Space X, a private company hoping — with reason — to be the first to launch a commercial rocket into orbit, test-fired their new Merlin 1C engine yesterday. The cool thing: it’s on the rocket, and the rocket is on the pad! The only thing that prevented liftoff was a restraining arm holding the rocket in place.
The launch window for this flight runs from July through September, and it will be the third attempt for Space X. The first rocket was lost shortly after liftoff, and the second just barely didn’t make it to orbit. This one looks pretty good. It will launch from Omelek Island in the Kwajalein Atoll in the pacific ocean. The rocket, called a Falcon 1, will carry a Department of Defense Trailblazer satellite.
June 26th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Gotta love the space-x guys. So many of the private space folks seem to do nothing more than burnd VC funding with nothing to show for it.
I hope these guys make it. I want to see an F5 heavy.
June 26th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Err. I mean F9 heavy. Brain fart FTL.
June 26th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Have they not yet learned that their previous failures was the act of God punishing them for their hubris? Imagine! Sending a rocket to just float around in the Heavens! Blasphemy, I say, pure blasphemy!
On a more serious note, Space-X is awesome.
June 26th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Hey Ian,
how about that BFR that they have talked about? sounds like it would be one hell of a machine
Mark
June 26th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
I love SpaceX:D. I feel like Princess Leia: “SpaceX, you’re my only hope!”
June 26th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
What do you mean by “private company”? I’m not clear on how this is different from Boeing/Lockmart launching Deltas, etc.
June 26th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Travis, because it is private startup, not big company that parasites on government money on basis “cost+profit”.
June 26th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
I’m just curious as to why the DoD would use a launcher that has not yet proven itself to launch a satellite? Seems like a risky move, and a waste of money if this one fails to reach orbit.
June 26th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
I’m just curious as to why the DoD would use a launcher that has not yet proven itself to launch a satellite? Seems like a risky move, and a waste of money if this one fails to reach orbit.
Yeah, there’s that. But they do do this. Every rocket starts with a 0% success rate
Phil, I’m curious where you got the notion that SpaceX is any kind of first? First to launch without government funding? Uh, no, it’s a DoD payload. First not-NASA or DoD designed rocket? Uh, no, what about Orbital’s Pegasus (very cool technology, that)? I’m not sure what you mean.
I think you’re listening to their hype a bit much.
June 26th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Selling a product to the government isn’t government funding. Government funding is when the government supplies a portion of the operating funds for the company. It’s the same difference as buying a softdrink and buying shares in a softdrink company.
June 26th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
A friend of mine just pointed me to this site for Sea Launch, another private company. http://www.boeing.com/special/sea-launch/
I’d never heard of them before. Any buzz on them?
June 26th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
Duh, you know, I should use the search function on the sidebar there before I post ; )
June 26th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Every step towards cheaper or more mainstream space flight is a step in the right direction. Now if only we could figure out how to make those carbon nanotubes cheaply and get started on a space elevator. . .
June 26th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
I was going to say, I thought that SeaLaunch was private, and they’ve launched satellites into orbit multiple times. They’re the company that launches DirecTV’s satellites into geosynchronous orbit, aren’t they?
Ok, I just looked at their website, and it says:
“Sea Launch Company, LLC, is an international partnership of American, Russian, Ukrainian and Norwegian businesses that provides a reliable, cost effective, heavy lift launch service for commercial customers.”
So that still sounds private to me, even if it’s not just one single startup company.
June 26th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
@ Tom
Sea-Launch uses Russian rockets. All designed and built by the Russian government. Sea Launch had a spectacular failure last year. It caused tremendous damage to their launch ship, I suspect they came very close to losing the ship entirely.
When SpaceX successfully puts a bird into orbit (and they very likely will), they will be the first privately funded company to have build their own to-orbit vehicle without up-front government funding.
Delta, Titan, Orbital ad all the rest were built like military aircraft. The government pays a bunch of money up front, etc… SpaceX designed their own systems without funding or involvement from any government.
Sure, the US goverment is NOW very interested in SpaceX. They weren’t at the start. The government only too interest AFTER SpaceX had spent hundreds of millions of their own money to build their own engines and vehicles. The money the government is now paying SpaceX is for services, not for products. The government is buying launches, just like they buy computers or copy machines. The government is not funding the construction and development of the SpaceX spacecraft.
Over the past decades, there have been dozens of US startups that have promised to do what SpaceX is doing. None have ever gotten as far as SpaceX. None have even gotten close.
June 26th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
Re: “private” : The DOD didn’t pay for the development of the Falcon, any more than they paid for the development of the Coke or Pepsi they supply to troops. They bought the launch services, just like you or I would buy a car. Space-X and their investors funded the end to end development of the launch system.
When they succeed it will be a big deal. Why? Because it will show you don’t need to belly up to the trough of cash, non-accountability and byzantine bureaucracy that is any federally funded program. It also means they can run lean and without the interference government pointy haired managers force on a project. Oh, and their funding won’t evaporate every four years.
The F9-Heavy will be awesome. And the reason it will be super cheap (relatively speaking) is precisely because there’s no government retards involved. However, the Ares-5 will loft way more to TLI than the F9, dunno about the F9-H.
All the exciting space stuff is happeing in the private sector.
June 27th, 2008 at 1:56 am
Indeed, this is extremely cool, but aside from the “awesomeness factor” that comes with testing an engine like this, is it pretty stupid?
I mean, you’d have to know damn sure that the engine is going to work, and not shatter your whole launchvehicle.
June 27th, 2008 at 6:05 am
Sanity, they’ve already tested the new Merlin 1C several times, with excellent results, so it wasn’t a big risk. In fact, they recently conducted a simultaneous hold-down firing of FIVE of these engines at once, part of their progression towards the full nine-engine test for the Falcon 9.
I’ve been following SpaceX’s efforts since before their first, failed launch attempt, and have enormous respect for Musk’s entrepreneurial and managerial skills. They can do this.
June 27th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Watch your ass NASA, the private sector is about to take a huge bite out of it.
June 27th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Tyler has it bang on.
Back when the Saturns were launching in the 60’s and early 70’s the mine ore (for example) was taken from, the steel works, the full monty was recorded and defined – there had been a lot of failures for all sorts of reasons and they wanted to get it right.
I personally believe this attitude still persists with, well the big established companies, but the Russians don’t do it – at least to that degree. They possibly make things more than necessarily strong and burn a bit more fuel. And check carefully what they have.
Fuel ain’t expensive (relatively. And I live in Europe – don’t complain about fuel costs ok?)
I am really interested in SpaceX. They have a well thought out vehicle, they aren’t saving every gram for the sake of it – they’ll make it work.
I really hope Boeing and LockMart are quaking in their boots because $500 for a ’space-rated bolt’ is history. And all of you American tax payers putting all sorts of lovely interesting things into orbit or beyond will perhaps not get ripped off quite so thoroughly.
Nic
P.S Ok, ok those companies do a good job. But boy do they charge for it.
June 27th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
What’s the SpaceX’s cost per pound to L.E.O.?
June 27th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Er … cost per PAYLOAD pound to LEO, I mean.
June 28th, 2008 at 3:40 am
Awesome, I’d love to see rockets like this launching from Australia. There is plenty of room for it. ;p
June 28th, 2008 at 8:00 am
I hate to say this, but, Space X is not free from government bureaucracy. Do you not think the FAA, at least, isn’t going to have something to say about what they intend to put in “their” airspace? My mother told me all kinds of stories about the government crap she had to put up with in her days of working at Boeing. Space X will have just as much pointy-headed input as anyone else.
June 28th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
Phil,
When you talk about the launch window being July to September, what exactly does that mean? Is the only time the weather will be good enough, or something else?
Thanks,
Jason.