SpaceX Boosts Malaysian Satellite Into Orbit

Soychemist writes "On the same day that yet another shuttle launch was postponed, SpaceX successfully carried a Malaysian satellite, RazakSAT, into orbit. This is the second successful launch in a row for Elon Musk's space exploration startup. Later this year the company will launch its larger Falcon 9 rocket, which could be used to carry cargo to the International Space Station. RazakSAT was designed by ATSB and carries a high resolution camera. If it is intact, the satellite will take photographs of Earth that could be used to better manage natural resources." Adds xp65: "The satellite was separated from the Falcon 1 about 48 minutes after liftoff at 3:35 GMT (11:35 pm EDT). The orbit is 685 km and 9 degrees inclination. Launch was delayed several times due to a faulty helium valve on the ground and bad weather at the launch site at Kwajalein. This was the fifth flight of the Falcon 1 rocket, with the last two flights being succesful. Later this year the inaugural flight of the larger Falcon 9 rocket is planned from Cape Canaveral."

Comments

Comparison to Space Shuttle invalid

[Big Smirk]

Yes, I know, its good to make fun of NASA and its shuttle program.

I guess it doesn't take long for the public to remember that the space shuttle carries humans and thus is subject to a completely different set of requirements. Loose a Malaysian satellite - who cares, they are insured (BTW the insurance rate is of course based in part on the success/failure rate).

Not to mention the shuttle is in a completely different payload class, and more importantly, it is used with hundreds of thousands of miles on the air frame.

From the bottom of the article "Now 0-for-3, SpaceXâ(TM)s Elon Musk Vows to Make Orbit". While the shuttle has had its failures, its record is slightly better.

Yes, Soychemist, you are an ass.

Re:Comparison to Space Shuttle invalid

[kaiser423]

Well, that whole human rated thing, and the fact that SpaceX launched from Kwaj atoll in the Pacific where the storm that's over Florida isn't.

NO ONE launches satellites into known lightning storms, and if there had been a storm over Kwaj they would have scrubbed also. In fact, they did have to wait for rain showers to pass.

Re:Comparison to Space Shuttle invalid

[Anonymous Coward]

NO ONE launches satellites into known lightning storms, and if there had been a storm over Kwaj they would have scrubbed also. In fact, they did have to wait for rain showers to pass.

Not to mention the launch scrub followed by a three-month delay due to the fact that they were worried about the vibration environment of the launch damaging the satellite and decided to do a new engineering analysis.

Which was the right thing to do, of course. If you're not sure, don't launch.

Nevertheless, when NASA delays a launch to do a safety check, everybody complains how incompetent they are. When Space-X delays, everybody praises them for being cautious.

Still: Good job! Keep up the good work!

Re:Comparison to Space Shuttle invalid

[0123456]

Yes, I know, its good to make fun of NASA and its shuttle program.

I guess it doesn't take long for the public to remember that the space shuttle carries humans and thus is subject to a completely different set of requirements. Loose a Malaysian satellite - who cares, they are insured (BTW the insurance rate is of course based in part on the success/failure rate)

You just answered your own question: If a rocket isn't safe enough to carry humans, it's not safe enough to carry a billion-dollar satellite without paying a large fraction of a billion dollars in insurance premiums.

'Human-rating' is mostly bogus: the primary difference between a satellite launcher and a 'human-rated' launcher is that there's no abort system on a satellite launcher so if you're going to lose the payload anyway you might as well just crash and burn. A human-launching system needs to ensure that it will fail nicely so the crew can escape... something with the shuttle, of course, has singularly failed to do.

Lastly, I believe the total development cost of the Space-X launcher is a small fraction of the cost of a single shuttle launch, so they expected a few failures in development.

Re:Comparison to Space Shuttle invalid

[FleaPlus]

Nevertheless, when NASA delays a launch to do a safety check, everybody complains how incompetent they are. When Space-X delays, everybody praises them for being cautious.

The difference is that SpaceX's delays have been due to them trying out a totally brand-new rocket design and launch support system. The Space Shuttle, on the other hand, has been around for quite a while, and most of the delays (besides the weather-related ones) are due to the inherent technical finickiness of the Shuttle design. And of course, most of the weather-related delays can be blamed on the fact that it's a ground-based launch system situated in the thunderstorm capital of the US.

SpaceX's launch procedures are designed to be as efficient and timely as possible, with a number of automated safety checks. Heck, even for yesterday's launch it turned out that there was a malfunction in the helium-loading equipment, which was quickly fixed and just resulted in a delay of a few hours. For the Shuttle, I imagine a malfunction like that could easily result in a delay of days.