SpaceX successfully launches Falcon 1

As you might have heard, SpaceX (… finally …) succeeded with the launch of its Falcon 1 during the weekend.

This, the third Falcon 1 flight, injected a dummy mass into orbit rather than the previously planned two commercial satellites. This was due to the launch agreement specifying at least one successful launch prior to the first fully commercial flight boarding paying customers.

Since their last launch attempt, SpaceX has performed extensive modifications on the Falcon 1 launcher, the main one being the modification to the time constant (2 to 3 bit number) used by the flight software to control the time delay between separation of the first stage and ignition of the second, an error which led to the loss of the previous flight.

White Label Space joins the space community to congratulate SpaceX for this achievement and expects that this is the first in a long series of successful launches. We will certainly stay tuned for the upcoming Falcon 9 launch, SpaceX’s launcher having the most promising lunar capabilities.

What if Falcon 1 was Reviewed by NASA?

I didn't see this video of the recent Falcon 1 launch attempt until today. If you watch from about 2 minutes and 40 seconds, you can clearly see the two stages springing apart after the separation command and then the separated first stage pushing slowly back up against the second stage!

Man... how frustrating that must be for them!

But I have to admit, this is a great example of the differences between private and government funded space programs. If a government space agency like NASA was doing a review of the updated Falcon 1 configuration used for this flight (evolved Merlin 1C engine), it probably would have noticed the problem prior to the flight, and might have saved the mission. But at what cost? Having to satisfy every demand of a customer like NASA must add a huge cost to the development.

I guess this reflects the risk of a fully private development of a launcher (or any space system). It might take an extra mission to iron out all the bugs, but if you can save costs elsewhere, you can hopefully complete your development program at a lower overall cost.

Note that Falcon 9 on the other hand seems to have complete NASA oversight (see this Press Release about the Critical Design Review (CDR) for the Falcon 9/Dragon Mission), so one might expect that the Falcon 9 will suffer less failures.

Finally, compliments must go to SpaceX for showing the public their development setbacks in such an open, honest manner. It is a fine example for other developers of launchers or space hardware. Could you imagine the traditional government agencies providing such transparency on all their failures?

If Only SpaceX Checked Top Gear

YouTube link here

If only SpaceX had reviewed the catastrophic outcome of this flight attempt by the BBC automotive show Top Gear.. perhaps the loss of their Falcon 1 launcher could have been averted ;)

It was pretty sad news for a young a dynamic company such as SpaceX, however I guess the message of all that is, whether you are flying a SpaceX Falcon 1 or Top Gear Shuttle, stage separation is critical issue and potential single point failure.

So to the guys at SpaceX, no rocket has been developed without failures, keep up the good work and we are sure that you will soon succeed!