Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

SpaceX Successfully Tests Nine-Engine Cluster

Posted by CmdrTaco on Mon Nov 24, 2008 10:08 AM
from the what-did-you-do-this-weekend dept.
the_other_chewey writes "At their test facility in Texas, SpaceX, the privately funded space-flight company, have successfully tested their nine-engine cluster which is planned to provide the heavy lifting capability for their Falcon 9 and Falcon 9 Heavy rockets. The firing lasted three minutes (a full 'mission duty cycle,' i.e. a simulated launch) under full power, delivering 3.8MN (or 855,000 lbs.) of thrust. SpaceX have made a video of the test available. The Waco Tribune has a short report about it, with comments by locals."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] SpaceX Conducts Full Thrust Firing of Falcon 9 79 comments
Toren Altair sends us this excerpt: "Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) conducted the first nine engine firing of its Falcon 9 launch vehicle at its Texas Test Facility outside McGregor on July 31st. A second firing on August 1st completed a major NASA Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) milestone almost two months early. At full power, the nine engines consumed 3,200 lbs of fuel and liquid oxygen per second, and generated almost 850,000 pounds of force — four times the maximum thrust of a 747 aircraft. This marks the first firing of a Falcon 9 first stage with its full complement of nine Merlin 1C engines. Once a near term Merlin 1C fuel pump upgrade is complete, the sea level thrust will increase to 950,000 lbf, making Falcon 9 the most powerful single core vehicle in the United States. The Falcon 9 will launch SpaceX's spaceship Dragon with up to 7 humans from 2009 on." We discussed SpaceX when it won the NASA competition to provide low cost commercial transport to the ISS, and also when it launched an earlier design. Basic specs for Falcon 9 are available, as well as a more technical paper (PDF).
[+] SpaceX Launch Fails To Reach Space 263 comments
azuredrake and many other readers have written to tell us: "The New York Times reports that the third SpaceX launch has failed following the second-stage ignition of the Falcon 1 rocket. The SpaceX launch had three satellites on board, all of which were presumably destroyed in the incident. This marks the third failed launch for SpaceX — twice they failed to reach orbit, and once the Falcon 1 rocket was lost five minutes after launch. While the company vows to carry on, this certainly raises some questions about the likelihood of successful privatization of the Space industry." Reader Nano2Sol points out a video of the launch from a camera on Falcon 1, and notes a small oscillation just prior to the footage being cut off. Spaceflight Now ran a mission update blog leading up to the failure, and they also have more coverage on the loss of the rocket.
[+] SpaceX Launch Failure Due To Timing Problem 244 comments
FleaPlus writes "Private orbital spaceflight company SpaceX recently announced that last weekend's Falcon 1 rocket launch failure was caused by a collision between the first and second stage of their rocket. This was due to a timing problem, when their brand-new engine design produced residual thrust for 1.5 seconds longer than expected; they're currently working to fix the problem and launch again, perhaps as early as next month. In a recent interview with Wired, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk remarked on their efforts: "Optimism, pessimism, f-ck that; we're going to make it happen. As God is my bloody witness, I'm hell-bent on making it work.""
[+] SpaceX Gets Operational License For Cape Canaveral 133 comments
FiggyOO writes "For those of you who witnessed the launch of SpaceX's Falcon 1 rocket, launch 3, you will be glad to hear that SpaceX has received a license to launch from space complex 40 (SLC-40) at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station on the Florida coast. This Launch complex is just south of launch pads 39A and 39B which have been used to launch the space shuttles, and will continue in that role for a few more years. This launch complex will enable SpaceX to launch the much-anticipated Falcon 9 rocket, which will eventually carry the Dragon capsule. In doing so, SpaceX hopes to fill the void between the end of the shuttle program and the coming of the Constellation. They have already begun moving into the launch complex, including moving a 125,000 gallon liquid oxygen tank on the back of a semi." We've been following Elon Musk's SpaceX for years.
[+] On Fourth Launch Attempt, SpaceX Falcon 1 Reaches Orbit 518 comments
xp65 writes with the just-announced success of Elon Musk's SpaceX's long efforts to reach orbit with a privately-developed launching craft: "T+0:08:21 Falcon 1 reached orbital velocity, 5200 m/s Nominal Second stage cut off (SECO) — Falcon 1 has made history as the first privately developed liquid fueled launch vehicle to achieve earth orbit!" dbullard adds "This was a completely new vehicle — it's not using any previously developed hardware. All developed from scratch. No government supplied hardware, Russian engines, or old ICBM motors. My hat's off to the employees of Space X — all 550 of them. (Note — no 'cast of thousands,' just 550). They've got video of the entire launch."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by thesymbolicfrog (907527) <`sloanes.k' `at' `gmail.com'> on Monday November 24 2008, @10:17AM (#25872871)

    I read, "The Waco Tribune has short report about it, with comments by lolcats."

    I need either more sleep or less internet.

  • by GargamelSpaceman (992546) on Monday November 24 2008, @10:25AM (#25872987) Homepage Journal
    But gollum bit one off and fell into a volcano.
  • I'm surprised they didn't name the rocket the Beowulf 9.

  • Uninformative video (Score:4, Interesting)

    by hcdejong (561314) <acme AT xmsnet DOT nl> on Monday November 24 2008, @10:32AM (#25873081)

    The great big plume of fire and smoke is impressive, but I would have preferred a pre-ignition closeup of the engine cluster.

  • Congrats SpaceX (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Diagoras (859063) on Monday November 24 2008, @10:39AM (#25873151)
    I'm looking forward to the launch. Anyone know when that is? I've heard everything from January to March from several people. Anywho,let's hope that SpaceX succeeds. Otherwise we'll end up depending on Russia from 2010 to 2015 for our man-capable launch systems with all the political consequences that entails.
    • Re:Congrats SpaceX (Score:5, Informative)

      by ComputerInsultant (722520) on Monday November 24 2008, @11:04AM (#25873447)
      Unless NASA releases money for COTS-D very soon, we will still have a manned launch gap. The Falcon 9 and Dragon are man rated, but to launch people into using the Falcon 9 and Dragon, you need much more. You need a Launch Escape System and a Emergency Egress System. Neither of these is currently in development at SpaceX and both have a long lead time to develop.

      Without the additional COTS-D money to start development on these systems, SpaceX will not carry people until they find the money from other sources to fund these development efforts.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      This test was the last major step before shipping it to the cape, so it seems the schedule on the website with delivery scheduled by Q408 is accurate. As far as when it launches... my WAG is by summer. From what I can tell getting it to the cape is largely a move to show the new administration "hey, remember us and COTS", so there may be a bit more work that has to be done on it.

      Here's hoping the lessons from F1 carry over and there aren't new issues to discover.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        SpaceX pwns Slashdot - there is cultural convergence involved since Elon founded PayPal and is young and geeky. On top of that he is the furthest along in fielding crew-capable private orbital spacelift. Much further than Virgin/Scaled, BlueOrigin or others. In some ways, SpaceX is further toward native crew-launch than Lockheed, Boeing or United Space Alliance (Post-Shuttle) - mostly because Dragon and Falcon 9 are coming along much faster than Orion/Constellation on much, much less money.

        There is a certai

  • by bossanovalithium (1396323) on Monday November 24 2008, @10:39AM (#25873155)
    The price of gas must've made the test irresistible..
  • And... (Score:5, Funny)

    by owlnation (858981) on Monday November 24 2008, @10:50AM (#25873269)
    The headline in today's Arachnid Advertiser states:

    Biped Puppets Successfully Complete Engine Test. The Grand Plan Still On Schedule.
  • O.o (Score:5, Funny)

    by 4D6963 (933028) on Monday November 24 2008, @11:00AM (#25873381)

    the privately funded space-flight company, have successfully tested their nine-engine cluster

    But can you imagine a Beowulf cluster of these? If only global _cooling_ was our problem..

  • Cool! Go Science! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by crescente (1334029) on Monday November 24 2008, @11:02AM (#25873419)
    With all the cries for help in the finance world, it warms my heart to see a science/research based company giving me some good news. Cheers!
  • by wcrowe (94389) on Monday November 24 2008, @11:14AM (#25873607)

    The old Rocketdyne [wikipedia.org] engine test center was located a few miles outside my home town many, many years ago. The old timers said that the noise was ungodly when they tested their engines. Among the many things they would complain about in this rural area, was that the cows would become so upset, they wouldn't give milk.

    When I was a college student back in the early 80's my friends and I used to love to take my jeep out to explore the "ruins" of the old test center. Most impressive were the deflectors (don't know what else to call them) that shunted the rocket blast 90 degrees to vertical. They were enormous. I have no doubt that the locals weren't exaggerating too much when they described the noise and vibration from the engine tests.

    • Dude, you were in Chatsworth? I lived in Chatsworth for 12 years -- now in West Hills.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      The noise from a large missile motor is incredible. I have worked at a test site in a previous life and it is something you never forget. So, yes, I'm not surprised that the cows got upset - I am surprised that they didn't stampede and broke through the fences.
  • by holmstar (1388267) on Monday November 24 2008, @11:30AM (#25873797)
    "I live in Valley Mills, just taking the last steak off the grill. Space-X shook the T-Bone off the grill hit my dog on the head, he thought I smacked him, he bit my ankle. My wife just getting into our water bed shook up a huge wave, threw her out of bed. She blamed it all on me. Milk in frig.is now butter-milk, the cats,will not leave the kitchen. My son couldnâ(TM)t hear his stereo, cranked it up, blew the windows out of the neighbors house. Guess Iâ(TM)ll be replacing them on Sunday. It was a great light show!"
  • by Jafafa Hots (580169) on Monday November 24 2008, @12:12PM (#25874355) Homepage Journal
    Dear Greater Waco Area Residents, We appreciate your feedback regarding our recent test as it allows us to improve our notification process to the surrounding community. Since we began operations in 2003, SpaceX has conducted over 2000 tests, and nearly ten have been multiple engine tests at similar times of day. During these previous tests, we did not receive complaints from citizens in your area. The weather on November 22, with low clouds and cool temperatures, drastically affected the distance the sound and light travelled. We began test procedures for this particular test at 7:00am on Friday, Nov. 21 and executed it as quickly as possible, working through hundreds of pages of procedures designed to keep the community, staff, and hardware safe. While no further tests are planned for this stage in McGregor, in the future we will increase our notification to include local news media and law enforcement in McLennan, Coryell, Bell, and Falls counties. As a resident of Central Texas for over 25 years, with family in the area, it is extremely important to me, as well as all of SpaceX, who choose to raise their families in the area, that our testing is safe for local residents. The propellants used are non-toxic and environmentally friendly, In factâ"the Falcon 9 burns a higher grade of kerosene (more environmentally friendly) than a 747 and burns only about half of what a single 747 flight does. The smoke you may have seen was composed mostly of steam and dust. SpaceX strives to be a good corporate neighbor, bring high technology jobs to the area, and stimulate the local economy. We are proud to have operations in McGregor and make use of facilities which have historically played such an important role in American history. Engines which propelled American astronauts to the moon and back were developed and tested here, as well as the Sidewinder and Phoenix missiles. The launch vehicle engines tested last night will soon take cargo, and eventually crew, to the International Space Station. Falcon 9 represents the only medium to heavy lift rocket that is 100 percent Made in America and with this vehicleâ"SpaceX will bring leadership in launch back to the US. The leadership role is currently held by former Soviet Republics, France, and China. http://www.wacotrib.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/communities/breakingnews/entries/2008/11/23/spacex_issues_statement_on_con.html [wacotrib.com]
    • by MaxwellEdison (1368785) on Monday November 24 2008, @10:21AM (#25872937)
      Billy Mays embedded the thrusters in Mighty Putty. They won't be going anywhere anytime soon.
    • Re:FP (Score:5, Funny)

      by ZeroExistenZ (721849) on Monday November 24 2008, @10:26AM (#25873013)

      So why didn't it go anywhere with all that thrust? Any physicists?

      As you can see, it's bolted to the launchpad, which is in return bolted to earth.

      They actually tried to move earth into a higher orbit to cure global warming, to it makes sense the rocket didn't seem to be moving relative to earth, but earth did together with the rocket.

      Why you ask? To avoid planet Nibiru ofcourse.

    • Re:FP (Score:5, Interesting)

      by AKAImBatman (238306) * <(akaimbatman) (at) (gmail.com)> on Monday November 24 2008, @10:28AM (#25873029) Homepage Journal

      I'm not a physicist, but I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that it has something to do with those heavy steel/concrete ties seen in the video. If you can provide more than 35 meganewtons of restraint, the rocket isn't going to go anywhere.

      (Not to say that such logic is bleeding obvious. /sarcasm)

      Now for a real bit of discussion: Does anyone know how tall that test stand is. The thing appears to be HUGE! To the left of the stand you can see what appears to be power lines. An off-the-cuff approximation would suggest that the stand is 6 times taller than the lines. If we take a wild guess at the height of the lines (say, 15 feet?), we can guesstimate that the stand could easily be 90 feet or more in height!

      That's impressive for a company who's only launch to date was an oversize firecracker in comparison to the rockets flown by their competitors. I honestly hope that what they learned with the Falcon 1 speeds development of the Falcon 9. A price war in the rocket industry would be awesome for long-term space access.

      • Re:FP (Score:4, Informative)

        by hcdejong (561314) <acme AT xmsnet DOT nl> on Monday November 24 2008, @10:41AM (#25873175)

        Does anyone know how tall that test stand is.

        The Falcon 9 first stage on top of the stand is about 25 m high (I've assumed it's half the total height of the Falcon 9). The stand appears a bit over 2x as high as that first stage, so 60 m/180 ft would be my initial guess.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          The Falcon 9 first stage on top of the stand is about 25 m high (I've assumed it's half the total height of the Falcon 9).

          The Falcon 9 is 54.9 meters tall. The first stage is a bit more than half that height, so call it 30 meters.

      • Re:FP (Score:4, Informative)

        by Nyeerrmm (940927) on Monday November 24 2008, @11:19AM (#25873671)

        The website says the top of the BFTS ("Big Falcon Test Stand") is 235 feet high. Presumably this includes the blue "Stairway to Heaven" running up the side of the first stage, so I'd say the concrete stand is probably about 150 feet... having been up to the top I must say it's impressive, and a little scary. Fortunately theres an elevator up to the concrete platform, but only too steep stairs up to the top from there.

        Also, while I love the company, I woudl say that they did just buy the site, including the test stand from another company that I can't remember the name of off the top of my head.

        • Re:FP (Score:4, Interesting)

          by FleaPlus (6935) on Monday November 24 2008, @05:12PM (#25878181) Homepage Journal

          The website says the top of the BFTS ("Big Falcon Test Stand") is 235 feet high. ... Also, while I love the company, I woudl say that they did just buy the site, including the test stand from another company that I can't remember the name of off the top of my head.

          The test stand originally belonged to Beal Aerospace [wikipedia.org] a private spaceflight startup which went defunct back in the dot-com days.

          One thing that's pretty cool is that SpaceX is also developing a rocket (the "BFR") that will be too big for the BFTS. Also, I think one can assume from the names that Elon Musk is probably a Doom fan.

          http://www.thespacereview.com/article/497/1 [thespacereview.com]

          The development of Merlin 2 begs the question: what is SpaceX planning that requires such a powerful engine? In past talks Musk has hinted at the development of something called the "BFR" (where B stands for "big" and R for "rocket"), a heavy-lift vehicle far larger than the Falcon family of vehicles. At SpaceVision2005 Musk disclosed that the BFR, in its current iteration, would use "multiple" Merlin 2 engines. The BFR would be able to place 100 tons in low Earth orbit, putting it in competition with NASA's planned shuttle-derived heavy-lift launcher. The BFR is so big, Musk said, that it's too large for the BFTS at their Texas test site: even if they beefed up the stand, he said, the overpressure from the engine tests would break windows in a nearby town. Musk said they would have to test the vehicle either at the launch site or, perhaps, at NASAâ(TM)s Stennis Space Center in Mississippi.

      • Re:FP (Score:5, Informative)

        by bazookazuz (1337697) on Monday November 24 2008, @11:25AM (#25873759)
        I work for the TX facility. The concrete tripod is 120' tall and the legs are 10' in diameter. The stage is 85' tall and 12' in diameter. You can see it 25 miles away when you are driving to work. It is pretty awesome (-;
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          I work for the TX facility.

          If I may ask a tangential question, how do you like working for SpaceX out at the test facility? I've been considering applying for one of the test engineer positions out there. Really, the main thing keeping me from doing so is the fact that it's way out in Texas (not because of the usual Texas cliches, but just because I like the Pacific NW too much). Anyway, how are the hours? Any major gripes? What sort of work do you do and what kind of background did you come from?

          Thanks and

      • Re:FP (Score:5, Informative)

        by rabidkumquat (897955) on Monday November 24 2008, @11:44AM (#25873967)
        850,000lbf (lbf = pounds force) is a relatively small load. It is easy to forget exactly how strong steel is in tension: using standard 50ksi steel (typical structural steel), only about 18 sq-in would be required to hold the rocket down (albeit with no factor of safety).

        For comparison, the main cables in the George Washington suspension bridge in New York each carry ~260,000,000lbf [jhu.edu], and are designed to resist almost 3 times that load. While the amount of thrust developed by the Falcon 9 is seriously impressive for a lift vehicle, it is trivial from a ground-based engineering standpoint.

        There is a reason structural engineers work in kips not pounds (1 kip = 1000lb), and yes IAASE.
    • Re:FP (Score:5, Informative)

      by v1 (525388) on Monday November 24 2008, @10:34AM (#25873103) Homepage Journal

      Awesome, simply awesome. Glad to see they passed the test, or at least didn't blow up. Hope they got some good test data. Ideally they were giving it some control feedback to make sure the gimbals etc that aim the rocket were all responding correctly, performing their orbital roll etc. Getting the most bang for the buck (without the bang!) since I'm sure this test cost a not-so-small fortune considering the fuel used.

      As for the "why didn't it take off" question, it was pretty firmly fitted to the ground. Despite it's size and total impulse capacity, that's over a 3 minute span. It's not designed to lift more than itself and its payload, at a marginal acceleration. The thrust output is variable also, and can't be allowed to crush the payload with G-forces. Despite its massive size, it wasn't going to be going anywhere.

      I'd be interested to know the power curve on the rocket. Most of the fuel is actually spent lifting the FUEL. From one viewpoint, the engine could be constant-thrust, and would accelerate slowly at first, and increase its acceleration as it consumed fuel and became lighter with the same thrust. Or it could back off the thrust as it got lighter, to prevent the g-forces from acceleration from becoming too great for the vehicle or its payload. I'm sure the power-to-weight-ratio could get really high as it nears the end of its firing if it were left at maximum thrust. Anyone happen to know the power curve or acceleration curve on ascent? I thought I read somewhere they try to keep the g-forces under 8g, and not for too long of a period of time, at least for crew.

      • Re:FP (Score:4, Funny)

        by AJNeufeld (835529) on Monday November 24 2008, @10:50AM (#25873273)

        Glad to see they passed the test, or at least didn't blow up.

        "No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. What? Look, somebody's got to have some damn perspective around here. Boom, sooner or later. BOOM!"

      • Re:FP (Score:4, Informative)

        by evanbd (210358) on Monday November 24 2008, @11:52AM (#25874087)
        There are nine engines in a cluster. Burn time for the cluster is 178 seconds. All engines run at full throttle. At t+160s, they shut down a pair of engines to reduce the g loading slightly, but otherwise it's constant thrust. Remember, though, that liftoff acceleration is very mild -- about 1.2g, iirc. For a given engine thrust, you usually improve payload mass by adding tankage until it can just barely leave the pad.
    • Well, if you had read some of the comments, many of them already are complaining.

      "What kind of toxins are we being exposed too!!!11!"

      Yeah .. I much prefer this comment:
      "By Jermiah November 23, 2008 12:24 AM | Link to this I quite enjoyed it. Nothing like a glass a scotch a lawn chair a cigar and 1.5 million foot pounds of pressure to make someone feel alive."
      • I quite enjoyed it. Nothing like a glass a scotch a lawn chair a cigar and 1.5 million foot pounds of pressure to make someone feel alive.

        Man, gotta love the smell of burning proppelant in the morning. I love this one:

        Wow..Just observing the numerous misspelled words in your posts makes me realize why you idiots thought that the aliens were coming!

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        "What kind of toxins are we being exposed too!!!11!"

        Burned kerosene. If that bothers our poor environmentalist friends, then they might want to start a protest against Kerosene Lamps [wikipedia.org], portable stoves, home heating (primarily Japan, UK, and Ireland), and jet engines.

        Which reminds me. Greenpeace has released a commercial [gametrailers.com] decrying the toxicity of game consoles. It "stars" Mario, Master Chief, and Kratos. Trademarks for which they obviously don't have the rights. (Evidenced by the awful voice acting.) Worse yet

        • Circuit boards in general are made with toxic processes and often contain toxic chemicals in trace amounts.

          I'm pretty sure the recycling of game console boards is just as bad as computers, meaning that it is a problem, but nowhere near as many game console boards are sold as PC motherboards making the issue barely worth discussing (about 70 million PCs were sold in the US in 2007, not including servers and laptops whereas just a few million game consoles were sold).

          • Circuit boards in general are made with toxic processes and often contain toxic chemicals in trace amounts.

            I'm pretty sure the recycling of game console boards is just as bad as computers, meaning that it is a problem, but nowhere near as many game console boards are sold as PC motherboards making the issue barely worth discussing (about 70 million PCs were sold in the US in 2007, not including servers and laptops whereas just a few million game consoles were sold).

            Actually, its 1000 times worse, due to the concentration of burning parts around "recycling" centers.

            Check out this 60 minutes segment from two weeks ago. It's hard to watch in places, watching 4 year old kids playing in old capacitors and lead solder.

            http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4586903n [cbsnews.com]

      • Haha, look at this one:

        I am so angry at SpaceX! My children and I were very scared. How dare them conduct this test without letting us know! We live across from the McGregor Airport and our entire house shook and trembled. The sky was on fire. My 11-year-old son said he âoethought the sun was exploding.â I grabbed a jug of apple juice and made my kids go into my closet fearing the worse.

        So, when you fear for the worse, you go into your closet with a jug of apple juice? "One apple a day keeps the doomsday away."

    • Yeah, let's all blame it on George Bush and act like it wasn't there before or like no cultural factor (of old origin) has to do anything with that.
    • Especially in the middle-of-nowhere-Texas.

      Oggity boogity! Terrrrsts gunna git ya! Boogity boogity boo!
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      You would need one HECK of a heat shield to withstand flying at escape velocity so deep in the atmosphere. I'm sure it could be done, but it would look like a meteor flying up instead of down.
    • 1938 War of the Worlds radio broadcast. Almost 50 years to the date. Same reaction from the tough Texan crowd.
    • Picking on Texans? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by iamlucky13 (795185) on Monday November 24 2008, @03:08PM (#25876655)
      It's fun to pick on Texans for things like cowboy hats, unnecessarily large barbeque pits, and their slow drawl, and it's easy to pick on people who didn't know what was going on when you're reading a news article after the fact that starts out by telling you exactly what went on, but "fearful idiots" is a remarkably stupid generalization.

      How do you think residents would respond in your area? "The house is rattling, there's a tremendous roaring sound, I can feel reverberations through my body, and there's a bright glow on the horizon...meh, my WoW character is about to level up. I'll worry about it later." Somehow I'm guessing not.

      Supposing they tested this near New York, or better yet Boston (The Mooninites are coming! The Mooninites are coming!)? There'd be hysteria in the streets. Heck, in some places you'd probably even get looting and throngs fleeing the city. The same goes for pretty much any place in the entire US, with the likely exception of Cape Canaveral, where rocket launches happen relatively frequently.

      Things like this are genuinely bewildering when you don't know what's going on. About 10 years ago I saw a natural gas pipeline fire...from 50 miles away. The whole family was out on the back porch staring at the eerily pulsating glow of the reflection off the clouds trying to figure out what was going on. Until the local news reported on what was actually happening, our best guess was a forest fire, but a nuclear bombing of Portland was another speculation (we figured it unlikely, however, partially because there was no similar glow to the north, in the direction of Seattle). Coincidentally, they said the flames from that fire were as much as 200 feet high, so it was probably similar in brightness to the SpaceX test, but not nearly as loud.

      A final more general comment: SpaceX has been conducting engine tests out there for several years now. In fact, their first Falcon 9 firing (1 engine at that time) on that test stand was almost a year ago, and their first nine-engine, short duration fire was three months ago. In view of this, SpaceX's statement that the sound carried much further than in the past due to the weather is probably quite accurate. It also probably didn't help that they did the test at 10:30 PM. Perhaps in the future they'll work safe stopping points into their procedure so they can delay to the next day if the test preparations take too long.

      They probably also should consider putting up simple walls to reflect some of the sound upward and reduce the complaints long term. At the very least, have a facility-wide arbor day celebration and go plant lines of trees along the edge of the test site. I know our local racetrack was able to reduce neighborhood complaints (and make the treehuggers a little happier) by doing this.
      • Re:Texans... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Ogive17 (691899) on Monday November 24 2008, @01:38PM (#25875493)
        I hate how shit like this gets modded "insightful," if anything it's flamebait. What happened, did you see the one idiot the local news crew always seems to find that says "I'm not voting for Obama because he's a Muslim" and decide that an entire state is worthless? That's what the local news in (Dayton,Ohio) would show. They'd air some toothless person from the OH/WV boarder saying they wouldn't vote for Obama.. trying to generalize everyone who voted for McCain.

        It's annoying that on a site with so many smart people that moronic generalizations can be seen as insightful. You know, not everyone who voted for McCain is a racist, or is a bible thumper, or is a fear and/or war mongerer. Some places actually do better under Republican policies (small towns). I didn't vote for McCain, but I don't bash the people who do. They have the right to vote for whomever they want for whatever reason they want.