SpaceX launch webcast: Orbcomm-2 Mission [video]

Post by lmm » Tue, Dec 22, 2015, 12:34 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #322

RonaldRaygun wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually more about complexity. They could simply replace the center engine with a lower power design and still get plenty of mass to orbit. The issue then is that you have to design a completely new engine and have 2 different engines in your first stage. More complexity generally equals more risk, and historically SpaceX has sought to maximize simplicity for the sake of reliability and rapid iteration.

And you suddenly introduce a single point of failure for the return part of the mission.

Post by gchokov » Tue, Dec 22, 2015, 12:39 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #166

FeepingCreature wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even a small difference in orbits adds up over time. You don't need much fuel for orbital adjustments, as long as you're staying in the same plane. Say one satellite's orbit is a bit smaller. That means that, over time, they will naturally drift farther and farther apart, until they end up on different sides of the globe. At that point, just raise the smaller orbit slightly. Kerbal Space Program is really good for un…

You just described the way I launched my first comms network constellation[0] - basically loaded a whole bunch of satellites on a single rocket and deployed them on slightly different orbits, so that they'll spread themselves out as the time goes. Only mid-launch I figured out I could just put three of them on Kerbisynchronous Equatorial Orbit at 120° phase difference :/. Yes, KSP is absolutely amazing for learning t…

Post by Praxilla » Tue, Dec 22, 2015, 12:43 PM UTC

lutorm wrote: post #298

zaroth wrote: post #248

In a single moment, SpaceX earns itself more than $50 million dollars, right? That's a big bonus for everyone who made this possible and some well earned time off, and then back to work changing the world! So from what I've read, the returns are immense; the amount of learning they can do from examining their own rocket is the real initial treasure. Their rocket design should advance considerably based on this trove,…

I guess this would be a good place to point out that we are hiring! :-) http://www.spacex.com/careers

Post by ansible » Tue, Dec 22, 2015, 12:48 PM UTC

molyss wrote: post #263

twistedpair wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point. Orbcomm already paid off the booster. Now SpaceX can take it up for a joy ride for only a few hundred grand of gas and really fly the fins off it. I bet they relaunch this booster on their own dime as a demo.

I have no inside knowledge, but I'd suspect Orbcomm paid next to nothing for this launch. Between "You'll be the first launch since the last one... You know, that one with a small anomaly..." and fact that this was the first launch of a new version of the falcon 9 (with slightly different engines, cooler/more pressurized O2), I know that if I were negociating for Orbcomm, I'd ask spaceX to cross the last digit on the…

Post by yitchelle » Tue, Dec 22, 2015, 12:53 PM UTC

alkonaut wrote: post #332

noir-york wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Many of us in other countries wouldn't think of chanting our countries name Unless you're German, than that statement is almost certainly false. And even Germany is changing. Your statement most likely reveals more about your political leanings then the levels of nationalistic fervour in different countries.

> Unless you're German, than that statement is almost certainly false. What? Imagine a Scandinavian or a Briton chanting their countries names in any other place than a sporting event (with an opposing country). It just doesn't happen.