update: yeah...that's why I said take that report with a grain of salt. SpaceX says nothing wrong. http://www.businessinsider.com/report-explosion-on-elon-musks-spacex-rocket-falcon-9-2013-10?op=1
This is just old news, with some click trawling from zarya's part. It's already know that the second stage restart failed. [edit]SpaceX: But that doesn't change the fact that a second stage restart is needed for the geostationary orbit from Cape. So SpaceX needs to reassure that the fix is in place before SES-8 launch. Also: [edit]SpaceX and Aviationweek:
Since this video and grasshopper flights; reaction to the sign is changed from "wow how cool" to "Why they don't already build landing pads!!!"
Some really interesting information from Elon's transcript. Here is a neat snipet "We actually do have some great video of the re-entry. It's coming back. It's actually on the boat or boats, I should say. So we don't have that. We should be able to post that maybe that later this week. There's some pretty cool video" http://shitelonsays.com/transcript/spacex-press-conference-september-29-2013-2013-09-29
I'd buy a ticket but I think our sons/daughters are really going to benefit from Elon and friends. Stuff like this is the stuff of dreams. Makes me want to inquire at SpaceX just to be a data analyzer. Love how they think they have enough data to make a successful landing. Fairings acting as landing gear as stabilization during retro firings might help, but I'd bet they add more fairings to ensure no spin. Or deploy a stabilizing chute of some sort to help with the centrifugal forces.
I'm not a rocket scientist, but my instincts say that this has to be a more stable configuration than the tic-tac-toe positioning. And reusability within a year is just unbelievable. I really hope we get to see videos of the landing attempt. Elon said they'd be out at the end of last week but other media incidents likely created a distraction from that.
I don't see how that would have much effect on stability; rockets need an active control system to be stable anyway. I'm guessing it was done for structural reasons, or to simplify the structure (symmetry means you can use identical parts 8 times).
Falcon 9 Certification Delayed Due to Government Shutdown http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/asd_10_10_2013_p01-01-625424.xml "October 10, 2013 The U.S. Air Force’s work to determine whether the Sept. 29 first launch of Space Exploration Technologies’ (SpaceX) Falcon 9 v1.1 rocket will count toward the company’s requirements for certification to compete for government launches is being delayed by the U.S. government shutdown."
This is pretty cool: Wow! Photographer Captures SpaceX Falcon 9 Rocket Launch Like Never Before | Space.com
Mission Overview | Next Gen Falcon 9 Demonstration Flight Mission Overview | Next Gen Falcon 9 Demonstration Flight - YouTube
I was hoping for more on the 1st stage reusability results. We, at least, got a glimpse of the engine re-fire in this video.
This guy is like a kid in a candy store. Neat stuff! I especially enjoyed the RC heli footage (twitter feed).
This is my favorite image there, the heat protection covering of the Octaweb make 9F look more like a spaceship and less like an expendable rocket. (And static(hot)fire's weathering makes it look more like its namesake. : )