SpaceX launch webcast: Orbcomm-2 Mission [video]

Post by mikeash » Tue, Dec 22, 2015, 4:06 PM UTC

InclinedPlane wrote: post #286

molyss wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

For this launch, Orbcomm paid a pittance. They paid Falcon 1 prices for a Falcon 9 launch.

Post by mikeash » Tue, Dec 22, 2015, 4:09 PM UTC

rtkwe wrote: post #207

oroup wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hydrogen in the Space Shuttle Main Engine creates embrittlement in the alloys of the engine. [1][2] The launch sequence also involved running the engines at 104.5% of rated capacity. [3] Before Block II of the engines, the turbopumps needed to be disassembled and rebuilt between flights. [4] I have no real idea how significant coking of the Merlin engine is, but the SSMEs were hardly "clean". [1] https://en.wikip…

IIRC the 104% was additional performance they enabled through upgrades and design improvements beyond the original design not over-driving them.

Post by chiph » Tue, Dec 22, 2015, 4:12 PM UTC

sqldba wrote: post #215

I just wanted to ask, what kind of technology or science understanding do they have now which was required to make this happen now rather than X years ago? (Also, is it fair to say that while this is an achievement, it is only more-so when they can reliably repeat it; I mean it's not exactly safe yet for people, who knows what a gust of wind could do?)

Post by mikeash » Tue, Dec 22, 2015, 4:17 PM UTC

arrrg wrote: post #305

mikeash wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is arguably the greatest achievement in space flight since 1969 and you're going to tell the people who made it happen how they should celebrate?

Especially because of that. This nationalism is so weird. I mean, to me it’s mostly incredibly weird, nothing else much. I just cannot picture myself ever ever ever doing something like that, it’s just so incredibly alien. But a good demonstration of the toxic virality of nationalism, I guess. It manages to wriggle itself into anything.

Post by Tloewald » Tue, Dec 22, 2015, 4:57 PM UTC

grkvlt wrote: post #130

JshWright wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New Shepard is able to make several compromises that make landing _much_ easier. New Shepard doesn't have to get anywhere close to orbital velocity, so it can use a far less powerful engine. That means it can throttle down far enough to hover. That is a _huge_ advantage over Falcon 9, which must time the landing burn perfectly to hit 0 velocity at the exact moment it touches the ground. They're in the same club like…

But the F9 first stage doesn't get to orbital velocity, either, remember. The achievements are comparable, despite the fact it makes SpaceX come second. Blue Origin was first with a VTOL rocket stage, as part of a space system.