SpaceX's Falcon 9 Appears As UFO In Australia 143
RobHart writes "ABC (the Australian Broadcasting Commission) has reported extensively on a bright spiraling light that was seen in Eastern Australia just before dawn. It has just broadcast a report from an Australian astronomer who has suggested that the light was probably the successful Falcon 9 launch, which would have been over Australia at that time on its launch trajectory."
Update: 06/05 22:20 GMT by T : Setting aside the literal exhaust fumes, reader FleaPlus says, It's "interesting to look at the reactions from those in Congress who control the purse-strings for NASA (one of SpaceX's biggest customers). The successful launch was congratulated by Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL and former astronaut) and Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (D-FL), both praised and criticized by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) due to the successful launch being a year later than previously predicted, and blasted by Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) for merely replicating what 'NASA accomplished in 1964,' who added that the company's success 'must not be confused with progress for our nation's human spaceflight program.'"
Oh, those Falcon UFOs! (Score:5, Informative)
DST (Score:3, Informative)
A doubter quoted in the article says "Firstly, the time of the launch was 18.45 GMT, which translates to 4.45am EST, the duration of the flight was 9 minutes 38 seconds - this is a full hour before the reported sightings."
Did he forget that we're on DST right now? He should have looked up the EDT time, not EST.
Re:DST (Score:4, Informative)
Congress is happy (Score:3, Informative)
Re:So ..... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:DST (Score:5, Informative)
No, that was boost time.
It will be falling for the next year or so, until the orbit finally decays.
Re:maybe Australia has a space program (Score:4, Informative)
and nobody outside Australia knows about it, and we all think it is just some UFO flyover when they launch a rocket in to space.
Come on. Nobody here can keep a secret. Have you met an Australian outside AU who knows how to shut up?
Re:Congress is happy (Score:5, Informative)
Keith's note: This is hilarious. Ares 1-X was a suborbital mission with a fake second stage, a first stage motor different than the final one, and used borrowed avionics. Falcon 9 flew an operational vehicle first time out of the hanagr and put a payload into orbit at a small fraction of the cost that an Ares would require. Falcon 9 has a better chance of closing the gap than Ares 1 will. Apparently the good senator (her staff that is) are utterly unaware of the fact that Ares 1 will not achieve any of its milestones until after Falcon 9 has already done so. Yet we never hear anything from her about that, do we?
As for Sen Shelby's comments, It would seem that SpaceX is better equipped to do what "NASA accomplished in 1964" than the NASA of 2010 can accomplish - and do so faster - and more cheaply. Ares 1 would cost much more and be ready later than Falcon 9.
Re:Second Stage Burn over australia (Score:5, Informative)
There is always a final burn after 1/2 orbit to circularize the orbit. Which is probably what the OP was babbling about. There was no intention to put the Falcon 9 into an escape orbit.
On the other hand, Falcon 9 is capable of putting a payload into GEO. It requires more deltaV to achieve a circular orbit at GEO than it does to reach escape speed (if the fuel needed to circularize the orbit at GEO were spent during the initial boost, Falcon 9 would be about 150 m/s shy of a Mars transfer orbit.
Re:I wish I saw it! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Second Stage Burn over australia (Score:1, Informative)
Escape velocity is easy to achieve. Hell, a delta 2 sent both rovers to mars. The falcon9 has a lot more lift than it. They weren't aiming for anything, with a hyperbolic orbit right over a ground station they can track it for a long time as it travels away from the earth and gain valuable data.
Yes, it was more successful than even they had hoped. Even if the second stage didn't light at all, they would have still called it a success. And I would agree with that. They got more accomplished than Ares I did, and that launch cost over a billion dollars.
Re:Congress is happy (Score:5, Informative)
SpaceX started years before the Aries program, used 30 year old technology
I guess you forgot that the Constellation system was supposed to take us back to Luna and then on to Mars and not just the ISS which is the primary target of the Falcon 9 system.
You are misinformed. The Ares I rocket is just a LEO launcher. It is an extended space shuttle solid rocket booster with an upper stage powered by a single Saturn V motor. The technology in it dates to the mid-1970s or even earlier.
The Ares V is a heavy-lift booster that outclasses anything built. Or it would if they'd actually try building one. It is a STS External Tank with five motors off the Delta IV under it and two STS SRBs attached to it. The upper stage is powered by the same Saturn V derivative motor used on the Ares I.
Both programs started development circa 2005 (SpaceX was only founded in 2002). SpaceX has delivered a working launch vehicle. NASA has launched what was literally a slightly modified SRB out of the Space Shuttle inventory as the Ares I-X, and is unlikely to launch the real thing until 2017. The Ares V hasn't even begun to leave the drawing board.
SpaceX has a working satellite launcher that can be made man-rated. The Constellation program has nothing.
Re:Second Stage Burn over australia (Score:3, Informative)
According to the Falcon 9 user's guide [spacex.com], it's capable of sending a payload of about 2.5 tons to escape velocity (C3=0).
Though I agree, the OP meant "orbit circularization".
Anyway, three cheers for SpaceX, but if I were NASA I'd make damn sure they know what the deal was with that roll before they let a Dragon anywhere near the ISS.
Re:Politicians (Score:3, Informative)
Russia, China, and soon India all have more advanced space programs than the USA right now.
Not right now. The U.S. put more people into orbit on one flight last month than China has in their entire history. Maybe someday China and India will pass us, but not yet.
The other part that Obama's critics dont get (Score:3, Informative)
Obama is trying to develop a viable space program that works and we can actually afford. The first part of that is a lowering
the cost to get stuff to orbit. Spacex will be part of that plan
Re:Politicians (Score:4, Informative)
Agree. If there's one thing space exploration has taught us, it's that plans count for nothing. The US had grand plans for the Shuttle. The Soviets had grand plans for the Moon. You don't have a space program until main engine cutoff.
I don't want to be a chest-beating American here, the grandparent post may turn out to be true 20 years from now. But right now, at this moment, the U.S. has:
1 guy in orbit
300 tonnes of space station hardware in orbit
13-20 Earth-observing satellites
2-3 sun-observing missions
1 mission to Mercury
1 mission to the asteroid belt
4-5 missions to Mars
1 mission at Saturn
1 mission heading to Pluto
plus some miscellaneous ones I've forgotten about. Some numbers are approximate because it depends on how you count.
Anyway, *that* is a space program. The future may bring what the future may bring, but right now, find me another country that is doing a tenth as much space stuff.
Re:Sen. Richard Shelby's Comment (Score:2, Informative)
SpaceX isn't aiming to do anything new, they're aiming to do the same thing for less than half the price (per kilogram, Falcon 9 Heavy compared to the Ariane 5).