SpaceX (general discussion)

Dragon029 said:
Michel Van said:
sferrin said:
There look like puffs from the maneuvering system on the 1st stage but they didn't try to land it did they?
Click to expand...

Oddly Not this Time
But they made complet Return Procedere landed But there was no ship to Land on...
Why is unclear to me
Click to expand...
They performed a controlled landing in the ocean (for the purposes of gathering flight data, etc). The reason they didn't land this one on a barge is because it's a Block 3 Falcon 9, SpaceX is limited in their floorspace and they want to have the entirety of their Falcon 9 [non-Heavy] fleet at the Block 5 configuration. Evidently SpaceX's believes that it's cheaper to expend a Block 3 (maybe recycling some recovered components) and build a new Block 5 in its place.
Click to expand...

What a problem to have. ;)
 
I guess that SpaceX wanted to excessively stress the 1st-stage to see how much cross and down-range mileage they can get through 'lift' of the vehicle. Huge angles to the air-flow (angle of attack), taking the opportunity to determine the structural red-line of the Lithium-Aluminum booster might be the game here.

David
 
fredymac said:
Spotted this picture while hunting for Falcon Heavy images. Supposedly it is a fairing "grabber" which invokes images of this thing dashing under a parachute suspended fairing and catching it but I would guess it is simply a transport cradle used after fishing the hardware out of the sea.
Click to expand...

Speaking of the fairing, Scott Manly had an interesting observation from some of the posted footage of the recent launch:

(4:50)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJ6nn8fZOmc
 
Correction notice from Manley:
Apologies: I made a huge Mistake - The gap in the trail is the staging event. I thought the time stamps didn't match up and came up with an alternate explanation, but then when I looked again I realised I was looking at the wrong video, I should have trusted my first instinct. So thanks to everyone who noticed. I'll try to do better in the past.
Click to expand...
 
The Zuma launch has been delayed a day and also it looks possibly that this booster will undergo a second Static Fire Test.

https://mobile.twitter.com/SpaceXUpdates/status/948276898789982208
 
Team at the Cape performed a propellant loading test of Falcon 9 on Pad 40 this morning – additional static fire test of the rocket was not necessary. Targeting January 5 launch of Zuma.
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/948554978163007488
 
Flyaway said:
Team at the Cape performed a propellant loading test of Falcon 9 on Pad 40 this morning – additional static fire test of the rocket was not necessary. Targeting January 5 launch of Zuma.
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/948554978163007488
Click to expand...

Lets hope that Zuma gets launched this time.
 
FighterJock said:
Flyaway said:
Team at the Cape performed a propellant loading test of Falcon 9 on Pad 40 this morning – additional static fire test of the rocket was not necessary. Targeting January 5 launch of Zuma.
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/948554978163007488
Click to expand...

Lets hope that Zuma gets launched this time.
Click to expand...

Further testing, looks like the Falcon 9 has had a second WDR has now delayed the launch to Saturday.
 
Wet Dress Rehearsal

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/01/spacex-falcon-9-launch-clandestine-zuma-satellite/
 
I believe Elon has indicated on Reddit Zuma is a very valuable payload hence the abundance of caution.
 
https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/article/the-us-dominated-rocket-launches-in-2017/ar-BBHUP0k
 
Looks like there will be no official confirmation of launch success. Might be because no agency officially owns this payload.
 
I think you shouldn’t think of weapons as being used against the Earth but rather again other satellites. Notice the quote here from Frank Rose.

This is about the same time I believe someone said Zuma appeared on the manifest as a NG payload.

In response to these possible threats, the Obama administration has budgeted at least $5 billion to be spent over the next five years to enhance both the defensive and offensive capabilities of the U.S. military space program. The U.S. is also attempting to tackle the problem through diplomacy, although with minimal success; in late July at the United Nations, long-awaited discussions stalled on a European Union-drafted code of conduct for spacefaring nations due to opposition from Russia, China and several other countries including Brazil, India, South Africa and Iran. The failure has placed diplomatic solutions for the growing threat in limbo, likely leading to years of further debate within the UN’s General Assembly.
“The bottom line is the United States does not want conflict in outer space,” says Frank Rose, assistant secretary of state for arms control, verification and compliance, who has led American diplomatic efforts to prevent a space arms race. The U.S., he says, is willing to work with Russia and China to keep space secure. “But let me make it very clear: we will defend our space assets if attacked.”
Click to expand...

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/war-in-space-may-be-closer-than-ever/
 
The Zuma payload may have been lost.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/01/the-zuma-satellite-launched-by-spacex-may-be-lost-sources-tell-ars/

Or is this doing a Misty.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/3077830/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/spy-satellites-rise-faked-fall/
 
After all the extra care they took to make sure the launch went off without a hitch that would sure be a letdown.
 
sferrin said:
After all the extra care they took to make sure the launch went off without a hitch that would sure be a letdown.
Click to expand...
Isn't it SOP to say a highly classified sat is 'lost' so it stops getting tracked? Or am I reading too many Dale Brown novels?
 
For moment is only speculation and rumours about the lost of ZUMA

and I think that "who ever is responsible" of ZUMA, will not ever tell Us during next 45 years
until the documents are declassified in 2063...
 
Just saw the mission logo for the ZUMA mission today. I wonder what, if anything, can be gleaned from it. The four-leaf clover at bottom center of the shield presumably represents the landing pad for the first stage and a good luck charm. The "ZUMA" payload name is on the left side of the shield, as is an interesting six-star cluster in the sky which reminds me of six star (5+1) clusters that have been seen on other various "black" project logos and unit patches.
DOu9i-CW4AAetzl.jpg
 
This article does a pretty good job of summing things up.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/9/16866806/spacex-zuma-mission-failure-northrop-grumman-classified-falcon-9-rocket
 
The media will be making hay off this for months. As long as there is nothing one way or the other they'll continue to dribble out speculation until the cows come home.
 
Jeff Foust
@jeff_foust
Statement from SpaceX’s Gwynne Shotwell this morning that Falcon 9 “did everything correctly” on the Zuma launch; claims to the contrary are “categorically false.” Preparations for future launches moving ahead.
Click to expand...

Actual statement on link below.

https://mobile.twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/950738807221080064
 
On Monday evening, Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal reported that Zuma failed to activate correctly, and that rather than orbiting the planet, the system was crashing back to earth. An industry official familiar with the mission told C4ISRNET the satellite likely cost more than $3 billion.
Click to expand...

https://www.c4isrnet.com/intel-geoint/2018/01/09/spacex-launched-a-spy-satellite-sunday-it-may-have-failed-what-happens-now/
 
bring_it_on said:
On Monday evening, Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal reported that Zuma failed to activate correctly, and that rather than orbiting the planet, the system was crashing back to earth. An industry official familiar with the mission told C4ISRNET the satellite likely cost more than $3 billion.
Click to expand...

https://www.c4isrnet.com/intel-geoint/2018/01/09/spacex-launched-a-spy-satellite-sunday-it-may-have-failed-what-happens-now/
Click to expand...

Only a yesterday it cost $1billion! ;)
 
Ouch. Well, I wonder if anybody will suggest we don't launch the JWT. "OMG, what if the launch fails? That's $8 billion down the drain." (Yes, I'm aware of the stupidity of not launching the thing. Doesn't mean somebody won't suggest it, unfortunately.)
 
Boxman said:
Just saw the mission logo for the ZUMA mission today. I wonder what, if anything, can be gleaned from it. The four-leaf clover at bottom center of the shield presumably represents the landing pad for the first stage and a good luck charm. The "ZUMA" payload name is on the left side of the shield, as is an interesting six-star cluster in the sky which reminds me of six star (5+1) clusters that have been seen on other various "black" project logos and unit patches.
DOu9i-CW4AAetzl.jpg
Click to expand...

Shamrocks are historically associated with signals intelligence.
 
quellish said:
Boxman said:
Just saw the mission logo for the ZUMA mission today. I wonder what, if anything, can be gleaned from it. The four-leaf clover at bottom center of the shield presumably represents the landing pad for the first stage and a good luck charm. The "ZUMA" payload name is on the left side of the shield, as is an interesting six-star cluster in the sky which reminds me of six star (5+1) clusters that have been seen on other various "black" project logos and unit patches.
DOu9i-CW4AAetzl.jpg
Click to expand...

Shamrocks are historically associated with signals intelligence.
Click to expand...
I don't write this as a nit-pick, only with an attorney's mindset of everything having a precise meaning (as well as being half-Irish), but that is a four-leaf clover on the logo, not a shamrock. If shamrocks have traditionally been related to SIGINT, I wonder what the four-leaf clover symbolizes for this mission (aside from my first blush impressions noted above)?
EDIT: Welp, I'm an idiot. As per SpaceX in their St. Patrick's Day 2016 (17-March-2016) Facebook post:
https://www.facebook.com/SpaceX/posts/10157191762440131:0
Happy St. Patrick's Day!

The four leaf clover on SpaceX mission patches began with the fourth flight of Falcon 1, which launched September 28, 2008.

This mission marked the first time Falcon 1 successfully achieved orbit and the first successful orbital launch of any privately funded and developed liquid-propelled payload-carrying rocket.

When the flight succeeded, the clover stuck and has been with us ever since.
Click to expand...
 
Fuel dump of Zuma's Falcon 9 Upper Stage observed by a Dutch pilot over east Africa (and rumours that Zuma failed)

https://sattrackcam.blogspot.co.uk/2018/01/fuel-dump-of-zumas-falcon-9-upper-stage.html?m=1
 
latest news on case
http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a14927488/spacex-zuma-mission-just-keeps-getting-weirder/

The Facts:
SpaceX launch ZUMA with Falcon9 into orbit and second stage fuel dump was observed
ZUMA aka USA-280 got designation as NOARD Cat ID: 43098.
interesting it's orbit is used by USA-276 aka NROL-76 who will near by if ZUMA reach orbit.
NORAD had list USA-280 as in orbit. (everting that makes one orbit)

The Rumors:
an unnamed source reported to Ars Technica that the satellite had re-entered the atmosphere after failing to separate from the upper stage,
possibly due to a failure in the payload adapter provided by Northrop Grumman.
follow by the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg reports of a "unnamed U.S. official", that the Zuma satellite fell back to Earth over the Indian Ocean
According "the SpaceX Fan Club" at Google+, Northrop not use SpaceX payload adapter due to secrecy,
ZUMA came from Northrop Facility already on own adapter and fully encapsulated in the payload fairing, to SpaceX Facility at Cape

The Speculations:
According SpaceX the Falcon9 worked, despite a "delay" in Payload faring separating.
The second stage fuel dump indicates that the Falcon9 made it's job and the stage fell back to Earth over the Indian Ocean.
According severals source, ZUMA was installed on own payload adapter build by Northrop Grumman. not the one SpaceX use.
Mean the source at Ars Technica could be right, and ZUMA reenter attach on second stage over the Indian Ocean.
Making this scenario the most likely, so the error lies at Northrop not at SpaceX...
 
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-10/lawmakers-look-into-spacex-launch-that-ended-with-lost-satellite

Alabama stuffed-suit politician trying to blame SpaceX (because ULA is in his state) and grab the spotlight at the same time.

"Republican Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, who heads the panel that approves appropriations for NASA, said the lost satellite raises new questions about SpaceX contracts. Shelby is a strong supporter of United Launch Alliance, which has operations in his state."
 
And he is also a member of the SLS coalition, with Bill Nelson (AFAIK) SLS Senate Launch System ::)
 
Archibald said:
And he is also a member of the SLS coalition, with Bill Nelson (AFAIK) SLS Senate Launch System ::)
Click to expand...

Don’t forget the considerable political clout of NG that comes from being s defense prime.

Analysis on what Zuma might have been for based upon its inferred inclination:

http://www.satobs.org/seesat/Jan-2018/0096.html
 
SpaceX delays commercial crew test flights to latter half of 2018

http://spacenews.com/spacex-delays-commercial-crew-test-flights-to-latter-half-of-2018/
 
New article from Eric Berger.

Sources familiar with discussions behind closed doors have told Ars there are two primary working theories about what may have gone wrong with Zuma and caused it to burn up in Earth's atmosphere. One idea, in contradiction to SpaceX's official statements, is that the rocket's upper stage underperformed and caused the problem. However, at this time, it seems more likely that the mechanism built by Northrop Grumman to release the satellite failed to operate properly.

If the Pentagon is not going to provide an answer to the question of Zuma's fate, then it may be some time before there's clarity on this issue. Eventually, information should leak out from classified briefings on Capitol Hill. Even so, this is unlikely to be "official" confirmation. Such a vacuum of information offers fertile ground for rumors and speculation.

Already, rumors abound that Zuma was a satellite intended to monitor or intercept nuclear activities by North Korea and that the story about its failure is a matter of subterfuge. For the record, Ars would not knowingly report a falsehood, and we continue to have reliable sourcing that indicates the Zuma payload did, indeed, fail to reach orbit.
Click to expand...

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/01/pentagon-ask-spacex-about-zuma-spacex-thats-not-our-story-to-tell/
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom