SpaceX Launches First Rocket from Iconic Florida Pad

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
In another success for Musk’s rocket company, SpaceX has managed to launch a Falcon 9 from NASA’s 39A pad and land its first stage nearby. As you may know, Launch Complex 39 is famous for being the origin point of all six Apollo moon landings, as well as the first (and last) space shuttle flight.

This is SpaceX's tenth supply mission for the International Space Station, but the Dragon capsule on the rocket is carrying a special payload. It's hauling an experimental module, Raven that will test autonomous space rendezvous technology: its three-sensor array will track spacecraft visiting the station and help guide them safely to their intended destination. Expect launches from 39A and elsewhere to be relatively commonplace. SpaceX vowed that it would launch rockets every 2 to 3 weeks, and it's clearly making good on that promise so far.
 
Last edited:
Something epic about such rockets and space tech.
Incredible technology for the Stage 1 re-entry and landing, never realised it freefalls with transonic transition condition and yet looks so stable.
Cheers
 
buhbuhfet said:
what evidence is there that proves rockets work in a vacuum aka "space"?
Click to expand...
You mean engineering answer or just practical answer.
Practical real world, look at the Moon landings that used rockets for braking (been quite a few over the years from several countries) or take-off (unless feel the manned landing was a hoax :) ).
Anyway to date only rocket propulsion has been shown to be able to accelerate outside the earth's atmosphere, excluding the EM propulsion drive for now until fully proven by Nasa.

Cheers
 
buhbuhfet said:
what evidence is there that proves rockets work in a vacuum aka "space"?
Click to expand...

G0Zf8yi.png


http://www.livescience.com/34475-how-do-space-rockets-work-without-air.html
 
buhbuhfet said:
where is the evidence? show me
Click to expand...
LOL so all lunar landings that involved SOFT landing were faked :)
To do a soft landing you need rockets, also without rockets working in a vacuum to continue acceleration it would take a freaking long time to reach the moon.
Its all fake!!!! :)
 
i'm looking for "scientific" tests done on earth that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that rocket propulsion works in a vacuum
 
SpaceX must be building up an inventory of previously launched rockets.

Time to turn one of those around. That will be another big first.
 
blandead said:
Einstein proved that because light travels through space, meaning so does energy and mass
Click to expand...

You need to also apply Isaac Newton's laws on Momentum and then apply that to the thrust generated by rockets and engineering how this all works.
TBH the rocket equations would be meaningless to all of us here and I guess buhbuhfet knows that and would say that does not explain it scientifically.
But he can research Isaac Newton's laws on Momentum and common sense should help him if he is serious with researching rocket propulsion and thrust technology.
Cheers
 
blandead said:
Einstein proved that because light travels through space, meaning so does energy and mass
Click to expand...
Just in case you are serious, you do not need atmosphere or air for rocket propulsion as everything is provided by the rocket, nor does it rely upon aerodynamics to fly but just to break through the peak pressure resistance for acceleration, and not to shake itself apart or critical systems and components.

Cheers
 
Just to add,
rockets are the classic example of Newton's "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction."
Fundamental part of why they work in space.
But why some are concerned with the EM Drive as it breaks some fundamental known rules of classic physics, and why I explicitely mentioned excluding it from the context of only rockets can accelerate in space to date.
Cheers
 
buhbuhfet said:
evidence boys, that's all i want, show me
Click to expand...
Seriously....
1. Use internet.
2. Search Isaac Newton laws on Motion involving momentum (2 of the laws will be of interest to you).
3. Search on rocket propulsion and thrust.

You will then have all the answers you need proving why it works in space.
You do understand "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction"?
One aspect of Isaac Newton's law that applies to rockets and space.
 
i'm not looking for your answers, i'm looking for scientific testing that proves the theory
 
I..
Facepalm...
Isaac Newton's Laws of Motion is fundamental SCIENCE!
The rocket thrust propulsion aspect (albeit incredibly complex involving many parts) is the engineering applied to that SCIENCE.....
At least study the 3rd law of motion (the science that has been tested and accepted) that applies to thrust.

You understand the difference between a rocket and a plane?
...
 
Last edited:
are you reading what i'm typing?
show me the scientific testing done, which prove the theory that rocket propulsion works in a vacuum
 
buhbuhfet said:
are you reading what i'm typing?
show me the scientific testing done, which prove the theory that rocket propulsion works in a vacuum
Click to expand...
Rockets DO NOT use or rely upon environment air or atmosphere, in fact it is detrimental to them in terms of launching and acceleration and peak resistance.
That is an engineering fact.
It is not the same as say SCRAMJet or a jet engine turbine.
 
buhbuhfet said:
what evidence is there that proves rockets work in a vacuum aka "space"?
Click to expand...


obviously there's no way some one could possibly be this dumb but i'll explain it in a way even a 2 year old can understand it anyways. they work in space because they provide their own oxygen source within the combustion chamber. they do not rely on an external source like a turbine engine..
 
buhbuhfet said:
what evidence is there that proves rockets work in a vacuum aka "space"?
Click to expand...


Don't worry guys, I will handle this. I deal with this lots in the places I frequent.

Your assumption is that rockets push against the air, much like a propeller on an airplane. There is some truth to that. But as you note, in space there is no significant amount of air.

In its place, is the nozzle.

The expansion of the exhaust and the hardness of the nozzle is all thats needed for acceleration.

AmO0aCD.jpg
 
And with that picture, Newtons Laws of Motion and reading about THRUST gives him all he needs.
And if he bothered to search about rocket propulsion he would know the difference between a rocket and a plane (with turbine jet engine), but that is already explained in summary by some posts.
Cheers
 
CSI_PC said:
And with that picture, Newtons Laws of Motion and reading about THRUST gives him all he needs.
And if he bothered to search about rocket propulsion he would know the difference between a rocket and a plane (with turbine jet engine), but that is already explained in summary by some posts.
Cheers
Click to expand...

I enjoy watching the fake moon landing and flat earth videos to see how people interpret the world around them.

I think for many of these people they see the big glowing flame stretching out and try to rationalize what the flame is doing.....not realizing the flame has already done it's job before you even see it. But they think surely there must be some useful reason this flame is shooting out for hundreds of feet.
 
buhbuhfet said:
are you reading what i'm typing?
show me the scientific testing done, which prove the theory that rocket propulsion works in a vacuum
Click to expand...

Aside from the fact we've done it?

It's really simple: Newtons Laws of Motion. Propellants go out the rocket nozzle, and produce thrust in other direction.

The real question you should be asking is "Why WOULDN'T Rockets work in space"? But no, you're arguing the opposite to try and "prove" your own illogical arguments, because the moon landings, satellite TV, and GPS are all obviously fake, according to you. Because of some conspiracy, because "reasons".

You also have the practical evidence that all rocket engines are vacuum tested in vacuum chambers here on earth (not to prove they work, but rather to prove they won't blow up for structural reasons).
 
buhbuhfet said:
lol ok, keep talking, i'll wait for evidence
Click to expand...

OK here you go, found what you are looking for as it combines the proved science Laws of Motion with the engineering principles of rockets.
Everything you need for rockets in space.
http://www.braeunig.us/space/propuls.htm

Only thing missing is a complete guide to Newton's Laws, but they provide the relevant scientific laws and equations on that page as you wanted.
Cheers
 
westrock2000 said:
Don't worry guys, I will handle this. I deal with this lots in the places I frequent.

Your assumption is ...
Click to expand...

cool story bro, what does it matter what my assumptions are?,
show me the scientific testing done in the real world which prove what you're saying happens actually ,
preferably with video footage
 
buhbuhfet said:
i'm not looking for your answers, i'm looking for scientific testing that proves the theory
Click to expand...

You've been given that answer in this thread.

Your argument at this point is "give me scientific evidence conducted on earth to prove that rockets work in space." Why bother, there's evidence they work in space by actually working in space. Setting up a massive vacuum chamber to prove something that has already been proven is just an odd argumentative stance.

Here: http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1846/how-do-rockets-work-in-the-vacuum-of-space
 
Last edited:
buhbuhfet said:
cool story bro, what does it matter what my assumptions are?,
show me the scientific testing done in the real world which prove what you're saying happens actually ,
preferably with video footage
Click to expand...

I don't understand the request. Are you wanting a video of a scientist pointing to a rocket motor saying "You can see the rocket is real because my hand is being consumed by the flame". I don't think you are going to easily find videos proving a theory of something that happens in real life everyday. I mean do you need a video explaining that solar technology is a possibility or does a working calculator in your hand prove it enough?

hqdefault.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top