A transcript, from Miles O’Brien.
Category Archives: Space
Entrepreneurs
More Space Property Rights Discussion
Over at Open Market, I respond to criticism from Eric Dawson.
America Has Returned To Space
My thoughts on the implications of Dragon’s successful flight, over at PJMedia.
The Space-Policy Cavalry To The Rescue
Well, OK, not the cavalry, but the teddy bears (or dogs, or whatever the heck they are), have decided to forgive me and help out with fundraising for the Kickstarter project, which has raised only a third of the needed funds. Go to the link to click on the video (on the image of the ISS).
Enter The Dragon
This is one my pedantic pet peeves. The vehicle is has never entered before, so it’s not true that this is a “re” entry. If SpaceX uses it for another mission (unlikely — I’ll bet it goes to the Smithsonian), then it would be a reentry.
Anyway, either way, it should be down within the hour, and if it is, that will be pretty much a perfect flight (with the exception of the LIDAR issue with Kibo during final approach).
[9:09 PDT update]
Dragon has landed, according to SpaceX. Well, splashed down, anyway. Not sure that “landed” is the right term here.
[Update after reading email]
I only glanced at the subject. In the body of the email, it says “Dragon has (splash) landed.”
Falcon First-Stage Recovery
OK, back in the office after over a week of travel to DC and the Bay area.
Over in this comment thread, the question arises of the disposition of the first-stage from last week’s launch. I was wondering too, so at the gala banquet at the Air and Space Museum on Friday night to honor John Glenn and Scott Carpenter, I asked Stephanie Badnarek, director of government relations for SpaceX. As I suspected, she told me that they’re not worrying about recovery of the first stage right now, and probably won’t until they start to attempt to fly it back, pending results of the Grasshopper flights. That wouldn’t surprise me — I don’t think they’ve come even close to an intact entry, and the recovery systems are just parasitic weight at this point.
[Update a couple minutes later]
Clark Lindsey has some notes from the SpaceX press conference on the mission so far, and plans for Dragon entry tomorrow.
It Begins
SpaceX has signed on their first commercial customer for Falcon Heavy:
Washington, DC / Hawthorne, CA May 29, 2012 – Today, Intelsat, the world’s leading provider of satellite services, and Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), the world’s fastest growing space launch company, announced the first commercial contract for the Falcon Heavy rocket.
“SpaceX is very proud to have the confidence of Intelsat, a leader in the satellite communication services industry,” said Elon Musk, SpaceX CEO and Chief Designer. “The Falcon Heavy has more than twice the power of the next largest rocket in the world. With this new vehicle, SpaceX launch systems now cover the entire spectrum of the launch needs for commercial, civil and national security customers.”
“Timely access to space is an essential element of our commercial supply chain,” said Thierry Guillemin, Intelsat CTO. “As a global leader in the satellite sector, our support of successful new entrants to the commercial launch industry reduces risk in our business model. Intelsat has exacting technical standards and requirements for proven flight heritage for our satellite launches. We will work closely with SpaceX as the Falcon Heavy completes rigorous flight tests prior to our future launch requirements.”
This is the first commercial contract for SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy launch vehicle. Under the agreement, an Intelsat satellite will be launched into geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO).
I’m guessing that last week’s successful Falcon 9 flight sealed the deal.
The Dragon Approaches
Apparently, SpaceX got permission to approach, and are just outside the Keep-Out Zone, a few hundred feet away. The grab may occur within an hour or so.
Truth To Power
At GLEX, I just asked Mike Griffin from the floor what the payload was which demanded to be sent up in a single launch that demanded a Saturn-class vehicle. He responded by saying that this wasn’t the place to debate it, and then with a straw man about sending things up screw by screw. Buzz had previously softened him up with a comment about the need for more innovation and fewer jobs programs for the launch vehicles. He initiated the discussion with a slam at propellant depots.
[Update later evening]
I typed that from my phone. Here’s a fuller story. Mike (without prompting) stated that heavy-lift is the highest priority for space exploration, and that depots would be useful, but not immediately so. Ian Pryke agreed with him. Buzz responded (from the second row) as noted above. I then asked the panel (not Mike specifically) from the back of the (full) room the question above. His response (from memory, not an exact quote):
Rand, we’ve been arguing about this for years and this isn’t the place to debate it. It’s possible to break a vehicle down to individual nuts and bolts, and launch it that way. But there is a reason that we deliver crude oil in large tanker ships and [several more examples of large vehicles delivering stuff]. I don’t understand why space transportation is different than any other kind of transportation. We can argue about this forever, but at some point we just have to rely on common sense.
My response (here): Note that he didn’t answer the question, nor did he explain why a quarter of a million pounds was the right answer. The nuts and bolts thing is a strawman. Surely there is some optimimum, some happy medium between one fastener at a time, and a Saturn V delivering everything at once, fully fueled.
The reason that space transportation is different (at this time) than other kinds is because it is a new industry with a limited market, and there is insufficient traffic to amortize the development of such a large vehicle that will fly so rarely. It makes sense to build dozens of oil tankers to carry millions of tons of oil. For a vehicle that will deliver a hundred-plus tons once or twice a year, not so much. The first practical airplane, from an airline standpoint, was a DC-3, not a 747. There are other reasons it is different, but that one by itself should suffice.
Briefly, I refuse to concede to Mike’s condescending (and insulting) claim that he has a monopoly on common sense. And I understand that it wasn’t the right place for a debate. In his mind, there is no right place for a debate because a) he thinks there is no need for a debate and b) he knows that if he were ever to have one with me, he’d get creamed (at least judging by the last round between Space News and Competitive Space). Plus, he would never dare legitimize me or my arguments by debating me, just as Michael Mann and Briffa and Jones and Hansen refuse to come to the Heartland conference to debate.
[Bumped]