SpaceX Launch - 5:54:39 PM UTC

Come oooon, let everything work perfectly.

up we go again

Can't wait for the landing. Last time the engineers had multiple orgasms when the thingy landed on the drone ship.

bump

T-5mins lads

File: stuff.png (38KB, 676x630px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 676x630px

Approximate activity schedule

>>58484040
>]
in the press kit, they say "1st Stage Landing" under the mission timeline. It's the first time that it doesn't say "experimental" landing in the press kit. They must be really confident now....

Noice.
Tuning in.

File: 1480602151719.png (305KB, 556x401px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 556x401px

>space botnets

File: 1412217584394.jpg (92KB, 717x510px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 717x510px

>>58484066
>inb4 it blows the drone ship up and billions of dolars go down the drain
>mfw

Oh man that close up of the engines. I can't wait for falcon heavy

File: snapshot_15.10_[2016.12.23_02.34.17].png (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

oh boy, it's gotta be another fireworks

HERE WE GO

TEN SECONDS

GOOD LIFTOFF

MAX Q IN ~1 MINUTE

good camera work

so bright

Is there a stream with onboard cams again?

when is it going to explode

>>58484158
nvm, there it is.

>dat heat on the exhaust
how can noctuas even compete?

>>58484169
in about three minutes

EARTH IS FLAT LIKE KANSAS

>>58484169
Landing at ~T+ 7min 40sec

WAFFLES

le tiny space feet

holy shit here we go. that shit is falling FAST

File: rong.jpg (83KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 1280x720px

>>58484202

HELL YEAH SCIENCE BITCH

File: cd6bcef86876cda89eaff7f94c8a0d82.jpg (239KB, 1000x1268px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 1000x1268px

>>58483876
can't wait

Success.

I SEE THE BOAT

LOOKS GOOOD

BULLSEYE!

NO CRASH

"falcon landed"

>>58483876
flawless victory!

File: 1468343415754.jpg (508KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

508KB, 1280x720px

HOLY SHIT THEY DID IT AGAIN

beautiful

Beatiful

>>58483876
Mars trip when

Guys...

GUYS...

What if...

What if we made a rocket...

What if we made a rocket and...

What if we made a rocket and landed it...

So we could re-use it...

Instead of just letting it become trash in space....

File: 1451942435244.jpg (15KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 500x375px

>tfw no drone ship gf to land on

File: 1377703465248.png (3KB, 186x186px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 186x186px

>stream starts stuttering and distorting the second the rocket is entering the cam
>lags for a sec and the rocket just stands there
and you people think this is legit

File: PNODhwz.jpg (48KB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 480x270px

So I told SpaceX to reuse first stage.. they actually did it the absolute madmen hahahahahahaha!

>>58484281
Less than 10 years according to the Golden God Dr. Elon Musk-sama himself

>>58484285
that will never work

As an onlooker I still find it baffling that they can calculate every small movement beforehand.

Amazing how the entire first stage launch and landing in happens in less than 10 minutes.

>>58484295
Holy shit go back to /pol/, are you clinically retarded?

File: 1304291682280.jpg (54KB, 252x264px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 252x264px

>>58484285

Fuck yeah they made it

File: tt3nl2rv.jpg (19KB, 252x264px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 252x264px

>>58484308
hi elon

File: blackjackDonkey.jpg (123KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 720x540px

>>58484317
Hi. How is it being poor?

>>58484307
it's the darn atmosphere/rocket equation. Space really isn't that far away - it takes an awful amount of energy though.

>>58484295
that was even low for /x/-tier conspiraposting.

>>58484310
>>58484317
wew

File: 1309458559351.png (28KB, 604x453px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 604x453px

>>58484295

>>58484308
Some people are just idiots. Leave him and let him die dumb.

We should rather be glad that everything went great so far.

fuck i missed it. They landed..... yay : D....

>>58484376
xD ^___^ =333333

>>58484376
They had a few bloopers. The mic of the female host didnt work at the beginning, but the launch was perfect.

do we know if this is a re-utilized stage?
is the stage going to be used in future missions or we are still in the testing phase?

>>58484406
there probably would've been more news if it was a reused rocket

>>58484406
Testing for sure. No contract SpaceX gets is gonna allow them to use that stage.

This is literally state of the art.

File: 27042449393_789ca61efc_o.jpg (1MB, 3000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3000x2000px

>>58484406
-nope

-yes, hopefully. SpaceX has a bunch of returned stages to do testing on. First reuse should be this year

>>58484399
>The mic of the female host didnt work at the beginning
Dumping all my SpaceX stock now so...

File: 27042449393_789ca61efc_o-1.jpg (2MB, 3000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3000x2000px

>>58484435
photo didn't load for some reason

>>58484383
so r@ndum >xDDD

>>58484420
They also changed something about the helium tanks which caused the last explosion. So its probably a new rocket. Also, it would be really bad if something happened with this launch. So why take the risk of using a reutilized stage?

>>58484426
>No contract SpaceX gets is gonna allow them to use that stage.
since when? They already have a client who wants to be the first to fly on a reused stage. They'll be flying one this year almost certainly.

>>58484406
It was a new stage.

They should do a launch with a re-used stage sometime this year. They have customers willing to fly on a reuse stage, and it's great publicity for any satellite launched on one.

File: tub.png (91KB, 1236x873px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1236x873px

once we start reflying stages the bathtub curve really comes into effect.

In fact, new stages will probably less more to the clients than reused stages, as they have not been "proven"

then old stages will be really cheap, for student cube stats or the like

>>58484474
Oh well then I guess I'm wrong. What I really meant is that misson critical stuff won't use a reused stage. Too, uh, critical.

Hmmm, sounds like the rocket is dumping leftover LOX. Cant see anything though because SpessX is livestreaming the rocket on its orbital path.

>>58484494
for the near future, yes

but once stuff gets reused a lot
>>58484509
would you want your billion-$ sat to launch on a stage that has never been flown, or a stage that has been flown successfully 12 times?

the bathtub curve is important, but people dont really know about it

>>58484452
how good would it be in terms of risks, using a reused stage considering the materials and structure has been stressed out to the max already?

File: g00yezfz.jpg (3MB, 3000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3000x2000px

>>58484452
whats that to the right?

>>58484509
>What I really meant is that mission critical stuff won't use a reused stage.
Why not? Surely it would be more preferable to reuse mission critical stuff.

If you were flying from the US to Europe, would you prefer to do so on a 747 that had just been built and never flown anywhere before, or on one that had safely completed thousands of transatlantic flights already?

In the future, the safest rockets will almost certainly be ones that have completed many missions already.

>>58484524
ah I had the quotes switched around

>>58484532
What do you mean? There's just 4 first stages.

NASA ON SUICIDE WATCH

File: AwWoES4.jpg (85KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 720x960px

Halfway to deployment

>>58484591
what's the attrition rate for pups?

>>58484522
It always dumps an excess fuel after landing. Makes it more bottom heavy which means less prone to tipping, plus eliminates the chance of a kaboom for any reason.

>>58484527
planes can fly thousands of times, because they are designed to withstand their particular environment - wind, rain, birds hitting them, etc

SpaceX, after analyzing landed stages, is figuring out how to make rockets survive launches more than once - in a way, figuring out how to design them with the same goal as planes - you don't throw it away every time.

It's an iterative process. basically they will keep launching stages, see what's broken, and then replace it with something that can launch a few more launch cycles than the original.

Even without any data from landed stages, spacex said that their 1st recovered stage "could have" been refueled and launched the next day. So it probably won't be long until stuff gets reflown quite often

There is a graphics glitch on the pole.... Must be a stressy day for spacex

>>58484629
texture wrapping is difficult AF. you try and put a rectangular texture on a sphere, and weird shit happens unless you use the proper algorithm.

Usually at the "poles" of a object the texture freaks out. It makes sense then that the earth's poles are the location of the weirdness.

t. took a bunch of 3d graphic design classes

>>58484460
Actually no, the first stage was tested and at vandy before the Amos mishap, it was taken back to Hawthorne for some retrofitting of which we don't know the details but it's still the same old falcon 9 stage one

>>58484692
But didnt the guy at the beginning say that they modified it so it could hold helium at higher temperatures?

>>58484717
meaning it's a new rocket off of the assembly line, and they made some changes to it.

right now they are on block 4 F9. block 5, the final block according to SpaceX, is coming soon

>>58484717
They modified the loading procedure from what is understood, any future stages like the ones for echostar, CRS 10, ses-10 is reuse and then whatever is beyond do have slightly modified copv's but that's it

>>58484739
block means "version"?

What happens after block 5? They just stop developing it and keep using the same one?

>>58484768
Block 5 is when the design is meant to reach maturity for a while and also when falcon 9 cores become interchangable with falcon heavy side cores, of which the current ones aren't, however for the falcon heavy demo flight they are modifying at least one of the returned stages to be a side core

SEPERATION SOON

When's the explosion

>people think the landing is real

all hollywood cgi

So, when the whole network is online and all 70 sats are up, will you be able to see them every night? They sadly dont make flares, right?

>>58484899
They do not as astronmers hate the iridium flares and have been very vocal about it, however the flares from the old sats will still be around for another 2 or more years depending on how long deorbiting them takes

>>58484890
next launch is at January 26, 2017

File: vandebergh_kh111.jpg (104KB, 610x458px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 610x458px

>>58484899
yeah, they unfortunately do not make flares. Sat watching is a cool hobby though - with the proper equipment you can snap some neat pics

we've deduced what some spy sats are doing though amateur photography

>>58484950
are these your pics? Is the equipment expensive? And does it work in rather urban regions?

>>58484970
not mine. but all you need is low light pollution and a ~10" telescope. And patience.

You'll need to know how to decipher this as well if you want to actually find any sats

http://www.calsky.com/csrender.cgi?object=Satellite&number=3&obs=14543647303162&tdt=2455339.50512939&sat=26934

(that's for the spy sat in the pic)

Honoraburu dispray

Did the guy expect the camera to be switched off?