Falcon 1 launch video

....is up on You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eGiqqoYP5E
It does indeed show roll oscillations, but it's hard to determine if
those are abnormal or simply if that's how the booster corrects its
ascent path... by letting it get a bit out of line and then correcting
it back onto the desired path.
Time from liftoff to transmission stoppage was two minutes, twenty seconds.
According to the liftoff timeline:
http://spaceflightnow.com/falcon/003/timeline.html
That's nineteen seconds before stage separation was supposed to occur,
but exactly at the time that the booster was to switch to inertial guidance.
Was the camera supposed to shut off at that point, or does its shutdown
indicate some sort of a problem with the vehicle itself at that time?
Video of the second launch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LpKC...eature=related
Shows no loss of camera view at that point, and some oscillations again
occurring during first stage burn, that become very marked after second
stage separation.
Have they got a propellant sloshing problem with the second stage that
starts during first stage burn in both cases?

Pat

On Aug 3, 9:52 am, Pat Flannery wrote:
...is up on You Tube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eGiqqoYP5E
It does indeed show roll oscillations, but it's hard to determine if
those are abnormal or simply if that's how the booster corrects its
ascent path... by letting it get a bit out of line and then correcting
it back onto the desired path.
Time from liftoff to transmission stoppage was two minutes, twenty seconds.
According to the liftoff timeline:http://spaceflightnow.com/falcon/003/timeline.html
That's nineteen seconds before stage separation was supposed to occur,
but exactly at the time that the booster was to switch to inertial guidance.
Was the camera supposed to shut off at that point, or does its shutdown
indicate some sort of a problem with the vehicle itself at that time?
Video of the second launch:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LpKC...eature=related
Shows no loss of camera view at that point, and some oscillations again
occurring during first stage burn, that become very marked after second
stage separation.
Have they got a propellant sloshing problem with the second stage that
starts during first stage burn in both cases?

Pat

How much of your taxed private loot did you have invested? (zero/
zilch)

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth

In article
tatelephone,
Pat Flannery wrote:

...is up on You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eGiqqoYP5E
It does indeed show roll oscillations, but it's hard to determine if
those are abnormal or simply if that's how the booster corrects its
ascent path... by letting it get a bit out of line and then correcting
it back onto the desired path.
Time from liftoff to transmission stoppage was two minutes, twenty seconds.
According to the liftoff timeline:
http://spaceflightnow.com/falcon/003/timeline.html
That's nineteen seconds before stage separation was supposed to occur,
but exactly at the time that the booster was to switch to inertial guidance.
Was the camera supposed to shut off at that point, or does its shutdown
indicate some sort of a problem with the vehicle itself at that time?
Video of the second launch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LpKC...eature=related
Shows no loss of camera view at that point, and some oscillations again
occurring during first stage burn, that become very marked after second
stage separation.
Have they got a propellant sloshing problem with the second stage that
starts during first stage burn in both cases?

Pat

What I would like to know is: Why in hell don't they use inertial
guidance all the way from launch, the way properly-designed missiles and
launch vehicles do?

We have been using IG at launch since the earliest polaris and Saturn-V
days.

It seems that switching guidance systems in mid-flight is just asking
for failure.

--
Remove _'s from email address to talk to me.

Orval Fairbairn wrote:
In article
tatelephone,
Pat Flannery wrote:

...is up on You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eGiqqoYP5E
It does indeed show roll oscillations, but it's hard to determine if
those are abnormal or simply if that's how the booster corrects its
ascent path... by letting it get a bit out of line and then correcting
it back onto the desired path.
Time from liftoff to transmission stoppage was two minutes, twenty seconds.
According to the liftoff timeline:
http://spaceflightnow.com/falcon/003/timeline.html
That's nineteen seconds before stage separation was supposed to occur,
but exactly at the time that the booster was to switch to inertial guidance.
Was the camera supposed to shut off at that point, or does its shutdown
indicate some sort of a problem with the vehicle itself at that time?
Video of the second launch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LpKC...eature=related
Shows no loss of camera view at that point, and some oscillations again
occurring during first stage burn, that become very marked after second
stage separation.
Have they got a propellant sloshing problem with the second stage that
starts during first stage burn in both cases?

Pat

What I would like to know is: Why in hell don't they use inertial
guidance all the way from launch, the way properly-designed missiles and
launch vehicles do?

We have been using IG at launch since the earliest polaris and Saturn-V
days.

Most likely misuse of terminology between "inertial guidance" and
"closed-loop inertial guidance".

It seems that switching guidance systems in mid-flight is just asking
for failure.

Just about every launch vehicle uses open-loop guidance during early
first stage flight and switches to closed-loop only once above most of
the atmosphere. Saturn V did, shuttle does, etc.

Pat Flannery wrote:
Time from liftoff to transmission stoppage was two minutes, twenty seconds.

That was the amount of webcast the audience got of the spacex website.
They probably pulled the plug on the webcast machine when the failure
happened. That means that the video from during the time it takes the
webcast machine to convert and buffer video from one format to another
was not seen in public.

Webcasts are always somewhat delayed to live broadcasts.

--
Mika Takala

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...
...is up on You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eGiqqoYP5E


The screaming and chanting is the problem, do they launch these things
from the local Hooters?

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...
...is up on You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eGiqqoYP5E
It does indeed show roll oscillations, but it's hard to determine if those are
abnormal or simply if that's how the booster corrects its ascent path... by
letting it get a bit out of line and then correcting it back onto the desired
path.
Time from liftoff to transmission stoppage was two minutes, twenty seconds.
According to the liftoff timeline:


What bugs me about the second launch, they said when
the stages bumped on seperation, that started the fuel
sloshing and finally loss of control. But a full minute
and a a half elasped from the bumb before any noticable
spinning occured.



http://spaceflightnow.com/falcon/003/timeline.html
That's nineteen seconds before stage separation was supposed to occur, but
exactly at the time that the booster was to switch to inertial guidance.
Was the camera supposed to shut off at that point, or does its shutdown
indicate some sort of a problem with the vehicle itself at that time?
Video of the second launch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LpKC...eature=related
Shows no loss of camera view at that point, and some oscillations again
occurring during first stage burn, that become very marked after second stage
separation.
Have they got a propellant sloshing problem with the second stage that starts
during first stage burn in both cases?

Pat

In article ,
"Jorge R. Frank" wrote:

Orval Fairbairn wrote:


What I would like to know is: Why in hell don't they use inertial
guidance all the way from launch, the way properly-designed missiles and
launch vehicles do?

We have been using IG at launch since the earliest polaris and Saturn-V
days.

Most likely misuse of terminology between "inertial guidance" and
"closed-loop inertial guidance".

It seems that switching guidance systems in mid-flight is just asking
for failure.

Just about every launch vehicle uses open-loop guidance during early
first stage flight and switches to closed-loop only once above most of
the atmosphere. Saturn V did, shuttle does, etc.

We didn't on the SLBMs! It was closed loop all the way! In fact we had a
"quick flyaway" maneuver for pad launches, to get it as far away from
the launch complex as possible for early pad-launched X-birds, in case
the first stage detonated (it never did).

--
Remove _'s from email address to talk to me.

On Aug 3, 10:22 am, Orval Fairbairn
wrote:
In article
tatelephone,
Pat Flannery wrote:



...is up on You Tube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eGiqqoYP5E
It does indeed show roll oscillations, but it's hard to determine if
those are abnormal or simply if that's how the booster corrects its
ascent path... by letting it get a bit out of line and then correcting
it back onto the desired path.
Time from liftoff to transmission stoppage was two minutes, twenty seconds.
According to the liftoff timeline:
http://spaceflightnow.com/falcon/003/timeline.html
That's nineteen seconds before stage separation was supposed to occur,
but exactly at the time that the booster was to switch to inertial guidance.
Was the camera supposed to shut off at that point, or does its shutdown
indicate some sort of a problem with the vehicle itself at that time?
Video of the second launch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LpKC...eature=related
Shows no loss of camera view at that point, and some oscillations again
occurring during first stage burn, that become very marked after second
stage separation.
Have they got a propellant sloshing problem with the second stage that
starts during first stage burn in both cases?

Pat

What I would like to know is: Why in hell don't they use inertial
guidance all the way from launch, the way properly-designed missiles and
launch vehicles do?

We have been using IG at launch since the earliest polaris and Saturn-V
days.

It seems that switching guidance systems in mid-flight is just asking
for failure.

Perhaps they merely blew a nonresetting (one time) fuse that didn’t
take into account their camera and added down-link load. How
pathetic.

Perhaps the forever growing “compost heap of NASA crap” is finally
perking, fermenting and flowing up hill like it should. Perhaps their
next Mars mission should be launched by Falcon 9 or F9 Heavy, thus
once having fallen back into the ocean they’ll have discovered water
(salty water none the less), and if their orbit destination manages to
get submerged deep enough, they might even discover an entirely new
species of complex life surviving where it’s entirely inhospitable to
us mere humans.

http://www.spacex.com/falcon9.php (fully submersible orbit capable)

http://www.spacex.com/falcon9_heavy.php (bigger submersible payload
capable)

As per usual, rocket powered by our hard earned public loot and NASA’s
perpetual spew of infomercial hype and flatulence. To think, all we
village idiots have to do is keep forking out our hard earned loot,
and then suck it up each time a spendy mission goes for the deep blue
kind of station-keeping orbit.

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth

On Aug 3, 11:02 am, "Jorge R. Frank" wrote:
Orval Fairbairn wrote:
In article
tatelephone,
Pat Flannery wrote:

...is up on You Tube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eGiqqoYP5E
It does indeed show roll oscillations, but it's hard to determine if
those are abnormal or simply if that's how the booster corrects its
ascent path... by letting it get a bit out of line and then correcting
it back onto the desired path.
Time from liftoff to transmission stoppage was two minutes, twenty seconds.
According to the liftoff timeline:
http://spaceflightnow.com/falcon/003/timeline.html
That's nineteen seconds before stage separation was supposed to occur,
but exactly at the time that the booster was to switch to inertial guidance.
Was the camera supposed to shut off at that point, or does its shutdown
indicate some sort of a problem with the vehicle itself at that time?
Video of the second launch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LpKC...eature=related
Shows no loss of camera view at that point, and some oscillations again
occurring during first stage burn, that become very marked after second
stage separation.
Have they got a propellant sloshing problem with the second stage that
starts during first stage burn in both cases?

Pat

What I would like to know is: Why in hell don't they use inertial
guidance all the way from launch, the way properly-designed missiles and
launch vehicles do?

We have been using IG at launch since the earliest polaris and Saturn-V
days.

Most likely misuse of terminology between "inertial guidance" and
"closed-loop inertial guidance".

It seems that switching guidance systems in mid-flight is just asking
for failure.

Just about every launch vehicle uses open-loop guidance during early
first stage flight and switches to closed-loop only once above most of
the atmosphere. Saturn V did, shuttle does, etc.

Switching most anything while on the fly is nearly always a bad idea,
unless working in the nearly failsafe analog format.

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth