First images of the crash landing of the Falcon 9 have been published. It got *so* *close.* The hydraulics controlling the aerodynamic fins ran out before touchdown; I’m unclear on why that would cause the rocket to tip over at this point, because I’d’ve been pretty sure it’d be pretty much all-rocket control. Perhaps at the very last moment where the fins could have meaningfully bit into the air they went hard over and tipped the rocket, and the TVC system just couldn’t compensate in time.
Coming sometime in 2015. I’m only a quarter of the way through the first book, so I hope the premiere is later in 2015. And I hope Syfy does a *far* better job with “The Expanse” than they did with “Ascension.”
Person of the Year: The Notorious Mr. Putin
In December, however, Moscow signaled plans to take over the Sea Launch program and use it to collaborate with Brazil or other so-called BRICS countries… “Now, after the latest events in Ukraine, one may forget about industrial production [there], let alone high-tech manufacturing. It’s dead,” he said, citing the Sea Launch platform’s proximity to the U.S. coast near Los Angeles. “Naturally we will take it away for our own use.”
A joint US-Canada project? Sure. US-UK? Sure. US-Germany? Sure. Heck, US-Anybody-In-NATO? Sure. But teaming up with nations that have the distinct potential of nationalizing industries, or undergoing severe political reversals? Not such a wise idea.
The SpaceX Falcon 9 with a Dragon resupply module was successfully launched early this AM, an the Dragon is on its way to a rendezvous with the ISS. The first stage successfully oriented itself, guided itself successfully down to the landing barge, landed on the barge… and then either hit hard or hit and fell over. In any event, the stage was destroyed, but the barge was not. As the stage would have been destroyed if they *hadn’t* tried to recover it, it’s no great loss; as they’re still very early in the learning process, it’s still a pretty good step in the right direction. They came, almost literally, this close to making it.
Sadly, there is apparently no video of the landing due to dark and fog.
This is one of the more unlikely-looking launch vehicle designs I’ve seen… a 1961 Saturn I first stage with an S-IV second stage and a nuclear upper stage. In and of itself that’s not that unusual… but the upper stage is *really* long and thin and appears to be devoid of a recognizable payload. The result, if it managed to survive launch and bending forces, is that at burnout it would be accelerating *really* hard.
However, the great probability here is that this was not an actual serious engineering study for a launch vehicle, but instead a notional concept, useful for studying the whichness of the why regarding the use of automated systems for nuclear rocket preparation an launch.
As soon as I branched beyond just Bombers in the “US Aerospace Projects” publications, a series on launch vehicles became both inevitable and mandatory. I haven’t yet put any together, however. I’ve been thinking about how to format them. The series on Spacecraft, of which a grand total of a single issue has been released, is very eclectic, with everything from work pods to space stations to starships; I asked the “up-ship emailing list” if that worked, and the result is that the *next* issue will be focused on a single type of spacecraft, and the one after that eclectic, rinse and repeat.
For Launchers, though, I’m considering following a pattern for each issue. As with Bombers, Transports, Spacecraft and so on, each issue will cover eight vehicles. I’m considering:
1) Designs leading up to the development of the Saturn I and V
2) Designs derived *from* the Saturn I and V
3) Heavy lifters… Nova, Post-Saturn and beyond
4) Aerospaceplanes of various types (airbreathing and non, just so’s they’re launch vehicles not payload)
5) early Space Shuttle designs
6) Shuttle derived vehicles
7) & 8) Misc
Here’s the thing: early Shuttle might often be *two* designs… the Booster and the Orbiter.
Comments? Complaints? Suggestions? Large bags of cash?
An image from the Chandra X_Ray Observatory merged with a Hubble optical image equals artistic awesomeness. What’s shown here is a single galaxy in the foreground with a single quasar in the distant background. In a Newtonian universe, the quasar would be hidden by the foreground galaxy, but since this is an Einsteinian universe, gravitational lensing not only brings the quasar into view, it brings it into view as four separate images. The end result sure looks like a sci-fi wormhole, just the thing you’d expect to see the Jem Hadar or Great Old Ones come squeezing through. High-rez at the link.
RX J1131-1231: Chandra & XMM-Newton Provide Direct Measurement of Distant Black Hole’s Spin
I meant to post this many hours ago, but I just spent… well, may hours in a fruitless attempt to find a report that I suddenly decided that I needed (this happens way too often). In any event… as of this writing, SpaceX is less than three hours from the next attempt to launch their Falcon 9 which will hopefully soft-land on a barge.
If you’re awake at 4:20 in the morning (mountain time), you can check of the live streaming of the launch HERE.
Hubble has taken another look at the “Pillars of Creation” in the Eagle Nebula. Much higher rez versions at the links:
In visible light:
And in near Infra Red:
—————————–
I can’t be the only one to see this: