SpaceX Launch Achieves Geostationary Transfer Orbit 131
SpaceX launched a Falcon 9 rocket this afternoon in a bid to deliver a large commercial satellite into geostationary orbit. The flight was successful: "Approximately 185 seconds into flight, Falcon 9’s second stage’s single Merlin vacuum engine ignited to begin a five minute, 20 second burn that delivered the SES-8 satellite into its parking orbit. Eighteen minutes after injection into the parking orbit, the second stage engine relit for just over one minute to carry the SES-8 satellite to its final geostationary transfer orbit. The restart of the Falcon 9 second stage is a requirement for all geostationary transfer missions." This is a significant milestone for SpaceX, and it fulfills another of the three objectives set forth by the U.S. Air Force to certify SpaceX flights for National Security Space missions.
Re:It ain't bullshit (Score:5, Informative)
The United States relies too much on ULA for its space-launch, ULA has easily raised its price and the tax-payers ended up having to cough up the dough.
FTFY. This is the first commercial satellite launched in the US since November 23, 2009 when Intelsat 14 launched on an Atlas V from LC-41. [blogspot.com]
SpaceX is so cheap (Score:5, Informative)
that existing space providers are in big trouble.
Even the Chinese are quaking in their boots, as they can't do it as cheaply as SpaceX. And EADS is frantically redesigning their new Ariane 6 to try to be more cost competitive with the Falcon.
SpaceX has completely rocked the space industry upside down, and A LOT of naysayers need to eat crow now. As recently as 2012 (see this article [airspacemag.com]), managers at NASA were poo-pooing Elon saying rockets are hard and noobs shouldn't try.
Re:Oh great (Score:5, Informative)
I have no idea why the NSA/USAF requirements is such a big deal, as it really doesn't have much of anything to do with a private company (in this case SES... an operator of GEO telecommunications satellites) is spending its money on another private company (SpaceX) to accomplish an otherwise very public mission. People are going to be pointing their satellite dishes at this satellite for crying out loud and watching television coming from it. I don't know how more public you can make such a flight.
The USAF is simply throwing up some BS that SpaceX needs to fly a few more missions and prove it can deliver satellites into various kinds of orbits before they are able to tell Boeing and Lockheed-Martin lobbyists where to go when the next round of launch contracts come out. Those two companies (in the form of the United Launch Alliance... jointly owned by both companies) want to pretend they are the only people in America capable of launching anything into orbit at all.
Re:It ain't bullshit (Score:5, Informative)
SpaceX could easily raise its price 100-fold and the tax-payers will end up having to cough up the dough.
What the heck are you talking about? Why would Boing or Lockheed (the current owners of the US govt launch monopoly) be and different? How is *more* competition from SpaceX going to lead to price increases and fewer options?
What if one day Russia or Iran or China ends up owning SpaceX ?
And what if some day Russia or Iran of China owns General Dynamics, Lockheed, Honeywell, Northrup, etc? Then those companies will no longer be US defense contractors, and others will *happily* step up to take over their cushy multibillion dollar cost-overrun laden US military contracts. So it's a totally absurd concern that would be no different 30 years ago than it is today.
When your #1 customer spends more than the rest of the world combined, you don't piss them off.
Re:SpaceX is so cheap (Score:4, Informative)
And the BBC claims they have $4 billion of satellite launches booked.
Re:SpaceX is so cheap (Score:4, Informative)
SpaceX is in the red currently and if they can market the heck out their rockets to Wall Street (for funding) and undercut everyone, hopefully timing will allow them to get into the black.
They do great work, but either SpaceX will survive as much as OSC did in the 90's (they did well to start subcompanies) or they will flame out hard from debt.
SpaceX doesn't need funding, they have paying customers [spacex.com]. And unless something goes terribly wrong, they are about to get a bunch more.
Re:SpaceX is so cheap (Score:4, Informative)
Oh well, back to making planes that don't fly. Or catch fire.
Are you talking about the Tesla?
Nah, more likely Boeing's Dreamliner. The Tesla has nothing on Boeing for self-combusting batteries. At least the Tesla needs major damage to trigger one. :)
Re:SpaceX is so cheap (Score:4, Informative)
His 150 engines number might be right after all, considering the first recovery of a first stage may happen as early as CRS-3. Mr. Musk has said that some of next year's contracts require new rockets, but some have clauses that allow reuse of a first stage, for a price break and at the customer's option. It remains to be seen if any of next year's customers will have to nerve to exercise that option, but it's possible.
Re:SpaceX is so cheap (Score:2, Informative)
Look, SpaceX launched 2 last year, will launch 4 this year (roughly 1 every 3 months; however, 3 came in the last 3 months) and supposedly will do 15 next year (i.e. 1 every 3 weeks).
How does that compare to Ariane [wikipedia.org]?
ariane launched 4 this year; 7 in 2012; 5 in 2011; 6 in 2010.
IOW, ariane is NOT much better than SpaceX this year, and if SpaceX is successful next year, they will do double what Ariane did in their best year.
So, how about Atlas [wikipedia.org] and Delta [wikipedia.org]? in 2013, 8 atlas/ 4 delta.
in 2012, 6 atlas/ 4 delta.
in 2011, 5 atlas/ 3 delta.
in 2010, 5 atlas/ 3 delta.
As I look at any of these major launch systems, it appears that SpaceX is pretty much on par for this year with 3 majors, AND with more than 15 launches / year for the next couple of years, it will put all of the rest to shame.
So, why the hatred for SpaceX?
Windbourne (moderating).
Re:Controlled booster stage attempt? (Score:3, Informative)
For the SES-8 and Thaicom-6 launches SpaceX commited 100% of the rocket's capabilities to boost the rocket into a super sync orbit.
A GTO orbit is less than 36000Km x 185Km.
SES-8 was inserted into a 80000Km x 295Km orbit.
It reaches apogee when the moon is close by.
This trick helps save fuel to allow SES-8 to live much longer. Typically satellites useful lives are limited by fuel used for station keeping maneuvers.
In this sense, SES-8 and Thaicom-6 launches are even more valuable to their operators than a typical GTO launch.
GEO satellites are responsible for circularizing the orbit, and this consumes a lot of their precious on board fuel.