SpaceX Successful Static Fire

ron_ivi writes "SpaceX's website is announced that they had a " great static fire today" where their Falcon rocket successfully had 3 seconds of thrust. Nice pictures and video of the test; and if analysis shows all was well, they'll be launching Thursday."

Comments

Awesome

[Eightyford]

I think this is great. I love Scaled Composite's X-prize winner, but this company is actually shooting for orbit! If you don't already know; it is a hell of a lot harder to reach orbital speeds as it is to only reach the outer limits of the atmosphere and descend.

Re:Sad

[Goonie]

Third, Carmack is rally, trooly, rooly building his rocket himself in his backyard, just like Commander Keen. It's more a hobby (albeit a very expensive one) than a business.

Nice, but we did that in the 1950s.

[Animats]

Very nice. Reasonable design. And roughly comparable to the Atlas ICBM booster of half a century ago.

The proposed bigger model, the Falcon 9-S5, is comparable to the modern Atlas V. 6 launches to date, 100% success rate. About 2x the price the new guys claim, but then, the Atlas is a proven product.

But the commercial launch market has collapsed. Iridium is done, and nobody wants to launch that many sats again. The geosync comsat market is saturated; everybody is going fibre optic. There's just not that much going up.

John and Elon are doing two **different** things

[everphilski]

Elon is copying technology that already exists and making a fairly conventional rocket - single engine pintle motors. He's also funding a full-scale production facility.

John is not. He is funding it by selling off his collection of cars. His development team is a group of friends. His idea is a little different - a VTVL with a hovering tail setdown, not a splashdown. He's working on four throttled throatless engines on his stage - a radically different beast. Control law between multiple engines is a pain. Quite frankly it hasn't been done yet - Apollo used 1 single gimbleable engine, and even that was in reduced gravity! Much easier since your closing velocities will be slower. Etc.

Long story short, Elon is repeating history but trying to cut costs and make it manageable. John is trying to do things a new way.

Re:John and Elon are doing two **different** thing

[Rei]

He's made both normal and throatless engines, and has gotten no decent ISP with either. The reason he's working more with throatless engines now is because he kept damaging his engines before ;) I swear, the armadillo aerospace blog is one disaster after another, half of which would have been resolved simply by reading history and the other half of which would have been resolved by doing the math first.

John is not "innovating". He's repeating the mistakes of the past. Remember his doomed experiments with thrust vectoring? How long did it take for him to give up what has been shown time and time again to not work well in rockets? How long did he stick with peroxide?