Falcon 1 flight 5 approaching

Could be as early as April 20th:
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=31061
It will carry a operational satellite this time.

Pat

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...
Could be as early as April 20th:
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=31061
It will carry a operational satellite this time.

I understand the satellite is designed to do underwater surveys.


(yes, poor taste, I admit.)


Pat



--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

On Apr 16, 11:58*am, Pat Flannery wrote:
Could be as early as April 20th:http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=31061
It will carry a operational satellite this time.


Wow it took them quite long. It would be fun, nearly like the NK
launch. Do you think they would be more successful?

Raghar wrote:
On Apr 16, 11:58 am, Pat Flannery wrote:

Could be as early as April 20th:http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=31061
It will carry a operational satellite this time.



Wow it took them quite long. It would be fun, nearly like the NK
launch. Do you think they would be more successful?


I imagine they have been devoting most of their effort to getting ready
for Falcon 9's first flight, which is slated to occur later this year.
Falcon 1 worked right on flight 4 with a dummy payload (after three
straight failures) so I'd say they have around a 2/3rd's chance that
this one will work also.
If it doesn't, they had better do some serious rethinking about Falcon 9
before attempting to launch it.

Pat

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...

I imagine they have been devoting most of their effort to getting ready
for Falcon 9's first flight, which is slated to occur later this year.
Falcon 1 worked right on flight 4 with a dummy payload (after three
straight failures) so I'd say they have around a 2/3rd's chance that this
one will work also.
If it doesn't, they had better do some serious rethinking about Falcon 9
before attempting to launch it.

I'm guessing there is nearly a 100% chance there will be an "anomaly" and
agree with your gustimate that they have a 2/3 chance that the payload will
make orbit.

Jeff
--
"Many things that were acceptable in 1958 are no longer acceptable today.
My own standards have changed too." -- Freeman Dyson

Jeff Findley wrote:
I'm guessing there is nearly a 100% chance there will be an "anomaly" and
agree with your gustimate that they have a 2/3 chance that the payload will
make orbit.



I wonder if they'll attempt to recover the first stage on this flight?

Pat

In sci.space.history Pat Flannery wrote:
I wonder if they'll attempt to recover the first stage on this
flight?

I can just hear the radio chatter on the recovery ship from Brophy,
the Chief Recovery Officer:

I got it.
I got it.
I got it.
I don't got it.

(My apologies to Mel Brooks)

BTW, SpaceX sent-out a missive announcing having sold two more F9
launches - Argentina being the customer. Looks like it is also up on
their website now: http://www.spacex.com/press.php?page=20090416

After reading the text I guess we can say so much for Sanger's
great-grandson trying to revive his great grandfather's work using F9
as a booster a la Frederick "Fronkensteen" Still more apologies, this
time to Mssrs Brooks and Wilder

rick jones

--
Process shall set you free from the need for rational thought.
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

On Apr 16, 3:02*pm, Rick Jones wrote:
In sci.space.history Pat Flannery wrote:

I wonder if they'll attempt to recover the first stage on this
flight?

I can just hear the radio chatter on the recovery ship from Brophy,
the Chief Recovery Officer:

I got it.
I got it.
I got it.
I don't got it.

(My apologies to Mel Brooks)

BTW, SpaceX sent-out a missive announcing having sold two more F9
launches - Argentina being the customer. *Looks like it is also up on
their website now:http://www.spacex.com/press.php?page=20090416

After reading the text I guess we can say so much for Sanger's
great-grandson trying to revive his great grandfather's work using F9
as a booster a la Frederick "Fronkensteen" Still more apologies, this
time to Mssrs Brooks and Wilder

rick jones

--
Process shall set you free from the need for rational thought.
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

Would a flight failure result in an Aby Normal situation? ;-)
-Mike

Rick Jones wrote:
After reading the text I guess we can say so much for Sanger's
great-grandson trying to revive his great grandfather's work using F9
as a booster a la Frederick "Fronkensteen" Still more apologies, this
time to Mssrs Brooks and Wilder


Yeah, I can just see a Falcon 9 booster lying horizontally on a
several-mile-long launch track down in Argentina.
Guess who is at the control stick of the skip-bomber?:
http://www15.ocn.ne.jp/%7Eoyakodon/n...altersheim.jpg
Yup, the ancient ******* is going to blow up New York come Heil or High
Wasser... :-D
BTW, if you've never actually read it, Sanger's Antipodal Bomber report
is quite a trip... especially when you get to its engine design, which
is over 100% efficient.
Yes, on a efficiency scale of 1-10, it goes to 11: http:
//www.astronautix.com/data/saenger.pdf
I'll say this for the engine design; it's damn inventive... it's a
bootstrapped system that uses the cooling of the combustion chamber to
turn the Lox into a vapor state via a closed-cycle steam turbine engine,
which drives the fuel and oxidizer turbopumps, and then recondenses into
water as it passes its thermal energy to the Lox in a heat exchanger.

Pat

Pat Flannery wrote:

Yes, on a efficiency scale of 1-10, it goes to 11: http:
//www.astronautix.com/data/saenger.pdf

That showed up as a text-wrap problem in my posting... it's well worth
reading, especially when you get to the part about firing the rifle
bullets around the giant grease*-filled hula-hoop.

http://www.astronautix.com/data/saenger.pdf

Illustration of the engine is on pages 9-10 of the PDF, BTW.
Want to see a high-expansion-ratio nozzle, wait till you see _that_ thing.
It makes something powered by fluorine look boring.
Page 11 will show you how the engine is 102% efficient. :-D

*...magic word...magic word:
http://www.onlyolivia.com/visual/gre...ine-front.html

Pat