4 ms·
Did the satellite self-destruct or something? The article seems to imply the rocket and payload reached its first goal orbit of 202 miles (to deliver another s
by United857 14y ago
Did the satellite self-destruct or something? The article seems to imply the rocket and payload reached its first goal orbit of 202 miles (to deliver another separate payload to the ISS).
At that altitude, while short of the 466 miles desired, it still should have taken months or years for the orbit to decay and re-enter the atmosphere!
- david_shaw 14y agoThe primary objective was to reach the ISS, which it did successfully. From there, it was to launch the satellite. From the article: > To ensure the station's safety, the agreement with NASA prohibited Space Exploration Technologies, or SpaceX as the privately-held California-based company is known, from restarting the rocket's second stage - needed to deliver Orbcomm's satellite to its proper orbit - if there was not at least a 99 percent chance that the rocket had enough fuel to complete the burn, said SpaceX spokeswoman Katherine Nelson. Because there was less than a 99% chance of success, SpaceX followed procedures and did not attempt to launch the satellite.
- reitzensteinm 14y agoAltitude alone isn't enough for orbit - it also needs sufficient velocity in the right direction, which presumably it didn't have. A stationary object placed 466 miles above the earth would just fall down.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- 46Bit 14y agoThe launch would be to an orbit that would decay in a short-ish time (perhaps fairly elliptical?), since SpaceX wouldn't want to leave the second stage up there long term as yet another large piece of space debris. Talking from the knowledge of a hobbyist here though, rather than an expert on such matters, so probably wrong on some counts.