Slashdot Mirror
SpaceX Files Suit Against US Air Force
Today Elon Musk announced that SpaceX has decided to challenge the U.S. Air Force's restrictions on rocket launches related to national security. Such launches are done with a Russian rocket right now, and that contract is not up for competition with other rocket makers, like SpaceX. Musk says the company has exhausted other options to become part of the bidding process. "We're just protesting and saying these launches should be competed. And if we compete and lose, that's fine, but why were they not even competed?" He also said it's the "wrong time to send hundreds of millions of dollars to the Kremlin," referencing events in the Ukraine.
At the same press conference, Musk announced that SpaceX's recent attempt to soft-land a rocket booster stage was successful. It landed and was in "healthy condition" immediately afterward. Unfortunately, they weren't able to recover it because it landed in the middle of a rough storm, which eventually destroyed the stage. The storm was rough enough that the Coast Guard wouldn't even send a boat out to help recover it. Musk said, "We'll get much bigger boats next time." SpaceX also plans on landing the stage on shore at some point, which makes recovery easier. Musk made this prediction: "I expect we will be able to land a stage back at Cape Canaveral by the end of the year."
At the same press conference, Musk announced that SpaceX's recent attempt to soft-land a rocket booster stage was successful. It landed and was in "healthy condition" immediately afterward. Unfortunately, they weren't able to recover it because it landed in the middle of a rough storm, which eventually destroyed the stage. The storm was rough enough that the Coast Guard wouldn't even send a boat out to help recover it. Musk said, "We'll get much bigger boats next time." SpaceX also plans on landing the stage on shore at some point, which makes recovery easier. Musk made this prediction: "I expect we will be able to land a stage back at Cape Canaveral by the end of the year."
"Such launches are done with a Russian rocket right now"
more correctly, the launches are done with an American rocket, using a Russian engine (RD-180).
see: http://www.forbes.com/sites/lo...
http://www.parabolicarc.com/20...
(the article has it right; the summary is inaccurate).
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Translation: some Air Force brass are getting board seats in some corporation X after retirement, so of course they don't want to open the bidding and allow SpaceX to take the contract.
I suspect the current arrangement with the Russians providing lift tickets to the ISS performs a similar function to the intelligence treaties we signed in the 90s allowing the U.S. and Russia to perform overflights of each others' countries to verify ICBM numbers and troop movements, plus the CIAs fanatical attention to assist the Russians in tracking and controlling any and all nuclear materials to keep it from wandering off in the hands of men like Viktor Bout, "Lord of War" arms dealer.
By subsidising the Russian space program with this sweetheart no-bid contract, we, the U.S., help ensure that dozens of very highly skilled engineers and scientists with the ability to lead a team interested in designing and building short, medium, or long-range rockets - for whatever purpose - are kept "on payroll" and reasonably content safely and securely inside Russia. Exactly where we want them. Instead of helping a potential aggressor nation like Iran, North Korea, or theocratic / military dictatorship Du Jour develop accurate, long range weapons for suitcases full of cash, women, mansions and national hero-worship.
The current deal also forces a certain level of cooperation between the space agencies, governments, and builds political good will on both sides. Good Will that Putin is destroying at the moment, but will return providing he doesn't go all Poland '39 on the remainder of Ukraine.
THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Heh, I thought I read this was launches to the ISS. Please ignore that. My point stands that we shouldn't be treating Russia like some rogue country, but still try and be cool with them. The guys point that we shouldn't be sending money to the Kremlin sends the wrong message to me. I think we should try and be peaceable and stay out of other country's affairs the best we can. I'd love to say,"Let the professionals deal in international affairs." but when you look at our elected officials just being corporate puppets, it makes me hang my head.
God spoke to me
"I'm not sure what world he lives in, but unless he's reusing his reusable rocket, he failed."
Uh, you do, you know, realize that there was never, you know, any plan to, you know, reuse the first stage even if it was recovered? And that, you know, the actual, like, goal of launching the rocket was not to recover the first stage, but, you know, to launch the payload into space to, like the space station?
Back in the real world, rather than whatever wacky alternate reality you live in, the goal of the recovery test was to perform a fake 'soft landing' over the sea to prove that such a thing was possible, and ensure that, if they screwed up, no-one would get hurt. That goal was successful. They only wanted to recover the stage so they could take it apart and see what had happened to the hardware in the process.
If you have to rely on eBaying your stuff to keep from getting evicted, you may have made some poor life choices and shouldn't blame Paypal for it.
(And I say that as someone who, as a poor undergraduate, often found myself selling stuff acquired in happier times -- I made some poor life choices.)
The problem with this plan is that Russia and its leader don't want goodwill from the United States. They want a monster that can be slain with saber-rattling like in the old Cold War days - even if they have to manufacture one out of an ally. Putin isn't interested in who dies in the process in his quest to cement his legacy as the greatest leader of the NEW Soviet Union that ever was - we (not just the United States, but the International community at large) can't be so foolish as to just ignore it. The only way he can get what he wants to have us in a position of weakness - and giving his nation the only means to get to and return from the International Space Station is about the best leverage that we can give him.
Its not a matter of *if* the relationship between the United States and Russia goes bad, its *when* it goes bad if Putin remains in power.
The idea was to test a soft landing, but not damage anything in case of failure. SpaceX determined that it would have landed safely on land, so next launch they can prepare a proper landing pad and worry less about frying the next town over.
I trust that he has a better idea of the consequences than you.
It's not bad planning, it's that the mission was to deliver goods. NOT deliver goods AND recover the booster.
LongTail SSH Brute Force analysis tool is here!
He designs and builds electric supercars and rockets. When you fart it just smells bad.
I am not interested in articles about life extension advancements.
Musk said, "We'll get much bigger boats next time."
Is he retrieving a booster or a shark?
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
It is about time that the FTC steps in and allows SpaceX to sell their rockets directly to the Air Force. Blame the rich local rocket dealerships, we corrupted their local politicians to create laws that are only designed to maintain their business model of selling old fashioned rockets. What people in the street want is to buy a next generation rocket, directly from the Internet, without having to talk to one of those sleazy rocket salesman. I am getting confused, you were saying Elon?
karma police: arrest this man, he talks in maths; he buzzes like a fridge, he's like a detuned radio. [radiohead]
We need goodwill now.
"If I be real nice to him maybe he won't hit me again! It's all my fault!"
Is such thinking any less heartbreaking on an international scale? No.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
This was a TEST, in case it's not terribly clear.
Specifically, it was a test of the rocket's ability to fly back from a launch, and hover over the ocean (the previous attempt to do this, without the landing legs, spun out of control).
It was hoped that the rocket could be recovered, so they could evaluate the condition of the rocket after reentry.
The design test - reentry plus hover over the ocean - worked just fine. Hence the test was successful.
The bonus part - recover the first stage - failed because of stormy seas. They couldn't reach the rocket before it sank.
Note that the design intention for the F9R is that it do the rocket thing, then brake to a landing and land on a pad back at the launch complex.
It is likely that they'll repeat this test at least once more (mostly because they're scheduled to do another launch next month, and aren't going to change the launch profile at this late date), then try to land the thing on the ground on later launches.
Note also that after they've worked out the problems with landing the first stage, they plan to start working on recovering the second stage (which will be REALLY interesting, since it'll essentially have the flight profile of a FOBS (Fractional Orbit Bombardment System), and might make several Space Defense Commands wet themselves.)
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Elon Musk is swimming in the waters of international politics. Big "no no" with this administration currently in office. He's about to get bitch slapped down and possibly lose it all.
Probably not. The administration hasn't shown that it's terribly interested in the details of Air Force contracting. There are probably Pentagon officials who are very annoyed and would like to slap him down, but this is simply Pentagon conservatism: the Pentagon likes to keep on doing things the way they do them, because that's they way they do them and it's too much trouble to change.
To the extent that the administration cares at all, they want to sever contracts with Russia (they've already given other orders to that effect), so they're probably mildly on his side. But for the most part, I expect that they don't care much one way or another-- it's not a big item on their agenda.
With Obama, he can be vindictive!
Typical content-free Obama-bashing. You want a president who's vindictive, that was Nixon.
In fact, Obama seems to like Space-X. He was the one who put "Commercial crew transport" as the official U.S. strategy for space access
Remember Alexander Litvinenko. Diss putin can get you killed.
As a taxpayer, I wouldn't usually care about these corporate tiffs, but SpaceX can probably save the government hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars which could be used towards additional capabilities in space... so using SpaceX for launches could allow the Air Force to double its launch capacity at the same cost. Forget about sending money to Russia using ULA rockets, using SpaceX could double or more than double US space capabilities which translates to more communications satellites, more surveillance satellites and more R&D payloads.
It is boggles the mind that the procurement folks at the air force would sign long term contracts with ULA just a few months before SpaceX has finished jumping through all the Air Force hoops for certification. Seems like a pretty blatant multi billion dollar gift (going out of business gift?) to the United Launch Alliance and is a bad deal for the Pentagon.
Given the likelihood of certification for SpaceX, at the very least the Air Force procurers should have limited the contract to nearer term launches and not so many.
Musk said, "We'll get much bigger boats next time."
Knowing Musk, that means he's going to build a flotilla of fully autonomous fusion powered Nimitz class aircraft carriers constructed entirely from carbon fiber. They'll probably haul the booster up with carbon nanotube wires and preserve it in amber, then transform into robots and fly back to fucking Cybertron.
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
Note also that after they've worked out the problems with landing the first stage, they plan to start working on recovering the second stage (which will be REALLY interesting, since it'll essentially have the flight profile of a FOBS (Fractional Orbit Bombardment System), and might make several Space Defense Commands wet themselves.)
:popcorn
We need goodwill now. Money is of no concern when you're thinking of the results of what could happen if Russia and USA blood goes bad.
So we're supposed to just throw all our money down the shitter to keep Russia from getting sad/angry? What are they going to do? Their economy is already collapsing and they've proven once before that you can't pose a real, sustainable military threat to much of anyone if you don't have the economy to keep it going. If we isolate Russia, their economy will take a dive and Putin will end up on the wrong side of pissed off Russians. They'll have a hard winter, then they'll come asking for money telling everyone they've changed their ways.
We're pretty dumb, so we'll give them some money and the cycle will restart. We don't need to buy their stupid rocket engine in no-bid contracts. Let the best solution win.
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
Elon Musk is a billionaire. Tesla builds electric tanks that are somehow street legal. SpaceX builds rockets and launches things into outer space. You sit around at home scratching your ass and tossing out criticism.
Musk 3
You 0
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
sssssshhhhhhhh.... you're not supposed to reveal to the supporting characters that they're cannon fodder in a James Bond novel.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
time to call in those favors Musk paid for in getting the President elected. Unless he's used them all up getting EV credits and immunity from Union hassles for TESLA.
Why is it that all cars are required to have front plates in CA, even if they did not come with them originally, but the Model S has no front plate or frame? Not a single one here in San Jose has a legal front plate that is required by law for everyone else.
Maybe Musk needs to save some favors for his other projects, or wait till after helping buy the next election.
In what way is one company getting the work like a job being split up among many companies? According to the ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers), over 20,000 different companies and universities worked on the Apollo program.
In short, the answer to your question is no.
https://www.asme.org/engineeri...
McDonnell Douglas handed the DC-X over to NASA who promptly dropped it and set it on fire.
Man, you make me sad. I remember how COOL that was at the time, it was the FUTURE, landing on a pillar of fire like a proper spaceship. Then we pissed away another 20 years doing nothing with it. May Space X have better luck.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Knowing Musk, that means he's going to build a flotilla of fully autonomous fusion powered Nimitz class aircraft carriers constructed entirely from carbon fiber. They'll probably haul the booster up with carbon nanotube wires and preserve it in amber, then transform into robots and fly back to fucking Cybertron.
Actually I COULD see Musk building a carbon fiber hulled, wind driven,Knowing Musk, that means he's going to build a flotilla of fully autonomous fusion powered Nimitz class aircraft carriers constructed entirely from carbon fiber. They'll probably haul the booster up with carbon nanotube wires and preserve it in amber, then transform into robots and fly back to fucking Cy
Actually I COULD see Musk building a carbon fiber hulled, wind driven, solar powered, cargo ship.
I doubt he'd bother doing such a vessel as a recovery ship for this project, though, since he's just planning to land a couple to test that the control systems are working adequately before he starts bringing them in on land. Even if it made sense to build one to use it twice, by the time it was done its mission would have already been completed.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
ROFL!
Wish I had mod points just now.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
DC-X started landing from zero kilometres per hour at a maximum altitude of ~3km without ever having to re-light the engines. A Falcon 9 first stage starts landing from 11,000 kilometers per hour (mach 10) at 80km and has to re-light the engines twice (retro burn and landing burn). There's an enormous difference.
DC-X is more comparable to Grasshopper, not an actual orbital Falcon 9 rocket.
Why all the hate? Is it just jealousy? I honestly don't understand why so many hate people they've never seen.
Learn to love Alaska
Seriously, SpaceX should sue the republicans for being the traitors that they are. If trash like shelby, wolf, Hatch, Coffman, etc were sued PERSONALLY, it would no doubt go through multiple courts, BUT, with information brought out, it would cause citizens to re-evaluate what is happening.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
...
We need goodwill now. Money is of no concern when you're thinking of the results of what could happen if Russia and USA blood goes bad.
And here I thought merely electing Obama would give us that....
For starters, MD/Boeing never funded it.
Secondly, DC-X cost the gov. loads of money, but was poorly built. The fact that they lost a leg speaks volumes.
Third, when NASA offered loads of help, MD/Beoing insisted on loads of money.
Finally, DC-X never went that high, nor anywhere near as fast. As mentioned, DC-X was a very small version of grasshopper which never got as high or fast, while F9R just flew TO SPACE and succeeded.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Who just happen to be by far the biggest military aerospace contractors, doing just about some of everything.
The RD-180 business is minor.
Just because you love your crazy axe murdering brother doesn't mean you should buy him an axe.
The problem is, it will go bad unless Putin gets what he wants, and what he apparently wants is to take over the neighbouring countries and rebuild Soviet Union. Which, of course, will bring him into a conflict with the EU, which in turn could lead to anything from World War III to EU dissolving from the stress to EU becoming a real federation to effectively counter the threat. To avoid such a chaotic situation with potentially catastrophic consequences Russia needs to be contained, and the most "goodwill" way of doing so is economic isolation.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
I think that the really amazing bit was that they were able to land over the ocean, in stormy seas. I wonder what the wind-speed was at that time?
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
The idea of brotherly love is supposed to be two-way. And right now, US is seen as enemy #1 not only by the Russian government, but by the majority of the Russian society (which is being fed propaganda about how US is behind everything bad that's happening in Ukraine from their TVs).
You nailed it with regards to the Obama administration with regards to space policy issues in particular, and defense issues in general. Apathy is the only word you really need to understand.
On the positive side for SpaceX and Elon Musk in particular, he was a major donor to the Obama campaigns in both 2008 and 2012, which I'm sure has paid off somewhat here as well. I'm not saying that Elon Musk endorsed Obama, but he definitely saw a rising star and made sure he was covered with a legitimate bribe (*ahem* campaign contribution) making sure that his bases were well covered. In other words, a proper businessman who knows he can be screwed over by an arbitrary government if he doesn't curry favor immediately with those on the way up.
You would rather than the country you live in be on the shit list of the U.S. government as opposed to being on a list of supporters?
Actually the Air Force when it did the EELV contract considered it a problem important enough that AMROSS got a license to build the engine in the US and got all the technical documentation to do it. They were supposed to have an assembly line in the US. But they ended up not building engines in the US because it was 'too expensive'.
After what happened in Crimea the 'reset' is over.
Hurt people hurt people. Hurt, people hurt people. People hurt hurt people, I could go on all day, but you get the point. I've been trying to fuel their hurt less, and encourage them towards harmony, like a good hippie, but it's hard, brother.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Well the thing is we told Ukraine that if they gave up their nuclear weapons, we'd help protect them from foreign aggressors; they did and then got invaded by Russia. Unless we do something effective pretty soon, it's going to be a hard sell to get anybody else to give up their nucs.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
I think you're right: jealously. Musk has runs on the board - multiple runs in multiple arenas. He should be every geek's action hero, but instead people are calling him a con-man, a fake, a wannabe. It's absurd in light of the observable facts, and the only explanation that fits is that a collection of true wannabe's are sitting at home chucking sour grapes.
... SpaceX hasn't managed to launch a single rocket without it having some mayor failure.
I think the correct tense form is *mayoral* failure.
Oh, unless you actually meant something else and just fucked up coz you were too distracted bootstrapping your own space launch business.
SpaceX hasn't managed a single flight with an acceptable level of reliability.
Acceptable to who? NASA seems pretty happy the last time they delivered supplies to ISS.
Hell, every Apollo flight had some kind of major failure. That's why you build in redundancies.
It's bad for business to sue your customers.
No, Elon made his hundreds of millions creating Paypal and selling it to eBay. It took Tesla to make him a billionaire
I'll have to rethink the realism of Moonraker. I used to think it was the most ridiculous of all the Bond films but Musk is well on his way to being a real life Hugo Drax.
Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
You would rather than the country you live in be on the shit list of the U.S. government as opposed to being on a list of supporters?
This argument is often raised, but Haiti and Cuba are countries that make you stop and think about it. Haiti received government support from the U.S. and it not doing well by any measure. Cuba has had an embargo with the U.S., Bay of Pigs, etc. and is doing relatively okay for it in comparison.
Now I like the U.S. and respect it for holding to its principles as a country, but there are a couple of supporting countries that have had their countries pretty well screwed over.
Actually only the first 3 flights of the Falcon 1 were a total loss. All other flights have achieved every primary mission objective, including CRS-1 that suffered an engine failure that would that terminated the flight of any other rocket currently flying
GP AC was unfairly dissing SpaceX. Yes, this *is* a big deal.
OTOH, you are unfairly dissing the DC-X. It was a proof-of-concept model of the eventual full-size Delta Clipper ship. Of course it didn't go very high or far, it was a small scale model built for testing the initial concept before shelling out the big bucks for the real thing.
It was revolutionary for its time. Up until the DC-X flew, many in the industry did not believe a rocket could be made to hover in midair and fly sideways. The fact that some idiot forgot to connect one of the legs and it tipped over and caught fire speaks more about NASA incompetence than anything wrong with the DC-X team.
I don't believe there was any direct technology transfer from the DC-X program to the Falcon 9R, but you can bet your ass that Elon had seen the DC-X flight videos and possibly drew inspiration from it.
The DC-X was a small scale experimental vehicle built to demonstrate vertical takeoff and landing under rocket power. It was never able to or intended to fly very high or very fast.
This was the first stage of a Falcon 9 orbital launch vehicle, returning after boosting the second stage and payload, on a launch that actually delivered a payload to the ISS. It's far bigger (the empty Falcon 9 first stage masses about as much as the fully fueled DC-X), far more capable, and it's currently being mass produced. It also uses a cheaper and easier to handle fuel and a more efficient and flexible staged architecture than the SSTO architecture envisioned for the launchers derived from DC-X.
So let's see if I understand the situation -- I don't live in your country, so this is damned confusing.
Not so long ago, you had a huge military enemy. They were bigger than you. They were scary. Many lives were lost on both sides. Then there were decades of espionage. Movies, history books, and even comic book super-villians were written about your relationship.
Then, you finally became allies, working together against many things. Once again, movies, history books, and even comic book super-heroes were written about your relationship.
As a direct result, and probably actually the primary cause, you share technology for space exploration -- a laudible partnership and persuit.
And now your own civilians are upset with your friendly relationship? So much so that they are suing you (i.e. themselves) in an attempt to actually harm or hinder that friendship?
And, one of the excuses is that your friend is powerful? Poke the bear?
There's a comedian with a great joke about your country -- "the U.S. goes to all the wars, they love war. they had a civil war! no one left to fight? screw it:, two teams...".
Damn, you guys really do look for fights.
It's not a treaty, no signer has ratified it. The "memorandum of understanding" states only that the US (and UK and Russia, and in a separate agreement, France) agrees not to use or threaten to use nukes on the Ukraine (which it hasn't), not to challenge the territorial integrity of Ukraine (which it hasn't), to respect the then existing borders of Ukraine (which it does), and to raise any attack by another party against the Ukraine in the Security Council (which the UK did, with US support.) There's no requirement to defend the Ukraine against another signatory or non-signatory attacking them. A mutual defence treaty is a whole different kettle of fish.
The US (and UK and France) have upheld their ends of the agreement (again, not treaty), only Russia has violated the agreement.
Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
Cuba isn't really doing all that well either, although I think their PR efforts are better than what Haiti does. It really isn't a fair comparison and Cuba has definitely been hurt with the various blockades and embargoes done against it. Don't forget, Cuba is still being ruled by a communist dictator that has even more control and authority over that country than Adolph Hitler had over Nazi Germany. About the only thing I can really say that is positive is that Cuba seems to be doing better than North Korea, but then again Cuba isn't investing in a nuclear weapons program either. Cuba wouldn't have survived at all if it wasn't for the generous patronage and support given by the Soviet Union, who gave that support primarily because keeping Cuba prosperous also was excellent PR.
Don't even get started with the Bay of Pigs invasion. There is no possible way that Cuba could have held out against the actual U.S. military, and why Kennedy let that abomination of a military action happen in the first place still is something to this day makes me say "Huh?"
In other words, comparing one former French colony that nobody cares about to a former American colony that is a deliberate thorn in the side of every occupant of the White House is not even a realistic comparison at all. Perhaps the worst part about American administration of Cuba was the singular failure to dismantle some of the even earlier Spanish institutions that should have been removed but weren't until Castro came to power.
The other thing is, even if CIA is truly behind every single thing happening in Ukraine, Russian populace at large believes that all those events have the singular purpose of getting at them. Basically, the "patriotic" picture of the world in Russia is that the country itself is sort of the center of all that is good and holy in the world (some people link it to Eastern Orthodoxy / Third Rome, some to Soviet legacy, many even combine the two), and the Western world (led by US) as a force of evil that would want to rule the world, and needs to destroy Russia utterly because it stands in the way of that. Therefore, every foreign activity of Western countries, real or imagined, is deemed to be aimed in Russia directly or indirectly.
The best part is that he knows how close he is to the trope.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
I missed what happened to it after the report of a successful soft landing.
"Unfortunately, they weren't able to recover it because it landed in the middle of a rough storm, which eventually destroyed the stage."
Well, if it's so damned smart and clever and capable and all, why didn't they tell it to land somewhere else?
Land at sea in the middle of a bloody storm, you get what you deserve!
We need goodwill now. Money is of no concern when you're thinking of the results of what could happen if Russia and USA blood goes bad.
So, this is danegeld.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
I didn't say anything about how the perception in US might be skewed, only how it's skewed in Russia. There's nothing black/white about it.
And yes, I do actually know what I'm talking about - I'm a Russian citizen, I watch the state media as well as private blogs in Runet, and have plenty of friends there who fall on all sides of the spectrum.
Actually, I am NOT dissing the X. It was similar to the models that are used for X-48 BWB.
BUT, the fact remains that neither DARPA, nor NASA ran the program. It was MD, and then Boeing that did it. And neither was willing to put money into it.
And as to the leg, since NASA had NOTHING TO DO WITH IT, other than funding, it was the original team that deserves the blame.
Actually, IIRC, one or two of the old DC-X engineers actually work for SpaceX. And there is no doubt that some of it did transfer, or at least the lessons did.
BTW, I have normally been one to stick up for clipper. I did not consider the F9R to be all that much above clipper. BUT, the clipper went up to something like 10K'. OTOH, F9R went to 60 miles and then returned. Vertically. THAT IS IMPRESSIVE.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Russia is the guy who occupied a part of another country, and is sponsoring hostage-taking terrorism in another part of that country to prepare for one more takeover. What did you expect the rest of the world to do? Send Putin roses?
I'm not of a particularly high opinion of how the West handled Kosovo, both back in 1999 and after its de facto independence. But, at the same time, it took an actual genocide (as in, people being dragged out of the houses and shot, or forced to relocate at a gunpoint, solely on the grounds of their ethnic identity), and over a year of negotiations and threats, before military force was used in Kosovo...
I don't agree with everything Russia do, but at least, almost of Crimean against to be part of Ukraina, since the end of Soviet. You, be a Russian must knew that!?
Sure, I don't have any doubts about the outcome of a fair referendum. But these things should be done right and proper, which is to say, a referendum carefully arranged, with plenty of observers present, and with everyone agreeing on how to handle the outcome. Not a hastily run affair under gunpoint with threats to those who disagree. And certainly not when, shortly after the referendum, people get beaten up for speaking the wrong language in public...
That is, you've proved that your one-way information.
That is, all you've claimed has never be proved, even Kerry, or Psaki... And how the non-information made you believed this?
Meanwhile, there more than one proof of financial support of Western for the 'Maidan' oligarchs.
My sources of information on this are the separatists themselves. You know that they give interviews and such, and they have websites and blogs of their own? They pretty much openly boasted of taking hostages, later explaining that it is to "exchange for our guys they captured". I have no idea what Kerry said on that subject - didn't even know he did - and I don't really care.
In general, 95% of my information sources on the situation in Ukraine is Russian and Ukrainian press, and blogs of people who live there. I only read Western press to know what the public opinion on the matter is.
Secondly, I don't see the difference between the Molotov-throwing protesters who overthrown Yanukovitch with who - you called terrorists - in the Eastern Ukraine. Either the way they do, or their intention.
There was no difference when people in Eastern Ukraine started to organize for federalization or more rights (language etc). The difference appeared when they took up arms before any violence being directed at them (on Maidan, the molotovs appeared only after the first brutal beatings, and guns appeared only in the last two days of the conflict when Berkut started shooting at protesters with real bullets), and when they started taking hostages and throwing journalists of "hostile" media into jail. The other difference is that those people not only carry guns, they carry military guns (full auto AKs, RPGs), and are generally very well outfitted for a grassroots militia movement - but then it all starts to make sense when those guys are asked where they're from, and a good half came there from Crimea, and a bunch more from Russia proper.
P/S: At least, Yanukovitch did NOT use military against his people!
Sure, he used his intensely loyalist personal guard instead, just like Saddam used his fedayeen - because the army might not be willing to shoot at unarmed people (heck, they aren't even willing to shoot at armed people, as the new government has found out!). Either way, he told them to use real bullets, and now we have 100+ bodies coming from Maidan. How many bodies are there in Slavyansk and Kramatorsk?