3 ms·
For starters, that wasn't an actual launch to orbit, that's just the low altitude testing frames for landing/reusability. It was deliberately destroyed as a sa
by will_hughes 12y ago
For starters, that wasn't an actual launch to orbit, that's just the low altitude testing frames for landing/reusability.
It was deliberately destroyed as a safety measure because the rocket was moving out of the testing zone and the onboard system wasn't able to compensate fast enough.
Apparently Elon and a few others were a little annoyed that more (appropriate) risk wasn't being taken in those test flights, because they'd been 100% successful.
Secondly, their launches of the production Falcon 9's have been 100% successful (with one launch not achieving a secondary objective). Additionally, after the first three Falcon 1's, they were also 100% successful.
And finally, they launched two Falcon 9's since August 22nd: September 7th: Asiasat 6 launch (Geosync), and September 21st - Dragon CRS-4 (ISS).
- avmich 12y agoAgree. And those Merlin-1D seem to be very efficient from economical point of view. Technically they are also good - record setting for open cycle engines. However, NK-33 are closed cycle and have better Isp. Economically they also made a lot of sense for Orbital, since they were bought as already made for another project. It can be justified.