luizopiloto Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 CR-7 ISS resupply mission tragically exploded 2 minutes into flight. Prior to this, SpaceX had not lost a Falcon 9 rocket (18/18).About 1 month ago, SpaceX was granted permission to launch Department of Defense (DoD) payloads. For the past 10 years, only ULA (joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Boeing) have been allowed to launch for DoD, and have been charging $200-$500 Million each flight. SpaceX has stated they will do it for $90 million, and would be able to win every open bid again them.ULA fought against this as hard as they could, paying some very powerful congressmen against this. ULA's only argument, and hope to continue their monopoly and win bids was to make a case that SpaceX was not safe enough. The only problem is that the Falcon 9 has the best track record yet.I believe ULA directly caused todays Falcon 9 rocket failure. I believe they did this using Lockheed Martin's new anti-rocket laser.Falcon9 explosion: Obs: take a look at the second stage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czvv1uoKKewHere is a demonstration video of Lockheed Martin's (ULA's) new anti-rocket laser: If you watch the Falcon 9 rocket at the moments before it is destroyed, you will see smoke/vapor coming out of the 2nd stage. Compare this to the demonstration video of the laser. They look remarkably similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Rhodan Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Laserbeams can't melt jet fuel !!!!1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) No. Just... stop it. Stop being an idiot. Nobody is immune to failure, not even SpaceX. Mistakes happen, a mistake happened yesterday, and a vehicle was lost. Do you think Challenger was shot down by the soviet union, too? SpaceX is a company comprised of real people. Real people screw up from time to time, or overlook things. Somebody screwed up and overlooked something. You don't need an idiotic conspiracy theory about corporate warfare to explain that.I'm pretty sure we have rules here against conspiracy theories, anyway. Edited June 29, 2015 by NovaSilisko Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frozen_Heart Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Are.... are you serious?There is IR footage available of the flight. A laser would show on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robotengineer Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 While I'm all for ULA going down in flames of shame, this sort of accusation is beyond reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RW-1 Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Let's add to it, the laser was aboard the X-37B, which swooped down to blow the 2nd Stg O2 tank using the mystical power of rainbow unicorns freed when the US Supreme court ruled in favor of same $ex marriages nationwide.The tank blew, I'm sure we'll find out why, but ULA wasn't involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heng Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 "[...]range of 1.5 kilometers on April 22, 2013,[...]"- from Lockheed's test"[...]altitude 32 km, speed 1km/s[...]"- from SpaceX 9 video, a few seconds before failure.While I would not categorically rule out a move like that, this would be an impressive improvement of the anti-rocket laser system within just 2 years... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryten Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Tory Bruno personally did it with his laser eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robotengineer Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Maybe it was more subtle, like loosening all the cargo in the cargo hold.../s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luizopiloto Posted June 29, 2015 Author Share Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) "You don't know the power of the dark side" - Darth VaderCorporations hate the fact of loosing 350million. Sabotage are a real thing in big corporations circle, and ULA is a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Boeing, two of the biggest military corporations in the world...I'm not telling ULA sabotaged SpaceX launch for sure... it's just a theory... a very plausible one... Edited June 29, 2015 by luizopiloto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robotengineer Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 "You don't know the power of the dark side lucrative government contracts" - Darth VaderFixed it for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sojourner Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 I thought conspiracy threads were against forum rules? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shpaget Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 They disguised a bomb as the school kids mushroom experiment, then sneaked it onboard.Obviously, ULA wants a contract for a new space station, and there is no need for one as long as ISS is up there.The bomb was supposed to go off after docking with the ISS, but the mushrooms counter-intuitively grew too fast, causing the overpressure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heng Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) I'm pretty sure we have rules here against conspiracy theories, anyway.Hmmm. not explicitly.You could construct something along this:"2.2 Forbidden content - Messages which contain, discuss or link to the following are explicitly forbidden: h) Accusatory comments that lack merit, offer no proof of concept or are of a potentially slanderous nature;"But "proof" is given (two quoted vids, plus connecting hypothesis). Not really without merit, if true. "Slanderous" depends on definition...While I disagree with the posted hypothesis, I - personally, not a mod - approve of this thread. Edited June 29, 2015 by heng typo, formatting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryten Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 This is pretty clearly slander. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwenting Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 This is pretty clearly slander.nah, only conspiracy theorists are dumb enough to believe OP. Nobody that could potentially feel slandered is stupid enough to take OP seriously and actually feel slandered... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heng Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) Come on guys. This is the "Science Labs". Not the "ban-the-user-above-you game".So, arguments given:Pro: - financially sound plan - <I leave that to someone else, lest I construct strawmen arguments>Con: - very risky, serious repercussions if caught - long range. as stated the system test was done at 1.5km, SpaceX was 20x farther (any experts? how much would a powerful laserbeam diverge?) - very fast flying target (although at that distance the angular movement would be smaller... not good with math. help?) - as Frozen_Heart pointed out: no laser visible in IR footage (*)Anything else?-- (*) PS: ohhhkay. there IS a blip in the footage (02:24/25) just seconds before failure... still not convinced, but do take note. Edited June 29, 2015 by heng PS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vger Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) Isn't it normal to have a thermal camera trained on rockets to look for irregularities in temperature?Surely a freaking death ray would not have gone unnoticed.Edit: And, Frozen beat me to it. Edited June 29, 2015 by vger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darnok Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Microwaves are visible? http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a16044/russian-anti-drone-microwave-gun/ If Russians have it... USA army doesn't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelLestat Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 I dont buy this, but in case ULA wants to sabotage a spacex mission, then it would be much easier to bribe one or two spacex technician to add a complication in the last test procedure.Which also sound kinda crazy unless spacex find strong evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
basic.syntax Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 At least, the OP states it as an opinion. But the risk is untenable, to attempt the specific OP scenario defies logic. It would be an all-or-nothing gamble. A rocket launch of this nature is observed, tracked, logged, dissected, and analyzed by incredibly smart folks. This idea has been discarded on the main SpaceX thread: This is sci-fi unlikely. It's hard enough targeting a camera at a flying rocket, but aiming a laser with such precision that it can burn through the rocket is orders of difficulty harder. If there *had* been a laser targeting the rocket, then on infrared we would have seen the rocket itself light up ahead of the exhaust trail for several seconds before it went boom. This is because it would take time for the laser to heat up the skin of the rocket sufficiently to cause structural failure. There might have been atmospheric heating effects, but we would not have seen them because the laser would be sweeping rapidly through the air, never heating any bit of air for long enough for us to see it. Adding to what softweir already said, we have indications of faulty readings in the second stage (= we know that something went wrong inside the rocket), so there is no point in even investigating if the launch could have somehow been sabotaged. If there had been a LV failure and all telemetry/internal readings were 100% fine, then you could start looking into that hypothesis, but this is not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Come on guys. This is the "Science LabsYes, exactly, which is why this thread should never have existed in the first place, but science rarely has a place in the science labs it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YNM Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) Conspiracy theory, theories that have if nothing but little merrit ? With many eyes to suggest it's not there ? What, a single failure and revert to conspiracy ?Not ban for user, should be thread lockdown. Edited June 29, 2015 by YNM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwenting Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Isn't it normal to have a thermal camera trained on rockets to look for irregularities in temperature?Surely a freaking death ray would not have gone unnoticed.Edit: And, Frozen beat me to it.sure, but NASA was "in on it" of course, and made sure that the super secret invisible ray was not seen on the footage (they probably released footage from a previous launch, or doctored it on a computer in real time, you know the same way they faked the moon landings as well...).If the launch happened at all that is, and wasn't a mass hallucination brought on by the USAF spraying the area with chemtrails after which the CIA stole the Falcon 9 rocket and hid it on their secret moon base on Mars... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frybert Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Psf, we all know Scott Manley looking at it too hard caused the problem! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts