Elon Musk, 3 times a charm? Or more like 3 strikes YOUR OUT!

[ortemus74]

3 times a charm... BAAAAAAAHHHH!!!!<br /><br />How much TRUST do you have in Elon Musk of getting his low-cost space dreams off the ground? I think he probably has a fundamental flaw with his merlin/falcon engines. <br /><br />At least he has 'all the money' to prevent himself from choking on all of his failures -or- DELAYS.<br /><br /><br /><br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Falcon 1 Maiden Flight Update: Posted February 10, 2006 <br /><br /><br />We were very happy to be able to execute a flight countdown all the way to lighting the engine. Although there wasn't a launch this time, we made a lot of progress refining the rocket and launch pad -- all work that needed to be done anyway. I will post a longer update next week, after we have enough time to finish forensics of recent events and formulate next steps.<br />---Elon<br />

 

[gunsandrockets]

You will see soon enough.<br /><br />

 

[tomnackid]

Well compared to the early days post war rocketry in the US and USSR (built on the "spare no expense" attitude of the cold war no less) a successful launch on the third try will be amazing! A successful launch on the 10th try will be would be amazing! In other word its probably way to early to write off the whole project.

 

[spacefire]

yup. many people don't realize that government funded programs have had many failures before the first succesful launch, some of them catastrophic-not only loss of vehicle but loss of life as well. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[tap_sa]

<font color="yellow">"How much TRUST do you have in Elon Musk of getting his low-cost space dreams off the ground?"</font><br /><br />A lot more than in your steam-747 <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" />

 

[qso1]

spacefire:<br />yup. many people don't realize that government funded programs have had many failures before the first succesful launch, some of them catastrophic-not only loss of vehicle but loss of life as well.<br /><br />My response:<br />Difference is funding, the Government had the funds to accomodate significant failure rates. Private industry investors may not have that kind of funding which will limit their tolerance to failures. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[j05h]

>Difference is funding, the Government had the funds to accomodate significant failure rates. Private industry investors may not have that kind of funding which will limit their tolerance to failures.<br /><br />Elon is somewhat different from industrial investors - he is fronting his own money. He has said repeatedly that he can afford several loss-of-rocket failures before giving up. I applaud the methodical, cautious approach SpaceX has taken. <br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[shoogerbrugge]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>it's not tax payers money he's spending<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />The biggest client of SpaceX is DARPA and the USAF, with a 100 million USD no questions asked contract, which is indeed your tax money at work.

 

[kdavis007]

Nope.. It takes time to get all of the kinks out...

 

[mlorrey]

Elon doesn't see a penny of that money unless he launches..

 

[qso1]

It just all depends on how much cash he actually has and how he actually reacts if or when he has a major setback.<br /><br />If he has enough cash to absorb several potential launch failures or major delays, more power to him. This is what spaceflight, particularly human spaceflight needs. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[cretan126]

qso1: I agree that the Government's ability to withstand failure allowed them to develop early rockets, I don't believe that is the case today. There is very little tolerance for failure, if any. DARPA is one exception, since their charter is to push the envelope with the potential of breakthrough payoff - you might say their motto is 'failure is expected'. That is why they are willing to pony up the money for the still-pending launch from Kwaj. However, they are the exception, not the rule. Note that they also are not trying to launch a valuable payload on this mission, just a very small student-built spacecraft. The Government organizations that do the real jobs of putting things - high value things - in space are - and should - not be as tolerant.

 

[qso1]

As you pointed out, todays tolerance for failure seems to be lower regardless of whether its business or Government. But the fact that we lost 2 shuttles while NASA is under Government control is indicative of the idea Government is usually better able to withstand failures. Unless Bill Gates finances NASA that is. Most business would not have been able to tolerate the loss of 2 shuttles if business ran the shuttle program the way its currently run. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[propforce]

First and foremost, you need to remember that space launch is still a very dangerous business, even with today's technology. <br /><br />Launching rocket is not like flying an airplane or race an Indy 500, it's way more uncertain and dangerous. <br /><br />Personally I'd like to see SpaceX takes their time and check every details and do not launch until they feel very certain of success. Even then, there will still the uncertainty of $hit happens, but that's the nature of this business.<br /><br />Never launch a rocket unless you're ready.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[cretan126]

I think it was curious that Elon referenced 'foresensics of recent events' with no elaboration on details. The fact that they apparently added the static fire test late in the game makes me wonder if there are bigger problems below the surface.<br /><br />On another front, I noticed that Elon is also putting some of his money into movies. He is listed as 'Executive Producer' of the soon-to-be-released movie "Thank You for Smoking" ( http://www2.foxsearchlight.com/thankyouforsmoking/teaser/). It's about a spin-meister for big tobacco promoting a positive image of smoking. Ironically, the catch phrase in the promo is "Nick Taylor doesn't hide the truth... he filters it"<br /><br />However, there may be an even more appropriate movie coming out a week earlier: http://www.failuretolaunchmovie.com/

 

[barrykirk]

Elon strikes me as a very shrewd business man and a calm operator.<br /><br />He isn't the type to get "launch fever" and press the launch button before the rocket is ready.<br /><br />He knows that all of the naysayers will shut up and forget about his delays once the rocket is off the ground.<br /><br />A successful launch gets him the following benefits.<br /><br />1) Paid for the launch ( Always nice )<br /><br />2) Respect for having accomplished the almost impossible and done it succesfully.<br /><br />3) Most people will forget about any delays.<br /><br />4) Possibility of future business ( launch contracts ).<br /><br />A failure will cause the following problems.<br /><br />1) Loss of reputation. ( Would you want to trust your precious satellite on an unreliable launcher? )<br /><br />2) Loss of possible future business. See Number 1 above.<br /><br />3) Don't get paid for the launch.<br /><br /><br />Having the rocket sitting on the pad a little longer because of a scrub does have costs, but they are very minimal compared to the long and short term loses compared to a unsuccessful launch.<br /><br />I'm still putting my money on him.

 

[edkyle98]

Mr. Musk has said that SpaceX would probably shut down if it suffered three launch failures out of the box with no successes. I've been wondering if it already has one strike against it now that it has managed to damaged both stages of the first Falcon 1 rocket (in two separate incidents). These have both been shipped back to California from Omelek and replaced with the second Falcon 1. The company has only completed three Falcon 1 vehicles altogether, so if the first one can't be repaired and the second one fails during the inaugural launch then the company might be down to its last bullet in a hurry. <br /><br /> - Ed Kyle

 

[mlorrey]

He hasn't suffered a vehicle loss. He still has all three rockets and has repaired/is repairing the damaged ones. What he means is that he wants at least one successful launch by the time he's used up all three. A scrub is not a launch failure, it is a scrub. Unless he gets off the ground and either crashes, blows up, or makes orbit, then it isn't a launch.

 

[teije]

a launch delay is not a launch failure. To illustrate, here ia a blurb coming from spaceflightnow about a Delta II launch slated for april this year:<br /><br />quote:<br /><font color="yellow">The Boeing Delta 2 rocket will launch the NASA's CloudSat and Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observations (CALIPSO) spacecraft. [...] Delayed from Jan. 29, April 15, May 26, June 17, July 15, Aug. 22, Sept. 29, Oct. 1 and 26. Delayed from Nov. 7 due to looming workforce strike. Delayed from December by the strike and Range closure period. </font><br />/quote.<br /><br />That is more than a year delay for a reliable vehicle that has proven to be flight worthy over and over again. Also, (I don't want to repeat what has been said over and over again, but just to illustrate) after STS 107 the first announcements were that the shuttle would fly again late 2003. It took quite a bit more time than that. <br /><br />It is important to be succesfull in the launch business, delays are part of that game.<br /><br />Teije