SpaceX News

[ladajo]

Looks like a nice touch down burn mark at the bottom right corner of the SpaceX logo on deck.
It then may be that the booster fell over onto the containers, then broke up with bits going over the side mid-deck where the rails are now missing.
Be interesting to know if they retained any engines on deck and can do a post flight assessment.

[Diogenes]

Elon Musk shares images of the failed Falcon 9 landing

Before impact, the rocket's fins ran out of fuel and lost power. Its engines tried to restore the proper landing angle, but failed, with the rocket hitting the ocean platform's surface hard at a 45 degree angle. The legs and the engine section were smashed, and residual fuel, combined with oxygen, caused an explosion.

http://mashable.com/2015/01/16/falcon-9-landing-images/

[Tom Ligon]

There are several stills with comments under them on that page. The target of Musk's tweets is John Carmack, who was one of the founders of ID Software (Doom, among other titles), who went on to found Armadillo Aerospace to take a crack at the Lunar Lander Challenge. John knows what it is to have a rocket crash and burn, and has built rockets for vertical landing that worked. Kinda neat to see him tweeting back and forth with Musk on this. He and Musk think a lot alike.

Looking at this video, I'd say that landing attempt was about 99% successful. That last 1% is, of course, a bitch if you don't get it right.

[krenshala]

Its too bad Carmack decided to close shop on Armadillo Aerospace. I understand his reasons, but I think it would have been a good thing if they had continued working on their designs.

[Skipjack]

They released a video of this as well. Make sure to turn on the audio (for some reason it seems to be off by default, at least was for me).
https://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK

[GIThruster]

Wow. . .this is big, really big if it happens.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/google-near ... 2?mod=e2fb

[paperburn1]

Update: SpaceX confirmed that it had received $1 billion in funding from Google and Fidelity Investments. The two companies will together own slightly less than 10 percent of the company. "This funding will be used to support continued innovation in the areas of space transport, reusability, and satellite manufacturing," SpaceX said in a short statement on its website. WHOOO looks like we got us a ballgame folks!

[Skipjack]

I am not sure whether I should be sad or happy about this. I don't want Elon Musk to give up too much control of the company. The moment they have to have a board meeting about every little thing, the momentum is gone.

[DeltaV]

Indeed. Submitting to shareholders is the kiss of death for any innovative aerospace company.

Death of the innovations, that is, though the company may coast on like a runaway supertanker.

[GIThruster]

Well regardless of what percent of SpaceX Musk holds he has to have board meetings with those who own significant shares of the corp. Given though, this buy in is 1/10 valuation, and he got a very nice valuation; this is a good deal and he has maybe 1 or 2 new board members. They get a vote but its 1/10 what his is so it doesn't much matter!

I'm totally excited for the cash infusion necessary for him to move ahead at breakneck speed rather than be strapped for cash and unable to do the new things he wants to.

[Betruger]

For the foreseeable future (conceding this latest bit wasn't really foreseeable), these new committee people having nothing to gain except helping the larger mission statement in the short/medium term, and only a chance at actual asserting authority over SpaceX in the long term.

So yeah, 1B$ for effectively no cost except commitment to succeed, towards a fairly solid $$ basis for Mars City 1 and maybe more... It's positives all around. We just may see ourselves break out of this single basket yet.

[D Tibbets]

I see two two aspects to this Google, etel investment. With the stated goal of developing a satellite based internet provider base Google will potentially provide a significant launch manifest base for space X. Good for Space X. Google owning part of Space X not only encourages Space X development due to the cash infusion, but may decrease the cost of satellite launches for Google (they are paying 10% of the Space X launch fee profits to themselfs). A win -win arrangement; if as stated, the management does not become entangled.

Even if Space X launches stay static in cost (no booster recovery) it is competitive with the alternatives. Space X has enough experience with a successful launch history, the risks are no greater than with any other launch source alternative. If the investment helps to achieve some of Musk's reusability goals, the cost advantages for Google becomes even more profound. Not only are they launching their satallites at competitive or possibly much reduced costs, they are gaining some potential profits from Space X launches for other customers.

From Musk's perspective the cash influx may be very welcome as he is committed to other costly endeavors- mostly Tesla Motors, and an expensive lithium battery manufacturing startup. How much does Musk control in Space X? Is it the remaining 90%, are there other investors? Did Musk give up any voting control, or is Google a silent partner?

Dan Tibbets

[paperburn1]

SpaceX is a private company owned by management and employees, with minority investments from Founders Fund, Draper Fisher Jurvetson, and Valor Equity Partners and now Google. The majority is still owned and controlled by Musk . I was never intended for SpaceX to be a whole owned subsidiary of Musk.

[GIThruster]

http://www.nasa.gov/content/nasa-boeing ... MbJcijZkky

[Tom Ligon]

The benefits of OSC losing an Antares last fall ...

TWO baskets.

I'd say three, but OSC seems to have just struck a deal to buy more Russian rocket motors.