Falcon 9 second stage tested

Rick Jones wrote:
But this link:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2009/...able-falcon-9/

suggests there will be a Launch Escape Tower.

That's more recent, so they must have decided to go with an escape tower
and just separate the capsule rather than the whole works.

Pat

David Spain wrote:
What no sub-orbital test first? How will they vouch for the capsule integrity
if they can't inspect it?

Oh, it will come down somewhere eventually...probably over India, being
mistaken for a Pakistani nuclear first strike.

Telemetry, shelemetry!! Show me the friggin thing back on the ground first before
I put my a$$ into it!

Number two will be designed to do a set of tests on-orbit, and then be
recovered after three orbits.

Pat

On Jan 7, 4:07*pm, David Spain wrote:


What no sub-orbital test first? How will they vouch for the capsule integrity
if they can't inspect it?

Telemetry, shelemetry!! Show me the friggin thing back on the ground first before
I put my a$$ into it!

Beside if they don't de-orbit it, how will Elon Musk get back his 1 MEEELION
dollars? Oh of course, ANOTHER X PRIZE!!!

Because it is going to fly unmanned many more times before it is
manned. This test doesn't valid the capsule design, it is for the
Falcon 9. The structural test article serves as better nose cone than
an empty fairing. Also it allows for the fairing development to be
delayed.
There is no prize money associated with this.

Me writes:

On Jan 7, 4:07Â*pm, David Spain wrote:


What no sub-orbital test first? How will they vouch for the capsule integrity
if they can't inspect it?

Telemetry, shelemetry!! Show me the friggin thing back on the ground first before
I put my a$$ into it!

Beside if they don't de-orbit it, how will Elon Musk get back his 1 MEEELION
dollars? Oh of course, ANOTHER X PRIZE!!!

Because it is going to fly unmanned many more times before it is
manned. This test doesn't valid the capsule design, it is for the
Falcon 9. The structural test article serves as better nose cone than
an empty fairing. Also it allows for the fairing development to be
delayed.
There is no prize money associated with this.

Sorry, should have included this link from Oct 1 2009 as background:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...80830f179f12bb

Note - :-) -

What a great publicity stunt tho! Orbit a million dollars, with the offer
being the first NGO that retreives it gets to keep it!

Of course, that's highly likely to be SpaceX...

Nobody said the stunt had to be fair... ;-)

Dave

PS: At even 10 million or less its highly unlikely that a spacefairing
GO would "retreive" it first in violation of the rules. At 20 million,
or above, wellll, one just might find in place of the cash a note:

"Comrade, the S.P. Korolev Rocket and Space Corporation thanks
you for your generous donation! With first bank note to be placed
on display at Russian National Archives next to Superbowl Ring!"

Me wrote:

Because it is going to fly unmanned many more times before it is
manned. This test doesn't valid the capsule design, it is for the
Falcon 9. The structural test article serves as better nose cone than
an empty fairing. Also it allows for the fairing development to be
delayed.

It also raises the obvious question of: "if it works like this, why do
you need a fairing?".

Pat

On Jan 8, 1:26*am, Pat Flannery wrote:
Me wrote:

Because it is going to fly unmanned many more times before it is
manned. *This test doesn't valid the capsule design, it is for the
Falcon 9. *The structural test article serves as better nose cone than
an empty fairing. *Also it allows for the fairing development to be
delayed.

It also raises the obvious question of: "if it works like this, why do
you need a fairing?".

Pat

To carry payloads other than Dragon.