Jump to content

ULA launch and discussion thread


tater

Recommended Posts

I'm just coming back from the 401's viewing site, everyone seemed to be pretty disappointed after all the wait (it was 7*C/44*F here)... an angry man behind my car nearly veered off the road when he passed in front of us as we were leaving the area.

Edited by XB-70A
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all the trash-talking on Twitter, I'm pretty sure ULA's launch window closes before Rocket Labs is scheduled to launch.

I just wish every space launch agency did streams as well as SpaceX, though I suspect SpaceX, which had been heavily funded by venture capital, had more to gain from good PR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a great shock to nobody, everything's operating smoothly. Only remaining issue is payload separation, and that is a pretty unlikely failure mode.

Incidentally, for those who may have missed this, Rocket Lab is streaming their attempt to launch "Still Testing", their second lightweight Electron booster.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Tory Bruno tweeted to KSP (about spending a few hours playing it) yesterday, and KSP has made a tweet since then, but not replied. Unreal.

He seems like a genuinely cool guy, even if he's CEO of "old space," ULA is certainly "If it absolutely, positively, needs to get to space today."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Kerbal01 said:

this the thread for this tweet?

 

also: CEO of the most reliable launch provider this century; can't take a screenshot.

The fact that he is the CEO doesn't mean he is a computer expert.  Quite the reverse, he didn't grow up with computers the way you and I did.  CEOs don't design rockets, they manage the company. 

His record speaks for itself, and kudos to him for playing KSP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
1 hour ago, sevenperforce said:

I may be missing something earlier upthread, but has there been much discussion of ULA's "SMART" reuse plan? They claim dramatic cost savings over the booster-landing method.

Which makes no sense, whatsoever, lol. I can see it offering them dramatic cost savings over throwing everything in the ocean, but how could they claim it's a better savings than landing and full reuse of that stage?

The proof will be if ULA charges less per kg to LEO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, tater said:

Which makes no sense, whatsoever, lol. I can see it offering them dramatic cost savings over throwing everything in the ocean, but how could they claim it's a better savings than landing and full reuse of that stage?

The proof will be if ULA charges less per kg to LEO.

I'm suspicious of their numbers as well.

That being said, the baseline Vulcan is supposed to be pretty darn cheap:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, insert_name said:

Some excellent photography of the Atlas V in that article: a lot of images of transporting and erecting the core stage, the boosters, the Centaur, and finally the payload.

Here's to a successful launch of GOES-S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...