4 ms·
"A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket, which would power the Dragon V2 capsule, exploded during an Aug. 22 test flight. Musk said afterward in a Twitter post: “Rockets are
by teleclimber 12y ago
"A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket, which would power the Dragon V2 capsule, exploded during an Aug. 22 test flight. Musk said afterward in a Twitter post: “Rockets are tricky.”"
Am I the only one who finds this a bit misleading? That was a highly experimental version of the 9 that failed. And it failed while trying to do something no rocket this size has ever done. It seems that would be worth mentioning.
Next paragraph:
"The Atlas V boosters chosen by Boeing have a flawless record launching high-priced military payloads."
...yet the google finds me this:
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1222 http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1222
"Two top secret National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) ocean surveillance spacecraft were fired into the wrong orbit June 15 when the 200-foot-tall Atlas V rocket they were riding on stopped firing too early in space following launch from Cape Canaveral, Fla."
I guess I'm not surprised the media is uninformed (or biased) but it still ticks me off enough that I feel the need to point it out.
- ChuckMcM 12y agoBecause its a press release and Boeing is a partner. They didn't mention the Atlas V is built using RD-180[1] (aka Russian engines) even though much of the discussion is about not begin dependent on the Russians for access to space. Or that the expected cost per launch is not cost competitive. But the good news is that doesn't matter, what matters is how well both companies execute against the objective of a reliable manned launch capability. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V
- teleclimber 12y agoWhere did you get that this was a press release? FTA: "To contact the reporter on this story: Julie Johnsson in Chicago at jjohnsson@bloomberg.net"
- ChuckMcM 12y agoTo be perfectly clear I am just assumed it was, my assumption is that Boeing issues a press release with some talking points, the reporter reads it and rephrases it in their own words and that goes out on the wire. What results are pretty much the same words and talking points in a number of stories. But looking at the 'official' release here : http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2014-09-16-Boeing-CST-100-Selected-as-Next-American-Spacecraft http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2014-09-16-Boeing-CST-100-Select... and NASA's release here: http://www.nasa.gov/press/2014/september/nasa-chooses-american-companies-to-transport-us-astronauts-to-international/ http://www.nasa.gov/press/2014/september/nasa-chooses-americ... I could believe its just the reporter's take on the day's news
- jacobolus 12y agoThat was mentioned: > The Atlas V boosters chosen by Boeing have a long history of launching high-priced military payloads. The challenge: The United Launch Alliance rockets rely on Russian-made RD-180 engines whose availability is threatened by tensions between the U.S. and Russia.
- hop 12y agoI wondered that too. She's written 8 articles for Bloomberg and 7 of them are about Boeing - all in a positive light. Imagine she has the ear of Boeing PR. http://www.businessweek.com/authors/2763-julie-johnsson http://www.businessweek.com/authors/2763-julie-johnsson
- dragonwriter 12y ago> Imagine she has the ear of Boeing PR. Seems more like vice versa.
- teleclimber 12y agoGood catch. She's in Chicago too, which is where Boeing is headquartered.
- mercury888 12y agohmm shes probably on payroll. Bloomberg is sort of a catch22 with musk. They try to highlight him as much as possible, even so far as to over praise him with really stupid matters. Then one little mistake or negativity, it is blown up and seriously investigated and written about.
- grondilu 12y agoIt's not too surprising to see businessweek displaying a slight preference for Boeing over SpaceX, considering the former is public while the latter is private. Investors do prefer public companies for obvious reasons.
- tristanb 12y agoHas anyone contacted the author or editor? This kind of shoddy "journalism" annoys me.
- girvo 12y agoI once sent a polite email to an Australian journalist who was reporting on a tech topic, which he got rather wrong. He sent a very large, very rude and very nasty email back. I was a bit taken aback, and so I never bother anymore.
- readerrrr 12y agoThat was probably his goal. In those cases you should simply publish the conversation and keep moving.
- rodgerd 12y agoSam Varghese, by any chance?
- girvo 12y agoY'know, I think it might have been. I'm going to go spelunking in my old GMail account and see if I can find it, because now I'm curious.
- smackfu 12y agoIs NRO technically military?
- kevinastone 12y agoIt's part of the US Intelligence community, so it depends on your definition of the military. In practical terms, the answer is yes. It's mostly staffed from the Air Force and CIA.
- lutorm 12y agoThe Air Force handles all US government launches except NASA's.
- Crito 12y agoThey are under the DoD, which is typically a good way of figuring out if an agency should be considered military.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- Ankaios 12y agoNo, the Centaur upper stage is a standard part of an Atlas V. All Atlas V vehicles use Centaur second stages. Since the Centaur failed, part of the Atlas V system failed.
- throwaway_yy2Di 12y agoYou're right! My mistake.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- teleclimber 12y agoYes you are correct. I noticed that after re-reading the article. However I feel my point still stands. If the reporter is going to draw a fine point on what an Atlas 5 is, they could do the same for a falcon 9. Edit - - nevermind! See comment below.
- chaostheory 12y agoThis article is submarine PR for Boeing. http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
- snowwrestler 12y agoSubmarine PR is when a company manufactures news out of nothing and gets the press to cover it. This contract is actually news. If this story was shaped by Boeing PR, it's just straight ahead regular PR.
- chaostheory 12y agoSubmarine PR is always news. It's not always 'manufactured'. It's just happens to be coverage that subtly puts the client in a better light.
- alexjeffrey 12y agothat's just PR - PR companies wouldn't do so well if they pushed stories that showed their clients in a negative light.
- Vanayad 12y agoIt seems that quote is missing now. She might have corrected it. Good job!
- grondilu 12y agoThe sentence does mention it was a test flight. Maybe "experimental" would have been more accurate a word than "test", but that's just arguing over details. This sentence was not misleading and was basically stating facts.
- andygates 12y agoNot really, the dev vehicle had, for example, three not nine engines and critically had only one or a particular sensor where the real thing has three; the fault that exploded the test vehicle would have been outvoted by the other two redundant systems on a real F9. Calling them the same invites inaccurate feelings of splodeyness.