What is Digg?180 Comments
- basye, on 08/03/2008, -5/+163If they had only used an Iranian rocket, their satellites would have been photoshopped into space.
- Scaryclouds, on 08/03/2008, -4/+102Keep trying SpaceX you will get there!
- curseoflou, on 08/03/2008, -2/+61they'll never beat out planet express.
- DeFex, on 08/03/2008, -2/+54They lost Scotties ashes!
- inactive, on 08/03/2008, -1/+52also on board were the ashes of James Doohan...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Doohan - queenoftoshiba, on 08/03/2008, -2/+48Very costly start up expenses.
- PhillyMJS, on 08/03/2008, -1/+45She dinna have enough power, Captain!
- skoles, on 08/03/2008, -0/+40They can simply open a ticket stating the goods were not delivered.
- wazzledoozle2, on 08/03/2008, -2/+40Maybe they should test a working design BEFORE adding a payload?
- Nyaos, on 08/03/2008, -2/+30I never thought my money from paypal transactions would be funding private space exploration.
- BelatedHero, on 08/03/2008, -0/+27Statement from Elon Musk:
http://www.spacex.com/updates.php - Skooma714, on 08/03/2008, -1/+23C'mon guy, you ***** up. This isn't rocket science or anything.
Oh wait.... - cheezintern, on 08/03/2008, -0/+21It took nasa many billions and more than a few tries to get a rocket off the launch pad....
- krnldmp, on 08/03/2008, -0/+19"Anomaly", when used outside of strict scientific theoretical study, means "it busted".
- dupems, on 08/03/2008, -0/+18He's talking about the cargo, which was mainly a few government satellites. Those government satellites are not privately funded, someone needs to compensate the two of you for lack of reading comprehension.
- sanman, on 08/03/2008, -1/+17Too bad, but hey, it provides more learning.
Anything that doesn't put them out of business only makes them stronger.
I bet people like these will one day be the first to set foot on Mars. - inactive, on 08/03/2008, -1/+17for some reason this seems a little weird:
http://dc60.2shared.com/download/3699075/836a8914/ ... - ovni, on 08/03/2008, -1/+16A message from Elon Musk posted at spacex.com:
It was obviously a big disappointment not to reach orbit on this flight [Falcon 1, Flight 3]. On the plus side, the flight of our first stage, with the new Merlin 1C engine that will be used in Falcon 9, was picture perfect. Unfortunately, a problem occurred with stage separation, causing the stages to be held together. This is under investigation and I will send out a note as soon as we understand exactly what happened.
The most important message I’d like to send right now is that SpaceX will not skip a beat in execution going forward. We have flight four of Falcon 1 almost ready for flight and flight five right behind that. I have also given the go ahead to begin fabrication of flight six. Falcon 9 development will also continue unabated, taking into account the lessons learned with Falcon 1. We have made great progress this past week with the successful nine engine firing.
As a precautionary measure to guard against the possibility of flight 3 not reaching orbit, SpaceX recently accepted a significant investment. Combined with our existing cash reserves, that ensures we will have more than sufficient funding on hand to continue launching Falcon 1 and develop Falcon 9 and Dragon. There should be absolutely zero question that SpaceX will prevail in reaching orbit and demonstrating reliable space transport. For my part, I will never give up and I mean never.
Thanks for your hard work and now on to flight four.
--Elon--
(In a message to Employees, August 2, 2008) - inactive, on 08/03/2008, -0/+12Because this ***** is massively expensive and they're basically betting the company with every launch whether or not it has a payload so they might as well load it up and pray for success.
- FTLJohnson, on 08/03/2008, -0/+11Actually, the irony is kind of cool. Ya know, he wasn't actually repairing the rocket... So it failed, and didn't separate... I think the fact that the attempt was made is good enough, and hey... an rocket explosion is a pretty cool end.
- kennyboy019, on 08/03/2008, -1/+12That would be nice, wouldn't it? But you cant do that with a single use rocket. Its not like it comes back down and you get to try again. With these things you have to hold onto your ass and pray for the best.
Given that the launch went absolutely perfect they shouldn't have any problem doing this again. It sounds like a explosive bolt didn't fire which is something that happens quite often. - DavidinBoston, on 08/03/2008, -0/+10They should have left Scotty in the transporter's containment buffer.
Seriously, though, that sucks. Doohan was wonderful in the role of Scotty, and will always be remembered no matter what happened to his ashes.
He will live on forever in the hearts and minds of everyone who loved him and loved Trek. - MikeSD34, on 08/03/2008, -0/+9It's not rocket science people!
- scabbers, on 08/03/2008, -0/+9Unfortunate.
- sleazy, on 08/03/2008, -0/+8Get your ash to mars...
Get your ash to mars...
Get your ash to mars... - SkinnerBox, on 08/03/2008, -2/+10Or America trying things no one else is because we have to focus our energy on something other than hating America.
- SillyDigger, on 08/03/2008, -1/+9Its such a shame for a man who lived an amazing life.
- inactive, on 08/03/2008, -0/+8What the hell are you talking about?
- benologist, on 08/03/2008, -1/+8Internet multimillionaires only have one payday, like winning the lotto. Regular multimillionaires find a way to keep making money.
- Roryking, on 08/03/2008, -0/+7I'm pretty sure there's a "don't sue us if we blow up your sattelites" clause
- krnldmp, on 08/03/2008, -3/+10I doubt it.
- sockpuppets, on 08/03/2008, -1/+8Particularly because of the 3 quiznos franchises that were in the cargo stage.
- geobay, on 08/03/2008, -6/+13His ashes were so high is alcohol content, they probably caused the explosion.
- cubicledrone, on 08/03/2008, -0/+7The raw materials of success are failures. This is what happens when risks are taken. Try again.
- Yazilliclick, on 08/03/2008, -0/+6I believe he's trying to say they should test more (make several) and fire them and until they get to a point where they're essentially always working and they have the process down don't start putting loads on them paid by taxes.
- LucerinRed, on 08/03/2008, -0/+6When will people learn, you need a female cyclops, a robot, and a man from 1000 years ago in order to successfully run a space delivery service.
- AlienMushroom, on 08/03/2008, -0/+6Scottie's ash wanted to go to Mars instead.
- strictnein, on 08/03/2008, -0/+6aditude? Seriously... "aditude"?
- Caled85, on 08/03/2008, -0/+6ok, you go build an f-ing rocket
- Hockey13, on 08/03/2008, -0/+5Typhoon, the money that he used on Paypal is funding private space exploration. Customers using the site as Nyaos did allowed him to sell the site to eBay.
- bravo1995, on 08/03/2008, -0/+5@djoobacca: The difference between the Soviets and the US was that we did everything in the public eye. Every success, every failure, was broadcast on live TV. The Soviets did everything in secret, and only publicized their successes. Did you hear about the time one of their rockets blew up on the launchpad, killing half of the technicians and engineers on site? Probably not; they covered it up until decades after the fact.
The Russians' record of reliability back in the 50s and 60s was spotty at best. They were working under considerably more pressure from their government than the United States was.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A0 ... - Scynet, on 08/03/2008, -0/+5What part in "private rocket" did you not understand?
- tehknotte, on 08/03/2008, -0/+5ugh please why do people always have to show that they "get" the reference? good for you digg it up then there's no reason to say you know where it's from!
- gab00n, on 08/03/2008, -0/+5Well another lesson learned, hopefully next time everything will go smoothly.
- strictnein, on 08/03/2008, -0/+5@Pixelante
You fail to grasp one thing. Compare the cost difference of SpaceX's launches to that of a normal launch. SpaceX is going for "cheap", and that's what difficult here. - gcnaddict, on 08/03/2008, -0/+5Oh hi there. How about that Space Shuttle?
- esfisher, on 08/03/2008, -2/+7'cause bread lines are so much better, eh Comrade?
- jmcneilly, on 08/03/2008, -2/+7Americas failures are "best days" comparably for the rest of the world. America has more success by accident than many other countries trying their best.
- Scaryclouds, on 08/03/2008, -0/+4@Pixelante
So? It is still a new system. I'm a programmer by trade and even though there is information of programming everywhere it doesn't mean every program I write will be entirely without errors.
Also SpaceX is privately funded. They're still may have shareholders, but these are much more knowledgeable people who understand the risk of investing in a start up (i.e. it's going to take a lot more failures before they pull the plug) - blackeyedbrian, on 08/03/2008, -2/+6He's talking about the NASA and DOD sats, that are paid for by US taxes.
The rocket may be privately funded, but its still the govt payloads that got destroyed. I'm not sure if insurance will cover that though.
"Someone needs to compensate you for your lack of common sense."
- Someone needs to compensate your lack of reading comprehension. -
Show 51 - 100 of 181 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 