Antares Rocket Launch Scrubbed 45
An anonymous reader writes "This evening's planned launch of the Orbital Sciences Antares rocket had to be canceled just 12 minutes before liftoff, due to the unexpected separation of the booster's umbilical cable while the vehicle was on the launch pad. This is the first attempt to fly the Antares rocket, which is a commercial craft and direct competitor to the SpaceX Dragon 9. Beyond being the first flight of a brand new commercial rocket, this mission is also notable for carrying three of NASA's PhoneSats; small satellites powered by Android running on Nexus smartphones. With each PhoneSat costing just $3,500, they're designed to test the limits of extremely low cost spacecraft, similar to the European STRaND-1 mission. Since this is simply an orbital test, and the Antares will not be attempting to dock with the International Space Station, the launch window is highly flexible. It's anticipated Orbital Sciences will make another attempt at launching the Antares within 48 hours."
Re: (Score:3)
it was a spontaneous abortion - the umbilical came off
but I heard that if you go horseback riding...
They were right to scrub. (Score:4, Funny)
Wow! Antares is 470 light years away. Private space companies are advancing faster than I thought.
Excellent. (Score:4, Funny)
The last thing we need to do is antagonize the Antarans. We don't even have planetary missile bases yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh how I wish I had mod points! Excellent retro gaming reference :)
Re:Excellent. (Score:5, Funny)
someone set us up the bomb
Re: (Score:1)
Yes we do. We need some inter-planetary ones.
Powered by? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I think that whoever wrote that meant that they are controlled sell Nexus smartphones.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
That's something you should use you're eyes and brain four
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Dyslexics of the world, Untie!
Re:Powered by? (Score:5, Informative)
"Of course, the phones won’t exactly resemble their Earth-bound brethren while in space. To save weight, the screens and cases will be removed from the phones, and their batteries will be replaced with more appropriate power systems."
http://www.thepowerbase.com/2012/08/can-android-revolutionize-spacecraft-design/
Re: (Score:3)
Also:
http://phonesat.org/packets.php [phonesat.org]
http://open.nasa.gov/plan/phonesat/ [nasa.gov]
More details at both. I'm thinking it'll be fun to catch some of the packets as they fly by.
Re: (Score:2)
I hate it when that happens. (Score:2)
>unexpected separation of the booster's umbilical cable
I hate it when that happens.
Re: (Score:3)
Got to remember to screw in those to screws on either side of the connector. But if that rocket is like any of the PCs I've owned, there's never enough room to get your fingers in there to twist them.
wimps (Score:2, Insightful)
The Kerbals would've launched anyway. It would've been *glorious*.
Re: (Score:2)
Damned straight.
I can't count the number of times I've chanted "ABORT TO ORBIT, ABORT TO ORBIT, C'MON YOU SUMBITCH" while my wife and/or kids boggled at my antics. Desperately trying to circularize my orbit with my leftover RCS fuel, to avoid a restart and rebuild... Good times.
KSP is one of the longest-term entries in my gaming shortlist in years. Simple sandbox, just enough structure to get you having your own ideas, tons of flexibility.
Editors, do they exist? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
+1 Informative. Sorry, no mod points today so this will have to do.
Was it (Score:1)
Sounds a lot like the 4 inch flight (Score:1)
"Causes of the failure
Investigation revealed that the Redstone's engine shutdown was caused by two of its electrical cables separating in the wrong order.[6] These cables were a control cable, which provided various control signals, and a power cable, which provided electrical power and grounding. Both cables were plugged into the rocket at the bottom edge of one of its tail fins and would separate at liftoff.[10] The control cable was supposed to separate first, followed by the power cable. However, for th
Re: (Score:1)
Excellent time to scrub the launch (Score:5, Insightful)
This is similar to IT - when a user finds a bug in testing, that's a GOOD thing: it means it's not going to production like that.
Re: (Score:2)
Low cost satelites = bad news (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There might not be a practical solution to remove space debris past some threshold, would you rather find out that the case after the fact?
Sure. At least you did something in space.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes and no.
The idea is: the more crud we put into orbit the more garbage we have to deal with. So when we launch (rocket, shuttle-type-craft, etc) now we've got all of these ballistic metal+plastic slugs flying around that we either have to avoid or watch them damage/pierce the hull. Those things move fast: factor in many many of them and avoidance becomes near impossible if we start putting up too much.
Keep that going, and we'll need flippin armored vehicles to get past orbit which means heavier vehicles
Re: (Score:2)
are these even going to permanent orbit?
Re: (Score:3)
hey, everybody, look - a pissed-off government worker who can't stand that SpaceX can get the job done for 20% of the cost of NASA.
I'm old enough to remember Sally Ride talking about the plan for a moon base by 2010 and George the smarter committing to a 2017 Mars landing. The government has failed to execute.
Elon Musk is planning to retire on Mars and it looks like he will.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeppers, kinda hard to hide your age when you're a member of the 4 digit Id club (close to site founding in 1997 or 16 years ago). Even us 5 digiters are pretty creaky.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, ignore the fixed costs of the vehicle development and your math works out fine. I can pull the NASA administrator's quote about SpaceX being able to deliver for 20% of NASA's cost if you insist.
Re: (Score:2)