Sign in / up

back to article SpaceX does what it HASN'T done before: Dragon in close ISS flyby

It's another moment of truth for upstart space startup SpaceX as once again the company attempts to do something that has only ever been accomplished to date by major government space agencies: docking one spacecraft to another in orbit and transferring cargo. Dragon spacecraft seen on flyby beneath ISS above the Pacific, …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections
This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: "made a close pass within 1.5 miles of the station"

            'ITAR' so, in essence, by blasting it into orbit he's already exported it from the US or are the 'Merkins laying claim to space too?

            I ask because there's a few Europeans, Russians, Chinese and assorted others who might havea bit of an issue with that.

            0 1
      2. Maty
        Reply Icon

        Re: "made a close pass within 1.5 miles of the station"

        An American spacecraft - but the *International* space station. And that's where they were watching from.

        0 0
      3. GitMeMyShootinIrons
        Reply Icon

        Re: "made a close pass within 1.5 miles of the station"

        22 American Football fields.

        You know, American Football? Like Rugby, only slower and wrapped in body armour.

        2 0
        1. Jaybus
          Reply Icon

          Re: "made a close pass within 1.5 miles of the station"

          "You know, American Football? Like Rugby, only slower and wrapped in body armour."

          Must be why an American football player won the bronze medal in the 100m at the last Olympics. Had he been a rugby player, I'm sure he would have taken gold.

          0 0
    2. Tom 13
      Reply Icon

      Re: Surely

      I believe if it were being measured in metric units it would be 2.5km/1.55 miles.

      0 1
    3. Chris 244
      Reply Icon
      Coat

      Re: Proper Units

      What is this "miles" or "km" you speak of? Clearly what we have here is a pass distance of 262 double-decker bus lengths.

      http://www.theregister.co.uk/Design/page/reg-standards-converter.html#length

      5 0
  2. MrXavia
    Go

    Good work! they can work on automated docking at a later date!\

    Lets hope their success pushes the ESA into getting a reusable capsule and maybe even some people into funding Skylon!

    0 0
    1. Vulch
      Reply Icon

      They've recently announced a partnership with Bigelow which will need docking rather than berthing.

      1 0
  3. Dr. Mouse
    Thumb Up

    Well done SpaceX!

    There's still a long way to go, but they have made remarkable progress. Kudos!

    But WRT:

    "Such a launch abort capability is regarded as essential for manned flight, given the nature of launch rocket stacks (essentially huge lightweight towers packed with volatile explosive fuels, which will be set on fire and subjected to enormous stresses, heat and vibration)."

    It often amuses me that, although we have come so far in terms of technology, we are launching things & people into space using basically the same technology as Chinese 10th-century fireworks: A lightweight tube filled with fuel and set alight. I know it's a lot more complex than that, but we send our astronauts into space using a huge firework.

    2 1
    1. Anomynous Coward
      Reply Icon

      "we send our astronauts into space using a huge firework"

      I am going to be so excited when we have any other way of doing it.

      5 0
      1. jai
        Reply Icon

        space elevators damnit! how hard can it be????

        1 0
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          "space elevators damnit! how hard can it be????"

          A 72,000 mile long rope that needs to be strong enough to take it's own weight and support the force and weight exerted by a vehicle trying to accelerate up it to orbital velocity.

          1 1
        2. Crisp
          Reply Icon

          Space Elevators

          They are quite hard to build from what I hear.

          0 0
          1. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Space Elevators

            Not really - built one last week from LEGO. Had to take it down as the neighbours complained about it being "way too tall" and them not wanting the area turned into "some sort of freakish space-port thingummy-jig".

            I'll build another one when they are on holiday :-)

            2 0
    2. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Well done SpaceX!

      Well there are ion drives http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_thruster

      Or Inpulse engines, as I like to think of them

      Suitable for space use but not ready for lift-off quite yet

      1 0
  4. Winkypop Silver badge
    Thumb Up

    As a kid, I watched the Apollo missions on TV

    For me, it spawned a life-time of awe for all things astronautical.

    Go SpaceX

    1 0
  5. AndrueC Silver badge
    Thumb Up

    I hope this works. Commercial operations in space could breath some real life back into space exploration. There's money to be made up there and money is a great incentiviser.

    3 0
  6. D@v3
    Go

    thumbs up, pats on the back, and drinks all round.

    as a (reasonably) young person, I am hugely impressed with all this private space travel nonsense. I wish them all the best of luck, and long may it continue.

    2 0
  7. Tankboy
    Pint

    Well done.

    Nice to see a private company literally putting their own money where their mouth is.

    0 1
    1. Deebster
      Reply Icon

      @literally

      You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

      2 0
    2. Charlie Clark Silver badge
      Reply Icon

      Re: Well done.

      It's not *their* money. NASA is paying for everything except on a fixed-price instead of cost-plus basis.

      0 0
      1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
        Reply Icon
        Happy

        Re: Well done.

        It's not *their* money. NASA is paying for everything except on a fixed-price instead of cost-plus basis.

        That ignores the c$500m that Spacex (mostly from Elon Musk) put up to build 5 rockets (4 of which failed) *before* achieving orbit + the F9's they have also bank rolled.

        The money that NASA has put up so far has got them *two* capsules (Orbital Science has yet to fly) plus a new launcher (the Orbital Taurus II, but I think they've changed the name as the Taurus LV was not one of their more successful designs and virtually a new build) *plus* Dreachaser (from the biggest space company nobody has ever heard of) and the Boeing CST100 moving forward.

        All for about 1/2 what NASA spunked away on the X33 b***sup.

        0 0
  8. hugo tyson
    Go

    Holding your breath

    I watched the Apollo landings as a child and whilst it was enthralling I didn't have the context to understand its importance, so I didn't get the same emotions as later on watching the very first shuttle mission - when that was a New Era dawning - not only for the safety of the people aboard, but the future of manned space travel and so of all of humanity. When it landed safely the very first time I suspect millions finally breathed again....

    I agree this has the same feeling about it. Commercialisation should open up lots of possibilities, again the future of mankind in space is at stake. Plus the heart-in-mouth feeling that if the ISS were destroyed, or nearly so, very possibly no human would go to space ever again.

    OK, I know the Chinese will, actually, and independently of the West+exUSSR, if they can, but nontheless, that's the feeling....

    0 0
  9. Ian Yates
    Pint

    Have the Vulcans seen us yet?

    n/t

    1 0
  10. Tasogare

    Is there going to be live video of the docking attempt tomorrow?

    I'm thinking of something like the stream they did of the last Shuttle mission. I'd like to see this.

    0 0
  11. Steve 114
    Thumb Up

    Tough spec.

    Good to see Lewis Page not disapproving of something. Don't get me wrong, I generally agree, but this helps recalibrate the disapproval-rating scale. Does he write for mainline papers? They too could do with a corrective dose of reality.

    0 0
    1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Reply Icon
      Happy

      Re: Tough spec.

      You forget.

      It's American.

      And not made by BAe.

      0 0
  12. Brewster's Angle Grinder Silver badge
    Trollface

    OMFG!!

    It's a Lewis Page article that doesn't use the word "boffin"!11!!!1!!11!1111!11!!11!!11!!11!!11!1!!1!11!111!

    0 1
  13. Stevie

    Bah!

    An historic moment indeed, but what an archetypical American test: order the vessel to flash lights which the tester cannot see and therefore must use telemetry to confirm have been illuminated on command.

    I remember a test between a UK and US instrument landing system for aircraft (well, I'm getting on a bit). The British had a working model but all the Americans had was a computer simulation - of the British system not working at a certain European airport.

    The British team flew out, installed the equipment at the airport in question and proceeded to land the aircraft ion instruments alone in all kinds of weather during the following week.

    The US got the contract in the end anyway. There's a moral in there somewhere.

    3 3
  14. Charlie Clark Silver badge

    Economics of reusability

    I thought the Space Shuttle demonstrated that the nice idea of reusable rockets being cheaper didn't really work with space vehicles. I can imagine it being made to do so but would like to see more information as to how this would work. Especially the idea of sending the thing up with more fuel than it needs to get to where its going.

    It's an admirable in achievement in terms of time and materials used.

    0 0
    1. Rustident Spaceniak
      Reply Icon
      Boffin

      Re: Economics of reusability

      Well charlie, the shuttle was trying to do a lot more. Dragon would essentially re-use just the capsule, which is hardly equivalent to the shuttle cockpit. All the rest - the heavy bits of machinery - still gets dumped. But for the moment, this is the realistic way to do it, like it or not. The advantage is, at least in theory, where the shuttle needed to be essentially remanufactured after each flight, this time they may actually keep most of the thing in working condition.

      Of course, Mr Musk has much greater plans, wanting to reuse everything, but I'm not holding my breath for that. Time will tell...

      0 0
      1. Charlie Clark Silver badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: Economics of reusability

        Dragon would essentially re-use just the capsule, which is hardly equivalent to the shuttle cockpit. All the rest - the heavy bits of machinery - still gets dumped. But for the moment, this is the realistic way to do it, like it or not. The advantage is, at least in theory, where the shuttle needed to be essentially remanufactured after each flight, this time they may actually keep most of the thing in working condition.

        That's pretty much my thinking and a useful clarification of the situation. I think it's why ESA doesn't bother about trying to reuse the ATV. I suspect real reuse won't really be possible until we have an easy way of getting in and out of orbit and can employ modified ship containers.

        0 0
        1. James Hughes 1
          Reply Icon

          Re: Economics of reusability

          IIRC, SpaceX currently are building a test rig for their recovery system - basically big legs on a F9 first stage judging froo the pictures. They intend to do tests this year. http://www.flickr.com/photos/9614328@N02/7246837010/

          It may not be as far away as people think.

          0 0
    2. David 164
      Reply Icon

      Re: Economics of reusability

      The whole Space X vehicle will be reusable, eventually.

      Musk is take the computer programmer route, adding features version by version, instead of trying to build a complete reusable rocket from scratch first attempt.

      In 2013 they will begin test flying the a reusable Falcon rocket but in atmosphere testing.

      Hopefully by that time out own Reaction engines will be building a prototype of the sabre engine an a test vehicle.

      1 1
    3. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Reply Icon
      Boffin

      Re: Economics of reusability

      "I thought the Space Shuttle demonstrated that the nice idea of reusable rockets being cheaper didn't really work with space vehicles"

      You'll need a few qualifications on that statement. They would include :-

      That's built to a fixed constant cost cap which took *no* account of inflation (in the 1970's).

      Part of whose goal was job preservation at a series of NASA and contractor sites in various political, constituencies.

      That would *force* the winner to develop a newer higher performance engine an an engine cycle they had no experience with.

      With a thermal protection system driven *solely* by weight consideration and thermal capacity, not cost or replaceability.

      To lift a payload 3x what NASA wanted for their internal use.

      With a cross range to fly a mission it *never* attempted and which would have probably triggered WWIII if it had.

      Under NASA's micro management culture with the *complete* authority to demand tear down and redesign if *any* thing did note meet with their complete approval.

      You might like to consider what sort of vehicle you could come up with that set of constraints.

      1 1
  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It's cold outside.

    How long before they develop a big red ship and decide to start mining Jupiter then?

    I'm pretty good at unclogging chicken soup dispenser nozzles.

    2 0
  16. Local Group
    Trollface

    "Open the pod bay doors, Hal"

    "I' sorry, Elon. I'm afraid I can't do that."

    0 1
  17. b166er

    I was just ruminating today on the idea that patents are essentially a way of preventing mankind from having access to mans collective intelligence and that patent lawyers are, in effect responsible for holding back the evolution of man. How dumb.

    So it's amazing on the one hand that private enterprise is now going to space, but on the other, just think how much sooner we could have acheived that had we not been encumbered by patents.

    So please, no patent lawyers anywhere, including space.

    I doubt many will agree with me considering the current situation regarding intellectual 'property'.

    Ours is but a small slice of life which is over all too soon, so it seems crazy to me to be held back by any encumbrances.

    Let's hope that private space enterprises can co-operate, otherwise it may take them a lot longer than it did NASA to accomplish as much as NASA did. Which is a sobering thought.

    0 0
  18. figure 11

    Master jettison control enabled

    Watch out they will be jettisoning beta grove soon!

    0 0
  19. toof4st

    Blue Danube?

    Will they get to hear the Blue Danube when the initiate the docking sequence?

    0 0
  20. Purlieu

    Lawyers

    lawyers, bankers --> "B" Ark leaving tomorrow

    0 0
  21. IanPotter
    Boffin

    Re: Economics of reusability

    "I suspect real reuse won't really be possible until we have an easy way of getting in and out of orbit and can employ modified ship containers."

    Mass Drivers! If you can chuck an aircraft off a carrier fast enough to get airborne with one imagine what you could do with a really big one, chuck a shipping container into a low orbit and use some sort of orbital tug to take it where you want it.

    I'd talk to my patent attorney about this but he's outside right now after an airlock mishap...

    0 0
  22. Nick Ryan Silver badge

    Elite docking music

    ...unless the video is set to this, who cares?

    :)

    0 0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like