Slashdot Mirror
SpaceX Wins Use of NASA's Launch Pad 39A
SpaceX and NASA have reached an agreement (though negotiations on the details are ongoing) for the private space company to lease NASA's launch pad 39A. SpaceX rival Blue Origin had also sought the launch pad for its own use. From the article: "During the selection process, Blue Origin had filed a petition to the Government Accountability Office (GAO). The spaceflight company was claiming that NASA was favoring single-use of the launch pad which was designed as a multi-user facility. ... The GAO decided on Thursday that the petition has no basis, which prompted NASA to proceed with its decision process. The next day, the space agency informed both companies that it is granting the exclusive lease to SpaceX."
my own little missile seems to have launched itself on hearing this news!
0.1 Earth radius !! Here we come!!
China has just landed their space craft on the moon. Just hours ago.
When will Space-X do that ?
I mean, let's start up some REAL COMPETITION !
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Pipe dream or not, competition spurs innovation in an attempt to either improve quality or reduce price.
I suspect our species would have been better off with both given equal opportunity, than this outcome.
Pipe dream or not, competition spurs innovation in an attempt to either improve quality or reduce price.
Competition is good, but Blue Origin does not (at this time) represent competition to SpaceX. Certainly, they have no real use for a rocket launching pad of the scale of NASA's 39A.
Blue Origin is mostly just Jeff Bezos playing with his big pile of money.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
When companies (Microsoft?) get into the business of doing business by hiring lawyers to hobble their competition, we all lose. Those companies spend a lot of money that could to go R&D (remember that?) on lawyers, instead, which benefits no one but said lawyers.
'Member 3 years old? "Now, Elton, it's better to share."
Don't take life too seriously; it isn't permanent.
In any case if Blue Origin want to supply recreational suborbital of LEO travel for the masses, the New Mexico facility might be the e way to go. Fly in Albuquerque, three hour drive to the spaceport. Not really that much more inconvenient than KSC, though there is not happy stay in Coco Beach, and two hours closer to Orlando. There would have to bus or plane service, and a nice hotel, for the New Mexico Facility. But really, I think it could work.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Yes, and retro's post appears to be an "Unrelated Comment Object" sent from the young pulsar YRO 2155215.
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
When companies (Microsoft?) get into the business of doing business by hiring lawyers to hobble their competition, we all lose.
Nice platitude, but does not apply here.
Blue Origin is not yet in the business of launching rockets, they don't need the NASA pad. The snit is nothing more than Jeff Bezos stomping his feet like a little boy because he can't buy the deal with his huge pile of cash. Bezos has become used to being able to simply toss cash at something and - by magic! - it is his. That didn't work in this case.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Competition is good, but Blue Origin does not (at this time) represent competition to SpaceX.
That should not be for NASA to decide. Instead of having a "selection process", they should simply hold an auction. The launch pad should be rented to the highest bidder.
I've never heard of "Blue Origin" before. As such, I'm guessing they haven't successfully launched shit.
Space-X can actually use the pad now.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
You mean, like how Blue Origin tried to hobble SpaceX by securing a launchpad they had no use for?
SpaceX has 39 launches on their manifest, and has completed 9 successful orbital launches. They will probably get a whole bunch more once they complete the Falcon Heavy demo flight.
Blue Origin has zero launches on their manifest, zero successful orbital launches, and no firm timeline for when they might complete their first orbital rocket except that it appears to be in early development.
In short, Blue Origin had no conceivable use for the pad, except for a possible use in the long-term. I think what was actually going on there is that the United Launch Alliance, which had a near-monopoly on US launches until recently, was using Blue Origin as a proxy (co-sponsoring the bid) to try to hurt SpaceX, who is offering strong competition and forcing them to lower their prices.
Why exclusive? If anything a private entity should run the launchpad as a rental business. Of course, NASA receives a large chunk of the profits made at a decaying rate. There's plenty of space for multiple companies to operate and the pad itself can be scheduled.
That should not be for NASA to decide. Instead of having a "selection process", they should simply hold an auction. The launch pad should be rented to the highest bidder.
Bullshit.
The launch pad should be rented to the company that has the most potential to actually use it for something useful like launching rockets.
It's not a hotel room or a luxury car, it's a piece of valuable high technology. It's not a toy for rent.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
It's not a hotel room or a luxury car, it's a piece of valuable high technology. It's not a toy for rent.
I suspect what the GP meant was that SpaceX has the funds to rent it, and Blue Origin would likely not, because they don't have a viable business, so it should be a non-issue.
However, another poster pointed out that Blue Origin is likely being used as a proxy by the Space Industrial Complex to hurt Space X, which greatly complicates the funding picture.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Pad 39A is overkill for Space-X's Falcon 9. That's built and transported horizontally, then lifted to a vertical position for launch. The Falcon Heavy may need a more elaborate assembly process. Do they need the whole VAB/crawler-transporter rig? That seems the only justification for wanting all the Pad 39A infrastructure.
Indeed, SpaceX has demonstrated that first, that they can achieve objectives in space, and second, that their tech has some fairly impressive fault-tolerance while still safely fulfilling its mission. There was both an incident of an aborted post-ignition event that didn't damage the vehicle, subsequently allowing technicians to inspect and restart the launch, and a failure with one of the clusters of rockets that was successfully worked-around mid-flight, shutting down the affected engine and boosting the performance on the remaining engines.
Also to the matter of who can rent, GP's argument that anyone should be able to rent it is stupid not only because Blue Origin isn't ready to launch yet, but that the argument could mean that anyone, including those that don't have interest in space launches, could rent it. Mind you, there's a risk that SpaceX could block once other competitors enter the market, but on the other hand, 39B has been reconfigured to be multirole already, and 39C was planned and could still be built, and if serious competitors can demonstrate an ability to launch, SpaceX might lose its exclusivity the next time the contract comes up.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
I suspect what the GP meant was that SpaceX has the funds to rent it, and Blue Origin would likely not...
Blue Origin is owned 100% by Jeff Bezos of Amazon fame. He has the funds to *buy* it.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
I didn't even know that NASA held a raffle.
I was going to use it for barbecue parties. You guys were all invited.
178 miles from Albuquerque, but only 80 from El Paso.
Gotta hand it to you, that was pretty clever. happy holidays
You mean, like how Blue Origin tried to hobble SpaceX by securing a launchpad they had no use for?
Did we even read the same article? The same summary?
In short, Blue Origin had no conceivable use for the pad, except for a possible use in the long-term.
We must have, because that was the point of their petition: to open up the launchpad for multiple users.
Now, with SpaceX gaining exclusive access to the pad and facilities, Blue Origin is going to have to shop somewhere else or spend megabucks to build their own launch facility.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
It actually points to something rather important that's not being mentioned in all this talk about SpaceX vs Blue Origin in the context of competition for government support.
Seastead this.
The problem is that Blue Origin doesn't have one of these photos:
Elon Musk gives tour for President Barack Obama
Oh, for mod points!
This article is not the only report or for that matter even news agency that has reported on this topic. Blue Origin has indeed zero customers at the moment who want to use their services, and the contract is only for five years anyway before it is up for renegotiation.... at which time Blue Origin can try to put forward something of their own that actually can fly.
Elon Musk was so cocky about the whole thing that he offered at his own expense (or the expense of SpaceX and not NASA) to accommodate Blue Origin or for that matter any other American company that might want to use this launch pad for their own projects (referring also to United Launch Alliance). Furthermore, Mr. Musk speculated that the likelihood of Blue Origin actually qualifying according to FAA-AST standards necessary for human spaceflight (which is the only point of using this launch pad as opposed to other locations that certainly are available including at the Kennedy Space Complex at Florida) in the next five years is about as likely as seeing dancing unicorns in that same flame duct.
I have to agree with Mr. Musk on this point too. It isn't just a matter of Blue Origin spending megabucks to build their own launch facility, of which SpaceX has gone through and built three launch pads besides this one and is shopping around for a fourth launch pad in addition to this launch pad (that one is likely to be in Brownsville, Texas), but that Blue Origin is also not really capable of using this particular facility at all.
The whole point of this legal action is to try and delay any potential launches that SpaceX might do at this particular launch pad. SpaceX needs it for both the Falcon Heavy rocket as well and manned launches in particular. It also can act as a back-up site if SLC-40 (the other Florida pad that SpaceX currently operates) needs to go through a period of renovation.
There are another 38 other potential launch sites in the area that are suitable to various degrees or other for spaceflight activity. Some of them certainly are not really suitable and others are in such utter state of disrepair as to be essentially carving out a new spot in the swampland of Cape Canaveral, but there are other locations if the desire was made. There is also pad 39B, but that is currently being used by NASA for the SLS/Orion program as long as that program continues to get funding.
And SpaceX might even allow them to use the pad anyhow, if BO actually comes up with a launch vehicle that needs it.
Elon Musk quote:
However, rather than fight this issue, there is an easy way to determine the truth, which is simply to call their bluff. If they do somehow show up in the next 5 years with a vehicle qualified to NASA’s human rating standards that can dock with the Space Station, which is what Pad 39A is meant to do, we will gladly accommodate their needs. Frankly, I think we are more likely to discover unicorns dancing in the flame duct.
http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/37389musk-calls-out-blue-origin-ula-for-%E2%80%98phony-blocking-tactic%E2%80%99-on-shuttle-pad
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
I recommend you go read http://spaceksc.blogspot.com/ for his many articles on this very subject (39A). Summary: BO has no launch vehicle, zero mission manifest, and certainly no missions for what 39A is needed for, getting astronauts up to the ISS, for the five-year duration of this deal.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
In any case if Blue Origin want to supply recreational suborbital of LEO travel for the masses
If they only want to launch sub-orbital flights, 39A would be wasted on them. And by the way, "suborbital" and "LEO" are two completely different things. One is a toy that gets you into space for a few minutes, the other one gets you to stay up as long as you want. The only uses for sub-orbital are for recreational up-and-down flights, and very quick long-distance travel (the next step beyond Concorde).
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
The launchpad is public infrastructure built for a specific purpose. It should be used in whatever way best accomplishes said purpose. Since said purpose is not "making as much profit as possible", an auction would be the wrong tool to use in deciding what that way would be.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
It's true that SpaceX has managed to go where men have gone before using much of the 60's era technology.
It's also true that they have done this in a time when advances in technology have made this much easier.
To their defense, they have done this with meager resources and time compared to others with the same advantages and more.
IMHO, this is in concert with what NASA's mission ought to be. (Cheap, no big deal access to space.)
I suspect they will be good stewards of the launch complex.
WIth regards to a longer term mission, they seem to have the hots for Mars.
Perhaps a useful model for the first manned mission should be to Mars orbit
where one can remote control surface exploration with reasonable latency?
This seems about right as a goal to restart our ventures off the planet.
This is why the government cannot make money. It is an asset that can be rented. Since Space X is not going to be launching rockets everyday, then the pad should be scheduled and rented to whomever wants to launch rockets from it. I do not care if it is Kari Byron and LDRS.
Until Bezos' Blue Origin demonstrates with a number of launches reaching the same milestones that Space X has (Geostationary launches, ISS launches, etc),all that money Bezos has in his pocket means nothing.
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
Actually it was a joke about the Boston Police Department's reputation for its cars seen parked at Donut shops. See, if the police cars are in the donut shop parking lot, the scanners would find more stolen vehicles GPS tagged there, but it would reinforce the stereotype (if you are not from Boston, but watch "The Simpsons", you might get it). I guess those are "whoosh" down mods.
Gently reply
This is why the government cannot make money.
Governments aren't supposed to be about making money - governments are about doing things that are good for the citizens but unviable for a company to do.
If the government thinks that letting SpaceX use the pad is a Good Thing for the public, then that's what they should be doing, irrespective of whether they are going to make money from it or not. If you're going to base all decisions on whether or not you can make money from them then you may as well just port a corporation in charge of a country (although this seems to be exactly what a lot of crazy Americans think would be ideal...)
It is an asset that can be rented. Since Space X is not going to be launching rockets everyday, then the pad should be scheduled and rented to whomever wants to launch rockets from it. I do not care if it is Kari Byron and LDRS.
Now here you're suddenly showing that it *isn't* all about making money - SpaceX have shown that they can launch rockets, so giving them access to the pad seems like a Good Thing. If it were just about making money then the government would be happy to rent it to someone who is just interested in paying to make sure SpaceX can't use it, but aren't interested in launching rockets themselves - that most definitely doesn't seem to be in the interests of the public, *who are the people the government are supposed to be serving*.
http://blog.nexusuk.org
(smacks forehead)
Gently reply
We must have, because that was the point of their petition: to open up the launchpad for multiple users.
Ah, the real reason for BO's petition. They have no conceivable use for the pad themselves, so let's look at who they think the other users might be... How about ULA, their partner in the bid? ULA who has a near-monopoly on US launch capacity, and resents the competition that SpaceX has been causing?
Meanwhile there are presumably also pads 1-38 sitting around there on the cape. Sure, they probably don't all have all of the infrastructure of 39A, but they can likely be retrofitted as necessary The entire KSC / CCAFS facility can launch into the Eastern Test Range, so it should all be good.