]

>>6841562
Made me laugh

[Anonymous No.6841592]

>>6841562
"So the rocket that was supposed to take our experiment to ISS crashed, it's all burnt and under tons of metal now. But don't worry, at least it's not covered in kerosene"

[Anonymous No.6841604]

are space elevators still a pipe dream?

[Anonymous No.6841617]

>>6841562
They'll have built redundant models, and will probably get another flight.

That said, I met a bloke who worked on the Beagle 2 mars lander who said the failiure was like losing a child.

[Anonymous No.6841656]

>>6841604
Yes. The technology (materials, engineering) you'd need just isn't there yet. I'd say skyhooks are more viable as a long-term goal anyway.

[Anonymous No.6841672]

>>6841259
LOL no response

[Anonymous No.6841689]

Antares kill.

[Anonymous No.6841713]

It's interesting to note that SpaceX's very first launch of the Falcon 1 failed a few seconds after launch due to a fuel line rupture.

It's a bad time to be an Orbital employee, but considering that this was only the first flight of a new version (instead of a wholly new design) of the Antares and because Orbital has a few different types of launch vehicles, they should probably end up ok. Not good to be sure, but definitely not kill.

[Anonymous No.6841719]

>>6841259

My bet is post 1 is being a sarcastic twat. ie he knows that.

[Anonymous No.6841738]

No more legos :(
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/experiments/8.html

[Anonymous No.6841824]

>>6841254
one of the Soviet surplus NK-33s probably assploded

[Anonymous No.6841829]

>>6841476
lel. inb4 gov't bailout

[Anonymous No.6841831]

>>6841224
Daily reminder the earth is flat.

All "space travel" is a conspiracy perpetrated by Hollywood and capitalists.

Copernicus was the Pope's right hand man.

Man cannot fly because the aether would prevent him from doing so.

[Anonymous No.6841834]

>>6841431
the irony? Orbital was planning to eventually replace the Soviet NK-33's when they run out of their inventory... with Russian RD-180s!

[Anonymous No.6841877]

>>6841831
le this

[Anonymous No.6841883]

>>6841224
yesss, no more supplies for ISIS
god is on the kurd side!!!

[Anonymous No.6841888]

>>6841834
OSC was locked into russian engines the moment the airforce made this decision in the 90s. nobody, literally NOBODY, in the entire american aerospace industry likes using russian engines.

[Anonymous No.6841893]

>>6841476
insurance.

[Anonymous No.6841903]

What did elon musk say that's got everyone worked up?

[Anonymous No.6841906]

>>6841713
OSC is an old company. they've had failures before, but have also had many more successes. they have lots of other business groups besides CRS as well, so yeah. they will be fine.

personally i can't wait for SpaceX fanboys to bring this up in the future. daily reminder that spacex doesn't keep time cards, musky expects you to work on saturdays, and that desire to get paid fairly as a trained engineer is just your entitlement speaking.

[Anonymous No.6841908]

>>6841903
What.

[Anonymous No.6841918]

>>6841888

The RD-180 is fine, has launched dozens of Atlas missions, and dozens more, for an affordable price.

It's a globalized world, you use plenty of foreign products yourself.

[Anonymous No.6841919]

>Americans in charge of sending stuff to space

Are you niggas serious?

[Anonymous No.6841930]

>>6841918
I don't care that it's russian or imported, its just a fact in the industry that relying on a foreign supply of something as critical as an engine makes people uncomfortable.

[Anonymous No.6841932]

>>6841906

>Orbital rocket explodes
> HOW DARE YOU SPACEX FANBOYS

[Anonymous No.6841935]

>>6841908
He tweeted something and quickly deleted it.

[Anonymous No.6841936]

>>6841919
>posted from my europoor state owned mosque

>>6841932

[Anonymous No.6841949]

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html#.VFA9vBYfKUk

nasa is live news

[Anonymous No.6841957]

>>6841932
elon musk was on the sailboat. he will stop at nothing to realize his dream of a LEO supersatellite that hosts paypal. he will even stoop so low as to personally sabotage the competition's rockets.

[Anonymous No.6841970]

>>6841930

It's an overblown non-issue. The US got exercisable domestic production rights in the deal and has options to transition to other engines should a serious concern arise. The RD-180 in that role is as safe so far as any other engine and its usage is an ongoing success.

[Anonymous No.6841977]

>>6841919
I didn't know you had internet in Plebistan

[Anonymous No.6842009]

Who are the people asking questions? Journalists or curious nerds?

[Anonymous No.6842017]

>>6842009

they just let any curios nerd in the conference to harass officials who are dealing with a crisis

[Anonymous No.6842018]

>>6841312
>dat half a second delay between the blaze and "Avionics .... nominal"

[Anonymous No.6842024]

>I know it's early but <STATIC>

QUESTION REDACTED

Also these questions suck aside from the NPR guys question.

[Anonymous No.6842025]

[Anonymous No.6842038]

>>6842025
>tfw usually watch launches with sci
>tfw big failure seen live

[Anonymous No.6842039]

>>6841977
>>6841936

Stay pleb, mad.

The U.S. space budget is crumbling. The Chinese space budget is increasing at exponential rates and it will soon go through the roof. Plus, the U.S. has absolutely no long-term perspective when it comes to space exploration.

[Anonymous No.6842044]

>>6842039
b-b-b-but muh mars...

[Anonymous No.6842068]

>People asking the same questions over and over
>Asking super specific questions

Holy fuck these guys...

[Anonymous No.6842075]

Reporters already closing in on speculation I heard that Range Safety didn't send Destruct call soon enough

[Anonymous No.6842079]

>>6842039

US space budget is not deviating from usual level.
Chinese space budget is tinier. At least they have made good pursuits so far with what they do have.
US has other strengths like its science program. Chinese perspective is shaping up to be a similar robotic initiative. The weighted Importance of different time length perspectives is whooey right now.

[Anonymous No.6842096]

>is there difference-
>yes you dumb whore, yes there is a difference
Jesus can't they ask anything better.

[Anonymous No.6842115]

>>6841224

Yes.

Fuck this gay Earth.

Very sorry for all the people involved and the lost effort that went into it. A lot of collective human effort just went up in a ball of fire.

[Anonymous No.6842119]

>>6841476
Planetary Resources is fine. Their equipment is incredibly low cost, that was the whole point plus they have billionaires backing them. The other companies on board will be fine too, because you know launch insurance.

[Anonymous No.6842122]

>>6841476
Off topic but would this be a good time to buy Orb-sci stock?

[Anonymous No.6842127]

why don't they fly to space instead of blowing up lol

[Anonymous No.6842128]

>>6842122
Yes.

[Anonymous No.6842132]

>>6842122
No. Antares was hanging on by a thread already. I expect future launches to be canned.

I feel for the people working out there because I knew most of them, but they should have jumped ship 2-3 years ago when the delays were piling up and NASA was breathing down their throats about that beautiful pad that just got fucked in the ass.

[Anonymous No.6842142]

>>6842132
Actually I think Antares is locked in for several more flights in a contract with NASA. If they fix the problem and rebound like SpaceX did in 2008, they should be fine. That being said this is the THIRD major fuckup involving NASA payloads on an Orbital Science carrier rocket. Glory sattelite, Orbiting Carbon Observitory, both completely totaled because of a shitty payload fairing on their Taurus rocket. Fucking damages probably exceed a billion all three combined. Fuck Orbital, they've had four decades to get this shit right when SpaceX has only had one.

[Anonymous No.6842172]

>>6842025

[Anonymous No.6842175]

>>6842172
wut

[Anonymous No.6842180]

>>6842172
Mods can be so silly sometimes. Also fuck Orbital Sciences, the more money that goes to SpaceX the faster we get to Mars

[Anonymous No.6842186]

>>6842180
But we want competition to keep prices down and quality up.

SpaceX already got PLENTY of money from Crew program.

[Anonymous No.6842212]

>>6841224
fucking hilarious, nothing is funnier than seeing one put so much time money and effort into something only for it to blow up in a fireball. How much did they lose? $1.6 billion?

[Anonymous No.6842213]

>>6842186
Musk is the only billionaire I actually trust to be benevolent. His one and only goal is to colonize Mars, and considering how much money he dumped into SpaceX before it started being profitable is a sign of his commitment. Now the Falcon 9 is nearing complete reusability (first stage is going to land on an ocean barge in early December), the Faclon Heavy will launch in early 2015, and the Mars Colonial Transporter is well underway to launch sometime in the 2020's. Musk doesn't need competition, he is will forever remain committed to his one goal. Musk will not sell out, he is the literal anti-jew.

[Anonymous No.6842218]

>>6842213
Against jews? Sure.

But what about space jews?

[Anonymous No.6842237]

>america
>can into space without russia

pick one.

[Anonymous No.6842239]

>>6842212

something like that

what are the contingencies in place for cargo resupply though?

the guys up on the ISS ain't gonna starve anytime soon I hope right?

[Anonymous No.6842243]

>>6842213

yeah i agree.

He made all the patents for his electric car company free.

Even replaced the wall that previously held them in main tesla factory with this

what a fuckin bro

[Anonymous No.6842246]

>failure
>not 'vehicle mishap'

[Anonymous No.6842253]

>>6842239
CRS-5 is moved ahead of schedule? No, probably they'll get Russia to send up a Progress sometime this week. It's not like the ISS doesn't have enough vital supplies to keep functioning for many more months.

[Anonymous No.6842259]

>>6842253
Progress is actually launching in 5 hours to ISS.

Crazy.

[Anonymous No.6842294]

>>6841258
>there's obviously some sort of malfunction..
holy shit, thats fucking classic.

[Anonymous No.6842296]

Am I the only one that is genuinely depressed by this?

I hope Orbital doesn't go under, we need as many private space companies as we can get

[Anonymous No.6842303]

>>6842243
>He made all the patents for his electric car company free.
Not exactly. They pretty much just announced, "Tesla will not initiate patent lawsuits against anyone who, in good faith, wants to use our technology." And that's all they did.

There's nothing legally binding there, and you could drive a Model X through the room they left to initiate patent lawsuits against people who they decide are doing something other than using their technology in good faith.

Let's say there's a new car company, CarX, that uses patented Tesla technology and also invents its own and patents it, then Tesla uses CarX's patented technology without permission. So CarX sues Tesla for violating their patent. Tesla would most likely sue CarX for violating the patents they said were available for everyone, because they held that option in reserve.

Or let's say CarX makes a car that's similar to a Tesla design. They can say, "That's a knockoff. They're copying us too much." and then the patents come out and they sue.

They're not offering free licenses for the patents. They're basically inviting their enemies to take remote-triggered bomb-hats, and saying, "We promise not to set them off. Cross our hearts, for serious. We're just that nice and think you everyone should have a hat."

[Anonymous No.6842311]

>>6842294
When the Space Shuttle Challenger blew up, that exact quote was said.

[Anonymous No.6842314]

>>6842296
Well, normal practice would be to GROUND EVERYTHING until an investigation takes place. If it's something specific to the design it might eb trouble, but if it's some piece of carelessness a la Styrofoam or fucked seals, they shouldn't be doomed.

Here's hoping the Russians have forgotten all that silliness about us not ever using their rockets again...

[Anonymous No.6842319]

>>6841305
>lbs
>not using the metric system
This is why you fail America

[Anonymous No.6842321]

>>6842314
Russia is launching a supply Soyuz to the ISS in 4 hours actually.

They actually love that we depend on their rockets to launch cargo and specifically people.

[Anonymous No.6842323]

>>6842321
They do, but they would really love the chance to say, "Oh, apologies comrade, you not angry about Crimea anymore, eh? Oh, and not Ukraine? Well, just drop those sanctions... Good, you can hop on!"

[Anonymous No.6842325]

I don't get it, why not just copy Von Braun's rocket system?

[Anonymous No.6842328]

>>6842325
NASA literally lost all the spec documents to the Saturn V.

Also, it's likely very inefficient technology by today's standard.

[Anonymous No.6842334]

>>6842325
>The culmination of decades of endless work, stretching all the way back to before WWII
>The single most powerful rocket ever known to man
>We had it, we were set
>We threw it away

And for what? Some half-assed plan that just let the Soviet Union not completely bankrupt itself as soon?

RIPIP Saturn V, mankind just wasn't ready for you.

[Anonymous No.6842335]

>>6842328
Just because it's old doesn't mean it's inefficient. There's tons of old tech that we still use: shoes, bags, wheels, door knobs, keyboards, etc.

Plus it would save a shitton of money in design and you could probably make it better by using modern materials.

[Anonymous No.6842340]

>>6842213
>Musk is the only billionaire I actually trust to be benevolent.

the same guy that stood up in front of a conference full of FAA safety regulators and told them that human ratings aren't important for a rocket?

spacex survives because it doesn't pay its employees for their time, and pays for current launches on next year's tickets. his business case doesn't close.

[Anonymous No.6842342]

>>6842335
SpaceX has something better.

[Anonymous No.6842346]

>>6842325
That's so fucking cool.

[Anonymous No.6842348]

>>6842342
meh, you know that's litteraly just a soyuz capsule with slightly more space because the electronics have been miniaturized.

[Carbon No.6842352]

>>6841224
A certain someone who designs his own flying erections must be orgasmic after viewing this.

[Anonymous No.6842353]

>>6841718
>>6841736
epic shoop, faggot

[Anonymous No.6842354]

Launch failures come in waves, usually. There was a string of them in the late 70s, the mid-80s, and early 90s. Now perhaps another wave might be starting as Russia lost two Protons in the past year.

[Anonymous No.6842355]

>>6842342
>capsule
>in any way original

you musktards are hilarious.

[Anonymous No.6842356]

>>6842348
IT HAS A TOUCH SCREEN
WHY THE FUCK YOU WOULD BUILD SUCH AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF TECHNOLOGY
WITH
A
GIMMICKY
TOUCH
SCREEN

[Anonymous No.6842358]

don't worry guys, the 'dillo got this

[Anonymous No.6842360]

It appears to have been a propulsion system failure, judging by the footage.

[Anonymous No.6842364]

Damn, if only we had the Internet and live streaming in 1961...

[Anonymous No.6842365]

>[faint sound of Russian engineers rubbing hands in the distance]

[Anonymous No.6842367]

>>6842360
I think it exploded, judging by the fire.

[Anonymous No.6842368]

>>6842364
The first Moon landing was live streamed to the whole world.

Not 1080p though..

[Anonymous No.6842371]

>>6842365
for antares, the 1st stage and the main thrusters are russian & made in russia..

also, all this aint helping against pic related

[Anonymous No.6842372]

>>6842367
Yeh, probably. Trust me, I can tell you about every rocket failure since the 50s.

[Anonymous No.6842373]

80% success rate. :^)

[Anonymous No.6842376]

>>6842365
that's because there's no heat in their building

[Anonymous No.6842378]

>>6842367
I believe gravity is to blame here. It clearly pulled the rocket back down.

[Anonymous No.6842381]

I'm not sure if there was a Range Safety destruct. It's hard to tell from the video.

[Anonymous No.6842384]

Well on an interesting note, Russia launches a Soyuz to ISS in 4 hours.

[Anonymous No.6842388]

OK, which one of you did this.

[Anonymous No.6842389]

>>6842378
wrong, covalent bonding is the real perpetrator

[Anonymous No.6842391]

>>6842388
Probably you.

[Anonymous No.6842396]

>>6842384
Stream where? Two in one day would make SpaceX very happy.

[Anonymous No.6842401]

>>6842389
I blame the weak nuclear force. It fucks up everything, I tell ya.

[Anonymous No.6842402]

>>6842396
spaceflightnow.com

[Anonymous No.6842403]

>there are people in this very thread that want Orbital Sciences to fail
>they really believe less competition is good

[Anonymous No.6842406]

>>6842403
Russians aren't people.

[Anonymous No.6842407]

>>6842402
>Antares rocket’s enhanced upper stage debuts Tuesday

Well, it was hell of a debut. At least it seems like it was the lower stage at fault though.

[Anonymous No.6842410]

>>6842403
>>6842406
SpaceX fanboys aren't people*

[Anonymous No.6842413]

niggas be throwin around 'russian made rocket' like the soyuz aint real or somethin

smh

[Anonymous No.6842417]

>>6842356
because spacex doesn't want to be taken seriously

[Anonymous No.6842424]

>>6841254
I would guess that most likely, a leak developed somewhere that caused a fire in the boattail.

[Anonymous No.6842426]

Why don't they use a giant railgun to send things up in space.

[Anonymous No.6842429]

>>6841254
either a weld split (most of the engine has been under ultrasound, but i take it there is a limit to how much disassembly aerojet is willing to go through, so maybe some part didn't get checked.)

or aerojet directly fucked up when delivering or installing the engine. they've done it before.

[Anonymous No.6842432]

>>6842429
I'm going to try and duplicate it in Kerbal.

[Anonymous No.6842434]

>>6842426
1: there is no single impulse LEO insertion trajectory
2: can't build a payload that would survive the acceleration

[Anonymous No.6842436]

>>6842424
And I should add that it may have burned through wiring and caused the engine to lose thrust. There have been past failures of this type like Atlas-Centaur AC-43 in 1977, but the vehicle was much higher up before it destroyed itself. Since the engine here lost thrust just above the pad, there was likely a wiring burn-through in a short amount of time.

[Anonymous No.6842441]

>>6842434
OK, so how about a crane in geostationary orbit that brings things up.

[Anonymous No.6842442]

This is what happens when you privatize everything. Luckily nobody died. I'm sure they tried to maximize profits by reducing costs.

The rocket was probably made by slaves in China. We will never be a space faring civilization.

[Anonymous No.6842446]

>>6842442
Dude, dude. This has been happening since the 1950s. Any time you fly a giant tube full of explosive liquids, there's always the chance it will go kablooey.

[Anonymous No.6842452]

>>6842441
extending a tether from something moves it's CG, as the tether lowers, and the CG moves, the orbit will change. when the orbit wants to change more than the engines can resist, the whole contraption will go kablooie.

also, geostationary orbit is 35,786 KM up.

[Anonymous No.6842454]

>>6842356
Are you fucking autistic? Touchscreens are gimmicky? Is it fucking 2006 and the Nintendo DS just came out?

[Anonymous No.6842455]

>>6842452
So a really big tower with an elevator then.
I call it the Elevator to Space.

[Anonymous No.6842456]

>>6842452
>>6842446
>kablooe mind

[Anonymous No.6842460]

>>6842436
>There have been past failures of this type like Atlas-Centaur AC-43 in 1977, but the vehicle was much higher up before it destroyed itself

Now, what happened there was that an improperly brazed pipeline caused a leak leading to a fire in the engine compartment and vehicle self-destruction slightly under a minute into launch.

[Anonymous No.6842461]

>>6842455
A great glass one

[Anonymous No.6842463]

>>6842454
fuck yes, touch screens are gimmicky. fuck off with your retarded different-for-different's sake millennial babyshit.

[Anonymous No.6842467]

>>6842410
Oh look, SpaceX "fanboys" are a thing now. Yes, because we shouldn't embrace the private space company on the verge of developing a fully reusable launch system, and about to launch the heaviest rocket since the Saturn V (Energia doesn't count).

[Anonymous No.6842468]

>>6842454
Tell me what purpose a touch screen might have in a space capsule.
It's just a potential point of failure.

[Anonymous No.6842469]

>>6842463
You do realize how stupid you sound right?

[Anonymous No.6842477]

>>6842467
>spacex president promised 12 launches this year
>only people that take spacex seriously are amateurs outside of the industry

fanboys have always been a thing, it's how spacex survives.

>yfw the deputy administrator of NASA was a fanboy and got fired because everyone was sick of her advocating for a smaller budget

[Anonymous No.6842482]

>>6842477
>tfw she's now calling out NASA for building a big rocket to nowhere

[Anonymous No.6842486]

>>6842446
It's only supposed to happen in Russia now.

Are their rockets still horse drawn?

[Anonymous No.6842488]

>>6842486
They fly the only manned rockets in the world.

[Anonymous No.6842491]

>>6842486
Well, kinda. They've been flying the same shit for 50-60 years. The US program retired all its Cold War-era launch systems except for the Delta II.

[Anonymous No.6842493]

>>6842482
I was in the congressional hearings, lol. she sat there and said nasa doesn't need a bigger budget because spacex can handle leo, and that the sls will be awesome, and that private companies are perfectly capable of getting human ratings.

spacex wouldn't exist if it weren't for her.

[Anonymous No.6842496]

I have an idea.

Why don't we use a giant trampoline to launch payloads.

[Anonymous No.6842499]

>>6842486
Antares is half russian you know
and especially the parts that likely failed that launch
>>6842371

[Anonymous No.6842503]

>>6842496
I got a better idea.

[Anonymous No.6842504]

Is it possible that the failure was caused by the heavier second stage?

[Anonymous No.6842505]

>>6842477
You're so fucking stupid, if this was 2008 then people would take you seriously. The change SpaceX is causing to the launch industry is monumental. ULA announced they will develop a rocket that costs half to launch what Atlas V does. Arianespace announced they will take even more extreme cost cutting measures for the Ariane 6. The first stage of a Falcon 9 will land on a barge during CRS-5 next month. The Falcon Heavy launches early 2015. The ultra-powerful Raptor rocket engine is already undergoing parts manufacture. SpaceX has been valued by outside observers over 10 billion dollars. Please, take your autistic stupidity elsewhere.

[Anonymous No.6842507]

>>6842504
anything is possible. its rocket science. let's see what the investigation says.

[Anonymous No.6842510]

>>6842503
This pic gave me another idea:

SPACE
STAIRS

Seriously, what could go wrong?

[Anonymous No.6842511]

>>6842504
Unlikely, this would have been simulated several times and the engines tested for such conditions.

[Anonymous No.6842512]

>>6842468
Weight reductions getting rid of fucking knobs everywhere? And it's no more likely to fail than the shit they have now. Jesus Christ it's not like they don't have backups or anything. Fuck you are stupid.

[Anonymous No.6842514]

>>6842504
>>6842507
It was pretty obviously a fire starting in the engine compartment due to a leak,

[Anonymous No.6842515]

>>6841224
Lol. American engineering.

http://www.reddit.com/r/deathtoamerica/

[Anonymous No.6842516]

>>6842510
Stairwell to Heaven.

[Anonymous No.6842517]

I'm just happy that space travel is starting to... heat up again.

[Anonymous No.6842519]

>>6842510
>Seriously, what could go wrong?

[Anonymous No.6842520]

>>6841224
Step it up engineers.
:^)

[Anonymous No.6842530]

>>6842358

[Anonymous No.6842541]

>>6842505
>look at all these costs spacex is driving down!
>spacex still doesn't have a business model that closes without overbooking
>spacex still doesn't keep time cards, cannot do EVM
>18 hour workdays still the norm
>spacex has a snowflake contract with nasa that prevents nasa from rejecting bills for spacex initiated 'upgrades' to existing designs
>look how cheap spacex is!

spaceflight isn't affordable if corners aren't cut, and spacex peddles a narrative that is dishonest.

> SpaceX has been valued by outside observers over 10 billion dollars.

insiders and industry experts have concluded that the business case is bullshit, and that elon musk is running something along the lines of a ponzi scheme. outsiders unfamiliar with what it takes to safely put a rocket into space don't have the ability to read between the lines and recognize that spacex doesn't run a safe or solvent operation.

>The first stage of a Falcon 9 will land on a barge during CRS-5 next month.

inb4 'and its all paid for by private money!' line. that's incorrect. NASA has to pay for that R&D, because the contract says that spacex can change anything they want in their CRS rocket and nasa can't say no to footing the bill.

>look how cheap spacex is!
anything can look cheap if you can make the government pay for it. please take your shilling elsewhere.

[Anonymous No.6842546]

>>6842461
But won't they be torn to pieces?

[Anonymous No.6842558]

>>6842541
In the end, what truly matters is having a lot of people working and gaining interest in the great space venture, keeping pushing hard on the tech race for the greater good of humanity. Nah?
After that, it's only "natural" selection in the business / contractor gene pool.

[Anonymous No.6842565]

Every failure is a success, because it allows for future failures to be prevented. Great fireworks display, hope they discover the fault and add redundant precautions in the future.

[Anonymous No.6842567]

>>6842496
because then the payload will experience too much damaging acceleration for bouncing into space.

A better idea would be a giant sling shot. Of course with a giant slingshot we can't aim straight up because that's not an efficient way to get in to orbit, so we have to have a long track to increase our horizontal speed to orbital velocity and our launch vehicle needs to have a small rocket for orbital circularization.


Of course, since we want to send astronauts into orbit with our system, our slingshot needs to be many kilometers long, probably even more so to get the required strain to launch something into orbit

Of course, I'm doubting it will work because I think slingshots can't shoot stuff faster than the speed of sound of material in the bands

[Anonymous No.6842568]

>>6842558
spaceflight can be achieved without the unmitigated abuse of young enthusiastic engineers.

[Anonymous No.6842569]

>>6842565
>Every failure is a success
kek
failure is failure, at most it's a learning opportunity. i mean if it was an experiment sure, failure is part of it, but at this level? no way

[Anonymous No.6842575]

>>6842541
Wow. Just holy shit, wow. You are so deluded, it's just amazing. You didn't even provide a single source for your bullshit claims. Christ, do you actually believe this shit? Are you stupid or just incredibly insane?

[Anonymous No.6842578]

>>6842569
lessons learned:

1:fire aerojet
2:?

[Anonymous No.6842583]

>>6842541
And for the record, the Faclon 9 is much cheaper than any other rocket within it's weight range. That's a fucking fact. Good god, is it edgy now to be anti-SpaceX?

[Anonymous No.6842585]

>>6842496
>>6842567
you know the russians made a comment that the US should consider using a giant trampoline to get our guys into space since they were upset that the US didnt like them invading ukraine.

[Anonymous No.6842586]

>>6842575
some people have more sources than the front page of reddit. falcon9 sticker price is not what it costs to launch.

[Anonymous No.6842587]

>>6842578
Instructions unclear, dick caught in toaster.

[Anonymous No.6842590]

>>6842586
>some people have more sources than the front page of reddit
And you don't even have that it seems.

[Anonymous No.6842592]

>>6842578
actual lessons learned
1: don't go 108% on the engines
2: keep it nominal

[Anonymous No.6842593]

>>6842592
The Shuttle went to 104% so I guess that's true

[Anonymous No.6842594]

>>6842586
What? What does it cost to launch then genius? Nasa is not the only costumer you inbred retard, the majority of Falcon 9 1.1 launches have been for private companies. Companies that care about the actual price, because they do not get government funding to pay for the pricetag. So the "actual" cost must be lower than competitors, because otherwise SpaceX wouldn't have an ever increasing launch manifest.

[Anonymous No.6842602]

>>6842303
this.
also, their publicity stunt came after their efforts in creating a gigafactory for batteries. this was just an attempt to jump-start the need for their stupid fucking batteries.(not that its bad)

but people glorify individuals when they make the smallest of shit happen, and stomp on others with the mere whiff of a rumor (i.e steve jobs)

[Anonymous No.6842605]

you know, if you look at things like this:
http://www.indeed.com/cmp/Spacex/reviews
and the anonymous answer in
http://www.quora.com/What-is-it-like-to-work-with-Elon-Musk

in the light of not keeping track of time cards, you kind of have to wonder where the costs and revenues really are.

[Anonymous No.6842606]

>>6842602
Elon Musk has done more good for humanity than Steve Jobs ever did. Tesla is debatable, but if SpaceX is successful in creating a cheap, fully reusable rocket (which it looks like they will be) then that will easily be one of the top 20 technological achievements in human history.

[Anonymous No.6842608]

>>6842605
You're on the wrong board, please redirect yourself back to /x/ please.

[Anonymous No.6842617]

>>6842606
>cheap
>reusable
>reliable
>rocket
pick 3 and only 3

[Anonymous No.6842620]

>>6842590
>/r/spacex is a perfectly reliable and objective source of industry information
kek

[Anonymous No.6842623]

>>6842620
Still not seeing any sources there.

[Anonymous No.6842627]

>>6842617
Apparently SpaceX picks 4. The Falcon 9 is currently cheaper than the competition by a significant margin, reliable as evidenced by it's perfect success rate, besides the partial failure which showed how durable the rocket is when it lost an engine and still made it to orbit, it is most certainly a rocket, and it will be reusable within 2 years. The first stage has already completed two successful soft landings in the ocean after decelerating from hypersonic speeds in the outer fringes of the atmosphere. The next step is to land it on a floating barge, which is planned for the next launch in December.

[Anonymous No.6842630]

>>6842623
if you're asking me to dig up congressional hearing transcripts you can get fucked and drown in the koolaid. musk wants spacex to be the Apple of aerospace and retards like you act like that's a good thing.

[Anonymous No.6842632]

>>6842623
He's a moron, he browses /x/ and believes any shit conspiracy theory thrown his way. This is the type of person who believes we didn't land on the moon, or that the ISS doesn't even exist because the Earth is concave.

[Anonymous No.6842637]

>>6842630
Nice, no sources means we can completely discredit your insane (lack of) argument and ignore you. Moving on, who thinks SpaceX will succeed with the barge landing? Musk puts the odds at 50%, but they were successful with the water landings and he had given those even lower chances.

[Anonymous No.6842639]

>>6842627
shill harder holy shit.

>perfect success rate
you know the ISS almost had to open up the 45 day food supply this summer because spacex fucked up again, right?

[Anonymous No.6842642]

>>6842639
And what fuckup would that be? A delay? Rockets get delayed, it's better to delay than catastrophically fuck up like Orbital did today.

[Anonymous No.6842644]

>>6842623
>>6842627
>>6842632
>>6842637

I only just got here, but can you sound any more like a macfag?

[Anonymous No.6842648]

>>6842644
I just want him to put up or shut up. He can't go and complain that people are sucking Musk's cock and getting their info from reddit while claiming there are real sources out there without providing anything.

[Anonymous No.6842649]

That engibe was made in Ukraine, not in Russia

[Anonymous No.6842650]

>>6842644
You didn't just get here, you've been shitting up the thread for the past 3 hours, and you replied to two different people.

[Anonymous No.6842651]

>>6842642
orbital was on the pad and ready to go, nasa said 'oh give spacex a chance'. so orbital stood down.

surprise! spacex actually isn't ready at all! a few days later, orbital has a flawless launch.

[Anonymous No.6842654]

>>6842651
When was this? Because today Orbital fucked up spectacularly and SpaceX has a flawless track record with the commercial supply.

[Anonymous No.6842681]

>>6842328
>NASA literally lost all the spec documents to the Saturn V.

How the fuck is this possible?

[Anonymous No.6842686]

>Orbital literally gets BTFO
>Maaan spaceX really sucks!
never change /sci/

[Anonymous No.6842688]

>>6842541
You're the guy making the schizophrenia threads too aren't you?

[Anonymous No.6842690]

>tfw a mission flies to Mars, Titan, or another star system (for months, years, or thousands of years respectively) only for a fuckup such as this to happen on attempted landing

That why humanity will never leave Earth in any substantial way.

[Anonymous No.6842695]

>>6842690
Fun fact: two-thirds of mars missions fail

[Anonymous No.6842711]

>>6842695
Two-third of Mars missions failed in the past, back the the space race was in full swing, nobody knew what they were doing and the Soviet Union was responsible for most of them. We got better at it since

[Anonymous No.6842715]

>>6842711
>most space mission fuckups were Soviet ones
>the Soviets sent multiple probes to Venus, but we tend to ignore that and almost pretend it never happened

Way to go, Murrikans.

[Anonymous No.6842716]

>>6842715
venus isn't mars

[Anonymous No.6842717]

>>6842716
venus is way cooler
mars is just a dead piece of rock

[Anonymous No.6842719]

>>6842715
Funny thing is if the Soviets/Russians were downplaying/ignoring American space program achievements in the same way, they'd be called batshit crazy.

[Anonymous No.6842722]

>>6842717
Fuck no Venus is a piece of shit. Always been.

I'm glad NASA never had an interest in it. It would've leeched budget off actually relevant missions

[Anonymous No.6842723]

>>6842717
>venus is way cooler
I't way hotter actually (by some 500 degrees). Then again it's normal that ladies are hot, isn't it.

[Anonymous No.6842724]

>>6842715
I'm not handwaving soviet achievements, just saying comparing the current situation to space race era is a silly thing to do

[Anonymous No.6842726]

>>6842723

[Anonymous No.6842744]

>>6841224
Wow and they were delivering supplies to ISS? No wonder. This is what happens when you try to give aid to a terrorist organization. What the hell was the government thinking? Of course it's going to be hit with an IED or rocket. Are they really that stupid to think that ISS is just going to thank us for the supplies?! It's seriously 9/11 all over again.

[Anonymous No.6842745]

>>6842722

[Anonymous No.6842747]

>>6841831
>'merikans

[Anonymous No.6842748]

>>6842079
>US space budget is nominal
FTFY

[Anonymous No.6842749]

>>6842744
OK, so the routing protocol known as IS-IS is now terrorist too? You'll get investigated if you employ it in your network infrastructure?

[Anonymous No.6842750]

What caused the failure?

[Anonymous No.6842752]

>>6842750
Strapping a Soviet engine assembled in the 60s to the rocket seems to be the leading hypothesis right now.

[Anonymous No.6842753]

>>6842119
omg everytime this gif is posted i watch it about 40 times

>been on 4chan for years

lal

[Anonymous No.6842755]

>>6842745
Yea, I'd love to live there. Just dunno whether I'd first get squashed by the pressure, melted and evaporated by the temperature, suffocated by the atmosphere, or dissolved by the acid rain.

[Anonymous No.6842756]

$5 says it was a glitch that started the motor for the next stage prematurely which snowballed into a catastrophic failure

[Anonymous No.6842762]

Damn... Why would they use that kind of engine??

[Anonymous No.6842765]

>>6842756
that sounds like some Kerbal Space Program type shit.

[Anonymous No.6842766]

>>6842752
But the 60s was a good year, it can't be that.

[Anonymous No.6842771]

>>6842762
it's cheap, has high performance(for kerosene LOX rockets), and was designed under motherfucking Sergei Korolev.

It's history is interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMbl_ofF3AM

[Anonymous No.6842777]

>>6841834
Well.. to be fair, the RD-180s should have less rust / corrosion on them, so it will be an improvement.

[Anonymous No.6842783]

NASA GETTING BTFO

US GOVERNMENT GETTING BTFO

BRING ON ELON MUSK AND GET THESE AMATEURS THE FUCK OUT

[Anonymous No.6842786]

>>6841906

the slaves need to work and shut the fuck up.

if they don't then based Elon will just build worker robots to replace them. those aspies should be happy they're not working at fucking Foxconn

[Anonymous No.6842791]

>>6842753
Those who don't believe in black holes' singularity should watch it at least 400 times.

[Anonymous No.6842792]

>>6842783
Shut up, Orbital Sciences is a contractor just like SpaceX.

If anything SpaceX will suffer from this.

[Anonymous No.6842794]

>>6841246
What private company in their right mind would be willing to fund high-risk ventures like space exploration without some other entity working out the vast majority of kinks (read: catastrophic failures) in the whole process

[Anonymous No.6842795]

>>6842403

Orbital isn't that competitive.

Orbital fails just fine on their own, no need to put motivations in people's mouths.

[Anonymous No.6842798]

>>6842792

STAY FUCKING MAD YOU GOVERNMENT SLAVE

SPACE X WILL BE TAKING OVER AND CORRECTING ALL OF NASA'S RAMPANT INCOMPETENCE. THESE FAT FUCKS HAVE LITERALLY DONE NOTHING FOR 35 YEARS STRAIGHT EXCEPT PISS AWAY TAXPAYER MONEY. MEANWHILE ELON PROMISES TO HAVE PEOPLE LIVING ON MARS BY 2025.

NASA IS FUCKING FINISHED. NOT BECAUSE OF THIS LAUNCH, BUT BECAUSE OF WHAT IT HASN'T BEEN DOING FOR THE PAST 4 FUCKING DECADES. FUCK NASA AND FUCK THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

[Anonymous No.6842800]

>>6842786
what if they build a worker robot to replace elon musk?

[Anonymous No.6842802]

>>6842541

Rly? They have an R&D contract?

>Taxpayer risk bearing contract with no way to track performance

WoW NASA thanks for being a steward of my tax dollars! Can't wait for the A-12 of space flight! Oh wait they're not given that much money because they're a shit agency!

[Anonymous No.6842803]

>>6842511

It's happened before, and recently, I think either a proton or zenit failed because some software figure was set improperly after the first launch with an upgraded and heavier fregat/blockd? stage.

[Anonymous No.6842805]

>>6842800

Can't be done, Elon is the ubermensch incarnate.

By 2040, the United States will be in full decline as a world power, and slowly transforming into a 3rd world backwater like Mexico. Meanwhile Tesla and SpaceX will have taken over North America and put a colony with 15 million people on Mars, 10 million on Titan, and 5 million scattered throughout various stations beyond Neptune. It will finally be possible to get the fuck off this miserable planet and live somewhere that isn't totally FUBAR

[Anonymous No.6842806]

>>6842798
elon pls go

[Anonymous No.6842809]

>>6842541

You're unfamiliar with business. Startups often look like ponzi scheme to outsiders. Sometimes they fail like ones and sometimes the sell proves valid and they expand.

And future orders helping to pay for current launchers is a standard practice in the commercial launch industry. You're some prick hick whose world is the gravy train shuttle model where people are paid to sit around.

[Anonymous No.6842810]

>>6842805
Fuck Elon Musk

he should be doing projects like:

>global free, fast wifi
>solar panels everywhere
>wind turbines everywhere
>refining salt water into fresh water
>net positive fusion reactions

he should also be partnering with the makers of rasberry pi to bring computers to everyone on earth

[Anonymous No.6842815]

>>6842493

SpaceX and COTS predate the Obama admin(Garver) moron.

For commercial crew, SpaceX is a valid competitor that is both the quickest and cheapest option for meeting the task.

[Anonymous No.6842818]

>>6842477

For many factors, NASA isn't getting a huge pay raise, and rather than accept that into your worldview, you heap blame on people who aren't responsible. There's no extra cash to cover up your bad choices and for more graft for your ilk.

[Anonymous No.6842819]

>>6842429
>a weld split
My first impression was that one of the two engines failed, and a weld split is certainly a possibility, given the cursory ultrasound inspection. I know a retired Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) inspector who did MagnaFlux and X-ray inspections for Aerojet long ago, and he says ultrasound alone is inadequate.

[Anonymous No.6842820]

>>6842586

Yea, but you're an ignorant moron who doesn't understand that the extra overhead for NASA or DoD launches is a factor for all domestic rockets bought by them. A rocket flight will cost less for those who don't apply that overhead.

[Anonymous No.6842821]

>>6841551
One was to do with seed germination and another was to do with plant formation.
>experiments that would actually be useful
>NASA burns them
>mfw

[Anonymous No.6842823]

>>6842681

It's a myth.

We didn't rebuild the Saturn 5 for these types of missions for the same reason you own a car to drive to work and get groceries and not a bus.

[Anonymous No.6842828]

>>6842823
shut the FUCK up nerd LOL

[Anonymous No.6842836]

Why haven't we just pooled the world's resources and built a space elevator yet?

[Anonymous No.6842839]

>>6842836

The world spends its money on other things.
Space elevator is just one idea among many, not necessarily the best.
You'd have to also fund stuff for the space elevator to carry into space.
We have space access methods for what we do have to put up there.

[Anonymous No.6842840]

>>6842836
Because launch loops and mass drivers are better

[Anonymous No.6842850]

>>6842836
A space elevator hasn't been built because of a deficit in technological capacity, not because of a deficit in finances.

[Anonymous No.6842855]

They should just strap a bunch of Murricans to the bottom of a rocket and clap their way to space.

[Anonymous No.6842863]

Few hours later russian soyz sucefully took off to ISS.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYF0qg65Rwk

[Anonymous No.6842866]

Firecracker technology.
Boys love it.

[Anonymous No.6842867]

>>6842212
>>6842213
>a private company going to mars before a govt does
>with in the next 10-20 years
>he wants to quantify the costs himself
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_manned_Mars_mission_plans_in_the_20th_century

>12014 Holocene Era
>actaully shitposting in all caps

>>6842850
We could build a space elevator now with our pleb tier tech , it would just be prohibitively expensive.

[Anonymous No.6842868]

>>6842863
Based Korolyov does it again.

[Anonymous No.6842871]

As seen from a small commuter plane: http://youtu.be/zarWT7H9t54

[Anonymous No.6842879]

The engine(s) in this rocket was basically derived from the engines in the soviet n-1 moon rocket, and we all know how well that went.

They even ground tested one earlier this year and it exploded, how STUPID do you have to be to go ahead and use one anyway after such a recent failure in testing?

[Anonymous No.6842880]

[Anonymous No.6842884]

>>6842880

I guess they dun Kerbal'd

[Anonymous No.6842935]

I'd suck Musk's musky rod and let him do anything to my supple body.

No homo.

[Anonymous No.6842997]

>>6842791
You don't need to be sucked in all the way to the singularity to be killed dead. Beyond the event horizon any flow, even that of light, can only go in one direction, obviously meaning that a nervous (a especially a brain) or circulatory system cannot function. As a matter of fact, you blood or neuron signals would need to achieve relativistic speeds to be able to flow away from the black hole center even at certain distances outside the event horizon.

[Anonymous No.6843007]

>>6842119

[Anonymous No.6843022]

>>6843007
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEtbFm_CjE0&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[Anonymous No.6843027]

>>6842762
Its like the moist nugget of rocket engines

[Anonymous No.6843036]

>>6842172
>using Tor

[Anonymous No.6843048]

>>6842722

Part of the problem is that Mars gets almost everything. We have hundreds, possibly even thousands of images from the surface of Mars. We have a grand total of 7 for everything else that isn't our own neighbourhood.

[Anonymous No.6843088]

>use a fucking four decade old refurbished Soviet rocket
Jeez, what a shocker.

[Anonymous No.6843134]

>>6843088
And Falcon's engine is a glorified LMDE from the 60s.

The NK-33s are perfectly decent designs.

[Anonymous No.6843138]

>>6843134
sure, if you made them today

[Anonymous No.6843146]

>>6843134

That's not the point. SpaceX is using newly-manufacture units. Those NK33s were built when Ford was in office.

[Anonymous No.6843151]

>>6843146

Its not like orbital just digs them out a scrapheap, straps them on then fuels them up.

Aerojet modify them to their own design, and changes the designation to aj-something performing NDT and inspections etc.

[Anonymous No.6843165]

>>6843151

>Aerojet modify them to their own design, and changes the designation to aj-something performing NDT and inspections etc.
I know, and that's all well and good--but if the incident investigation determines that the anomaly was caused by engine failure, I'm not going to be any more surprised.

If pimping out surplus Soviet engines and calling them new is supposed to be the big draw of Orbital Science's business model, maybe they've got a problem.

[Anonymous No.6843181]

Th-thanks PR.

Also, anybody get the feeling that OS's... extensive experience with launch failures just makes them more versatile in the long run?

[Anonymous No.6843197]

>>6842541
>>The first stage of a Falcon 9 will land on a barge during CRS-5 next month.
>inb4 'and its all paid for by private money!' line. that's incorrect. NASA has to pay for that R&D, because the contract says that spacex can change anything they want in their CRS rocket and nasa can't say no to footing the bill.
Holy shit, this is so ridiculously wrong, I can't even imagine where you got this idea.

Falcon 9 development was not a part of the CRS or COTS contracts. NASA paid to develop Dragon, and SpaceX made a profit on that, and spent some of it on developing Falcon 9.

Nobody gave them a blank cheque for Falcon 9 development.

[Anonymous No.6843228]

>>6842823
It is a myth that the Saturn V plans were lost, but the capability was lost, and many of the industrial products it was produced from are no longer on the market. Saturn V production also involved a tremendous amount of highly skilled labor and tribal knowledge about how to get things done.

Producing an exact replica of any fifty-year-old vehicle would be very difficult, for these reasons.

Saturn V was expensive as hell, over $1 billion per launch in today's money, and society was a lot poorer back then, so there was a lot of pressure to move to something more affordable. The truly ridiculous thing, though, is that the space shuttle ended up being more expensive to fly than the Saturn V, despite being a lot less capable (and never mind the total absurdity of a reusable vehicle costing more to fly than an expendable one).

[Anonymous No.6843362]

>>6842340
Oh look, now it's SpaceX doesn't pay its workers overtime. What will you shills come up with next? They would have been sued by now if there was a serious issue. You think their competitors, who are now in a very tenuous position, would not jump at the chance to get SpaceX out of the game?

[Anonymous No.6843371]

>>6843362
SpaceX summons their rocket engines through a demonic portal.
If spaceX wants to fly more than 5 mission per year we'll run out of virgins to sacrifice even if we start drafting NEETs for it.

[Anonymous No.6843411]

>>6843048
Man I want a rover or a boat on Titan so bad

Hell even an airplane will do. It'd be ideal for topography surveys of the lakes too

[Anonymous No.6843456]

>>6842651
Was that the time SpaceX couldn't launch for weeks because our glorious United States Air Force's range radar system caught fire? Just sayin', not all SpaceX delays are their fault. That's why they're building a new pad down by the Rio Grande.

[Anonymous No.6843458]

>>6842749
http://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/1625188/belgian-chocolate-company-decides-isis-not-good-trading-name

[Anonymous No.6843464]

Russians launch supply ship to space station just 9 hours after U.S. epic fail.

[Anonymous No.6843467]

>>6842805
>tfw Californians will just turn the space colonies into Crapifornia.

[Anonymous No.6843507]

>>6843464
Russian food! well, better than nothing...

[Anonymous No.6843675]

>>6842879
Seriously Orbital Sciences... seriously... NK-33s... Space is supposed to be cutting edge technology, not shit that explodes if it wiggles.

[Anonymous No.6843691]

>>6842765
Flight controller really should have alt-L'ed to prevent this shit

[Anonymous No.6843713]

>>6843362
They have been sued, a few times in fact. E.g.:

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/08/12/spacex-faces-lawsuit-pay-working-conditions/

Please actually do some researcher before calling someone a shill you moron,

[Anonymous No.6843716]

Failure is part of science. If things went right 100% of the time we'd never progress. Not saying this is a good thing, but it is to be expected. Space and orbital science can be very unpredictable.

[Anonymous No.6843721]

>>6843197
Bollocks. Falcon 9 is explicitly part of the COTS bid and the agreement.

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/johnson/pdf/216459main_spacex_amend_2.pdf

[Anonymous No.6843723]

>>6843716
>If things went right 100% of the time we'd never progress
And we wouldn't need to because everything would be perfect...

[Anonymous No.6843724]

>>6843716
>Space and orbital science can be very unpredictable.
Or at least Orbital Sciences can be very unpredictable.

[Anonymous No.6843768]

>>6843724
Orbital are much better at working to a schedule.

[Anonymous No.6843865]

>>6843768
So what you're saying is SpaceX and Orbital Sciences can be very unpredictable.

[Anonymous No.6844300]

>>6841224
>guys shit their pants when rocket exploded
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qNL59WkIRY

[Anonymous No.6844329]

>>6843713
There is a difference between a company getting sued over a singular issue, and a company being so infested with corruption that it is essentially one giant Ponzi scheme. That is what the faggot I was replying to was trying to push, that SpaceX was somehow a giant fraud, that none of their achievments mean anything because they were propped up by Nasa during the most difficult part of their existence, and that SpaceX has not made a huge impact on the industry, because despite all the evidence to the contrary this guy is just a giant faggot who hates SpaceX and refuses to listen to evidence. Also, was the lawsuit resolved or is it still ongoing?

[Anonymous No.6844334]

>>6843768
SpaceX has schedule problems still? They've made most of the planned launches for 2014, didn't they?

[Anonymous No.6844345]

>>6844300
Their reactions are actually pretty funny

[Anonymous No.6844498]

>>6842403
>supporting Ruskies
>1920+94

[Anonymous No.6845043]

>>6844329
SpaceX are being sued on a number of issues, these are ongoing. You can find many cases on the internet of engineers working there complaining.

[Anonymous No.6845368]

>>6844345
Shockwaves are real. They were close. Did you watch the other video of the guys in the plane? The pilot could feel it move the plane.

Regardless of if the people in that video were in any danger, they did the intelligent thing, thinking about surviving. Darwin and such.

I'd imagine there was either a combat vet in that group or just some really intelligent people, to have everyone get down and not standing on that berm like that.