E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
SpaceX
SpaceX's webcast shows a rocket's-eye view of the Falcon 9 rocket's second-stage nozzle, with Earth and space beyond.
About nine minutes after the launch of SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket, ground controllers reported that a potential capsule-sized replacement for the space shuttle had reached orbit safely with nary a problem.
"Dragon is in orbit," SpaceX mission control announced.
The rise to orbit served as a test run for future resupply flights to the International Space Station. Before today's launch, SpaceX's millionaire founder, Elon Musk, observed that a successful ascent would demonstrate that the Dragon could reach the space station, even if it didn't later re-enter the atmosphere and make its scheduled splashdown in the Pacific.
The Falcon 9 and Dragon are being developed as a means to fill some of the roles now being taken on by the much-larger space shuttle. The shuttle fleet is due for retirement next year, 30 years after the first shuttle flew.
SpaceX says the 16-foot-tall Dragon is capable of carrying more than 3 tons of payload to the space station in each of its pressurized and unpressurized sections. The shuttle, in comparison, can carry 25 tons or more in its payload bay, depending on launch configuration.
For a detailed look at the Dragon capsule as well as the Falcon 9, check out this infographic from Space.com or this SpaceX press kit (posted by Spaceflight Now).
Musk has said the really "risky bit" is still to come, when the Dragon is due to descend after making two or three orbits at an altitude of 186 miles (300 kilometers). Splashdown could come as early as 2:02 p.m. ET. If the thrusters don't work just right, or if the craft's heat shield fails, the Dragon could literally go down in flames. But even then, the SpaceX team would be able to chalk up today's flight as a "75 percent success," Musk told me.
Stay tuned for updates on the Dragon's maiden space mission by checking Twitter (via @b0yle or @SpaceXer), or checking Cosmic Log's SpaceX coverage.
Leave a Comment:
This is cool and all, but seriously, how can we ever have truly cost effective space flight if we don't have a totally reusable launch mechanism and vehicle?
Can anyone say XCOR? There needs to be more effort put into that type of system.
Definitely cool.
What says a reusable vehicle is going to be cheaper? You SERIOUSLY think that the current shuttle program is less expensive than, say, the soyuz rocket program?
I suggest you look at the cost of the Russian space program compared to our flawed one. How much money to you think NASA is wasting right now on their awesome reusable vehicle that has cracks everywhere, and has successfully killed FAR more astronauts than the Soyuz program?
While a reusable vehicle CAN be cheaper, that's not implicitly the case.
It's possible to make an inefficient anything, yes. Don't let the Shuttle experience indict all RLV notions. But it does require a respectable traffic model do justify development. We should've started smaller. That may yet be the case.
Ever hear of disposable cups, disposable razors, and disposable bottles?
The trick to making a disposable system work is reducing the cost of the throw-away parts until the system produces more value than is thrown away.
And recycling is always a possibility with disposable items.
Someday they'll develop a truly reusable single-stage-to-orbit vehicle, but the tech just isn't there yet.
For now rockets like these are safer and more cost effective than semi-reusable launch systems like the Shuttle.
By having a change of mindset. Mankind understands so little and wants to understand so much. That to put a pricetag on exploration of the universes.Will only keep mankind rooted in one place grappeling with that primitive concept. We need to understand that is our destiny if we are to remain a viable species, for much longer. We are given the gifts of Life, Stewardship and Exploration . If we continue to waste them with prohibative cost and redtape dogmas. We humans of earth will stay right where we are and perish.
Fantastic news! Congratulations and best wishes to the whole SpaceX team.
SpaceX IS planning to make the whole system reusable!
As I recall,when nasa's political masters in congress picked that design the astronaut review panel went"HUHH?!?!?THAT thing??"Then it was kept operating decades beyond it's planned obsolescence.
the only hope for financially viable space flight is free enterprise ; let's all join hands & sing "over the rainbow"!!
Free(commercial) markets will do more to drive down the cost of space flight than anything else. Government too often gets burdened down. Politically the governments and politicians view risk as unacceptable which is not possible in programs such as space exploration. The risk space flight poses are real and when there are accidents it is viewed as failure, not progress, by the government and the public. Commerical markets understand this better(not always but most of the time). Risk is always part of the game in any venture, just more so in space exploration.
I wish we would spend a quarter of the space effort on undersea exploration, we know so little of our own planet!
It's truly amazing that this company could go from conception to flight in status in under eight years. With innovative and competitive firms such as this, the excitement may well return to the idea of space flight.
NASA was bogged down as all bureaucracies eventuallyare. Moving NASA to a scientific support role, facilitating the private companies currently pursuing space flight should make for an exciting few years.
Congratulations Space X.
Having worked on/with many "Race to Space" concepts/companies back in the mid 90's, I can truly say that Space-X is doing it right! Have actually interviewed there and they're a truly innovative company. But the 'reusable' value of any system will be the test of Payload Wt/Dollar vs. Shuttle, Delta III/IV, Saturn etc. And Space-X should be able to beat any of those NASA programs...
I definitely thnk this is cool.
I always wondered why they haven't used planes in LEO though. The SR-22 for example could achieve alitudes and speeds fast enough to reach orbit, couldn't it? Is it possible to return on a slower descent to lessen the heating during re-entry so that a plane could withstand it?
SpaceX developed Falcon 9 and Dragon spacecraft for about one-hundredth what NASA is spending to develop the Ares I and Orion capsule. Why does the media keep glossing this over?
NASA doesn't build rockets, their prime contractors do. In the case of the Shuttle and Ares rockets that's P&W, ATK, Lockmart, Boeing .... NASA is at the mercy of these giant companies who've been gorging themselves at the trough of corporate welfare for decades.
Let me repeat; NASA's Ares I and Orion space craft - $50 BILLION, and its behind schedule. SpaceX Falcon 9 and Dragon Spacecraft - about $500 million.
SpaceX developed Falcon 9 and Dragon spacecraft for about one-hundredth what NASA is spending to develop the Ares I and Orion capsule. Why does the media keep glossing this over?
NASA doesn't build rockets, their prime contractors do. In the case of the Shuttle and Ares rockets that's P&W, ATK, Lockmart, Boeing .... NASA is at the mercy of these giant companies who've been gorging themselves at the trough of corporate welfare for decades.
Let me repeat; NASA's Ares I and Orion space craft - $50 BILLION, and its behind schedule. SpaceX Falcon 9 and Dragon Spacecraft - about $500 million.