Slashdot Mirror
Delta 4 Inaugural Launch A Success
brandido writes "Space.com is reporting that the Delta 4 has lifted off from Cape Canaveral at 5:40 pm EST. According to the Article: 'Boeing's Delta 4 has lifted off from pad 37 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. Everything appeared to be working normally with the rocket as it made its initial climb out over the Atlantic Ocean during the first minute.' It will now take the two-stage rocket some 37 minutes to deliver the Eutelsat W5 spacecraft to orbit, so keep your fingers crossed all continues to go well.'" Looks like everything went swimmingly well.
Were there any mounted cameras for cool launch vids?
FoundNews.com - get paid to blog.,
but did they strap a video camera to it???
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.
-Bertrand Russel
I watched the event live on TV and they had a camera showing it from the rockets view.
You could watch each stage fire off. Pretty neat.
Real question I ask, is why are they back to using the Deltas? Didn't the older ones blow up enough or are the Shuttles THAT booked up?
"Where is my mind?"
What use can there be for at least 37 launch pads on one base?
I would cross my fingers, but this happened at 5:40. It's 8:20 now.
Looks like everything went swimmingly well.
Don't say "swimmingly" when there is a rocket flying over the ocean with a satellite payload. Swimming is the last thing we want the satellite to do.
Heh...I'm guessing they *didn't* get John Carmack to design the onboard computer :)
Project Steve
Rueters:
The Delta 4 swerved suddenly of course at 5:45pm today and headed for Iraq with uncanny precsion eventually crashing into Saddam Hussein's secret, undergroud, booby trap filled hideout. A Pentagon spokesperson said "Our plan is working wonderfully, uh, I mean... to bad about the whole rocket foul-up."
Cloud City Digital: DVD Production at its cheapest/finest
Looks like everything went swimmingly well...
:(
It can't be well if its swimming
[alk]
Uhh, spread the FUD love around. This rocket is carrying a satellite. Not humans.
i swear my userid used to be lower.
Additionally, shuttle missions were limited to 4 per year according to new budget proposals by NASA, I think for 2003 and most of them were slated for the International Space Station. So, yes... they're that booked.
The Seattle PI had this link on their webpage.
Here's hoping that Boeing doesn't acquire Armadillo Aerospace. I'd hate to see what would happen if John was launching a Delta 4.
Space.com is now reporting that the entire launch was a success. It made it through the last 37 minutes and deployed the satellite.
Come play Heroes of Might and Magic Mini online.
How can people so viciously attack the heaven with these 'rockets'. Hasn't anyone learned anything from the bible? God lives in those skies and we best not be attacking his realm for he may wreck havoc on us for this obvious contempt over His will.
When will people learn?
GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
Unfortunately space.com's article doesn't say much about the actual satellite, a few more details here: http://www.spacedaily.com/news/satellite-biz-02zc. html
So can one of these puppies actually break orbit. I mean we DO need something capable of delivering a thermonuclear warhead to Mars to preemtively stop those Martians from developing nuclear weapons...
Viral software licensing is not freedom, it is in fact GNU/Socialism.
...and we still don't use flying cars.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Does anyone else really wish they could go see a launch live? I've had a fascination with space and rockets since I was a child (geek, what? JUST because I have glowwy-glowwy rounded uv-sensitive cables inside my computer, DOESN'T MEAN...) but have never had the fortune to see a launch in person.. Sure, watching on TV is nice and all, but it cannot begin to compare to the joy of seeing a rocket claw it's way into the sky (mmmmmm.... fiiiirrrre) and become it's own star for a while..
-Trev
Yeah I heard N'Sync and Lance Bass are finally going to space on this one.
As I read of another stunted shot into space, another symbol of our aborted attempts to get man into the void, I can but shed a tear and say "WHERES MY FLYING CAR!?!?!"
Boeing:1
Carmack:0
Great!
:D
Astronauts used to be pilots, and daredevils. Then they slowly phased into glorified cable men. Now they're construction workers.
I'm glad I didn't want to be an astronaust when I was a kid, I'd have to change my background profession every 10 years to keep up with NASA's purpose.
"Where is my mind?"
It's about cost, reliability and payload.
{Note - this goes off-topic because I googled a bit and was stunned by modern launch capability. Sorry}
A Space Shuttle can throw about thirteen tonnes into low earth orbit. That's a huge chunk of satellite. Unfortunately, NASA will charge you in excess of $500 million for the service. The reliability is excellent. One failure in over 110 launches. Probably the most reliable launcher in history. Use the Space Shuttle if it's very heavy, cost is no problem and it absolutely, certainly, definitely must get there.
Delta is an old, proven, excellent technology. It used to be considered a 'light' launcher. Delta IV, however, can smack a meaty Thirteen tonnes to orbit. Yowza. I only found that out now. OK, that vehicle hasn't been built yet.
Whoo-Hoo! I just read that page again. The Delta Heavy (not built yet, but all technology in place) can stuff 13 tonnes into Geosynchronous transfer orbit. It can throw (and this is astonishing) twenty-three humungous tonnes to low earth orbit. What the hell can compete with that?
Well, Ariane 5 ECS-B can do twelve tonnes to Geosynchronous orbit. No payload assist required for orbit transfer.
The Russian Proton
can do about 23 tonnes to low earth orbit. This is the only one I know the cost for. You want twenty-three thousand kilogrammes orbiting at 350 kilometers? 75 million dollars. Cash up front, go talk to your insurers. (The Proton is almost as insanely reliable as the shuttle, actually - certainly comparable with Delta)
Right. That's it. I'm going to become a rocket engineer. It's got to beat the hell out of managing telecoms networks for a living.
Lance Bass, Bill Gates, John Ashcroft, and the PanIP bastard all have a meeting underneath it at launch time.
First stage should be swimming anyway; they ditch in mid-atlantic. If it's not- that's bad- it means it hit the mainland, it could have taken out Disneyland or something. So you've got it backwards in fact but I knew what you meant ;-)
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"Well, purely from an aesthetic standpoint.
There's just something about a liquid fueled center surrounded by a bunch of boosters.
The whole thing just looks beefy.
Dragging people kicking and screaming into reality since 1996.
The space.com story said that a "rocket" is putting a "satellite" into orbit. Forgive me for being a complete ignoramus, but what's so special about that? Hasn't this been going on for decades? Somebody explain this to me like I'm six.
There's a list of 'delta-v's here.
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"Does this mean we've gone back to the "sane" method of launching satellites, and can stop wasting the shuttles (which cost WAY more to send up than a "disposable" launch vehicle) on such mundane tasks?
I hope so. While I totally support "real" space exploration, the shuttles have, for the past few decades, scammed the US out of billions (trillions, yet?) of dollars. We use them for nothing even remotely interesting, yet pay a fortune to maintain and occasionally launch them.
*FWHOOOOOOMMM*
"SON OF A BITCH!!!"
"Uh oh. I think they hit Azrael..."
...
"Why the fuck is the can always a launch window for these people?! I swear, if I hadn't gotten up just then, those little bastards would've been in such a world of shit..."
"Heheh. I bet they're trying to get you back for Soddom! Get it? Soddom? Heh."
"Do you have to use that one every chance you get, Michael?"
"Yes. Wait... World of shit! Ha! I missed that one!! You're hilarious, man... angel... whatever."
"RrrrrAHHH! WHERE'S MY FLAMING SWORD? I will bust some DIVINE JUSTICE on ALL YOUR ASSES!"
...
"Come on, Enoch, that was pretty funny. Asses. Ha."
"Michael, you are such a dork. Why didn't he read the note He put on the door?"
"You're the only one who can ever read His handwriting."
"Oh, right. I wish He's use that label maker we got him..."
"Who writes 7-dimensional "E"s anyway?"
For some reason that just totaly blows my mind:
And that fact that the new Atlas V is based on a russian engine?????
That just depresses the heck out of me......
Chinese Radar Operator: Comrade Colonel, you better have a look at this radar.
Comrade Colonel: What is it, son?
Chinese Radar Operator: I don't know, sir, but it looks like a giant--
American Jet Pilot on patrol: Dick! Dick, take a look out of starboard.
Co-Pilot: Oh my God, it looks like a huge--
Woman on Cruise Ship: Pecker!
Man on Cruise Ship: [raising binoculars] Where?
Woman on Cruise Ship: Over there. What sort of bird is that? Oh goodness, it's not a bird, it's--
Uninformed Canaveral Sergeant: Privates! We have reports of an Unidentified Flying Object. It has a long, smooth shaft, complete with--
Baseball Umpire near Kennedy: Two balls! [looking up from game] What is that? It looks just like an enormous--
Comrade Colonel: Wang!
Chinese Radar Operator: Yes, sir?
Comrade Colonel: Get on the horn to Wu and let him know about this.
Cake or Death? Cake Please!
They just meant fast you know - rushin!
....
... try the fish!
OW! hey! hey! quit throwin things
Please! please! Settle down folks, I'm here all week, tip your waiter and
Cake or Death? Cake Please!
If you check the Shuttle manifests, you'll see that the DOD has most dates. My imagination tells me most of the lifts for DOD are satellites. ...therefore, most domestic satelites are lifted by Shuttle, me thinks.
The satillite is how you get to see spiderman on TV.
Damn, I thought I watched Spiderman on cable TV... I'll call my cable operator and ask them to rename their service to satellite TV. Maybe I can sue them for lying to me all these years?
you are right that we as public cannot buy them yet. but that does not mean it's not there.
moller international has been working on flying cars for a while now and it's very near completion. I would recommend reading more about it here(about middle of page) at zzz.
You can also invest in his company. stock symbol is MLER or something.
My life in the land of the rising sun.
...just don't become an editor... ;)
Well, at one point the plan was to use shuttles to launch all the US satellites-- commercial, civil and military. In 1985, there were supposed to be 15 (!) launches. The shuttles were going to VERY inexpensive. The challenger accident happened, and, after a serious re-examination, the program was really tightened up and its mission was narrowed.
This led to the rebirth of the Delta, the Delta II, to launch the new GPS satellites (planned for shuttle originally). Reagan announced that shuttles were not to be used for commercial satellite launches, and the commercial launch industry was reinvigorated.
Fast forward 10+ years, the AF decided they need better launch options, give Lockheed-Martin and Boeing (nee Mcdonell Douglas) 1/2 Billion dollars each. They used this to develop the EELVs (Delta IV and Atlas V).
The point of the EELVs is to replace the Delta II and Titan IV, as far as the Air Force is concerned. Commercial satellites just aren't launched on the shuttles anymore. One or both of the EELVs may be used to launch the new space plane NASA plans to build, and variants could be used to help launch the replacement for the shuttle.
Any of these rockets can get you to Mars, or at least a Rover. NASA uses Delta IIs for most of their Mars missions, which is much smaller than the IV. Bigger rocket, bigger payload.
As for the shuttle, it's an amazing piece of technology that is completely unappreciated due to its string of successes, high cost, and early problems. The marginal cost of a shuttle is about $40 million, not $500 million. That higher number comes from dividing the shuttle budget ($2 billion) by the number of launches/year (4). Adding one flight costs $40 million that year, although it will shorten the life of the shuttle, so that needs to be taken into account.
Then realize that the shuttle is the heaviest launcher in the world right now, it can put more payload into orbit than any other system. That does not include the mass of the shuttle itself. There may not be a space vehicle as versatile, powerful and reliable as the Space Shuttle for another 50 years. It's a shame the shuttle will never recover from its early problems.
This guy is completely uninformed. There are no DOD dedicated shuttle missions anymore. Those ended with Challenger.
get real (prove it)...they're all blacked out, so who knows, outside of a few defense contractors :)
I was at work, at Cocoa Beach Surf Company. Apparently I work well enough, 'cause my boss kindly allowed me to go up to the top of our five story parking garage to watch the shot this evening. On top of the garage I met my son, and an old friend who is now senior photographer for the local paper hereabouts, Florida Today. My son had the scanner and his telescope (we're both pretty seriously into this). Nice view from our perch, and we could plainly see the launch vehicle, sitting there on the pad out on the Cape, lit up by the searchlights. After sundown, but not dark by any means. The guy on the Photo Ops channel counted it down and when they fired it up, it put out an impressive blaze of orange flame, and began lumbering upward. Kinda slow getting off the ground and as my son (staring through the telescope) called "tower clear!" I made a comment about how it was nearly as slow as an Atlas getting going. Soon enough, it got to moving right along, arcing seaward over the lights of Cocoa Beach with a brilliant yellow-orange flame topping a dense column of smoke from the two strap on solid rocket motors. Nice rumble when the sound finally arrived. It moved into and above the deck of thin cirrus that covered the whole sky, and remained plainly visible and audible. I wondered aloud to my son as to how it was going to look when the solids went out and were jettisoned. (The main engine is LOX/LH2 and has no sensible flame that you can see. It's see-through clear, kinda like an alcohol flame or something like that) Soon enough, the two solids separated and could be seen winking on and off, tumbling over and over in free fall, now in direct sunlight way the hell and gone up there. The Delta IV continued on its merry way, now arcing (apparently) downward, as it sped towards an aim point vastly beyond our local horizon. Surprisingly, despite the LOX/LH2 flame, it remained QUITE bright. Moreso even than the Shuttle, which has an identical deal (LOX/LH2 clear flame) going on after SRB sep. Not sure what the deal is with that. With the Shuttle, the brilliant light is coming from the inside of the three SSME's. The nozzle lining is white hot and puts off a pretty bright light. I guess that's what was going on with the Delta, also, but since the Shuttle has three motors and the Delta has one, I just wasn't expecting that much bright light following SRM sep. Anyhoo, it stayed visible for quite a while, before fading into the cirrus murk out over the ocean. Shortly after everybody else departed the parking garage roof (I'd put a couple of tourists on to the fact that there was going to be a little show today and they were fully stoked at what they saw) my son and I noticed a weird cloud at extreme altitude, with direct sunlight shining on it. We had earlier discussed whether or not this one would "blow a balloon" and had decided that it wouldn't. ["Balloons" form when rockets exit the sensible atmosphere and the exhaust gasses from the engine nozzles begin spreading out without any resistance from the surrounding atmosphere, which isn't there anymore. On evening shots, with the sun the exact perfect distance BELOW the local horizon and the sky the exact perfect shade of dark, the exhaust gas will rapidly expand, and form a weirdly beautiful {fucking GORGEOUS, to be more precise) spectacle in the darkling sky, enveloping the pinpoint brilliance of the rocket itself, before fading away a few minutes later] This bird did NOT blow a "balloon" (we've NEVER seen LOX/LH2 do it and have more or less decided it just doesn't happen), but it DID leave that weirdie bluish-white glowing cloud. Not sure what the deal was. We'll probably both be very old and very gray before an identical set of circumstances repeats. Whatever. Anyway, it was a real pretty shot, and we're glad the vehicle performed nominally and put the payload where it's supposed to be.
Is it fascism yet?
The Space Shuttle isn't used to launch most satellites! It's only used when its special capabilities are required.
Why? Because rocket scientists happen to be bright enough to realize that it's currently more cost effective to launch things on disposable rockets!
I'm getting really sick of people who post who don't have a fucking clue about what they are talking about. I'm even more pissed off at the ones who proclaim the authoritative way to fix some perceived problem, while they are total uninformed about what the real situation is.
I believe that the DOD missions are over now, but they hardly ended with Challenger. STS-53, STS-39, STS-38, STS-36, STS-33, STS-28 and STS-27 were all DOD classified payloads after Challenger. The last one of these was in December '92, over 4 years after the shuttle returned to flight.
How much a launcher can put on orbit depends also on the orbit. Shuttle may be useful when putting heavy loads to low orbits. Getting the payload to geostationary (many communiations satellites) or other high orbits (e.g. INTEGRAL satellite observatory has 3 day orbit going halfway to Moon at apogeum), or launching probes to other planets is easier with Delta.
Wasting fuel on getting the shuttle to high velocities needed to reach these orbits is just stupid. If the astronauts wanted back home after being fried in the (Van Allen) radiation belts, an extra load of fuel is needed. In principle the Shuttle could be used to get an upper stage and the real payload to a lower orbit, but it does not make sense.
The astronauts are a problem. Plenty of equipment is needed to keep them alive, they can't take that much radiation, and you want them back. A robotic shuttle (like Buran) or preferably fully reusable lower stages would be much, much better for simply putting stuff on the orbit.
At work today, I got a phonecall from this guy from NASA. He was calling for "NASA Tech Briefs" and wanted to know whether the address I filled out on a "free subscription" card a year or two ago was correct. It was, but I never got a single issue, so I told him to cancel my subscription because I wasn't getting it. He replys with the usual telemarketer response: "Why?!". I reply that I'm busy at work and don't have time to talk with him. I wonder if another guy from NASA will call me and ask if I've received the space station that I ordered yet.
Which had the side-effect of making the Shuttle an even bigger financial liability than before. At least chucking out satellites to beam repeats of M*A*S*H earned some money.
Best wishes,
Mike.
I hope you're just Trolling, but on the off chance you're serious, I'll ask:
.
Yes, I do. I would gladly go to Mars, under the understanding that I couldn't return, if there was about a 90% chance of surviving the first year
Why ? why not send a Machine to gather the data in your place and live a productive life studying the results ? what would your death achieve ?
I understand taking risks for a good cause, if you plan, test, and implement in a professional manner, there is still a risk and taking it is an heroic act. A soldier who dies fighting to defend his country is a Hero.
But just throwing your life away for no good reason is not heroism IMHO, just a stupid, senseless, act of self hatred
-- Sometimes one must do w/o thinking. Almost always it's the other way around.
Working for necessity's mother.
With all these new rockets I hope that space tourism can be expanded beyond paying $20 mils to the Russians.
It's important to understand that the Space Shuttle (while a Marvelous piece of technology) is far to expensive for "most" satellite launches. There are numbers out there (somewhere on the internet) that compare cost per pound, for the various launch vehicles. Because it's man-rated, and much larger than the other vehicles, the shuttle is MUCH more expensive, on average.
The shuttle, on the other hand, is perfect for getting "hands-on" time with a payload, either as a capture, repair and relaunch, or for those payloads that need tender loving care, before being sent on their way.
That being said, when there is payload space available on an existing shuttle flight, fitting in satellite launchs that make sense for shuttle launch, is a good thing... (Satellite launches that make sense for Shuttle carriage would tend to include low-earth orbit birds) High Altitude Satellites (geosynchronous, and such-like) tend to require a "second stage" to lift them from the shuttles (approx.) 180 mile orbit... making them even less cost effective for deployment by Shuttle.
All of that being said, it took the Challenger accident to convince NASA that the shuttle wasn't the Do-it-all pick-up-truck to the stars that they liked to think it was. Before Challenger, NASA's plans were to shift more and more Satellite launches (ever hear of Shuttle Centaur? - it's the Centaur second stage, modified for use from the shuttle payload bay) to Shuttle based launches.
Fortunately, they are now using a "best fit" when it comes to launching Satellites, which means that if it can be done without on-site human intervention, and isn't LEO bound, it'll probably launch on a Delta, Titan, or some other suitable unmanned launch vehicle.
-I know you think you saw me post this, but you didn't.
-- All That's Evil in the Geek Space
The are called pioneers. They take signficant risks in the hopes of either a better life for themselves, or better lives for those who will follow them.
The first reason is because it's not just about science. It's about paving the way for further humans to follow. Second, machines are not good scientific assistants! The most advanced Mars landers yet developed (the Mars Exploration Rovers which will be launched early next summer) can do in a day what a human field geologist requires tens of seconds to do!!! (This is according to the leader of the project.) Now, this is not to say the the rovers are bad... they are totally outstanding robotics. But, they pale in the comparison to human beings.
If you take the ratio of (science performed)/(dollar spent), human exploration of Mars wins over robotic exploration, by far! The problem is that it costs a heck of a lot to send a human. But, if you do send people, the science they perform will be far more effective then a similar cost worth of robots.
(All those robots would look pretty cool on an open Martian field, though.
The Delta 4 class of rockets are powered by the only brand-new large rocket engine developed in the US since the Space Shuttle Main Engine -- which was developed during the early 70s. The funny thing is that Rocketdyne (now a division of Boeing) didn't actually have anybody there anymore who knew how to design rocket engines.
:) ) and any of thousands of things could have gone wrong, but apparently they've got something solid going here.
So, it ended up just like the movie Space Cowboys. Boeing rounded up all of their retired engineers, and put them to work designing one last engine. My neighbor went shuffling out every morning to work, coming back each evening with stars in his eyes for getting to work on this.
His take on this engine, confirmed by reports in Aviation Week, is that it is a great advance over the previous state of the art. It's remarkably simpler than previous engines, and operates at dramtically lower pressures -- trading a tiny bit of efficiency for dramatically higher reliability and manufacturability.
It's great to see that everything worked as planned. Almost everything in the Delta 4 is new (except the name 'Delta'
What will be really impressive is the first launch of the heavy lifter version of the Delta 4. Where the launch yesterday had a core vehicle with two small strap-on solid boosters, the heavy-lift version has three copies of the core side-by-side. It should be an absolutely beautiful launch, with the three RS-68s burning away with clean oxygen/hydrogen flames, and no smoky solids getting in the way. I can't wait.
thad
thad
I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
If we had half the balls that they had during the
first age of exploration--one single, decently-sized
testicle--and we'd be on Mars now. Hell, give us both
balls and we'd be setting out to colonize Titan.
whuppy enjoys smelling like diesel fuel
You know the drill.
If the future navigation system [for interactive networked services on
the NII] looks like something from Microsoft, it will never work.
-- Chairman of Walt Disney Television & Telecommunications
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...