SpaceX landing on floating platform in the ocean CONFIRMED! =P
So Elon Musk has confirmed SpaceX will attempt to land on a floating platform 90m*50m for their next Falcon 9 flight. YAY!
Florida Today:
He estimated no better than a 50-50 chance of a successful platform landing on the first attempt.SpaceNews.com:
[...]
"So I think we're quite close," he said.
“We actually have a huge platform that’s being constructed in a shipyard in Louisiana right now,” Musk said in the interview, which was webcast live. He described the platform as about 90 meters long by 50 meters wide. “We’re going to try and land on that on the next flight.
“There’s at least a dozen launches that will occur over the next 12 months,” Musk said. “I think it’s quite likely — probably 80 to 90 percent likely — that one of those flights will be able to land and refly.”
Space.com coverage: www.space.com/27538-spacex-reusable-rocket-test.html
_________________________________________________________
Antares (by Orbital Sciences) explodes. =(
Sadly, the Antares rocket has exploded seconds after launch for their CRS-3 mission:
From simple visual inspection of this video, it seems like an engine failure for one or both engines - from the small engine flash and subsequent smoke; (or other failure causing engine flame-out or automatic shutdown). Subsequently, with no thrust, the rocket fell back to earth and the impact caused the big explosion.
Cargo carried included normal CRS foodstuffs, experiments, etc, and the Arkyd3 - a testbed for Planetary Resources' telescope satellites, including one which was Kickstarted (including a contribution from yours truly).
According to Wikipedia, Orbital Sciences hasn't had that many failures, with successes in all Minotaur vehicles and the Pegasus with 3 outright failures and 2 partial successes (on primary payload) early in their launch history.Note that this is in line with many launch vehicle companies including SpaceX, whose Falcon 1 platform was their testbed which failed 3 out of 5 times.
However, SpaceX's Falcon 9 has had no failures except 1 secondary payload failure over its 13 total launches these last 4 years. Add to that: NASA pays $1.6 billion to SpaceX to deliver cargo over 12 missions while they have to pay $1.9 billion to Orbital Sciences for only 8 missions. Add to that each mission delivering more cargo in the Dragon by mass than Orbital Sciences' Cygnus spacecraft. The Cygnus is only superior in delivering more pressurized volume than the Dragon, and can't return cargo to Earth like the Dragon does.
Talk about SpaceX cutting costs and competition savings! (The citizens of USA should be glad SpaceX is now able to compete for USAF/DoD/NRO contracts.) I'm glad it's SpaceX that won the CCDev contract, and has a really cool Dragon V2 crewed spacecraft coming out, designed for reusability and landing by thruster functionality. Hurray for SpaceX reusability - providing sustainable and cheaper access to space!
Dailymail's coverage, in-depth: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2810128/Ready-liftoff-Nighttime-rocket-launch-International-Space-Station-visible-East-Coast.html
Space.com's coverage, editor promises updates on this page:
www.space.com/27576-private-orbital-sciences-rocket-explosion.html
UPDATE:
More about the accident and engine here: http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/42340antares-rocket-explodes-after-liftoff includes spectator video and sound of explosion:
Press conference at 9pm ET (12pm AEDT, now) on Nasa TV
Broadcast live streaming video on Ustream
More updates to follow probably; from conference:
Emphasis of launch/rocket science and space science being hard (obviously). No injuries, only lost hardware.
Orbital Sciences - will investigate what's wrong, solve the problem and prevent future problems.
Investigation includes evaluating debris (like aircraft investigations [like ATSB]!) - don't touch debris, could be dangerous.
Wallops - good range clearing of safety area.
ISS - incl crew in good shape, have supplies for at least 4-6months always, Progress spacecraft tomorrow, SpaceX on Dec 9, quite a bit of research hardware lost and spare hardware.
Investigation data and everything locked down until investigation process goes through; wait for daytime for debris collecting. Solid propellant burning in area. Contract - provides for ability to eventually get hardware lost on this flight to orbit, Orbital compensates NASA if they don't reach orbit. Launchpad could be damaged, tank pressure sensor readings still available and holding pressure - extent of damage not known until fully investigated.
Engine failure observed in telemetry and visually ~T+10s and range then sent the destruct command ~T+20s, before it hit the ground.
Investigation: Orbital in command, supported very well by NASA and MARS (@Wallops), debris in morning, cameras, telemetry/data. Orbital obviously won't fly until they know and correct the problem.
Insurance - Orbital does have various/some amounts of insurance on their launches.
Engines - Orbital chose to go with this (Russian) engine as there weren't many choices for powerplants of this size, especially in USA, and it was extensively tested and has proved robust. They've also chosen another engine for future Antares, according to the link above providing the video of spectator view. Wonder if they considered using SpaceX's engines =P
