SpaceX

publiusr said:
Oops the bottom blew out.

Bezos--topless
Elon --bottomless.

The universe must have its little jokes.

At least the toilet survived this blow-out.

Fate called, to inform everyone that April is Old Space month.

Oh, and the NSF video of this debacle wasn't great either.

Elon...I'm laughing at the superior intellect.

The NSF guys did show a side view that didn't look quite as bad....but there was some debris.
Click to expand...
What bottom blow out? You think this was a failure?
 
publiusr said:
Oops the bottom blew out.

Bezos--topless
Elon --bottomless.

The universe must have its little jokes.

At least the toilet survived this blow-out.

Fate called, to inform everyone that April is Old Space month.

Oh, and the NSF video of this debacle wasn't great either.

Elon...I'm laughing at the superior intellect.

The NSF guys did show a side view that didn't look quite as bad....but there was some debris.
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gATVyKYCHGc
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/x/status/2044590183761277386
View: https://x.com/SpaceX/status/2044590183761277386/video/1
 
BlueAbyssal said:
Almost certainly forever. Without ML-2 and EUS, there's hardly a reason for BOLE to exist either, and restarting production under a future administration will be exorbitantly expensive, and likely deemed not worth the trouble.
Click to expand...
Probably the end of the era of large solid motors, in the US anyway.
 
My thoughts too Sferrin, why a Falcon Heavy for the ExoMars-Rosalind Franklin rover. I would have thought that the Ariane 6 would have done the job perfectly well since it is ESA in charge of the mission.
 
Sferrin said:
I'm surprised they're using a Falcon Heavy for this. The much larger Curiosity and Perseverance rovers were launched with Atlas V. You'd think a Vulcan, Ariane 6, or even a regular Falcon 9 could do it.
Click to expand...
For what it is worth ChatGPT says it is because of the throw weight. Easier to get a trans-mars-injection and the extra margin gives a wider launch window. Falcon Heavy is also proven while to be honest Vulcan isn't.
 
Ozair said:
For what it is worth ChatGPT says it is because of the throw weight. Easier to get a trans-mars-injection and the extra margin gives a wider launch window. Falcon Heavy is also proven while to be honest Vulcan isn't.
Click to expand...
Still leaves Ariane 64 though. But yeah, the window makes sense.
 
It has certain irony that Falcon Heavy is far cheaper in launch cost compare to Ariane 64

Back to Topic
Booster 19 and Starship 39 return to Megabays for final checkup before launch.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom