7 ms·

SpaceX Successfully Completes First Mission to Geostationary Transfer Orbit

262 points by jamesmoss 13y ago

mehmehshoe 13y ago
I am so glad this went well. Too bad it did not happen on Thanksgiving. I had my laptop out and had all the kids looking over my shoulder watching the two launch attempts. Doing my part to get the younger ones interested. Nice picture from the space-x site- http://www.spacex.com/media-gallery/detail/90781/2601 http://www.spacex.com/media-gallery/detail/90781/2601
- mdaniel 13y ago
  Thanks so much for posting that link. I saw the streak picture from another commenter, and wondered if there was a high-res version. It's so beautiful that I would have it on my wall, but I doubt it would print out nearly as nicely as it appears on-screen.
- Idiosyncra3y 13y ago
  I was there on the Monday before Thanksgiving and was really disappointed that it didn't happen then.
- MrZongle2 13y ago
  * I had my laptop out and had all the kids looking over my shoulder watching the two launch attempts.* Yep, same here! Thank goodness for Kerbal Space Program. It's a marvelous backup.
- speleding 13y ago
  That picture works really well as a desktop wallpaper (hi-res, dark, not too much contrast)
deletes 13y ago
Two cool pictures from the flight: http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/styles/media_gallery_large/public/launch_streak.jpg?itok=iGCSBDgq http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/styles/media_galler... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BamdsH0IIAA-W_b.jpg:large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BamdsH0IIAA-W_b.jpg:large
- TallGuyShort 13y ago
  I love the views they broadcast of the engine bell. Takes on an eerie, transparent luminescence several minutes into the fight. Thanks for sharing.
some_guy_there 13y ago
Can anyone explain why they placed the satellite in 295x80 000 km orbit? Is it especially hard to place satellites directly into geostationary orbit, or something else?
- zrail 13y ago
  Yeah, going straight to GEO isn't very efficient. Instead SpaceX (and most other commercial operations) insert the satellite into GTO and then the satellite's operators take over and do the final burn into GEO.
- whatshisface 13y ago
  It takes less energy to change your orbital inclination (think "angle") from the orbit they are putting it in than from geosynchronous. Once it reaches the right inclination, they will put into the final orbit having used less fuel than they would have if they had launched it directly.
- ubernostrum 13y ago
  So, orbits are weird. As in, "burning your engines in space almost never does what you'd intuitively expect based on a lifetime on Earth with things like cars and planes" weird. In order to get geostationary, you need to get to a circular orbit at an altitude of 35,786km above Earth's surface. Trying to do that all in one burn is, I guess, theoretically possible but is going to waste an absurd amount of fuel. The reason for this is that changing altitude in orbit = changing your speed. Specifically, you have two points you care about: your apogee (highest altitude) and your perigee (lowest altitude). To raise your apogee in the most efficient manner, you accelerate prograde (in the direction of your orbit), at perigee. To raise perigee in the most efficient manner, you accelerate prograde at apogee. Or, more simply: what you do at a certain point in your orbit will end up affecting what happens at the point in your orbit that's precisely opposite the point where you did something. So the most efficient way to get up there is to use a transfer orbit. First you get into a lower, "parking" orbit (which doesn't take as much fuel as going all the way up in one go). Then at perigee you burn to raise your apogee out to the altitude you want. Then you cruise to apogee, and burn again to raise your perigee, resulting in a circular orbit. Here's a detailed article on that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hohmann_transfer_orbit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hohmann_transfer_orbit Except it never goes quite that simply in the real world, so you actually end up doing more than two engine burns, but under ideal theoretical circumstances, you'd do it in two.
pvnick 13y ago
SpaceX is the company that really makes Elon Musk a role model for me. I find everything they do inspirational. I must have watched that video of their employees outside mission control watching the falcon 9 launch a dozen times [1]. You should see the lines of students at my university's career fair when they come, you almost can't even see the recruiters behind the sea of undergrads swarming their booth. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XtD-5L7cLk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XtD-5L7cLk
- bhauer 13y ago
  Agreed! I love watching the videos because I live in Hawthorne, which is a very modest suburb of Los Angeles (where homes in the safer neighborhoods are only $700k). So when they say things like "Hawthorne Control," it makes me proud of this town and hope for a little bit of a coattails effect for the Hawthorne airport vicinity.
- hga 13y ago
  Due to Space-X's approach and achievements I find myself excited by space for the time since the early '70s when Apollo ended and it was clear nothing much would come from NASA for the foreseeable future. OK, staying up and watching Neptune All Night in 1989 as our first and last probe for it, Voyager 2, flew past it, and we received the first pictures was cool, but Space-X is about seriously getting out into space potentially in an long term economical way.
mdaniel 13y ago
I have a deeper appreciation for the amount of work that goes into an operation like that after having bought [Kerbal Space Program](https://kerbalspaceprogram.com/ https://kerbalspaceprogram.com/) and its mobile companion [Simple Rockets](http://jundroo.com/project/simplerockets/ http://jundroo.com/project/simplerockets/). Engaging with those simulations also makes watching movies like "Apollo 13" into a whole new experience, too. Congratulations to everyone involved, and I can't wait to see what they do next.
slackpad 13y ago
It's cool to see so many people excited about this launch. Just wanted to remind people that we have a lot of software job openings right now. People are often surprised to learn that SpaceX is hiring web developers -http://www.spacex.com/careers/position/3890 http://www.spacex.com/careers/position/3890. There are some interesting internal tools projects that are critical parts of each mission. We have embedded developer, PM, and test roles open as well.
- dhughes 13y ago
  What about janitors? I'm sure I could clean up the poop! I think I'm the reverse of (Gattaca) Ethan Hawke in this situation.
- outworlder 13y ago
  The fact that SpaceX is hiring web developers is not surprising per-se. The fact that it is a 'frontend' position and that page says it's 'avionics' - that is surprising indeed.
  - dasmoth 13y ago
    I think there might actually be a bit of a scope for some public-side web development that interfaces (indirectly!) with the avionics. Some other launch providers do animations based on vehicle telemetry once the vehicle is out of range. Last night, SpaceX just showed a static image. Given that there's a lot of interest in their webcasts, I imagine they'd like to do better at some point... [Edit: kind-of wonder if they're using a certain amount of in-house webapp stuff for mission planning, etc., as well]
    - outworlder 13y ago
      Yeah, I did expect to see some telemetry. At least, the orbital parameters. SpaceX should just provide an API for that, we'll build the rest ;)
      - toomuchtodo 13y ago
Killah911 13y ago
It was quite amazing to watch the launch, it was right at sundown so the colors left by the exhaust looked different. Here's a pic: http://twitter.com/AhmedRezaT/status/408004729201897472/photo/1 http://twitter.com/AhmedRezaT/status/408004729201897472/phot...
nortlov 13y ago
Let's give it up for the payload too! Orbital Sciences' SES8!
everyone 13y ago
I dont like spaceXs propoganda department. I believe this is a difference between a public and a private space program. SpaceX seem to cover up any hiccups or issues they have and always present this saccharine sweet 'flawless' report of their missions. Thats dishonest and just not scientific imo.
- InclinedPlane 13y ago
  They seem to be incredibly open to me. They have been very transparent about pretty much every hiccup and misstep they've had in any flight. I think you are comparing them to an ideal which has never existed in reality.
  - everyone 13y ago
    They cut the live feed when an issue came up on one of their dragon capsule launches.
    - zackbloom 13y ago
      You don't think NASA wouldn't have cut the feed on the Challenger disaster if they could have?
      - rplnt 13y ago
        Perhaps, but there were people on Challenger. Not that it would look any different on cameras...
      - twistedpair 13y ago
        They did cut the feed. The actual video feed kept going until range control fired the FTS to destroy the SRB's that kept flying along after the shuttle was blown apart. You didn't get to see that back in the 80's. That footage had only recently been released.
    - ghshephard 13y ago
      There is a little bit of hyperbole involved when you have an issue with them cutting the live feed on one of their missions and then claiming: "SpaceX seem to cover up any hiccups or issues they have and always present this saccharine sweet 'flawless' report of their missions. " You may want to dial it back a few notches - trust me, I tend to reach for the hyperbole a little too quickly myself. (Note - I read subscribe to Elon Musk's twitter feed, and he's a lot more balanced on SpaceX than he is on Tesla)
2na 13y ago
I LOVE the job openings on SpaceX careers page, they are literally looking for rocket scientists :-) http://www.spacex.com/careers/list http://www.spacex.com/careers/list
- danparsonson 13y ago
  It's not exactly brain surgery though https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THNPmhBl-8I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THNPmhBl-8I
InclinedPlane 13y ago
It's easy to miss how important this launch is. SpaceX builds rockets but lots of organizations around the world have built and continue to build rockets that do everything that this rocket did, and sometimes more. But in some ways that's also why this launch is impressive. SpaceX is a private company that has developed its launch vehicles outside of a conventional government procurement program, on their own terms. The typical way that anything gets done in the space launch business is that a government organization develops plans and dedicates a budget and then contracts with companies for procurement. In the end it's still a private company developing a launch vehicle whether it's Lockheed-Martin or SpaceX so again this may seem very similar on the surface. But the differences in character have a huge number of effects. Government directed development is bureaucratic, it's expensive, it's risk averse, and it's often inflicted with institutional superstitions and fads. Even worse it tends to rely on a "big design up front" or "waterfall" development model. Commercial development tends to be extremely pragmatic and iterative, leading to improved results. Look at the Atlas V and Delta IV for example. Both have been in service for about a decade, after being developed through a government procurement program, and both have not seen significant changes in their design during their operational period. Compare that to the story at SpaceX who have developed 5 different rocket engines and 5 different launchers in the decade or so they've been operating. The SES-8 launch represents only the second launch of a new iteration of the Falcon 9 rocket, the v1.1, which uses new engines, a new thrust support structure, stretched fuel tanks, a new ignition system, and is designed to be capable of re-use of the first stage with the addition of landing legs. Let's imagine a hypothetical parallel universe SpaceX. They could have put a Falcon Heavy into production based on the Falcon 9 v1 core, or they could have made less ambitious changes to the Falcon 9 v1.1 while retaining the same performance levels. With such a lineup they would still have a very bright financial future ahead of them. Their low manufacturing and operational costs enable them to offer similar launch services to the competition at much lower prices. With the offerings I've described SpaceX could easily become a multi-billion dollar company with very healthy profit margins. But SpaceX has grander ambitions than just making money, they want to open up the spaceflight market and they want to kickstart manned exploration of Mars. This mission is a bit of a demonstration that their ambition has not gone too far, that they are actually capable of delivering on their promises and, crucially, that they can deliver satellite payloads to orbit just as well as anyone. What does that mean? In the simplest sense it means that SpaceX's bank account is going to get pretty fat over the next few years. A corporation getting wealthy isn't a big deal right? Except in this case that profit isn't just going to be spent on yachts and mansions and private jets, much of it will be re-invested in the company in order to further the company's (and its founder's) vision. At most rocket companies making rockets is an excuse to make money. At SpaceX making money is an excuse to make more rockets. They're going to develop and prove reusability of the Falcon 9 v1.1 first stage "live" as it were using operational missions. They've already used operational cargo delivery missions to flight-proof a substantial portion of the manned capsule hardware they've been working on. Over the next few years they are going to bring into service first stage reusability, the Falcon Heavy (and then later bring reusability into that platform as well), and the manned Dragon. Meanwhile they're developing LOX/Methane fueled engines for their next generation launchers which should be highly reusable (since Methane burns so cleanly) and be targeted at Manned Mars missions. Most space launch companies are content with sitting at comfortable plateaus and waiting for government encouragement, and funding, to step up to the next plateau, but SpaceX is a company that has constant innovation in its blood. This mission validates the work they've done and their development style while also providing a huge signal to the industry that SpaceX is a reliable carrier. Which will help to funnel a lot more business their way and give them more excuses to build and develop more rockets, culminating in launch costs a fraction of what is possible today and catalyzing manned exploration of the Solar System.
ChuckMcM 13y ago
Very cool, anyone know if there were any cubesats on this mission? I have a fantasy about putting a cubesat in geosync orbit that I could ping from a converted Dish or DirectTV antenna.
dba7dba 13y ago
I'm glad spacex.com website looks more modern. Congrats by the way. :)

262 points by jamesmoss 13y ago

I am so glad this went well. Too bad it did not happen on Thanksgiving. I had my laptop out and had all the kids looking over my shoulder watching the two launch attempts. Doing my part to get the younger ones interested. Nice picture from the space-x site- http://www.spacex.com/media-gallery/detail/90781/2601 http://www.spacex.com/media-gallery/detail/90781/2601

mdaniel 13y ago
Thanks so much for posting that link. I saw the streak picture from another commenter, and wondered if there was a high-res version. It's so beautiful that I would have it on my wall, but I doubt it would print out nearly as nicely as it appears on-screen.
Idiosyncra3y 13y ago
I was there on the Monday before Thanksgiving and was really disappointed that it didn't happen then.
MrZongle2 13y ago
* I had my laptop out and had all the kids looking over my shoulder watching the two launch attempts.* Yep, same here! Thank goodness for Kerbal Space Program. It's a marvelous backup.
speleding 13y ago
That picture works really well as a desktop wallpaper (hi-res, dark, not too much contrast)

deletes 13y ago

Two cool pictures from the flight: http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/styles/media_gallery_large/public/launch_streak.jpg?itok=iGCSBDgq http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/styles/media_galler... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BamdsH0IIAA-W_b.jpg:large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BamdsH0IIAA-W_b.jpg:large

TallGuyShort 13y ago
I love the views they broadcast of the engine bell. Takes on an eerie, transparent luminescence several minutes into the fight. Thanks for sharing.

some_guy_there 13y ago

Can anyone explain why they placed the satellite in 295x80 000 km orbit? Is it especially hard to place satellites directly into geostationary orbit, or something else?

zrail 13y ago
Yeah, going straight to GEO isn't very efficient. Instead SpaceX (and most other commercial operations) insert the satellite into GTO and then the satellite's operators take over and do the final burn into GEO.
whatshisface 13y ago
It takes less energy to change your orbital inclination (think "angle") from the orbit they are putting it in than from geosynchronous. Once it reaches the right inclination, they will put into the final orbit having used less fuel than they would have if they had launched it directly.
ubernostrum 13y ago
So, orbits are weird. As in, "burning your engines in space almost never does what you'd intuitively expect based on a lifetime on Earth with things like cars and planes" weird. In order to get geostationary, you need to get to a circular orbit at an altitude of 35,786km above Earth's surface. Trying to do that all in one burn is, I guess, theoretically possible but is going to waste an absurd amount of fuel. The reason for this is that changing altitude in orbit = changing your speed. Specifically, you have two points you care about: your apogee (highest altitude) and your perigee (lowest altitude). To raise your apogee in the most efficient manner, you accelerate prograde (in the direction of your orbit), at perigee. To raise perigee in the most efficient manner, you accelerate prograde at apogee. Or, more simply: what you do at a certain point in your orbit will end up affecting what happens at the point in your orbit that's precisely opposite the point where you did something. So the most efficient way to get up there is to use a transfer orbit. First you get into a lower, "parking" orbit (which doesn't take as much fuel as going all the way up in one go). Then at perigee you burn to raise your apogee out to the altitude you want. Then you cruise to apogee, and burn again to raise your perigee, resulting in a circular orbit. Here's a detailed article on that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hohmann_transfer_orbit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hohmann_transfer_orbit Except it never goes quite that simply in the real world, so you actually end up doing more than two engine burns, but under ideal theoretical circumstances, you'd do it in two.

pvnick 13y ago

SpaceX is the company that really makes Elon Musk a role model for me. I find everything they do inspirational. I must have watched that video of their employees outside mission control watching the falcon 9 launch a dozen times [1]. You should see the lines of students at my university's career fair when they come, you almost can't even see the recruiters behind the sea of undergrads swarming their booth. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XtD-5L7cLk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XtD-5L7cLk

bhauer 13y ago
Agreed! I love watching the videos because I live in Hawthorne, which is a very modest suburb of Los Angeles (where homes in the safer neighborhoods are only $700k). So when they say things like "Hawthorne Control," it makes me proud of this town and hope for a little bit of a coattails effect for the Hawthorne airport vicinity.
hga 13y ago
Due to Space-X's approach and achievements I find myself excited by space for the time since the early '70s when Apollo ended and it was clear nothing much would come from NASA for the foreseeable future. OK, staying up and watching Neptune All Night in 1989 as our first and last probe for it, Voyager 2, flew past it, and we received the first pictures was cool, but Space-X is about seriously getting out into space potentially in an long term economical way.

mdaniel 13y ago

I have a deeper appreciation for the amount of work that goes into an operation like that after having bought [Kerbal Space Program](https://kerbalspaceprogram.com/ https://kerbalspaceprogram.com/) and its mobile companion [Simple Rockets](http://jundroo.com/project/simplerockets/ http://jundroo.com/project/simplerockets/). Engaging with those simulations also makes watching movies like "Apollo 13" into a whole new experience, too. Congratulations to everyone involved, and I can't wait to see what they do next.

slackpad 13y ago

It's cool to see so many people excited about this launch. Just wanted to remind people that we have a lot of software job openings right now. People are often surprised to learn that SpaceX is hiring web developers -http://www.spacex.com/careers/position/3890 http://www.spacex.com/careers/position/3890. There are some interesting internal tools projects that are critical parts of each mission. We have embedded developer, PM, and test roles open as well.

dhughes 13y ago
What about janitors? I'm sure I could clean up the poop! I think I'm the reverse of (Gattaca) Ethan Hawke in this situation.
outworlder 13y ago
The fact that SpaceX is hiring web developers is not surprising per-se. The fact that it is a 'frontend' position and that page says it's 'avionics' - that is surprising indeed.
- dasmoth 13y ago
  I think there might actually be a bit of a scope for some public-side web development that interfaces (indirectly!) with the avionics. Some other launch providers do animations based on vehicle telemetry once the vehicle is out of range. Last night, SpaceX just showed a static image. Given that there's a lot of interest in their webcasts, I imagine they'd like to do better at some point... [Edit: kind-of wonder if they're using a certain amount of in-house webapp stuff for mission planning, etc., as well]
  - outworlder 13y ago
    Yeah, I did expect to see some telemetry. At least, the orbital parameters. SpaceX should just provide an API for that, we'll build the rest ;)
    - toomuchtodo 13y ago

Killah911 13y ago

It was quite amazing to watch the launch, it was right at sundown so the colors left by the exhaust looked different. Here's a pic: http://twitter.com/AhmedRezaT/status/408004729201897472/photo/1 http://twitter.com/AhmedRezaT/status/408004729201897472/phot...

nortlov 13y ago

Let's give it up for the payload too! Orbital Sciences' SES8!

everyone 13y ago

I dont like spaceXs propoganda department. I believe this is a difference between a public and a private space program. SpaceX seem to cover up any hiccups or issues they have and always present this saccharine sweet 'flawless' report of their missions. Thats dishonest and just not scientific imo.

InclinedPlane 13y ago
They seem to be incredibly open to me. They have been very transparent about pretty much every hiccup and misstep they've had in any flight. I think you are comparing them to an ideal which has never existed in reality.
- everyone 13y ago
  They cut the live feed when an issue came up on one of their dragon capsule launches.
  - zackbloom 13y ago
    You don't think NASA wouldn't have cut the feed on the Challenger disaster if they could have?
    - rplnt 13y ago
      Perhaps, but there were people on Challenger. Not that it would look any different on cameras...
    - twistedpair 13y ago
      They did cut the feed. The actual video feed kept going until range control fired the FTS to destroy the SRB's that kept flying along after the shuttle was blown apart. You didn't get to see that back in the 80's. That footage had only recently been released.
  - ghshephard 13y ago
    There is a little bit of hyperbole involved when you have an issue with them cutting the live feed on one of their missions and then claiming: "SpaceX seem to cover up any hiccups or issues they have and always present this saccharine sweet 'flawless' report of their missions. " You may want to dial it back a few notches - trust me, I tend to reach for the hyperbole a little too quickly myself. (Note - I read subscribe to Elon Musk's twitter feed, and he's a lot more balanced on SpaceX than he is on Tesla)

2na 13y ago

I LOVE the job openings on SpaceX careers page, they are literally looking for rocket scientists :-) http://www.spacex.com/careers/list http://www.spacex.com/careers/list

danparsonson 13y ago
It's not exactly brain surgery though https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THNPmhBl-8I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THNPmhBl-8I

InclinedPlane 13y ago

It's easy to miss how important this launch is. SpaceX builds rockets but lots of organizations around the world have built and continue to build rockets that do everything that this rocket did, and sometimes more. But in some ways that's also why this launch is impressive. SpaceX is a private company that has developed its launch vehicles outside of a conventional government procurement program, on their own terms. The typical way that anything gets done in the space launch business is that a government organization develops plans and dedicates a budget and then contracts with companies for procurement. In the end it's still a private company developing a launch vehicle whether it's Lockheed-Martin or SpaceX so again this may seem very similar on the surface. But the differences in character have a huge number of effects. Government directed development is bureaucratic, it's expensive, it's risk averse, and it's often inflicted with institutional superstitions and fads. Even worse it tends to rely on a "big design up front" or "waterfall" development model. Commercial development tends to be extremely pragmatic and iterative, leading to improved results. Look at the Atlas V and Delta IV for example. Both have been in service for about a decade, after being developed through a government procurement program, and both have not seen significant changes in their design during their operational period. Compare that to the story at SpaceX who have developed 5 different rocket engines and 5 different launchers in the decade or so they've been operating. The SES-8 launch represents only the second launch of a new iteration of the Falcon 9 rocket, the v1.1, which uses new engines, a new thrust support structure, stretched fuel tanks, a new ignition system, and is designed to be capable of re-use of the first stage with the addition of landing legs. Let's imagine a hypothetical parallel universe SpaceX. They could have put a Falcon Heavy into production based on the Falcon 9 v1 core, or they could have made less ambitious changes to the Falcon 9 v1.1 while retaining the same performance levels. With such a lineup they would still have a very bright financial future ahead of them. Their low manufacturing and operational costs enable them to offer similar launch services to the competition at much lower prices. With the offerings I've described SpaceX could easily become a multi-billion dollar company with very healthy profit margins. But SpaceX has grander ambitions than just making money, they want to open up the spaceflight market and they want to kickstart manned exploration of Mars. This mission is a bit of a demonstration that their ambition has not gone too far, that they are actually capable of delivering on their promises and, crucially, that they can deliver satellite payloads to orbit just as well as anyone. What does that mean? In the simplest sense it means that SpaceX's bank account is going to get pretty fat over the next few years. A corporation getting wealthy isn't a big deal right? Except in this case that profit isn't just going to be spent on yachts and mansions and private jets, much of it will be re-invested in the company in order to further the company's (and its founder's) vision. At most rocket companies making rockets is an excuse to make money. At SpaceX making money is an excuse to make more rockets. They're going to develop and prove reusability of the Falcon 9 v1.1 first stage "live" as it were using operational missions. They've already used operational cargo delivery missions to flight-proof a substantial portion of the manned capsule hardware they've been working on. Over the next few years they are going to bring into service first stage reusability, the Falcon Heavy (and then later bring reusability into that platform as well), and the manned Dragon. Meanwhile they're developing LOX/Methane fueled engines for their next generation launchers which should be highly reusable (since Methane burns so cleanly) and be targeted at Manned Mars missions. Most space launch companies are content with sitting at comfortable plateaus and waiting for government encouragement, and funding, to step up to the next plateau, but SpaceX is a company that has constant innovation in its blood. This mission validates the work they've done and their development style while also providing a huge signal to the industry that SpaceX is a reliable carrier. Which will help to funnel a lot more business their way and give them more excuses to build and develop more rockets, culminating in launch costs a fraction of what is possible today and catalyzing manned exploration of the Solar System.

ChuckMcM 13y ago

Very cool, anyone know if there were any cubesats on this mission? I have a fantasy about putting a cubesat in geosync orbit that I could ping from a converted Dish or DirectTV antenna.

dba7dba 13y ago

I'm glad spacex.com website looks more modern. Congrats by the way. :)