Re: Falcon 1 to Pad
From: quasarstrider (quasarstrider_at_yahoo.com.br)
Date: 10/14/04
- Next message: Lou Scheffer: "Re: EELV Cost Almost Doubles"
- Previous message: quasarstrider: "Re: Space Travel for the Rich"
- In reply to: edkyle99_at_hotmail.com: "Falcon 1 to Pad"
- Next in thread: ed kyle: "Re: Falcon 1 to Pad"
- Reply: ed kyle: "Re: Falcon 1 to Pad"
- Reply: ed kyle: "Re: Falcon 1 to Pad"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 14 Oct 2004 10:42:56 -0700
edkyle99@hotmail.com wrote in message news:<1096556287.274691.276470@h37g2000oda.googlegroups.com>...
> Craig Covault AW&ST story at:
>
> "http://www.aviationow.com/avnow/news/channel_awst_story.jsp?id=news/09274wna.xml"
>
> says that the first SpaceX Falcon 1 is expected to move
> to its Vandenberg pad by the end of next week. A static
> firing is planned first. If the first flight doesn't
> happen by late November, it will have to slip to 2005 due
> to range upgrades. After that, Falcon 1 has only two more
> outstanding launch contracts (Falcon 5 has one).
There is something I have wondered for a while... Glancing at old
photos of Beal rocket engine tests, the nozzle looks eerily familiar
to the one SpaceX uses in their first-stage engine Merlin. I know the
first stage in Falcon 1 has a pump engine while Beal's rockets were
exclusively pressure-fed (although the second stage in Falcon 1 is
also pressure-fed) and the fuels aren't the same, but the feeling's
still there.
Then add the fact that SpaceX uses Beal's former testing facility
in Texas to test Merlin. So, err, are some of the same people
involved, or am I just seeing things that really aren't there?
- Next message: Lou Scheffer: "Re: EELV Cost Almost Doubles"
- Previous message: quasarstrider: "Re: Space Travel for the Rich"
- In reply to: edkyle99_at_hotmail.com: "Falcon 1 to Pad"
- Next in thread: ed kyle: "Re: Falcon 1 to Pad"
- Reply: ed kyle: "Re: Falcon 1 to Pad"
- Reply: ed kyle: "Re: Falcon 1 to Pad"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|