SpaceX ISS Dragon resupply mission is today

http://new.livestream.com/accounts/142499/events/1579124/videos/4530165

by iwwr • 14 years ago

89 32 14 years ago

new.livestream.com

ChuckMcM• 14 years ago

Hmm, the site says we're still 23 hrs from launch so perhaps they meant "tomorrow" in the headline. Aka "Sunday"

chaud• 14 years ago

Launch of this first commercial resupply mission (SpaceX CRS-1) to the complex is set for 8:35PM EDT Sunday, October 7 from Launch Complex 40 at the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida.

tsotha5• 14 years ago

If by "today" you mean "tomorrow".

I really hope this goes well. The Falcon 9 is still a pretty new rocket, and the Dragon is still a pretty new capsule. Give me five more good launches and I'll be able to watch without holding my breath.

softbuilder• 14 years ago

> Give me five more good launches and I'll be able to watch without holding my breath.

Until they put people in them. And then the breath-holding starts all over.

danielweber• 14 years ago

IIRC the safest class you can get a rocket into occurs once it has 14 successful launches in a row. PS I'm not an expert in this.

VexXtreme• 14 years ago

To me, this is nothing short of amazing. This is the first time we are seeing commercial entities working closely with national/international government run space programs. This is a new era for space exploration because this is the first time private money will start rolling into space exploration programs.

The problem with government funded programs is they are underfunded, limited in scope and often have no competition that would push them forward. One of the reasons why Apollo programs were so successful is because Americans and Russians were trying to out do each others and that created a healthy environment for amazing new tech to emerge. The problem today is that no country really cares about space exploration anymore... at least not to the extent they used to.

When you allow free market forces and commercial competition to do their thing, you end up with all sorts of great things that otherwise never would've been. Can all of you imagine where we would be right now if everything computer related was ever researched and invented solely by governmental research programs? Probably somewhere in the 80s/90s, tech wise. If it weren't for Apple and Google trying to make as much money as possible in the phone market, we'd still likely be stuck with black and white phones with mechanical keypads. Same thing is about to happen with space programs. It's the capitalism, competition and free markets that allow for great inventions to emerge. Human greed CAN be a good thing.

chucknelson3• 14 years ago

I sometimes wonder why space exploration interest ever waned. You would think as population increases and natural resource supplies tighten, that the world would be a bit more motivated. I'm convinced that interest is low because the problem is just too damn hard.

tisme• 14 years ago

Because once you've won a race there is no point in continuing to run.

Access to space never was about access to space to begin with, it was a showdown on the world political stage.

codex3• 14 years ago

The Space Shuttle was designed and built by a private contractor (North American Rockwell) after a competitive selection process among many private parties; even in the SpaceX case, the funding is provided by the government to private parties through the age-old bidding process. So I'm not sure what's so revolutionary here, especially given an almost zero potential for space profits absent government support. Mining the asteroids might be an opportunity the private sector could exploit in a few decades.

tsotha5• 14 years ago

The big difference is SpaceX was able to keep the cost down because they put the money in up front and thus weren't forced by Congress to spread the work over 20 states. But that will change now that they have government contracts.

InclinedPlane2• 14 years ago

The difference is extreme. In the Space Shuttle case NASA signed off on every little detail of the design and manufacture of the vehicle and told Rockwell to go build it, deliver it to them, and then they undertook operations with the vehicle. This is very comparable to, say, the US military procuring and operating a fighter jet such as the F-22.

Now let's look at SpaceX's Falcon/Dragon. SpaceX financed, designed, and proved the Falcon-9 launch vehicle on its own. To its own specs. To its own design. And to its own internal budget. Similarly, SpaceX began designing the Dragon pressurized spacecraft on its own. NASA came along and offered up the potential for a contract for resupply of the ISS, they did not specify the design or method of construction of the launch vehicle and spacecraft to achieve this goal, nor did they fund the complete development costs of such a system. Instead, SpaceX stepped up and said "hey, we have something that we think could fit your needs" (as did Orbital Sciences Corp.) and then NASA provided some moderate funding to help with specialized development costs for ISS resupply and then extended the opportunity for ISS resupply contracts after a successful demonstration. This is comparable to buying a plane ticket.

SpaceX's NASA contracts are quite lucrative for them (because they can provide a service at a lower price than the competition but it is a very highly priced service) but even without them they are poised to reap massive profits from bog-standard commercial launch services. They have a contract with Orbcomm to launch 18 satellites, and contracts with MDA Corp., SES, Thaicom, NSPO, Asiasat, SS/Loral, Argentina, Israel, and others to launch commercial satellites over the coming years. Because SpaceX is able to set the retail price of its launches at the current market floor (somewhere around the per kg price of the Long March, Soyuz, or Proton) despite their underlying costs being much lower they are able to pocket a healthy profit per launch, which should fatten their wallets mightily even over the next few years let alone the next decade or so.

chucknelson3• 14 years ago

FYI - A bit strange, but the actual pre-launch news conference doesn't start until 37:15 into the video on the page this story links to.

mkramlich• 14 years ago

What excites me the most about SpaceX and Elon Musk is not so much the superficial/ostensible meaning of what they're doing (private contracts to deliver payloads to space) but the following. The fact that a foundation is being laid for a situation where basically a single guy, a private citizen, namely Musk with his personality and talents and passion, can one day slam his fist down and say, "That's it. Fuck it. We're going to Mars." and then make it happen. Putting humans on the surface of Mars. Or an asteroid, whatever. As completely private missions, if desired. Without getting bogged down by a flaky showboating Congress, by NASA budgets, by legacy bureaucracy, etc. Because they're building (incrementally) a complete in-house stack for taking people off-planet and (eventually) to other ones, and back. Yes you have to make the money work. That's doable. But more importantly it reduces their exposure to bureacracy, government and BDC inertia. And it's not a baby-vs-bathwater situation. They can hire away the brains from NASA and other space companies, where needed, where possible, so it's not like they're losing out on all that accumulated experience and best practice. But they do get to start from scratch and make it much easier to greenlight new "risky" projects and Get Things Done.

Planetary Resources excites me for similar reasons. Though I don't think they have quite the same degree of talent at the top in a single guy as with the case of SpaceX. But still, very promising team, vision and approach.

codex3• 14 years ago

Given that a publically funded manned Mars mission would be at least $10B, a private mission would be difficult even if the cost were reduced 10x. And SpaceX can't even reduce orbital launch costs by 10x over today's gold standard; according to Wikpedia, the Russians have the currently cheapest operational LEO system on a per kilogram basis. Meanwhile, SpaceX's costs are 2x over original estimates. While the Space Shuttle was such a boondoggle that almost anyone could reduce costs as compared to it, contemporary Russian programs are not nearly as poorly designed and executed.

varjag• 14 years ago

Russian programs are not contemporary: they are early 1970s projects with some 21st century trim jobs. They R&D costs and production lines were amortized before Reagan came to power.

btyrad2• 14 years ago

From what I have read on Forbes, Quora, and the link below, it looks like wikipedia might be incorrect. http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/05/spacex-dragon-takes-f... and http://satellite.tmcnet.com/topics/satellite/articles/171190...

mtgx• 14 years ago

If cost would be reduced 10x, I figure there's a pretty high chance the Government will pay them for it.

otibom• 14 years ago

> for taking people off-planet and (eventually) to other ones, and back.

Aren't they planning one way trips ?

stcredzero4• 14 years ago

There will be money to be made from return tickets.

reichert• 14 years ago

Sometimes I wonder if the reason Musk has worked so hard/had so much success with spacex is just because he wants to return to his home planet.

jonsen• 14 years ago

What an alien comment.

SpaceX ISS Dragon resupply mission is today

Related Stories