Talk:Falcon 9 flight 1

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Falcon 9 flight 1 redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A news item involving Falcon 9 flight 1 was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 5 June 2010.

Wikipedia

January 2009 assembly

According to [1], "the majority of the Falcon 9 being assembled is actual flight hardware" - was this just a structural test? --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 17:54, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I think I a lot of the press around the Jan '09 raising was PR gimmikry. Although they said this was flight hardware, most if not all of the equipment was reported to have left later. Also, the flight engines, first stage, and now second stage have all been in testing in Texas since Jan '09. My guess is that what we saw at the pad last year may have been "flight capable" hardware rather than "flight 1 hardware". Unless you can find any references specifially saying certain parts from Jan '09 are going to be on flight 1, I'd leave it out. If you look through the SpaceX thread under the commercial spaceflight forum section on nasaspaceflight.com, you'll see quite a bit of discussion about what hardware has been seen where. --StuffOfInterest (talk) 18:16, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks - perhaps the "flight hardware" in the photos was for later missions. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 18:56, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Different Picture?

the picture used is from last year's assembly including the larger payload compartment for non-Dragon missions, anyone have a recent picture? 173.2.224.226 (talk) 05:29, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The picture comes from SpaceX's website, and is part of a collection that SpaceX released under GDFL after being asked by a Wikipedian. If there's a specific recent image one you think would be good, I'm sure they'd be okay licensing it under GDFL. --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 13:20, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Found a more appropriate image in commons. --IanOsgood (talk) 20:56, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's the mission profile like?

The article just says it reached orbit, is it still there? How many orbits did it make? Is it doing any experiments or just collecting telemetry etc. It would be nice to have this info in the article. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 14:27, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing yet on the Heavens Above website, which does have the X37B orbital elements. I see that the Dragon capsule has not been detached from the second stage, and am wondering about Space X's plans, if any, for deorbiting the combination. It is too low to stay up for long, and large enough to make one wonder about the potential for a hazard if it should come down in a populated area. Does anyone have any insights (or reliable sources) about this? Perhaps the destruct system (same that delayed the launch) will be used. Wwheaton (talk) 02:00, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's there now: Orbit: 242 x 268 km, 34.5° (Epoch Jun 7). —WWoods (talk) 17:13, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Flight anomalies

liftoff appeared to occur several seconds early, combined with a sharp twisting motion. The rocket is supposed to be clamped down for several seconds while the engines reach full thrust and are verified by the flight computer. I'm wondering it the clamping mechanism failed and the rocket twisted out of its grasp early. --EntrenchedBcrat (talk) 03:15, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I find it hard to believe that anything like that would not have resulted in fatal problems, either mechanical damage to the vehicle or flight dynamics anomalies. The videos I've seen appear to be noisy, with the time labels erratic. I think there must have been some electronic or data issues in the time synchronization or the video cameras. Wwheaton (talk) 17:09, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The audio was probably out of sync - maybe it made a trip the the California office before being added to the video. Nevertheless there was a sharp 90 degree turn made by the rocked in the first few feet of launch. --EntrenchedBcrat (talk) 00:34, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to the upper stage?

Is the UpperStage/MerlinVacuumEngine still in orbit? Is it yet another derelict "artificial satellite" that will stay in orbit for months/years? Anyone know of public information on this? N2e (talk) 17:06, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article has been merged and is now a redirect

Effective 30 Nov 2011. Noted. N2e (talk) 02:33, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, the merger was conducted per WP:LAUNCHES following discussion at WT:SPACEFLIGHT. --G W… 09:11, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]