Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX rocket explodes during testing over Texas

bbc.co.uk

1–10 of 95 posts

Re: SpaceX rocket explodes during testing over Texas

#5
The Falcon 9 explodes again? ...While the European Vega rocket (aimed at the same size of payloads, but much more versatile of the Falcon 9[1]) is 3 success out of 3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vega_rocket

The political will to create a private market for rockets is strong in US. So strong that a lot of American public money has been used to save SpaxeX from failure, multiple time.

But concretely, what's the point of it? NASA worked fairly well if well founded. Now for political reasons they prefer to give money to SpaceX, even if they have issues with their job...

[1] Vega launch satellites to Sun synchronous orbit, satellites here are earth observers and usually a few tonnes at most, the majority much smaller. Launches here are very infrequent, so matching spacecraft is difficult. Falcon 9 isn't currently equipped with an appropriate fairing to do dual launch like this without satellites built to stack (which most aren't). Falcon 9 might haul 9 tonnes, but you might not be able to find 9 tonnes of spacecraft to that orbit. Vega payloads are also kept in a clean environment and fairing, something SpaceX hasn't demonstrated. Horizontal integration can be an issue. ITAR issues... The list goes on.

Re: SpaceX rocket explodes during testing over Texas

#7
post #5

The Falcon 9 explodes again? ...While the European Vega rocket (aimed at the same size of payloads, but much more versatile of the Falcon 9[1]) is 3 success out of 3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vega_rocket The political will to create a private market for rockets is strong in US. So strong that a lot of American public money has been used to save SpaxeX from failure, multiple time. But concretely, what's the point…

The point of it is that the US government finds it politically inexpedient and costly having to pay Russia or United Launch Alliance[1] (who sometimes use Russian engines anyway[2]) in order to get people and equipment to space. SpaceX is an obvious path away from the Russia Space Agency / ULA.

For things that the government wants to launch from the US, having a second US-based option for space launch will get the US out of the bilateral monopoly that exists with ULA.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Launch_Alliance [2] http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1408/20rd180delivery/

Re: SpaceX rocket explodes during testing over Texas

#8
post #5

The Falcon 9 explodes again? ...While the European Vega rocket (aimed at the same size of payloads, but much more versatile of the Falcon 9[1]) is 3 success out of 3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vega_rocket The political will to create a private market for rockets is strong in US. So strong that a lot of American public money has been used to save SpaxeX from failure, multiple time. But concretely, what's the point…

Are you trolling? Most rocket platforms have had a rate of failure. The ESA's Ariane 5 (predecessor of the VEGA rocket) had launch failures as well. SpaceX has had an amazing run in comparison to most other platforms.

>But concretely, what's the point of it? NASA worked fairly well if well founded...

NASA doesn't build rockets. They have always outsourced the job to aerospace companies.

> Now for political reasons they prefer to give money to SpaceX

I think you'll find that political reasons are keeping NASA from buying more launches from SpaceX.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/25/spacex-...

EDIT - changed my wording from "very checkered history" to "had launch failures as well" - in my rush to respond, I went from memory and checking the facts found my words too strong.

Re: SpaceX rocket explodes during testing over Texas

#9
post #5

The Falcon 9 explodes again? ...While the European Vega rocket (aimed at the same size of payloads, but much more versatile of the Falcon 9[1]) is 3 success out of 3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vega_rocket The political will to create a private market for rockets is strong in US. So strong that a lot of American public money has been used to save SpaxeX from failure, multiple time. But concretely, what's the point…

Well actually NASA, like any beaurocracy, grew so large that rockets were costing billions of dollars to launch a new rocket. Without market forces to keep the costs in check, no one thought this a problem and contracts were issued based on paperwork driven development.
Post reply on HN