salttee
Posts: 2470
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Jan 11, 2018 12:07 pm

The only explanation that makes sense:
moo wrote:
Now there is an agency out there who can merrily get on with operating the satellite without oversight - as it doesn't exist any more...


Methinks we now have a stealth satellite up there.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Topic Author
Posts: 8005
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Jan 11, 2018 3:02 pm

parapente wrote:
BTW has anyone got a view on Bezos' plans?New Glen is bigger than you want for commercial launches but too small for Mars - or the Moon really.He must have a commercial objective.I can only think of a space hotel in Earth orbit.

Amazon warehouses in orbit, able to deliver products via drone anywhere in the world within a few hours.... :spin:

Also there is a thread for Blue Origin projects as well: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1028003
But really isn't much out there about BO's plans for the future.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
ZaphodHarkonnen
Posts: 694
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:20 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Jan 11, 2018 3:30 pm

Tugger wrote:
parapente wrote:
BTW has anyone got a view on Bezos' plans?New Glen is bigger than you want for commercial launches but too small for Mars - or the Moon really.He must have a commercial objective.I can only think of a space hotel in Earth orbit.

Amazon warehouses in orbit, able to deliver products via drone anywhere in the world within a few hours.... :spin:

Also there is a thread for Blue Origin projects as well: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1028003
But really isn't much out there about BO's plans for the future.

Tugg


15 mins delivery to any point on earth. :p
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Jan 11, 2018 5:34 pm

What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
GST
Posts: 821
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 10:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Jan 11, 2018 6:21 pm

Going back to the Zuma situation...if the payload adaptor failed to release, wouldn't the 2nd stage and payload still be in full orbit at that time, and thus trackable? I suppose the 2nd stage could be commanded to de-orbit the whole lot after the failure, but I can't imagine them wanting to do that until expending all troubleshooting options? I see no reason why they would intend to release the payload from a suborbital trajectory and require Zuma to power itself into its desired orbit - that seems risky and wastes a lot of potential station-keeping propellant. I'm not normally conspiratorially minded, but given that we know this is a military payload I'm not sure I see an alternative, besides the stealth sat hypothesis.

I'm sure some lovely A.nutter will be along to tell me the key bit I'm missing here.

Of course Zuma could simply be a testbed for some new reentry vehicle or hypersonic glider technology...perhaps SpaceX's launch was intended to be suborbital, putting Zuma into a re-entry at a specific point/speed/attitude...man that feels very much like a KSP "test this component" mission!
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Jan 11, 2018 6:27 pm

Falcon Heavy static fire has been canceled for today. There will be another try tomorrow.

https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/sta ... 8909132800
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 6696
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Jan 11, 2018 7:55 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Falcon Heavy static fire has been canceled for today. There will be another try tomorrow.

https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/sta ... 8909132800


Well if they are going to try tomorrow, whatever they found today, must be minor.
Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4774
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:27 pm

casinterest wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
Falcon Heavy static fire has been canceled for today. There will be another try tomorrow.

https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/sta ... 8909132800


Well if they are going to try tomorrow, whatever they found today, must be minor.


It can be anything, including range related rather than rocket related, so a postponement isn't necessarily an indication of a fault - static fires on Falcon 9s have been randomly postponed as well, and they are established rockets.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Topic Author
Posts: 8005
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:59 pm

moo wrote:
casinterest wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
Falcon Heavy static fire has been canceled for today. There will be another try tomorrow.

https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/sta ... 8909132800


Well if they are going to try tomorrow, whatever they found today, must be minor.


It can be anything, including range related rather than rocket related, so a postponement isn't necessarily an indication of a fault - static fires on Falcon 9s have been randomly postponed as well, and they are established rockets.

To paraphrase my father-in-law who was involved in the early US rocket launches: It's scary as hell to finally push that launch button! Most didn't want to do it and risk it doing something its not supposed to do. A delayed launch was still a success, it hadn't blown up!

He was commenting on how often a launch would be delayed, by anything, for any reason. The fear was palpable. I honestly do not know how it is now though, since all of the USA's hope, dreams, and aspirations aren't on the line each time.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
zanl188
Posts: 3604
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:05 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Jan 11, 2018 10:58 pm

GST wrote:
Going back to the Zuma situation...if the payload adaptor failed to release, wouldn't the 2nd stage and payload still be in full orbit at that time, and thus trackable? I suppose the 2nd stage could be commanded to de-orbit the whole lot after the failure, but I can't imagine them wanting to do that until expending all troubleshooting options?


If the fairing also failed to release it would be hauling a lot more load to orbit. Then the increased surface area would produce more drag.
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
 
User avatar
Tugger
Topic Author
Posts: 8005
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Jan 11, 2018 11:34 pm

zanl188 wrote:
GST wrote:
Going back to the Zuma situation...if the payload adaptor failed to release, wouldn't the 2nd stage and payload still be in full orbit at that time, and thus trackable? I suppose the 2nd stage could be commanded to de-orbit the whole lot after the failure, but I can't imagine them wanting to do that until expending all troubleshooting options?


If the fairing also failed to release it would be hauling a lot more load to orbit. Then the increased surface area would produce more drag.

I just have the feeling that there is more to the story and that there wasn't a failure. Of course that is the most likely and logical explanation but with operations like this the only ones who know can't and aren't talking (actually it is the absolute - so far - silence on the matter with no one pointing fingers or saying anything anywhere really that also encourages me to think this). For all we know it could be in a very different orbit and designed so it won't be easily detected.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
User avatar
Nomadd
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2017 3:26 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 12:33 am

The payload deploys on a timer. There are no commands sent from the ground. If the payload didn't deploy, the 2nd stage would still fire up and re-enter because the payload can't activate and there's no possibly way to do anything. Both the 2nd stage and the payload without it's solar arrays deployed have very short lifespans, so there's no time to troubleshoot anything.
"Sources" are just people repeating things they don't understand. The payload did reach orbit, since the 2nd stage came down right where it was suppose to. If it failed to deploy from the adapter, it would have been de-orbited with the stage.

Fairing separation occurs at 60km or so, where drag isn't a factor over a short period.
 
GST
Posts: 821
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 10:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 2:36 am

Thanks Nomadd, that makes perfect sense.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 6696
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 3:10 am

Nomadd wrote:
The payload deploys on a timer. There are no commands sent from the ground. If the payload didn't deploy, the 2nd stage would still fire up and re-enter because the payload can't activate and there's no possibly way to do anything. Both the 2nd stage and the payload without it's solar arrays deployed have very short lifespans, so there's no time to troubleshoot anything.
"Sources" are just people repeating things they don't understand. The payload did reach orbit, since the 2nd stage came down right where it was suppose to. If it failed to deploy from the adapter, it would have been de-orbited with the stage.

Fairing separation occurs at 60km or so, where drag isn't a factor over a short period.


The fairing did separate, correct?

I heard this announced on the launch cast, and at that point, the 2nd stage is in a gravity trajectory, so if the payload adapter failed, this is on Northrup Grumman correct? One would think that something special was in play here, as this launch was delayed countless times. Were there arguments about the adapter or fairing placement with the payload being too large for the fairing?
Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
 
User avatar
Nomadd
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2017 3:26 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 3:24 am

Nobody on the outside knows all the details. My guess would be that the 2nd stage would send a "clear to deploy" signal or something, and the NG payload or adapter would actually initiate separation. So, it's conceivable that the NG side never got the OK to deploy, but SpaceX would have likely known that from the data they received.
This launch wasn't delayed "countless times". It was delayed once, because of an issue found with a similar fairing.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4774
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 3:39 am

Nomadd wrote:
Nobody on the outside knows all the details. My guess would be that the 2nd stage would send a "clear to deploy" signal or something, and the NG payload or adapter would actually initiate separation. So, it's conceivable that the NG side never got the OK to deploy, but SpaceX would have likely known that from the data they received.
This launch wasn't delayed "countless times". It was delayed once, because of an issue found with a similar fairing.


The point is that the second stage deorbited as planned and into the planned splashdown area on earth- which means it had no unexpected mass or volume on the way down, so separation did occur...
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 11:31 am

Dragon 2 schedule might slip further to the right.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/nasa-safet ... 1515753011

NASA’s plan to routinely ferry astronauts into orbit using private spacecraft—initially slated to start last year—has now slipped until at least the spring of 2019 and unresolved hazards threaten further delays.

New questions about the high-profile program, known as commercial crew transportation, emerged Thursday, with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s top outside safety panel raising red flags about persistent dangers. Under the program, NASA would rely on capsules developed and operated on a commercial basis by Boeing and Elon Musk’s SpaceX.

Potential threats identified in the group’s annual report range from unconventional rocket fuel systems to anticipated bombardment in orbit by tiny meteor fragments and other space debris.

NASA has stipulated a statistical limit of no more than one possible fatal accident per 270 flights. SpaceX and Boeing are developing separate fleets of capsules but neither is likely to meet that longstanding safety standard, despite years of testing, re-engineering and high-level government concern about what are called micrometeoroids, according to the report.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
parapente
Posts: 2587
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 1:27 pm

Thx Karel.Thats a spanner in the works.One would have thought that the spec's from the outset would/should have covered such matters.The thrusters on Dragon2 are integral so I hope they are not talking about those.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 1:32 pm

It's difficult to understand all these safety issues. Space Shuttle ferried astronauts to the ISS, and so does Soyuz. What makes Dragon 2 (and Boeing's CST-100 Starliner) so difficult to meet similar safety standards?
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 1206
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 1:59 pm

The question Karel is, was this 270 flights standard made up brand new, or also applied to Soyuz?

You can create a list of requirements that no manufacturer can meet. It's a safe way of saving money and dropping the project...
 
parapente
Posts: 2587
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 3:07 pm

I hope politics is not entering it.They refer to novel engines surely this can only refer to the super Draco abort engines (although they can do much more of course - Boeing may not like this?But they have been integral from the start they can hardly start questioning them now unless politics is playing a hand.
I think 2018 /19 will be absolutely pivotal regarding the SLS vs Spacex and therefore pivotal to Boeing - who have just stated (why I don't know) that they will be first to Mars.
It maybe that Trumps moon mission has put the cat amongst the pigeons.Spacex can clearly do this mission with BFR.Boeing/NASA clearly can't in any way.......
Smells like big politics trouble to me.Dragon2 may be the route to slow Spacex down???
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 3:45 pm

Jayafe wrote:
The question Karel is, was this 270 flights standard made up brand new, or also applied to Soyuz?

You can create a list of requirements that no manufacturer can meet. It's a safe way of saving money and dropping the project...


It's a new standard, and clearly made up by bureaucrats.

For reference, Space Shuttle had a Loss of Mission rate of 1 to 90. And while I don't have the official number for Soyuz, it had 16 failures out of 140 missions (thus 1 to 9).

In my opinion, a Loss of Mission rate of 1 to 270 is unrealistic. If it goes through, it means the bureaucrats will delay the program even further.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 4467
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 4:20 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
It's a new standard, and clearly made up by bureaucrats.


Clearly...

They'd rather impose that ludicrous standard to their indigenous companies instead of working with them on practical solutions to ensure reasonable levels of safety.
In the meantime, they're happy to keep launching their own astronauts in rockets from the 50s belonging to a foreign space program under strict budgetary pressures and a streak or recent failures, one on which they have no control and that belongs to a country at political odds.
I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Topic Author
Posts: 8005
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 4:43 pm

Does NASA control the required safety specs for any human (US based only I assume) going into space? Or just for government missions? SpaceX and others like Blue Origin could then still send people into privately or is that at risk?

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 1206
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 4:45 pm

Tugger wrote:
Does NASA control the required safety specs for any human (US based only I assume) going into space? Or just for government missions? SpaceX and others like Blue Origin could then still send people into privately or is that at risk?

Tugg


NASA controls what it pays, its missions in this case. Sadly, the design is payed and done for Nasa's missions.
 
itchief
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 10:15 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 4:55 pm

GST wrote:
Going back to the Zuma situation...if the payload adaptor failed to release, wouldn't the 2nd stage and payload still be in full orbit at that time, and thus trackable? I suppose the 2nd stage could be commanded to de-orbit the whole lot after the failure, but I can't imagine them wanting to do that until expending all troubleshooting options? I see no reason why they would intend to release the payload from a suborbital trajectory and require Zuma to power itself into its desired orbit - that seems risky and wastes a lot of potential station-keeping propellant. I'm not normally conspiratorially minded, but given that we know this is a military payload I'm not sure I see an alternative, besides the stealth sat hypothesis.

I'm sure some lovely A.nutter will be along to tell me the key bit I'm missing here.

Of course Zuma could simply be a testbed for some new reentry vehicle or hypersonic glider technology...perhaps SpaceX's launch was intended to be suborbital, putting Zuma into a re-entry at a specific point/speed/attitude...man that feels very much like a KSP "test this component" mission!



Can you show where this info came from, "but given that we know this is a military payload".

The only thing I have read is that no one agency has claimed ownership on the Zuma. I did read that the NRO has said it is not their's.
 
salttee
Posts: 2470
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 5:07 pm

itchief wrote:
Can you show where this info came from, "but given that we know this is a military payload".

The only thing I have read is that no one agency has claimed ownership on the Zuma. I did read that the NRO has said it is not their's.

The fact that it's "secret" with deductive reasoning, leads to the inescapable conclusion that it's military.
 
itchief
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 10:15 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 5:20 pm

salttee wrote:
itchief wrote:
Can you show where this info came from, "but given that we know this is a military payload".

The only thing I have read is that no one agency has claimed ownership on the Zuma. I did read that the NRO has said it is not their's.

The fact that it's "secret" with deductive reasoning, leads to the inescapable conclusion that it's military.


I will have to disagree with you. The only inescapable conclusion is that the US government paid for it and no agency has claimed ownership. I know this is a-net but guessing does not equal "deductive reasoning".
 
salttee
Posts: 2470
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 5:44 pm

itchief wrote:
salttee wrote:
itchief wrote:
Can you show where this info came from, "but given that we know this is a military payload".

The only thing I have read is that no one agency has claimed ownership on the Zuma. I did read that the NRO has said it is not their's.

The fact that it's "secret" with deductive reasoning, leads to the inescapable conclusion that it's military.


I will have to disagree with you. The only inescapable conclusion is that the US government paid for it and no agency has claimed ownership. I know this is a-net but guessing does not equal "deductive reasoning".
You think Health & Human Services put it up there to track the homeless? Or the Department of Agriculture spend a billion dollars on a satellite to find out who is ploughing their fields in a straight line?

Get real, there's nobody but the military who spends billions on secret projects.
 
MatthewDB
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2017 6:33 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 7:08 pm

salttee wrote:
I will have to disagree with you. The only inescapable conclusion is that the US government paid for it and no agency has claimed ownership. I know this is a-net but guessing does not equal "deductive reasoning".
You think Health & Human Services put it up there to track the homeless? Or the Department of Agriculture spend a billion dollars on a satellite to find out who is ploughing their fields in a straight line?

Get real, there's nobody but the military who spends billions on secret projects.[/quote]

The NSA and CIA are not "military", they are civilian agencies.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Topic Author
Posts: 8005
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 9:04 pm

MatthewDB wrote:
The NSA and CIA are not "military", they are civilian agencies.

And neither is NASA.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
salttee
Posts: 2470
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 9:17 pm

MatthewDB wrote:
The CIA (is) not "military", they are civilian agenc(ey).

You're flat wrong about that. The first CIA director Admiral Sidney Souers wanted the CIA to be purely for intelligence, but by the time Bedell Smith became DCI the CIA was carrying on military ops. Currently, among other things, they are conducting drone strikes in Pakistan at least. The initial invasion of Afghanistan was purely a CIA operation.

You can live in fantasyland if you want, but don't ask me to join you.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 9:50 pm

Falcon Heavy static fire has been delayed again. Next try on Saturday.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 9:54 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
FYI just to show how small Falcon Heavy is compared to Saturn V / BFR:

Image


OK, one more: this time with SLS included:

Image
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
zanl188
Posts: 3604
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:05 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Jan 12, 2018 10:54 pm

salttee wrote:

Get real, there's nobody but the military who spends billions on secret projects.


DOE, FBI, DHS, DOT, DOJ, etc... especially DOE....
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
 
salttee
Posts: 2470
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Jan 13, 2018 1:29 am

zanl188 wrote:
salttee wrote:

Get real, there's nobody but the military who spends billions on secret projects.


DOE, FBI, DHS, DOT, DOJ, etc... especially DOE....

Well that's kinda cheating, The DOE builds and maintains the nukes for the military.
None of the rest of your list are in the same league, not even the FBI.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4774
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Jan 13, 2018 2:03 am

Remember that there may be agencies we don't know about - the very existence of the NRO was only declassified in the 1990s, and yet it had been operating since the 60s...
 
salttee
Posts: 2470
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Jan 13, 2018 2:27 am

moo wrote:
Remember that there may be agencies we don't know about - the very existence of the NRO was only declassified in the 1990s, and yet it had been operating since the 60s...

Realistically, we can discount that. And while nobody knew the name, any semi-conscious person knew that somebody was operating those satellites overhead. It just turned out to be a separate entity, not just another department of the CIA.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4774
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Jan 13, 2018 3:30 am

salttee wrote:
moo wrote:
Remember that there may be agencies we don't know about - the very existence of the NRO was only declassified in the 1990s, and yet it had been operating since the 60s...

Realistically, we can discount that. And while nobody knew the name, any semi-conscious person knew that somebody was operating those satellites overhead. It just turned out to be a separate entity, not just another department of the CIA.


Really? Can we? Or would it just be beneficial to your argument for us to?
 
salttee
Posts: 2470
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Jan 13, 2018 3:46 am

Yes we really can. Unless you want to get into tinfoil hat territory.
 
zanl188
Posts: 3604
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:05 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Jan 13, 2018 5:12 am

salttee wrote:
Well that's kinda cheating, The DOE builds and maintains the nukes for the military.
None of the rest of your list are in the same league, not even the FBI.


All civilian agencies. All spend billions on secret projects.

A dollar doesn’t go as far as it used to.
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4774
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Jan 13, 2018 5:33 am

salttee wrote:
Yes we really can. Unless you want to get into tinfoil hat territory.


As we already have evidence there have been at least one agency that was classified to the extent that their mere existence wasn't confirmed, this is territory that most definitely doesn't require a tin foil hat....

So no, we really don't have to.

So far you have been given plenty of examples that disprove your position, and you have tried to hand wave them all away. That doesn't work.
 
itchief
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 10:15 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Jan 13, 2018 5:37 am

salttee wrote:
Yes we really can. Unless you want to get into tinfoil hat territory.


A quick goole search, Non-military intelligence funding for FY2016 was about $54 billion and the Trump FY2018 has $511 billion in nondefense discretionary spending. Plenty of room for other agencies to pay for ZUMA. I was able to complete the google search without my tinfoil hat.
 
parapente
Posts: 2587
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Jan 13, 2018 9:54 am

There is going to be a lot of activity over the next 24 months in terms of space travel - particularly maned space.I wonder whether there needs to be thread beyond just what Spacex are doing.
Was reading about Boeing Starliner --and then Orion.This latter (and visually similar) craft has been very quiet in the a PR sense.It does seem odd that 2 (Boeing /Lockheed) very similar craft are being built at the same time (I know Boeings craft is not designed for deep space).Is Dragon2 deep space capable?I assume not.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Jan 13, 2018 11:37 am

Dragon 2 does not has a service module like Orion. If I'm not mistaken, there is life support for about 7 days. Orion on the other hand can keep a crew of 7 alive for about 30 days.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
salttee
Posts: 2470
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Jan 13, 2018 2:17 pm

moo wrote:
salttee wrote:
Yes we really can. Unless you want to get into tinfoil hat territory.


As we already have evidence there have been at least one agency that was classified to the extent that their mere existence wasn't confirmed, this is territory that most definitely doesn't require a tin foil hat....

So no, we really don't have to.

So far you have been given plenty of examples that disprove your position, and you have tried to hand wave them all away. That doesn't work.

As I pointed out above, anybody paying attention would have known that somebody was operating all those satellites known to be up there. What difference does it make how they are administered? They could have been administered by one big department within the CIA or by multiple groups spread out between various agencies. It's all the same to the taxpayer paying for it, or the nations or individuals being spied upon. There was some shock at the scale of the spying / analysis effort, but for the informed person, there was nothing earthshakingly "new" in the revelation that there was an administrative level called the National Reconnaissance Office. But it did make a good news story for Joe Schmoe who had never given much thought to the subject before.

While there probably is some part of the NRO mission that monitors urban sprawl, soy beans and things like the polar ice caps, the bulk of the NRO mission is security related, ie: military. This includes the space reconnaissance effort, which is a military function; in this case, the NRO is acting as a subcontractor for the Air Force. So even if the Zuma satellite's purpose is to monitor space aliens, it still is a military function and most likely a part of the space reconnaissance office.

Your dance to deny that the very secret Zuma satellite is military is pointless.
 
GST
Posts: 821
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 10:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Jan 13, 2018 3:15 pm

itchief wrote:

Can you show where this info came from, "but given that we know this is a military payload".

The only thing I have read is that no one agency has claimed ownership on the Zuma. I did read that the NRO has said it is not their's.


Perhaps that was laziness on my part, I certainly didn't mean to open the can of worms that has writhed on this thread for the past couple of days whilst I was away. When I said Military, I guess I meant "agency or agencies that have large budgets to develop and operate secret stuff". Whether Zuma belongs to the military or a technically civilian agency is not of particular interest to me, the secrecy around it means that it is IMO overwhelmingly likely a national security or secret tech development asset.
 
User avatar
Nomadd
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2017 3:26 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Jan 13, 2018 3:59 pm

moo wrote:
Nomadd wrote:
Nobody on the outside knows all the details. My guess would be that the 2nd stage would send a "clear to deploy" signal or something, and the NG payload or adapter would actually initiate separation. So, it's conceivable that the NG side never got the OK to deploy, but SpaceX would have likely known that from the data they received.
This launch wasn't delayed "countless times". It was delayed once, because of an issue found with a similar fairing.


The point is that the second stage deorbited as planned and into the planned splashdown area on earth- which means it had no unexpected mass or volume on the way down, so separation did occur...

The payload mass was probably pretty small compared to the almost empty 2nd stage mass, so it wouldn't have made much difference in 2nd stage re-entry.
 
mxaxai
Posts: 528
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Jan 13, 2018 5:23 pm

Nomadd wrote:
moo wrote:
Nomadd wrote:
Nobody on the outside knows all the details. My guess would be that the 2nd stage would send a "clear to deploy" signal or something, and the NG payload or adapter would actually initiate separation. So, it's conceivable that the NG side never got the OK to deploy, but SpaceX would have likely known that from the data they received.
This launch wasn't delayed "countless times". It was delayed once, because of an issue found with a similar fairing.


The point is that the second stage deorbited as planned and into the planned splashdown area on earth- which means it had no unexpected mass or volume on the way down, so separation did occur...

The payload mass was probably pretty small compared to the almost empty 2nd stage mass, so it wouldn't have made much difference in 2nd stage re-entry.

However, almost anybody pointing a radar skywards these days could probably detect this new satellite. So if they claimed "We confirmed that ZUMA crashed with the second stage", it might happen that someone else presents evidence to the contrary, leading to some trouble.
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 1971
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Jan 13, 2018 5:30 pm

One of two things happened:

1. The Falcon9 launch went as planned. The 1st and 2nd stages performed nominally. The Northrop Grumman made payload adapter failed to release Zuma, and it tumbled into the ocean with the 2nd stage. This would make SpaceX's statements that Falcon9 performed nominally true.
2. Or the Zuma satellite was compromised in some form prior to launch, and the only way to keep the satellite was to fake it's demise, while it at the same time works exactly as planned.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos