SpaceX’s Historic Launch Aborted

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
With less than one half of a second until liftoff, the flight of SpaceX Dragon capsule powered by the Falcon 9 rocket was aborted by an on-board computer. NASA had completed the countdown all the way to Liftoff when the on-board computer detected a problem in one of the Falcon 9’s engines. The historic flight and subsequent docking with the International Space Station is rescheduled for May 22nd.
 
Good catch. Was that feature because it was built by a private entity?
 
I hope spacex can't get us back to the moon or even to Mars in my lifetime. Given I'm pretty young still, I have hope.
 
Although with a new rocket design delays in launch are expected. Better to fix the problem and try again than have the whole thing explode.
 
Why do all these launches always abort at the last minute due to a faulty (whatever) reading... why not run the diagnostics before the count down! :D
 
Its rocket surgery, too complex for us to understand why these things happen :)
 
Those engineers who made the software for the launch computer should be getting bonuses for saving the entire company's collective asses.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Why do all these launches always abort at the last minute due to a faulty (whatever) reading... why not run the diagnostics before the count down! :D
Click to expand...
In this particular case, the fault was an excessively high combustion chamber pressure on one of the engines. You won't get an abort like that until the last few seconds of countdown because lots of 'exciting' things happen at that point in the launch sequence. Reality is that, for most of the countdown, the vehicle just sits statically on the pad with not much going on (relatively speaking).
 
Nashligo said:
Good thing we canned those unreliable space shuttles.
Click to expand...

The Space Shuttles cost $1.7 Billion dollars on average to launch (depending on cargo and crew size). This Space X rocket carrying cargo to the ISS cost around $96 million to launch. The average sat costs around $150-300 Million to launch.

The Space X capsule will ferry 3 Astronauts at a time with cargo for around a little under $200 million a shot. Future Space X capsules have enough room for 8 Astronauts + Cargo and will still remain under $400 Million per launch versus $1.7 Billion per launch for the Space Shuttle. Space X estimates that within 10 years it can bring down costs by as much as 30 percent more.

The Space Shuttle was a fantastic piece of engineering and one of the most complex machines ever made by man. But it cost a fortune to maintain , it also was designed for LEO missions only and it was out dated. The Space X rockets can be scaled up to be powerful enough to head to Mars for under $10 Billion , something the Space Shuttle could never do. And because Space X is a privately own corporation , it has competitors that will also be successful and all of this will lead to cheaper and cheaper and cheaper space flight.

Keeping the Space Shuttle program a little longer would have made a lot more sense , I agree at least until we were ready with its successor. However we can not keep Space Flight only in the realm of Governments. To do so would be to hamper its potential , we need it to get cheaper and we need it now. The Space program has been in a static state for 30 years .. we need some change to reach for more. The Space Shuttle could never have gone to an Asteroid or to Mars .. don't you think if we could have it would have been done? The Space Shuttle is the perfect LEO vehicle but its too expensive.

So try to remember that while the Space Shuttle program is gone and that is sad (especially to those that lost their jobs because of it) the launch and success of this Space X cargo to the ISS is the biggest baby step anyone has taken outside of Government funded Space Flight period.
 
So basically SpaceX is an unproven program offering a higher cost than Soyuz, which has been operating safely for decades on a proven rocket design.

Oh, but it's not invented here, so we can't use it.
 
Aluisious said:
So basically SpaceX is an unproven program offering a higher cost than Soyuz, which has been operating safely for decades on a proven rocket design.

Oh, but it's not invented here, so we can't use it.
Click to expand...
I don't know where he's getting some of his numbers from, for example, the Dragon capsule can take 7 people, and the cost of a Falcon 9 rocket launch is listed as being around $56M for LEO launches at >80% of capacity, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_9

And there is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_(spacecraft)
At a May 18, 2012 NASA news conference, Space X confirmed that their target launch price for the crewed flights is $140,000,000 or $20,000,000 per seat if the maximum crew of 7 is aboard. This compares with the current Soyuz cost of $63,000,000 per seat.[65]
Click to expand...
So, under 1/3 the price of Soyuz, at the prices that were currently being offered.(Although some of that may be the Russians being able to set higher prices, knowing that they don't have much competition at the moment.)
 
sfsuphysics said:
Why do all these launches always abort at the last minute due to a faulty (whatever) reading... why not run the diagnostics before the count down! :D
Click to expand...

They hold the rocket down for a moment after starting the engines to verify that all the components are operating normally. In this case it looks like they had a bad valve of some sort on engine 5.

Aluisious said:
So basically SpaceX is an unproven program offering a higher cost than Soyuz, which has been operating safely for decades on a proven rocket design.

Oh, but it's not invented here, so we can't use it.
Click to expand...

It's cheaper than Soyuz, and the Falcon 9 has had 2 successful launches so far. These kind of aborts happen now and then with all rockets. Smaller, more focused companies are generally more efficient than large organizations with lots of separate duties. Bush's Ares I wouldn't have been ready for missions until 2015. Ares I-X (the first stage) was tested in 2009, I-Y (possibly with a real second stage) was scheduled for 2013. SpaceX launched a complete Falcon 9 + Dragon cargo capsule in 2010. Once they get this ISS test run out of the way they can ramp up production.

I also get the impression that NASA is contracting out as much as possible to create a program that Congress can't back out of. The defense department does the same thing with its contractors. SpaceX and the other rocket developers as well as the new Planetary Resources asteroid mining corporation are going to be dependent on NASA contracts for the foreseeable future. Planetary Resources whole business model revolves around NASA funding them to figure out how to mine asteroids for water (to make hydrogen and oxygen), paving the way for private missions to send precious metals back to Earth.
 
Soralis said:
I don't know where he's getting some of his numbers from, for example, the Dragon capsule can take 7 people, and the cost of a Falcon 9 rocket launch is listed as being around $56M for LEO launches at >80% of capacity, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_9

And there is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_(spacecraft)

So, under 1/3 the price of Soyuz, at the prices that were currently being offered.(Although some of that may be the Russians being able to set higher prices, knowing that they don't have much competition at the moment.)
Click to expand...

Target price...OK. People can't even build stadiums for a target price, I'll believe the manned space launch sticker price when I see it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top