If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Bloomberg)   While Elon Musk was busy touting SpaceX, Orbital Sciences went and did some science-y stuff in orbit   (bloomberg.com) divider line 54
    More: Cool, Orbital Sciences, Elon Musk, Orbital, SpaceX, Goldilocks, ATK, Dulles, Wallops Flight Facility  
•       •       •

3709 clicks; posted to Business » on 30 Apr 2014 at 10:48 AM (33 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



54 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-30 10:37:03 AM  
In other words, they did nothing much and investors liked that.

THIS IS WHY WALL STREET SHOULD NOT DICTATE WHAT YOU DO!
 
2014-04-30 10:45:14 AM  
Orbital is fine, but I wouldn't call merging with ATK "sciency stuff in orbit".
 
2014-04-30 10:51:40 AM  
Did they screw up another satellite launch?
 
2014-04-30 10:56:51 AM  
Remind me who's got a manned space launch coming up in 2015, again?
 
2014-04-30 11:09:11 AM  
Merging with atk...
img.fark.net

/I guess liberty rocket is a go...
/although this more sounds like the big threes plan to hobble Spacex.
/ Elon don't care, he just announced dragon 2.
 
2014-04-30 11:30:59 AM  
Um, no, submitter.  Yes they launched Cygnus to the station, but SpaceX has sent Dragon to the station 3 times now and they just conducted the first controlled soft-landing of a liquid first stage.

SpaceX is still way out in front in this race.
 
2014-04-30 11:31:41 AM  
Competition is great for spaceflight. That said, calling Orbital competition for SpaceX is like saying Bekins is competition for Greyhound.
 
2014-04-30 11:37:47 AM  
I read through that whole article trying to find supporting facts for the headline's claim "soars out of Musk's shadow" but found nothing.  Other than they decided to be content at the little rocket's table.

Perhaps this could have been better worded thusly "Orbital Sciences gives up trying to make it on their own and makes plans to merge with Alliant Techsystem.  Investors are happy the company may not go belly up after all."
 
2014-04-30 12:15:46 PM  
*re-reads article twice*

could someone help me correlate the headline to the article? I'm having difficulty
 
2014-04-30 12:20:03 PM  
I consider this good news. Competition is good & Orbital needed to do something. They have a limited supply of their first stage engines for Antares (that's why they wanted to start buying the RD-180, but got rejected). Their second stage is already powered by an ATK engine. I have no great love of ATK (for what are basically political reasons), but their engines have a pretty good record (with one obvious exception that was dealt with nearly 3 decades ago).

Maybe they will end up serving that market that SpaceX skipped over when they dropped the Falcon 1e.
 
2014-04-30 12:22:11 PM  

The Bestest: *re-reads article twice*

could someone help me correlate the headline to the article? I'm having difficulty


I believe shrooms must be involved. I'm not sure, never tried them.
 
2014-04-30 12:43:13 PM  
Huh?  And you may quote me.
 
2014-04-30 12:56:20 PM  
Girls, Girls Girls!  You're both pretty.  Now get back to work and get us off this rock.
 
2014-04-30 01:02:31 PM  
Subby is a Bloomberg click-bait headline writer?
 
2014-04-30 01:09:15 PM  

way south: this more sounds like the big threes plan to hobble Spacex.


Explain?
 
2014-04-30 01:11:57 PM  
Get it so we don't need the Russians for rides to the ISS and I'll be happy... for a little while. Then I'll want warp drive.
 
2014-04-30 01:20:23 PM  

szyska: Get it so we don't need the Russians for rides to the ISS and I'll be happy... for a little while. Then I'll want warp drive.


You mean you want the Alcubierre drive?

/star trek is science fiction.
//the reality is MUCH MORE fun.
 
2014-04-30 01:30:55 PM  

The Bestest: *re-reads article twice*

could someone help me correlate the headline to the article? I'm having difficulty


You have to look externally for the answer at the stock price jump due to the merger announcement.  It wasn't really called out in the article.

$27 to $33 is a sizeable jump.  Although since the announcement, it has faded down to $30.

Hardly soaring.
 
2014-04-30 01:35:33 PM  

Buggar: The Bestest: *re-reads article twice*

could someone help me correlate the headline to the article? I'm having difficulty

You have to look externally for the answer at the stock price jump due to the merger announcement.  It wasn't really called out in the article.

$27 to $33 is a sizeable jump.  Although since the announcement, it has faded down to $30.

Hardly soaring.


Of course that was regarding the actual article headline.  Fark knows what the hell subby read.
 
2014-04-30 01:46:05 PM  
Well Jebediah Kerman used the Science Jr, but he forgot to do a crew report. How much total science did they earn on the mission?
 
2014-04-30 02:02:08 PM  

Vertdang: Well Jebediah Kerman used the Science Jr, but he forgot to do a crew report. How much total science did they earn on the mission?


i.imgur.com

None yet.  Jebediah is still pushing it back.
 
2014-04-30 02:04:12 PM  

GleeUnit: way south: this more sounds like the big threes plan to hobble Spacex.

Explain?



The secret of Elons success seems to be in mass production.  For this to work he needs payloads. Doesn't matter where they go or how big they are as his boosters can restart and deliver multiple sats per shot. He can also stack boosters for more power than anything else on the market.
Hence the complaining when ULA got a bunch of launches with no competition. SpaceX might be able to do it cheaper and better but never got a chance to make a pitch. The government was more interested in preserving capability with companies that have a long standing history in it (a corrupt sweetheart deal for Lockheed and Boeing).

Lockheed Boeing and ATKwere the final three involved with launching the shuttles, and ATK in particular was left out in the cold when both the shuttle and constellation were cancelled. Alliant made a play for CCDEV but failed (SpaceX won in the second round). They also made a pitch for COTS and failed (Orbital and SpaceX won).

So as it stands we have SpaceX with the most versatile cargo delivery vehicle (two way trips, more cargo than progress and Cygnus) and also with the most adaptable and soon to be least expensive booster.
With Russia being an ass, SpaceX will be the go-to company for manned launches with Dragon 2.0.
Orbitals system needs Russian parts and that stock is now frozen. If Dragon becomes a cheap and reliable launcher of men and equipment then the future of SLS is in serious question.

SpaceX wins everything. Elon and his white cat retire to an evil villain's lair on mars.

[Conspiracy theory follows]

So here comes ATK to the rescue in Orbitals engine debacle. Focusing on smaller payloads they front themselves as having another capability that must be preserved by the fed.  With ULA taking the big launches and ATK/Orbital taking the small ones, its food out of Elons mouth and he can't hit the necessary production goals on falcon.

SpaceX's growth is stumped by lack of payloads (payloads redirected by corruption) until SLS goes live, and (as the official shuttle replacement) becomes an unkillable rocket to nowhere.  We go on another thirty year trip to orbit and occasionally blow up some astronauts for moon rocket prices.

SpaceX loses while billions continue to pour into Lockheed, Boeing and ATK.
All without the risk of having to develop new ships or hit specific goals.

/its the circle of LIIIIIIIIFE.
/We now return you to what has surely become a KSP thread while I was typing this.
 
2014-04-30 02:10:20 PM  
My favorite thing about OSC is that they apparently got the right to name the street their headquarters is located on just off Rt 28 in Ashburn, which means when I drive that road i am confronted with a giant Green Highway  exit sign that reads "Warp Drive"

and every time I say "aye Aye Keptain" which annoys my wife to no end
 
2014-04-30 02:34:08 PM  
bmwericus: "Huh?"

It's okay, I had permission.
 
2014-04-30 02:51:29 PM  
I was trying to explain the awesomeness that is Elon Musk the other day to my wife. She listened attentively, nodded when appropriate and then said, "That's all great, but he needs a new farking name. That name is ridiculous."
 
2014-04-30 03:00:15 PM  
way south:

The secret of Elons success seems to be in mass production.  For this to work he needs payloads. Doesn't matter where they go or how big they are as his boosters can restart and deliver multiple sats per shot. He can also stack boosters for more power than anything else on the market.
Hence the complaining when ULA got a bunch of launches with no competition. SpaceX might be able to do it cheaper and better but never got a chance to make a pitch. The government was more interested in preserving capability with companies that have a long standing history in it (a corrupt sweetheart deal for Lockheed and Boeing).


1) size and destination absolutely matter, and SpaceX has only a single configuration to offer (no solid rocket boosters, no 'heavy' version, no light version anymore for that matter) and only a few flights so far that barely scratch the surface of possible missions they'd have to fly.

2) the boosters can restart but this has nothing to do with multiple payloads, which has already be done by the way

3) yeah he can "stack" boosters by strapping them together like the Delta IV heavy, but this is not trivial and has not been built or flight tested

4) cheaper but not necessarily better. you get what you pay for

that said, I support what SpaceX is trying to do, but there's a lot more to space missions than just cargo trips to the ISS, no amount of whining will change that
 
2014-04-30 03:07:03 PM  

mongbiohazard: I was trying to explain the awesomeness that is Elon Musk the other day to my wife. She listened attentively, nodded when appropriate and then said, "That's all great, but he needs a new farking name. That name is ridiculous."




A New Farking User Name, perhaps?

/how does a a kerbal push a ship? Using his jetpack?
//Whackjob, try to create a giant ship that also has a K-Drive. that would be terrifying
 
2014-04-30 03:17:44 PM  

Cpl.D: Vertdang: Well Jebediah Kerman used the Science Jr, but he forgot to do a crew report. How much total science did they earn on the mission?

[i.imgur.com image 850x478]

None yet.  Jebediah is still pushing it back.


I'm playing the career mode, and I can get to the Mun (sort of), but having enough fuel to get back is problematic.

I launched a science sat just to get enough science.
 
2014-04-30 03:25:41 PM  
stevensrmiller.com
 
2014-04-30 03:35:38 PM  

syberpud: Girls, Girls Girls!  You're both pretty.  Now get back to work and get us off this rock.


I could use this on a Tshirt or coffee mug. Of course on the Tshirt, a whole bunch of people who don't read carefully would get offended.

Hey... Bonus.
 
2014-04-30 03:51:40 PM  

way south: Orbitals system needs Russian parts and that stock is now frozen.


If I did my math right Aerojet has enough NK-33s remaining to launch another 14 Antares rockets, so they're good for a while.

As soon as SpaceX relaunches it's first booster, the whole playing field is going to shift. It won't matter what the big three do after that because they won't be able to compete on price unless they innovate. That's something they haven't done for a while in the rocket industry. ULA doesn't even make an attempt to compete on price now. It'll be interesting to see what they do when they start getting hungry.
 
2014-04-30 03:56:23 PM  

Hella Fark: way south:

The secret of Elons success seems to be in mass production.  For this to work he needs payloads. Doesn't matter where they go or how big they are as his boosters can restart and deliver multiple sats per shot. He can also stack boosters for more power than anything else on the market.
Hence the complaining when ULA got a bunch of launches with no competition. SpaceX might be able to do it cheaper and better but never got a chance to make a pitch. The government was more interested in preserving capability with companies that have a long standing history in it (a corrupt sweetheart deal for Lockheed and Boeing).

1) size and destination absolutely matter, and SpaceX has only a single configuration to offer (no solid rocket boosters, no 'heavy' version, no light version anymore for that matter) and only a few flights so far that barely scratch the surface of possible missions they'd have to fly.

2) the boosters can restart but this has nothing to do with multiple payloads, which has already be done by the way

3) yeah he can "stack" boosters by strapping them together like the Delta IV heavy, but this is not trivial and has not been built or flight tested

4) cheaper but not necessarily better. you get what you pay for

that said, I support what SpaceX is trying to do, but there's a lot more to space missions than just cargo trips to the ISS, no amount of whining will change that


The Falcon Heavy version is slated for launch next year, largest thing going.
The timing should have warranted consideration at least. The launch manifest of ULA wasn't going to accommodate the new contract any sooner. They could have waited a few months before signing off dozens of launches on last years rockets.

The ability to restart means one booster can launch multiple payloads to slightly different orbits, which they have done.  You no longer need a variety of small boosters if you can share space on a larger rocket and get to the same destination.
There's  an argument to be made for the timeliness of the flight but even a Pegasus takes years to plan (and the payload is tiny).

If the rocket is just as reliable and has a competitive heft then cheaper is a kind of better.
You're paying a moving company and guys in tee shirts do the same job as unionized guys in matching jump suits. So long as your stuff gets there on time and intact there is no major difference in who does it.

/Long live the big-dumb-booster!
 
2014-04-30 04:02:01 PM  

way south: The Falcon Heavy version is slated for launch next year, largest thing going.


upload.wikimedia.org

www.parabolicarc.com

The Falcon Heavy still pales in comparison to Saturn V 2.0 (Erm, I mean SLS)
 
2014-04-30 04:09:04 PM  

meat0918: Cpl.D: Vertdang: Well Jebediah Kerman used the Science Jr, but he forgot to do a crew report. How much total science did they earn on the mission?

[i.imgur.com image 850x478]

None yet.  Jebediah is still pushing it back.

I'm playing the career mode, and I can get to the Mun (sort of), but having enough fuel to get back is problematic.

I launched a science sat just to get enough science.


Good. Just launch satellites to every body if you need science. They don't even need to orbit, so long as you are cognizant, you can get plenty of science from a flyby.
 
2014-04-30 04:17:10 PM  
^ Old and busted.

New hotness ...

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-04-30 04:34:12 PM  

hardinparamedic: way south: The Falcon Heavy version is slated for launch next year, largest thing going.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 850x653]

[www.parabolicarc.com image 511x378]

The Falcon Heavy still pales in comparison to Saturn V 2.0 (Erm, I mean SLS)


4.bp.blogspot.com

Wow, you're not kidding. What is that monster...
 
2014-04-30 04:39:37 PM  

IntertubeUser: ^ Old and busted.

New hotness ...

[upload.wikimedia.org image 850x660]

HOLY CRAP! They got Red Green working on Dream Chaser?
 
2014-04-30 04:45:45 PM  

hardinparamedic: way south: The Falcon Heavy version is slated for launch next year, largest thing going.

The Falcon Heavy still pales in comparison to Saturn V 2.0 (Erm, I mean SLS)


I think Way South means the largest thing going that will actually fly.

Yeah, okay. The block 1 versions will probably fly, but they only have so many SSMEs lying around. I have my doubts they'll ever fly beyond those.
 
2014-04-30 05:04:52 PM  

StopLurkListen: hardinparamedic: way south: The Falcon Heavy version is slated for launch next year, largest thing going.

The Falcon Heavy still pales in comparison to Saturn V 2.0 (Erm, I mean SLS)

Wow, you're not kidding. What is that monster...


That's an interesting image. I'm guessing it must be dated considering the Falcon Heavy will lift twice the payload mass that the shuttle could lift to LEO.

At one point they were considering replacing the SLS block 2 solid rocket boosters with liquid engines possibly powered with an F1 derivative. I haven't heard anything lately though. I think they are more concerned with getting the block 1 to fly at this point. They may have been using it as a ploy to dicker with ATK over price. After all, a perchlorate engine isn't the most challenging thing to make.
 
2014-04-30 05:22:13 PM  
I just giggle everytime I hear that name: Elon Musk. Sounds like a cologne.
 
2014-04-30 05:48:54 PM  

SewerSquirrels: I consider this good news. Competition is good & Orbital needed to do something. They have a limited supply of their first stage engines for Antares (that's why they wanted to start buying the RD-180, but got rejected). Their second stage is already powered by an ATK engine. I have no great love of ATK (for what are basically political reasons), but their engines have a pretty good record (with one obvious exception that was dealt with nearly 3 decades ago).

Maybe they will end up serving that market that SpaceX skipped over when they dropped the Falcon 1e.


It would have been better news if Orbital, who was the original private space enterprise 30 years ago with Pegaus, hadn't just wussied out of direct competition in manned flight.
 
2014-04-30 05:51:30 PM  

hardinparamedic: way south: The Falcon Heavy version is slated for launch next year, largest thing going.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 850x653]

[www.parabolicarc.com image 511x378]

The Falcon Heavy still pales in comparison to Saturn V 2.0 (Erm, I mean SLS)


2020's till first manned flight, one or two presidents maybe.
I'm not giving it a strong chance of sticking around through all the budget cuts and direction changes.

The 150 ton Falcon XX could compete with it for payload it if they give SpaceX a green light.
A proposed 300 million per flight VS 500 million for SLS.

/who am I kidding, I'll gamble its over a billion per flight on sls by the time its all said and done.
/The cost of transporting boosters alone should have removed ATK from the whole deal.
 
2014-04-30 06:09:19 PM  

IntertubeUser: ^ Old and busted.

New hotness ...

[upload.wikimedia.org image 850x660]


Didn't that get sucked through a wormhole and get lost in some distant part of the universe on a ship, say, a living ship, full of strange alien life forms?
 
2014-04-30 06:17:32 PM  

SewerSquirrels: At one point they were considering replacing the SLS block 2 solid rocket boosters with liquid engines possibly powered with an F1 derivative. I haven't heard anything lately though. I think they are more concerned with getting the block 1 to fly at this point. They may have been using it as a ploy to dicker with ATK over price. After all, a perchlorate engine isn't the most challenging thing to make.


From what I understand, there is a competition underway to design a new, reusable solid rocket booster for the block 2 system.

way south: The 150 ton Falcon XX could compete with it for payload it if they give SpaceX a green light.
A proposed 300 million per flight VS 500 million for SLS.


Block II is designed for lunar and beyond (i.e. Asteroid and Mars) cargo launches, including multi-part ships. Not for LEO launches. Block I and Falcon launches would be used for that.
 
2014-04-30 06:24:09 PM  
*looks at graph, sees "super heavy"*

i.imgur.com

/built previous to the most recent patch that improves structural stability
//yes it flew
///not far... save file would corrupt... hit the end of the parts tree
 
2014-04-30 07:39:10 PM  

IntertubeUser: ^ Old and busted.

New hotness ...


They damn well better name it the Farscape-1
 
2014-04-30 08:11:46 PM  
I put a few bucks in Orbital a while back, mostly to thumb my nose at SpaceX for telling us non-billionaires that there's no room for us on their ship.

I'm okay with ORB more than doubling their size and firming up their capabilities with this merger.
 
2014-05-01 12:29:40 AM  
SpaceX won because it bet that it would be smart enough to do everything itself.

And then did it.

Now they have rockets that can withstand engine ruptures, and are about to have rockets that can land on their feet and be flown again.

They're giving Dragon new thrusters so powerful they can serve as the launch escape system.  And Dragon has that really thick heat shield....

So I'm wondering if SpaceX, once its ships are man-rated, won't just go out to the Moon some weekend, scoop up some rocks and dirt, and come back home just to do it?

Once the re-usable rocket is reality, Elon could go out there anytime he wants.
 
2014-05-01 12:43:48 AM  

studebaker hoch: SpaceX won because it bet that it would be smart enough to do everything itself.


/facepalm

No. No it didn't. The Falcon 9's engines were based off of designs from the Apollo Program, combined with revisions undertaken by NASA in the mid-90s for a manned launch vehicle for a lunar return. They built on research that was conducted by NASA and research grant affiliates and offered to public companies under the commercial spaceflight programs that it participated in.

studebaker hoch: Now they have rockets that can withstand engine ruptures,


Which was not unique - the Saturn-series of rockets, and to a lesser extent the Shuttle were both capable of recovering from engine failures. The thing is that they did it commercially, which was an absolute first.

studebaker hoch: So I'm wondering if SpaceX, once its ships are man-rated, won't just go out to the Moon some weekend, scoop up some rocks and dirt, and come back home just to do it?


Because landing on the moon and then successfully returning to Earth is a good deal different in real life than in Kerbal Space Program, and the Dragon Capsule still has to ascend from the moon and burn for a return orbit to Earth. In addition, the Falcon 9 Heavy's GTO/LTO payload capacity is 19.5 thousand kilograms. The entire Apollo CSM-LM system weighed around 30kg. In addition, SpaceX does not have the infrastructure to support a trip to the moon at this time. Apollo's flight alone involved almost 20,000 people in various tracking, communications, and recovery operations, with tracking stations and ships all over the world.

SpaceX's ships are also going to be man-rated only to Earth Orbit operations.

studebaker hoch: Once the re-usable rocket is reality, Elon could go out there anytime he wants.


I have a lot of respect for Elon, but no, he won't. There will still be a LOT of red tape and Government oversight on missions to the Moon, and even Mars.
 
2014-05-01 10:17:42 AM  

hardinparamedic: From what I understand, there is a competition underway to design a new, reusable solid rocket booster for the block 2 system.


That's interesting. I have a friend who is on the team developing the SLS & he told me (a couple years ago) that they decided to trade reusability for performance on the SRBs. Apparently there was no discernible cost benefit to refurbishing over just building new ones and the recovery system was surprisingly heavy.

According to your link, the competition isn't limited to solid fueled boosters. I think it might make more senses to reuse liquid boosters if at all.
 
Displayed 50 of 54 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report