NASA Elon Musk Space X Launch Failed

[Marthe48]

Source: www.floridatoday.com



Read more: http://www.floridatoday.com/story/tech/science/space/2015/06/28/live-spacex-falcon-9-launch-dragon-capsule-cape-canaveral-international-space-station/29422285/

---

We were watching the launch from a site online with Chromecast and the rocket blew up.

[onehandle]

1. Crap. Wasn't watching, but last tweet 10 minutes ago was 'Liftoff!'

And I guess that was it.

[House of Roberts]

2. How soon after liftoff did it explode?

.

[Marthe48]

3. within seconds

I found a link and added it.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

10. It exploded around the 2.5 minute mark.

It looked like there was a malfunction in the top part of the rocket. I saw flames shoot out earlier from under where the nose resides about 1:13.

[Marthe48]

11. Thanks for correcting the time

I was still on my first cup of coffee

[RexDart]

61. That was a shock wave.

I saw it too, but right after that it was announced that it had gone supersonic.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

67. It sure looked like fire to me. Did they determine the malfunction yet?

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

4. Too bad. I hope they had enough data flowing back to allow them to figure out what went wrong. nt

[Bosonic]

5. video

[Marthe48]

7. Thanks for adding this

such a shame.

[BlueEye]

14. Isn't this the second consecutive failure of an ISS resupply spacecraft?

The Russian's Progress resupply mission spun out of a bad orbit a couple months ago. I am wondering how much mac and cheese they have in Space!!

[bananas]

63. Third - Orbital Sciences Antares exploded last October

http://www.space.com/27576-private-orbital-sciences-rocket-explosion.html

[snooper2]

69. they are just doing it for job security

They could have at least waited for the 4th

[ibewlu606]

6. No surprise.

Living here on the Space Coast, I have seen thousands of Cape workers laid off because of privatization. SpaceX has a crap product that doesn't work despite the infusion of tens of millions of our tax dollars and the give away of hundreds of millions of infrastructure at the Cape. There used to be thousands of high paying Cape jobs that were eliminated by SpaceX, and now we as taxpayers are paying for it.

[Marthe48]

9. it seems like they are starting from scratch, again

I read Space by James Michener. He said a joke about the the early countdown was "five, four, three, two, one, oh...sh*t"

The U.S. program had advanced so over the years. I watched Alan Shepard fly into space on a black and white TV in my grade school classroom. I watched the moon landing from a hospital bed after I had my appendix out. Then I started seeing the stupid commercials denigrating the money that the U.S. spent on space exploration. And then it all went south.
I don't think something as important as space flight should ever have been privatized.

[House of Roberts]

12. I wonder how big the penalty to SpaceX is for NASA to have all their equipment lost?

If this keeps up, the risk won't be worth the 'savings' of privatization. There can't be a profit made if the 'reusuable' launch vehicle isn't recoverable.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

13. Pretty sure Elon Musk has to pay for it.

[MH1]

17. Insurance. (I would assume) nt.

[House of Roberts]

19. Even Lloyd's of London won't write it for them if they're incompetent.

I wonder if it's more like the nuclear industry where the the investors get the profits and the taxpayer picks up the tab for failures?

[BlueEye]

22. I don't see any evidence of incompetence.

This is one failure, but their have been almost two dozen successful flights. Nobody has died. To date, their safety record is better than NASA's, an agency which has blown up many rockets and killed 17 astronauts.

Do I think NASA is incompetent? Not at all. Accidents happen, this is a dangerous business.

[Jester Messiah]

33. Failures are a necessary part of learning.

If we already knew how to flawlessly implement space flight we'd have a moon colony already.

[MH1]

23. Please go find evidence. I worked in the space industry.

I agree that I'm not 100% sure of insurance in this case, but NORMALLY - think of all those failed Mars missions - a space mission is insured.

Also - these are from 2012, I will look for more recent:

SpaceX Insured For ‘Maximum Probable Loss’ - http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/west/2012/05/22/248566.htm

SpaceX rocket insured to the max - http://www.bankrate.com/financing/insurance/spacex-rocket-insured-to-the-max/

[House of Roberts]

30. I'm in Huntsville, Alabama.

Most of what I made in the 70s and 80s was flight hardware for NASA.

No insurance company will keep paying out claims if it becomes too risky. The taxpayers underwrote NASA.

The rest of my post was a question.

ETA: Falcon 9 isn't human flight - rated, so it can't carry astronauts. We're hoping Atlas or Delta gets human flight - rated so we can stop depending on Russia for that.

[BlueEye]

18. I'm sure they carry insurance.

Their rates probably just went up.

[backscatter712]

57. Probably.

Space-launch insurance has always been expensive because launch failures are quite common.

But this is only SpaceX's first loss of a primary payload, which isn't bad for a relatively new rocket.

No doubt, there will be an investigation, a determination of the cause of the RUD, a full safety review, and that will all be provided as explanation to the insurance company, to try to keep those premiums down.

Launch failures are a part of the business, and both SpaceX and their insurer know this. They've got a plan.

[truthisfreedom]

15. Crap product?

They've had three perfectly successful launches. It's rocket science. Don't blame SpaceX for filling a void left by budget cuts. They've been brave enough to risk failure.

[LunaSea]

44. So the shuttle program was retired by Spacex?

Apollos end eliminated even more high paying jobs in Florida and several other states.
In both cases most jobs depended on government contracts.
Payed for by taxpayers.

Space business is often heartbreaking, and thanks mostly to congress, quite mercurial.
Plenty of companies and the military are still launching from the Cape. Boeing, Sierra Nevada and others plan to launch from the Cape in the near future. You may not like the policies that led to the current state of the launch business, but blaming Spacex for it is a mistake.

[backscatter712]

58. The Shuttle had serious problems.

It was insanely expensive and labor-intensive to fly, partially because of those heat-resistant reentry tiles.

It was also quite dangerous, partially because of the tiles - see Columbia, but also because it didn't really have a proper launch abort system. Once the solid rocket boosters were lit, the shuttle had to ride with them to SRB separation, no matter how badly things went wrong. There were a few ways for the Shuttle to abort, either back to the Cape, or across the Atlantic, but there were a lot of scenarios were nothing could be done to save the Shuttle and crew. See Challenger.

[diverdownjt]

66. SpaceX didn't get rid of anything......

They are just the latest in a long line of sub-contractors used by NASA.

Their first 6(six) resupply missions went off without a hitch....and they very nearly
landed the 1st stage back on that ship last time. Space flight is a dangerous
business.

Let me guess....you were one of the layoffs right? Someone somewhere else got
a job with SpaceX because of this contract. The space flight industry is changing.
You must learn to adapt or perish. SpaceX is adapting why don't you?

[ForgoTheConsequence]

8. Paypal barely works.

I wouldn't trust this guy with a rocket.

[LunaSea]

45. Ebay owns Paypal now

Has for some time.

[truthisfreedom]

54. They're separating 3rd quarter this year.

Just got an email today. PayPal is going public.

[truthisfreedom]

54. They're separating 3rd quarter this year.

Just got an email today. PayPal is going public.

[cosmicone]

16. Musk is all hype and not much substance but stupid investors flock to him

Tesla buys its bodies from Lotus (with no discount) and batteries from Panasonic. Then assembles the stuff into a package that is sold to groupies at an exorbitant cost.

REAL car companies are going to drive Tesla into the ground because they can do the same stuff faster and cheaper with an established dealer/service network.

SpaceX is basically Chinese fireworks on steroids ....

[BlueEye]

21. Perhaps I have been drinking too much Elon Musk kool aid...

But it seems as though Tesla's work on better automotive batteries is highly innovative and progressive. Any effort to shift American automotive consumers away from fossil fuels is a welcome one, in my opinion.

I too am skeptical that Tesla's high cost structure model can be profitable in an industry that relies on cost efficiency and lean manufacturing. But imagine if Tesla ever went bankrupt, GM, Ford, etc. could swoop in and buy all their R&D, and perhaps bring electric cars to a wider array of consumers.

[cosmicone]

24. Yes, sometimes hyping can be an advantage

Musk started Tesla because of its hype potential which was immediately embraced by many A-list Hollywood stars and has burned through a lot of money. A real businessman would not have started Tesla.

In the process, Musk may end up doing a lot of good. However, my suspicion is that if Tesla goes bankrupt, the auto industry will dump the technology and go back to business as usual.

The demand for e-cars remains low and not enough volume to justify the kind of mega investments that would be needed. If the demand increases though, the car industry will keep churning out e-cars, at least to increase their average "fleet" gas mileage.

[Plucketeer]

28. Aw please....

Where WOULD the state of electric vehicles be without Tesla's influence? We'd still be at the stage of folks hanging headlights and taillights on glorified golf carts and calling them commuter cars.

[Plucketeer]

26. "SpaceX is basically Chinese fireworks on steroids .... "

Really? Really? So the launch pad incident that saw three guys fry in a capsule - what sort of Chinese fireworks was that? And the two space shuttles lost with all on board - which exemplary govt. agency was responsible for those "displays"?

Load expensive stuff on top of giant tanks of VOLATILE fuel components (not candle wax or tinder), light the other end of it and HOPE that not ONE human error or oversight lies buried in the guts between the life support end and the continuous explosion end. What could go wrong? Didn't Tom Hanks do a movie about the flawlessness of a government-operated space venture?

[BlueEye]

29. Let's not forget the largest government-operated space program to ever exist, that of the USSR.

On multiple occasions, the Russians had rockets explode on the launch pad, incinerating dozens (hundreds?) of engineers and bystanders. To this day, the exact number of cosmonauts killed in USSR spaceflight activities is a Russian government secret.

Although I would cite some incompetence in the specific case of the Russians, in general, this is not an indictment on public- or private-sector space activity. As you have eloquently pointed out, there are massive inherent risks associated with rocketry. It's astounding that we do it as safely and effectively as we do.

[Plucketeer]

38. Exactly...

We've had government and private AIRcraft ventures going on since a pair of bicycle repair guys managed to get off the ground - one hundred and twelve years ago, no less. And yet there isn't a day that passes without the most sophisticated of these well-developed craft suffering failures due to bad construction or maintenance. We should be outraged about this!

[Jester Messiah]

34. That's a bold statement.

What grounds do you have to make it?

[KeepItReal]

40. You do realize Tesla doesn't make the first car it produced any more?

And your facts about that car are way off: http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/mythbusters-part-2-tesla-roadster-not-converted-lotus-elise

The Model S its current vehicle being sold and forthcoming Model X have nothing to do with Lotus. They are built here in California.

Once the Gigafactory is completed, Tesla will be able to source its own batteries, also.

All those awards Tesla has received for the Model S were based on hype?

[RandySF]

52. "Real" auto companies?

This kind of talk bugs me because, having lived in Detroit, I've spent much of my life watching the Big 3 crush any domestic competition before it can get off the ground, all while making crap, themselves for many years. Musk is no saint but let's give Tesla the time and freedom to succeed or fail.

[truthisfreedom]

56. You're insane. Elon produced 2400 Tesla Roadsters using chassis from Lotus.

The Model S and every other product they're producing in the future are being built and assembled in California.

You're completely out of touch with reality.

SpaceX has a partnership with NASA. The Chinese have nothing to do with it.

Elon Musk is a genius. Who do you work for? Why are you attacking his good name?

I own a Tesla Roadster Sport 2.5. It's totally amazing. Goes 220 miles on a charge. Been driving it daily since March of 2011. Battery still has perfect charge capacity. It's rock solid. You are completely full of sh*t.

[cosmicone]

60. I expected such responses from Tesla groupies n/t

[Jester Messiah]

65. And yet you don't back up your claims.

So you're as easily dismissed.

[Historic NY]

20. Pretty sure its insured.....

how many multimillion private satellites blew up leaving the pad on NASA rockets, it happens. People are making it sound like it the end of the world, no lives were loss in this, were they?

[eggplant]

25. Wow, wtf is with all the hate here?

Rockets blow up from time to time. They all feed a collective insurance pool.

[Democat]

68. There are some on DU who hate all rich people

Doesn't matter how they got rich or what they do with the money.

[Diremoon]

27. I don't mind coprorations going into space

But I do mind them getting money that should have gone to NASA. Privatization is NEVER about doing it better and cheaper because of competition, and always about funneling money to corporate executives. The whole idea that "Private Industry is more Efficient" is a lie. They just felt compelled to get into space because the cost of doing it right (safely) is extremely expensive, and corporate types saw dollar signs. Instead of slow steady advances that benefit everyone and advance the whole country, they will once again privatize the profits, and socialize the losses.

[Neurotica]

31. Government or private--doesn't matter…accidents happen (note: aerospace family here)

And we are not willing to spend enough money to ensure that every launch is flawless (or as flawless as possible). It's an inherently risky business. Period.

BTW, NASA has used private contractors forever.

[Kablooie]

36. Reminds me of NASA's early days when everything was blowing up.

[fasttense]

32. Privatization of a government function is never, ever cheaper.

Thanks Dire for saying what was in my head. And Welcome to DU

If you think about the logic of the situations you know turning over a government function to a private industry will always have to be more expensive. Private industry has expenses government functions do not have to meet.

A government organization does NOT have to make a profit. Private industry can not stay in business long without a profit. That is an expense and frequently the biggest expense for most corporations.

The interface between the private industry and the government (because somewhere the product or service provided by private industry has to be turned over to the government) has to be manned and is frequently beefed up in order to make the private industry product usable for the government. For example take turning over the military to mercenaries. There has to be a system set up to pay for the war and soldiers. There has to be a system set up to communicate with the mangers of mercenaries to get them where they are needed. What normally happens is the decision is sent down to a manager on the government side than sent back up to the CEO on the private industry site. This makes changes and communications cumbersome and slow.

The contract has to be monitored. You can hire a corporation to provide you with mercenaries but how do you know the mercenaries are killing the people you want them to kill? The government spends a lot of money on buying services and products but they need to make sure our tax dollars are being used wisely and the government is getting the product they are paying for. The bushes just ignored this and handed out millions of our tax dollars to anyone who said they would shoot and torture an Iraqi. But if you are serious about saving tax dollars and not giving out dole to CEOs, than you need to carefully inspect the results of the contract. This means hiring more people to monitor.

[LunaSea]

46. NASA did get the money

They hired Spacex. Same as they hire Boeing and hundreds of other companies to do the work. And NASA has overview over all the work, especially when it comes to safety.

[backscatter712]

59. Hell, even the Shuttle, and Saturn V were built by contractors.

All that changed was the structure of the contracts.

[Historic NY]

64. Wait so your saying private corporations never had a hand in space

exploration............got back and do your homework instead of spewing sour grapes nonsense.

We got to the moon because of private corporations. NASA doesn't manufacture it assembles components from around the world.
These old launching pads are getting new life and NASA is getting the funds from them for other projects.

https://www.nasa.gov/press/2013/november/nasa-hails-success-of-commercial-space-program-private-space-station-resupply/

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/sep/16/nasa-boeing-spacex-contracts-manned-flights

[Kablooie]

35. Spending more up front may be a more efficient way to go.

Trying to save costs could cost more overall because you have to redo everything so many times.

[Sunlei]

37. rather spaceX keep trying and learn from the 'mistake'. Also like to see public stock for spaceX.

[still_one]

39. when he wants volunteers for a manned flight, I think I will hold off

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

41. NASA lost a few. That's a risky business.

I think a manned Mars mission might be a bit down the road.

[still_one]

42. I know, but they spend years before a mission, and have multiple redundancies built in. These things cannot

be rushed, and the safety record for NASA isn't bad. I don't know the QC behind Space X, or how much time constraints they are under, but I do believe that the Challenger disaster as an example of a NASA flaw, was entirely preventable if it wasn't for politics, assuming if they delayed the flight because of the cold weather, the President and his staff would be upset. I would like to think NASA learned from that one, don't push saftey issues when your engineers are telling you the seals will leak in cold temperatures.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

43. This may be one business that shouldn't be privatized

Pushing past safety, going with the low-cost supplier, bad ideas.

[LunaSea]

47. NASA has always gone with the lowest bidder

who could deliver the work, and on occasion gone with some bad ideas.
The shuttle for instance, was originally TWO vehicles, neither of which used solid fuel motors.
Congress cut the budget, and NASA found a cheaper, and more risky way which led to serious problems down the road.

[still_one]

49. Isn't that what NASA does, gets estimates for the lowest bidder? Morton Thiokol regarding the

Challenger, though in that case I am not sure there was much competition. However, you are correct, NASA directors oversee all the contractors, and are responsible for the safety, design etc., with a lot of cross-checking going on. There is no reason a private enterprise can't do that, but they are under different constraints then a public one I think

[rafeh1]

48. I would have fbi investigate

Spacex is a national security asset. It is being targeted by arianspace and Russian, chinese, indian and lockheed.

These are big and dirty competitors. Fbi should investigate.

[still_one]

50. I guess it depends. If the folks involved with SpaceX have security clearance, or have signed

non-disclousure agreements from work done with previous government projects, probably, otherwise, I am not so sure

[RandySF]

51. What is there to investigate?

SpaceX didn't pop out of thin air last week. And a test failure is a test failure, not a national security threat.

[RandySF]

53. For those who want to bury SapceX right away I would ask one question.

Did NASA get it right the first time before they sent Albert II and Alan Shepard into space?

[Uncle Joe]

62. That's a bummer.

Thanks for the thread, Marthe.