Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Dragon launch to ISS delayed

6 views
Skip to first unread message

Alan Erskine

unread,
Jan 19, 2012, 5:05:55 AM1/19/12
to
http://www.space.com/14251-launch-delay-spacex-dragon-spaceflight.html?utm_content=SPACEdotcom&utm_campaign=seo%2Bblitz&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social%2Bmedia

David Spain

unread,
Jan 19, 2012, 9:15:03 AM1/19/12
to
Alan Erskine wrote:
> http://www.space.com/14251-launch-delay-spacex-dragon-spaceflight.html?utm_content=SPACEdotcom&utm_campaign=seo%2Bblitz&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social%2Bmedia
>

Hmm interesting pict-o-graphs on the capsule exterior there.
Why doesn't that one look a bit like Marvin the Martian?

Dave

Snidely

unread,
Jan 19, 2012, 1:14:34 PM1/19/12
to
Alan Erskine <alan.e...@bigpond.com> scribbled something like ...

> http://www.space.com/14251-launch-delay-spacex-dragon-spaceflight.html?
> utm_content=SPACEdotcom&utm_campaign=seo%2Bblitz&utm_source=twitter.com
> &utm_medium=social%2Bmedia
>

This is more of a .station news item than a .shuttle, innit?

/dps

Brian Gaff

unread,
Jan 19, 2012, 1:16:46 PM1/19/12
to
Bloomin eck' a strange link that one.
Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email: bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________


"Alan Erskine" <alan.e...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:9WRRq.2001$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...
> http://www.space.com/14251-launch-delay-spacex-dragon-spaceflight.html?utm_content=SPACEdotcom&utm_campaign=seo%2Bblitz&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social%2Bmedia


Alan Erskine

unread,
Jan 20, 2012, 5:45:07 AM1/20/12
to
On 20/01/2012 5:16 AM, Brian Gaff wrote:
> Bloomin eck' a strange link that one.
> Brian
>

Worked for me.

Alan Erskine

unread,
Jan 20, 2012, 5:46:05 AM1/20/12
to
Why? The Falcon 9/Dragon is a shuttle and this group has no real
purpose (surely all shuttle-related posts should now go to .history).

Alan Erskine

unread,
Jan 20, 2012, 5:49:10 AM1/20/12
to
And, as I don't like cross-posting, I've trimmed your attempt at
redirection. Also, it was nothing to do with ISS - it's only about
Falcon 9/Dragon - a shuttle.

Snidely

unread,
Jan 21, 2012, 12:18:05 AM1/21/12
to
Alan Erskine <alan.e...@bigpond.com> scribbled something like ...

> On 20/01/2012 9:46 PM, Alan Erskine wrote:

>> Why? The Falcon 9/Dragon is a shuttle and this group has no real
>> purpose (surely all shuttle-related posts should now go to .history).

Dragon is not The Shuttle, and why should it matter that this group has no
real purpose (and I disagree that STS-related posts should now go to
.history).

> And, as I don't like cross-posting,

Pooh.

> I've trimmed your attempt at
> redirection. Also, it was nothing to do with ISS - it's only about
> Falcon 9/Dragon - a shuttle.

Going to ISS is nothing to do with ISS?

/dps

Alan Erskine

unread,
Jan 21, 2012, 5:19:26 AM1/21/12
to
It's about a manned spacecraft. As there is no group for similar
discussions, and Dragon is the likely replacement for STS, it seems most
appropriate to continue to use this group for similar posts.

While this group was originally intended for STS-specific posts, it's
still 'shuttle' related.

Brian Thorn

unread,
Jan 21, 2012, 11:47:53 AM1/21/12
to
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 21:46:05 +1100, Alan Erskine
<alan.e...@bigpond.com> wrote:


>> This is more of a .station news item than a .shuttle, innit?

>Why? The Falcon 9/Dragon is a shuttle

Whether Dragon should now be called a "Shuttle" is irrelevant (but
you'll find no reference whatsoever by SpaceX proclaiming
Falcon/Dragon to be a Shuttle.) This group was created way back when
to discuss the U.S. Space Shuttle.

Dragon is little different from Soyuz and Progress. Do you see any
posts about Soyuz and Progress in sci.space.shuttle?

sci.space.station is probably the best place for Dragon discussions,
as Dragon (and ATV, Soyuz, Progress, HTV, and Cygnus) only exists to
serve the Station now.

Brian

Jorge R. Frank

unread,
Jan 21, 2012, 3:14:45 PM1/21/12
to
I agree with Brian and Snidely.

Alan Erskine

unread,
Jan 21, 2012, 3:27:16 PM1/21/12
to
No. The delay isn't with Dragon anyway; it's with Falcon, so it's LV
related. There's no specific group for that.

Also, Dragon is to be reuseable and so is Falcon; so I think this is the
appropriate forum.

Snidely

unread,
Jan 21, 2012, 5:18:49 PM1/21/12
to
Alan Erskine <alan.e...@bigpond.com> scribbled something like ...

> No. The delay isn't with Dragon anyway; it's with Falcon, so it's LV
> related. There's no specific group for that.

SSP works fine for discussing Falcon, just as it does for Soyuz (R-7) and
Arianne V. If it gets to flight rates that justify its own group, we
should do that rather than twisting SSS.


/dps

JF Mezei

unread,
Jan 21, 2012, 9:38:29 PM1/21/12
to
Alan Erskine wrote:
> http://www.space.com/14251-launch-delay-spacex-dragon-spaceflight.html?utm_content=SPACEdotcom&utm_campaign=seo%2Bblitz&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social%2Bmedia

Where is the spacecraft right now ? Is it assembled and ready to be
moved to the pad ? What sort of tests would they be conducting that
would make them find bugs that had not surfaced before ?

Alan Erskine

unread,
Jan 21, 2012, 9:44:39 PM1/21/12
to
Last I heard, it was on the pad; but I think they would have moved it
inside by now, depending on how long the delay will be.

Brian Thorn

unread,
Jan 21, 2012, 11:59:37 PM1/21/12
to
On Sun, 22 Jan 2012 07:27:16 +1100, Alan Erskine
<alan.e...@bigpond.com> wrote:

>> sci.space.station is probably the best place for Dragon discussions,
>> as Dragon (and ATV, Soyuz, Progress, HTV, and Cygnus) only exists to
>> serve the Station now.

>No. The delay isn't with Dragon anyway; it's with Falcon, so it's LV
>related. There's no specific group for that.

Cite?

"The specific reason for the delay has not been revealed, as much as
the slip is is expected to be only a matter of weeks."

- www.NASAspaceflight.com

I'd put enormous sums of my money on this delay being due to Dragon,
which is after all making it first flight in its bonafide
"operational" configuration, and I don't blame SpaceX one bit for
delaying to make sure everything is as good as it can be.

>Also, Dragon is to be reuseable and so is Falcon; so I think this is the
>appropriate forum.

You are the only one who does. Take the hint.

Brian

Jorge R. Frank

unread,
Jan 22, 2012, 2:17:12 PM1/22/12
to
On 01/21/2012 10:59 PM, Brian Thorn wrote:
>
> You are the only one who does. Take the hint.

This is Usenet. If he insists anyway, we can't stop him.

Snidely

unread,
Jan 22, 2012, 2:37:36 PM1/22/12
to
"Jorge R. Frank" <jrf...@ibm-pc.borg> scribbled something like ...

> On 01/21/2012 10:59 PM, Brian Thorn wrote:
>>
>> You are the only one who does. Take the hint.
>
> This is Usenet. If he insists anyway, we can't stop him.
>

Can't stop him, but he may not get the response that the merits of the
material might deserve, and people might not remember later to search this
group for relevant articles.

Of course, Pat avoided SSS, so some of us may alreadhy have flexible search
strategies in place.

/dps

Jochem Huhmann

unread,
Jan 23, 2012, 5:19:28 AM1/23/12
to
Brian Thorn <btho...@suddenlink.net> writes:

> I'd put enormous sums of my money on this delay being due to Dragon,
> which is after all making it first flight in its bonafide
> "operational" configuration, and I don't blame SpaceX one bit for
> delaying to make sure everything is as good as it can be.

Surely not, but still SpaceX can be blamed for first talking NASA into
integrating two missions (the first operational Dragon test and the
first ISS cargo mission) into one and then delaying this mission *and*
forcing NASA to reschedule things at ISS because of this. Nothing major
probably, but I bet there will be lots of "told you so!" directed at
SpaceX right now...


Jochem

--
"A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no
longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

David Spain

unread,
Jan 23, 2012, 11:07:42 AM1/23/12
to
Snidely wrote:
> Of course, Pat avoided SSS, so some of us may alreadhy have flexible search
> strategies in place.

I noticed a few years back that this group seems to receive more that its fair
share of spam. Can't be quite sure of the cause, whether it be a disgruntled
poster handing this group over to spam bots or just the overall popularity of
the concept of sci.space.shuttle when the space shuttle was 'the' space
exploration story for the US.

But I finally implemented a pretty effective set of spam filters on my news
client and most of it has disappeared from view.

Dave

Greg (Strider) Moore

unread,
Jan 23, 2012, 11:40:39 AM1/23/12
to
"David Spain" wrote in message
news:PomdnfJzB8FPGIDS...@giganews.com...
Actually just in general I've noticed a drop, w/o filters.

>
>

--
Greg D. Moore President Green Mountain Software
http://www.greenms.com
Help honor our WWII Veterans: http://www.honorflight.org/
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.

bob haller

unread,
Jan 23, 2012, 11:38:07 PM1/23/12
to

>
> >I noticed a few years back that this group seems to receive more that its
> >fair share of spam. Can't be quite sure of the cause, whether it be a
> >disgruntled poster handing this group over to spam bots or just the overall
> >popularity of the concept of sci.space.shuttle when the space shuttle was
> >'the' space exploration story for the US.


probably because legit content was so little, it was overwhelmed by
spam

bob haller

unread,
Feb 5, 2012, 8:53:27 AM2/5/12
to
delayed again till april... software issues

Brian Thorn

unread,
Feb 7, 2012, 12:01:06 AM2/7/12
to
On 2012-02-05 13:53:27 +0000, bob haller said:

> delayed again till april... software issues

Completely unsurprising. They might want to take a page from the
Shuttle's book. The Shuttle team promised the first flight would happen
before the end of March, 1981. So wags had 1981 calendars made up that
read, "January", "February", "March", "March", "March"…

Shuttle ended up launching on March 43rd.

Brian

bob haller

unread,
Feb 10, 2012, 9:06:12 PM2/10/12
to
now delayed till late april. no biggie to guarantee success

brandi arledge

unread,
Mar 4, 2012, 7:17:57 PM3/4/12
to
On Jan 19, 4:05 am, Alan Erskine <alan.erski...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> http://www.space.com/14251-launch-delay-spacex-dragon-spaceflight.htm...
This postponement can only be for the best. With so much pressure it's
better to be safe than sorry.
0 new messages