SpaceX rocket explodes on Pad 40

[zorgon]

TRUST NASA to get you to the MOON   well maybe not This is the new moon lander  Thought they already did this??

No?

Sounds like it is crying




Seems Russians are having the same problems

[zorgon]

I gues "Rocket Science" isn't such a great field

[zorgon]

So stop blaming Aliens for mankinds miserable failure at getting us into space,  60 plus years since the NAZI made the first rockets and we are still blowing them up...

The Aliens are laughing their ass of at us (if they have an ass )

[Pimander]

The Aliens are laughing their ass of at us (if they have an ass )

David icke says they do.  Apparently they are green scaly shape shifting asses to be precise! 

I still suspect sabotage but I don't think we'll find out about it.

[Pimander]

So stop blaming Aliens for mankinds miserable failure at getting us into space,  60 plus years since the NAZI made the first rockets and we are still blowing them up...

Have you not seen Ancient Aliens?  If you can't explain something....


I reckon the fake bad hair is purely to make the aliens theme look as ridiculous as possible.  Can't they see that the majority of the UFO community don't need and help with that. LOL





I want abducting by the one in the middle please.

[Sgt.Rocknroll]

This crap happens all the time when you 'fart' your way into space.
OOOOO the aliens did it..
OOOOO it was a drone...
OOOOO it was a....?

jeessshhhh..

[spacemaverick]

hey space maverick,is beth your wife?

NO.......

[ArMaP]

I gues "Rocket Science" isn't such a great field

It's not a field in which success is guaranteed, that's for sure, but then I suppose there isn't any field with guaranteed success.

If we look at all the rockets sent to space the failure rate is still high when compared with more common (although complex) things like airplanes, but a failure rate of 8.4% (based on the data available here) is still a good failure rate for something that is still a risky business.

PS: the failure rate of the last 10 years is 5.8%.

[funbox]

Nothing has come up in the public media here in Brevard County.

not even a few crispy fried egrets ?

ill bet there's been a few over the years , do you know if they have a policy of scaring them off, pre launch? or do they just get the obligatory countdown like everyone else ?


funbox

[Pimander]

If we look at all the rockets sent to space the failure rate is still high when compared with more common (although complex) things like airplanes, but a failure rate of 8.4% (based on the data available here) is still a good failure rate for something that is still a risky business.

Considering planes have rocket engines on board don't you think that is a bit odd?

I'm still mystified as to why the standard way of reaching orbit is launching a rocket vertically from Earth.

The most sensible way would be to have an aircraft on the back of a large payload airplane and launch from high altitude.  I think Virgin tried that method but as usual anything that involves civilian space flight goes catastrophically wrong.

I am yet to have a good reason presented to me for launching in the ridiculous way they do when its safer to launch on the back of a plane.

[spacemaverick]

Considering planes have rocket engines on board don't you think that is a bit odd?

I'm still mystified as to why the standard way of reaching orbit is launching a rocket vertically from Earth.

The most sensible way would be to have an aircraft on the back of a large payload airplane and launch from high altitude.  I think Virgin tried that method but as usual anything that involves civilian space flight goes catastrophically wrong.

I am yet to have a good reason presented to me for launching in the ridiculous way they do when its safer to launch on the back of a plane.

I have wondered the same thing myself, at least for low orbit satellites.

[Pimander]

I have wondered the same thing myself, at least for low orbit satellites.

I'd even suggest that the bigger the payload is the more stupid it is to use a rocket.

I'm completely open to the idea that there is a fact I am not aware of or a genuine technical reason why not.  The costs are insane and planes are widely available.

[zorgon]

Have you not seen Ancient Aliens?  If you can't explain something....

Yes exactly. And in all these years since Roswell. we still havn't interviewed one on CNN...

Does it make sence that when you see how stupid our politicians are and inept at EVERYTHING else, that they are smart enough to cover up Aliens at a World level?

There are no Aliens

And this guys hairdo is all the rage on Centauri Prime

[ArMaP]

Considering planes have rocket engines on board don't you think that is a bit odd?

Do they? Which ones?

I'm still mystified as to why the standard way of reaching orbit is launching a rocket vertically from Earth.

The most sensible way would be to have an aircraft on the back of a large payload airplane and launch from high altitude.  I think Virgin tried that method but as usual anything that involves civilian space flight goes catastrophically wrong.

If I'm not mistaken, to reach orbit any object must reach escape velocity, which, for Earth, is 11.2 km/s (around 40,000 km/h). Escape velocity changes with the mass of the planet (Earth, in this case) and the distance between its centre and the object trying to escape its gravity, so getting a ship on the back of an airplane would give it a little help, both in speed and altitude, but not by much.

PS: escape velocity is independent of the mass of the object trying to enter orbit.

[ArMaP]

I'd even suggest that the bigger the payload is the more stupid it is to use a rocket.

It looks like Elon Musk thinks the opposite, according to this.
(look for the paragraph about horizontal air launches.