« first day (1638 days earlier)      last day (1214 days later) » 

1:42 AM
Doesn't necessarily rule out SpaceX for being at fault here, re: Zuma, even if the payload and payload adapter were NG built.
If a contract specifies values must stay within x constraints, and the relevant engineering articles are built to withstand 1.2x, yet the LV delivers 1.5x, well, that could very cause issues with the engineering article.
That being said, SpaceX is an incredibly secretive company (despite what most believe) — so it wouldn't surprise me if they keep something like that under wraps.
Either way, avoid Reddit, the SpaceX Facebook Group, and NASASpaceflight for this subject at least. It's all amateur speculation. Despite what each group would have you believe.
 
2:00 AM
SpaceX is really a more secretive company then they would have you believe.
But I don't think they would outright lie and say that the LV performed nominally when it did something out of bounds.
There is most certainly something very odd about the whole thing, from the moment the flight was announced. Why would it be any different now?
 
My thoughts are wait until we get another JSPoC pass. If it's picked up again, we can presume it's at least in orbit. Still wouldn't eliminate SpaceX being at fault due to something like excessive g-forces or vibrations, however.
Also, eh. Elon definitely lies publicly quite a lot of the time. Can easily imagine the same ethos pervading the rest of the SpX leadership team when needs be.
 
2:56 AM
It shouldn't show up in JSPOC, if they are doing things right.
Elon is an over-optimist, but outright bold face lie? Not so sure...
 
3:38 AM
What was the duration of the launch window for Apollo rockets, as far as being able to attain the proper flight azimuth? Whenever you want, that's why the roll program?
 
 
7 hours later…
10:15 AM
0
Q: Overzealous insta-closing of new users' first question with less than 5 site Q's per day here

uhohI've ran into several situations recently where a question that I'd like to answer is collecting close votes quickly. Often (but not always) they are of the silent, anonymous, sans-helpful-comment variety of close votes. I've posted an answer to this question, still waiting for the satellites to...

 
 
4 hours later…
2:39 PM
Static fire delayed to Thursday now.
Same window.
 
Not surprised, but...
 
Delays are to be expected, alas.
PAF details:
 
3:03 PM
 
Interesting.
 
Abby T. Mars on January 10, 2018

Last week, we bid farewell to Winter Bash and packed our Greatest Hats back into their boxes. It’s always a little sad to see the hats get put away for the year, but I always like to soothe my sorrows by reminiscing. (It’s only been a week and I’m nostalgic already.)

These hat shots came from the MSE community. Check them all out here!

The very first hat to be earned was Foot of the Rainbow, earned by Eran on Stack Overflow mere minutes after the event began. The first secret hat (spoiler alert) was awarded almost immediately thereafter: Ooh, Shiny! went to Olaf, also on Stack Overflow. A whoppi …

 
4:03 PM
 
 
3 hours later…
7:33 PM
Seems to be a large overuse of the [spacex] tag at the moment.
 
It's fairly common.
 
Yeah, I just removed it from the latest question about the lunar rover. IMO it should probably be reserved for questions entirely devoted to spacex, not just used tangentially.
 
I don't know about entirely devoted, but it shouldn't be tangential, I agree. And that one was pretty tangential.
 
that's fair
 
For instance, I just added the launch tag there. It isn't about launching, but it is a fairly important part of the question.
 
7:36 PM
Yeah, agreed
lol, about time this got created and formalised, I guess. space.stackexchange.com/tags/roadster/info
 
8:06 PM
3 days in a row of hitting the reputation cap...
I'm not really trying to do that, but...
Working on getting a few more tag badges.
Unless something really strange happens, I'll be the first to 60k. But I probably won't be in the lead for much longer...
 
@PearsonArtPhoto I hit it today. Yay. 24/50 towards Epic.
 
8:26 PM
Nice!
 
 
3 hours later…
10:58 PM
I'm trying to understand why roll programs, only concerning 'flight'. If the inclination of the moon was 0 and you launched from the equator, would you still need to roll?
 
11:21 PM
@Mazura have you looked at this question? space.stackexchange.com/q/5065/4660
 
@kimholder - Neat, thanks. That doesn't come up when I google about roll programs. I guess I forgot to ask google questions in complete sentences to yield SE results ;)
 
i found that by searching on space.se for roll maneuver. Sometimes using google works better though, i must admit.
 
11:37 PM
I almost never search inside SE. It kinda sucks. The only time I do is to find something I've read already.
So wait, what? Are we really going to give up on the ISS, or is it a hype ploy for funding?
 
It's not a hype ploy. NASA would like to have room in the budget for other things thanks to not having to pay for upkeep and missions to the ISS. But there is a lot of chatter about possibly privatizing it. That's only rumor though, so far.
 
At some point iSS reaches end of life. I.e. The seals that are buried inside the walls of some module need to be replaced. So ISS aint forever. The solar panels will degrade.
Eventually the cost of fixing it is more thna launching a new one.
Initially ISS was only funded to like 2018, then extended to 2020 then 2024 and so on. There is an end in sight, but as @Mazura noted, it has been a money ploy in the past. But there really is an end.
The Russians plan to take their next three modules (Nauka, OM, something something darkside) and seperate tehm from ISS and go on their own as a space station. I.e. Fund Nuaka, OM as part of ISS project but since Nauka is like 10 years delayed now, might as well get their moneys worth as core of Mir3.
Besides, once BFR is flying, why would you want to use the ISS? Build a couple of large modules, launch on BFR and start with a fresh station, much bigger, simpler, and less maintenence with lessons learned from ISS.
BFR will accomplish Shuttle-C goals and be reusable.
 
Changes in the industry like you mention make me more inclined to think it isn't a ploy this time, also considering its increasing age.
 
@kimholder There is 100% an end to ISS. When? That is a question of how long people want to burn money on it. Right now, it takes 5 person-days of work to maintain. So a 6 person crew accomplishes 1 day of science. That sucks. Maybe that is what it takes to work in space, if so, humans should give up on it.
 
But it's good (paid for) until at least 2024?
 
11:47 PM
The key question is, did we learn enough of what NOT to do on ISS to do it right next time? I think with New Glenn/BFR as big payload launchers, we will see a station rebuilt, but iin one or 3 launches and done.
@Mazura Yes, funded to 2024.
Interestingly the argument has now been made, since Commercial Crew is delayed to 2018, that 6 years of missions is not worth the money invested in it.
Especially since Soyuz flights have been bought as backups for the first year or so.
 
6 years is a long time in today's changing market. New Glenn and FH, and F9 at least will be well proven by that time, and sure, maybe some BFR testing.
 
This is the wrong SE but it's worth a shot... Why does MechJeb roll my rocket for a while if its inclination is to be 0?
 
Oh, we definitely have players here. It has a tag. :)
 

« first day (1638 days earlier)      last day (1214 days later) »