Might be a little strange to consider this, but once we actually have space colonies and become a spacefaring race, sports will be so goddamn awesome. Seriously, how do NASA astronauts in zero gravity resist the urge to start reenacting the matrix, or playing space Quidditch using their rocket packs? Space football would be so awesome as well, and space nerf battles, and space ping pong, and oh my god I am so overwhelmed I cant even type
@mongorians22 The best part of all is building things in space! Zero gravity! you can maneuver HUGE heavy objects that on earth would weight over a ton easily.
@tehatemachine Yes, making the next superhero movie will be easier than ever before :)
But seriously, I would love to see Space X team up with Bigelow Aerospace, both are companies that have great ideas that are actually being tested, and both are commercial companies with a common interest in making space travel an affordable reality.
@mongorians22 yeah the inflatable spacecraft seems to be the most feasible way by far for ROOM! I hear ti's even safer than metal hull's. It's like a bullet proof vest in space from micrometeorites.
The cool thing about the Dragon is that it holds almost twice the crew as the Soyuz but is reusable and runs over $1 billion less to launch than Soyuz. I agree with the comment that governments are inefficient and demand too high of cost for what is needed to carry out these kinds of tasks. Great job by Space X and American ingenuity and drive.
@buyogi yup the private industry is the only way to get to space cheaper and safer. Because unlike a government. Companies are very limited with resources and have to used them the most effectively.
Governments suck. They will make technologies inefficiently and will eventually militarize them. The private sector is the engine of innovation and the future of space travel. Fuck Obama and fuck the U.S. government.
@LogicalFlawDetector-Of course, if the Kremlin (Kraplin) did everything that you claim the US governent is doing, which, by the way, they are NOT doing, you would have a bunch of wonderful things to say about it, wouldn't you? If they did do the things you claim they do, why didn't ANY of the US space programs become militarized?
Can anyone compare this to the Saturn 5 so far as performance? I'm wondering if they could use these for a moon mission. I know they can only make it into LEO.
@burn435353 The biggest difference with SpaceX is that they don't have cost plus contracts meaning they don't simply increase the price that they charge as the project progresses. Unlike most other aerospace contractors, they publicly post their prices and they are fixed. Also everything is built in house which is cheaper. The cost benefit goes to NASA, they can pay for ten Falcon 9 flights for the price of 1 shuttle flight.
can someone tell me how spacex is a profitable venture, i can see the possibility of profitability in the future through helium 3 mining on the moon, but currently i can only assume that its being subsidized by NASA, or NASA is paying spacex for launches, if this is so, what is the cost benefit of having a private space exploration company? why isnt nasa just doing this shit, or better yet, why not combine funding and have an international space program
@burn435353 It's being heavily subsidized by NASA. By that I mean that much of the development for Dragon and Falcon 9 is paid for already. The rest comes from contracts with other companies for launching satellites. I don't know if they're profiting yet, since I don't think they;ve done anything but test flights. Once they start launching cargo to ISS, they'll be making big bucks.
@burn435353 It currently states it is, but thats after large amounts contracts with he public sector (NASA). NASAs too ineffiencet for builidng shit so private sector like spaceX builds it. You cant have an internaitional space program with private companies
@ohkki123 The epic smoke of the Shuttle was also the epic fail of the Shuttle. Its cause by Solid rocket boosters SRB's. Oversized Estes model rocket engines and unsophisticated. Solid fuel explodes about 2% of the time because of air bubbles in production. One of the reasons Werner Von Braun left NASA was that he was against using solid fuel with manned rockets. SRB's cannot be turned off once started. After the Challenger accident, it turned out that Werner Von Braun was right.
@Apollo580 i pretty sure cars do less damamge than burning a hole into the atmosphere while LEAVING THE PLANET our cars are wayyy away from literally burning a hole...either way im not knocking it because science requires sacrifice....one of those sacrifices will be the planet...we kinda have to destroy this one to colonize a new one...
@youngflyss one rocket launch is harmless compared to a single 747.
While rockets burn more fuel per second, they do so at far higher temperatures (more clean combustion) and pass the thin ozone layer in a few seconds, instead of flying close to it for hours.
@samirls lol its alwas about money dude look at the budget of nasa for the apollo program something like 5 billion dollars a year and that was in 1960's, 70s today that same budget would equal 11 billion a year we did land on the moon u have to understand it was a whole program with many missions not just the famous apollo 11 which was a "show boat" mission to say we landed on the moon the ones before and the ones that followed actually were for science.
CHECK OUT "2012 UFOs Connections and Revelations" ON YOUTUBE This is a compilation of evidence revealed by former and present American presidents, astronauts, military personnel, politicians along with credible aired UFO footage. This compilation also contains planned revelations regarding knowledge of life beyond Earth along with it's current and ever ongoing presence which is being hidden from the public. This knowledge has been hidden from the public for over 50 years. + MORE.
SpaceX is the future. Now if they could just invent warp drive (heck they have launched a rocket with NINE engines in the first stage, and done it twice perfect)
@evilkitty52 Don't under estimate Russia. ISS could not be a reality with out Russian expertise. The US's best rocket Atlas V (until Falcon9) uses a Russian built engine. Russia also realized much earlier how bad of an idea a Shuttle system is. SpaceX will give the US what it really needs, an extremely safe (safest rocket design ever built for humans), practical, low cost ride to space.
@ti994apc to bad the first space x rocket from the cape parachutes failed to deploy and the rest of the rocket hit the water at about a hundred miles per hour (never on the news) and we have heard nothing from the 2nd rocket
@donzi1011 Falcon9 is an "expendable" rocket. No liquid fueled first stage has ever survived re-entry from any rocket. Even know SpaceX would eventually like to recover the 1st stage, its really a mute point in my opinion. You still have 30+ falcon9 disposable launches for the price of one Shuttle. Or, 240 people in space vs only 7 in Shuttle.
@donzi1011 That would be because they havent launched the second one. They dont have a infinite supply of money and are very careful. Yes the first one crashed so? The last falcon 9 performed perfectly. So really....
Interesting report from Russia on "commercial spaceflight's Spacex". Things sure have changed. Falcon 9 and Dragon are only the beginning more details -
Oh and the Soyuz has had at least 2 accidents we know about, killing 4 cosmonauts. They had the first test flight of the Soyuz style ship, was a mess from the word go. Flight computer went out, one solar wing was jammed so power was very low. Upon landing the parachute did not deploy correctly. The ohter one was more grizzly, the crew left their Salut space station and re-entered. When the hatch was opened they were all dead, the cabin had vented all the air.
They had JUST started to approach that flight rate in 1986, when Challenger happened, and there had been close calls before that, not to mention spare parts running in short supply, outdated computers that were tough to keep running. '86 was going to have an ave of 2 flights a month, did not happen.
The gov cant do anything cheap, the shuttle is a perfect example. Sold as a way to get to orbit cheap and safe, its not cheap at all and its safety is a bit dubious as well. To make the math of the shuttle work, they had to sell it as a system that could fly 2-3 times a MONTH and would not require a lot of work between flights.
The truth hurts: The engines pretty much need to be re-built after each flight, so then you need at least 4-5 "flows" to do that launch rate. Cant be done.
The reason we have NOT gotten out of LEO since 1972 is because of NASA and the fact they have been in business waaaaay longer than they needed to be. All this LEO work should have been handed off to the private sector years ago, then NASA could spend its funds on the cool stuff (The Moon, Mars etc) But they spend all their cash on being a taxi to the space station in a ship that is well beyond its warrenty period. Time to move on.
@Zoomer30 NASA has been working though. Shortly after the apollo missions, they did Skylab, Voyager, Galileo, Hubble, ISS, and many other expeditions. Mostly unmanned. NASA should be used properly for paving the way of space exploration while the private sector follows behind. The shuttle was supposed to be replaced in the late 90's by the venture start that the BUSH administration canceled!
@Zoomer30 NASA has been working though. Shortly after the apollo missions, they did Skylab, Voyager, Galileo, Hubble, ISS, and many other expeditions. Mostly unmanned. NASA should be used properly for paving the way of space exploration while the private sector follows behind. The shuttle was supposed to be replaced in the late 90's by the venture start that the BUSH administration canceled!
NASA workers wanting SpaceX to fail ranks up there with Rush Limbaugh wanting President Obama to fail, just makes no sense whatsoever. If NASA workers want to point fingers, point them at Bush, he is the one that set the date for the shuttle ending, and he did that way back in '03 so its not like this is breaking news.
SpaceX is showing us how its done, and Falcon 9 has made a believer out of me, I figured with nine engines theyd be lucky to clear the beach.
@Zoomer30 I am not a fan of bush, but the shuttle was not a good program.
I agree with what neil tyson said about the shuttle program. They werent doing anything beneficial, puting people in a tin can with some sub-par expierements running.
I bet the spacex people needed clean underwear when that fireball of flame popped up right after liftoff, almost looked like a bad day. Just a RP1 umbilical leaking.
When asked about having the cut the nozzle on the 2nd stage engine due to cracks in the extension, Musk was quoted as saying "She may not look like much but shes got it where it counts kid, and ive made some special modifications myself..."
I am a big fan of SpaceXs work, its time for the other companies to get their act together or this race will be over before anyone else even GETS to the start line.
Ha! I wouldn't bet against that theory! I think we have all had enough of NASA bumbling, over priced tin, and mismanagement of resources. Space X is the future.
NASA needs to open their books and hand over all their TAX PAYER funded data to the public domain. Then more private companies can start building better rockets. A space race in the private sector would see a massive jump in technology and we would be getting to Mars a whole lot quicker methinks.
@rdicko86 Just go to space.com and start reading through the news articles. Good, concise information written in a way that's easy to understand, so you can get a feel for what's happening with the various NASA (and military and private) programs.
@freesk8 NASA is more than just space... They designed the capsule and suits used to bring up the Chilean miners... NASA is a National Aeronautics And Space Administration. That means they also study aircraft as well as space craft and everything in between. NASA is the whole reason that this COTS 1 demonstration flight took place. The SpaceX Dragon will first carry cargo to the ISS FOR NASA. They may carry Astronauts later on as they prove themselves.
@freesk8 Yeah but the fed can do certain types of things better than the private sector... That's because the fed has consistent funding that's pretty much recession proof. Also remember that it was federal dollars from NASA that helped SpaceX to develop their COTS proposal into what we see here. Most of the other companies didn't do so well. The COTS proposals were submitted to NASA right before the recession. A lot of projects didn't make it because of that.
@freesk8 Subsities were awarded based on competition...SpaceX consistently beat the competition. They even beat out proposals by companies that were already in Aerospace including SpaceHab, ATK, Boeing/Lockheed Martin...
Boeing's ATV has already flown cargo to the ISS but lost, Lockheed Martin also worked on the ATV as well as the Japanese H-II (HTV).
SpaceHab has/had Arctus. I don't know it's fate though. SpaceHab has flown modules aboard the Space Shuttle in the past.
@freesk8 PS: the Dragon also has a crew capability of 7 astronauts... that's the same as the Shuttle... The other COTS proposals didn't have a crewed variant.
Very cool. Miss the launch on CNN this morning thanks for the upload. Kinda sucks if you want to go to space you have to be a millionaire kinda sucks for us that's not a millionaire.
@hutchison82 ahh okay.... in the same mag was a plasma rocket designed by this Franklin Chang Diaz that sounds pretty cool..... you may be interested in looking it up... and if they disbanded the shuttle why are they still using rockets? The US air force already declassified the X-37B which is capable of space flight.. so imagine the classified stuff....
@USFullOfLies Your going to be disappointed Jan 1st 2013 are you going to start on another fantasy 2012 was when the Myan's calender ran out do you think its the end of the world every december 31st?
Chariots of the gods uh ooh 70's flashback "they practically own south america" optical illusions on mars and the pyramids where built by men ever hear of the simplest answer is usually the correct one and I suppose the moon landings didn't happen as well
even checka-kgb-fsb spies infest rt: russia today! they are all part of the flying saucer alien abduction cover-up! martian coneheads from hydroate chaos and cydonia mars buildt the pyramids on mars moon egypt mexico and china! martian coneheads were the ancient astronauts (read charoits of the gods by eric von daniken)
space-x-falcon-9 dragon( manned ) cannot get to near earth apollo asteroids or moon luna or mars! to go interplanetary manned to phobos+deimos+mars and ceres in main asteroid belt...you will need hot fission engines!...
5-stars! space-x falcon-9 rocket provides american jobs!...nasa spends 55 $ million to russian roskosmos for each american astronaut round trip on proven "cosmonaut-killer" soyuz system! ("interkosmos-usa" sucks!) falcon-9-dragon capsule will carry astronauts to and from the international space station! / @ wisconsin
Any prove of your statement? There were no crashes of russian manned spacecrafts since 1971. Soyuz-1 and Soyuz-11 killed 4 cosmonauts ......BTW shuttle killed 14 astranauts
Shuttles hold more people, and are far more advanced, than the Soyuz craft. You can't measure the failures by casualties, as an accident can happen with any number of people aboard. Assuming that a space shuttle accident would kill everyone aboard, there have been 2 accidents, Challenger and Columbia. Assuming a Soyuz accident would kill everyone aboard, there have also been 2 accidents, Soyuz 1 and Soyuz 11. So you can't say that Soyuz has a better record, just less room for people.
Ah, but the shuttle has flown 132 times, whereas Soyuz has launched over 1700 times! so the shuttle's failure rate is 1.51%, and Soyuz manages 0.12%. You can't measure the failures by absolutes. Soyuz definatley has a better track record. Also, the soyuz has an abort mode for every stage of launch - once you light the blue tape under the shuttle's solid boosters, there's nothing you can do...
The shuttle's failures were both completely preventable, and were the fault of Nasa management, not the craft itself. The flight before Challenger's last, one by Atlantis, nearly had the same failure(the o-ring in a SRB shrank due to cold weather, and could not seal properly) and NASA was very aware of this, but launched anyway. When Columbia launched, NASA new about the foam that hit its wing, but decided to come to a decision AFTER it landed(obviously, Columbia broke up on landing.)
If you look at it the tech is all used here on Earth and alot of the tech is used for ocean reseach also billions are spent around the world on investigating the seas, underwater cities and submarine cruise liners have you watched too much Disney future videos oh and Goverment cover ups as well?
Chemtrails and aircraft shedding aluminium I live near an airport with lots of high flying aircraft and have never seen a trail last all day also its not the aircraft its the fuel and old aircraft use it too also you chemtrail boys ever heard of Volcanoes they throw out a hell of alot of chemtrails... Iceland anyone?
Leaving this important task to Private Indrustry is very risky, After a couple of sucessuful lanuches the narrow-minded managers will start cutting corners and the whole thing will collapse, then they will move on ( not accountable to anyone, with money in the bank ), The Sick State of America.
This will end like the real estate bubble machine.
Leaving this important task to Private Indrustry is very risky, After a couple of sucessuful lanuches the narrow-minded managers will start cutting corners and the whole thing will collapse, then they will move on ( not accountable to anyone, with money in the bank ), The Sick State of America.
This will end like the real estate bubble machine.
The Shuttle's are only a third the way through their lives and should never have been cancelled and the first thing Obama should have done is recind the order. The Shuttle is the most vesitile ship ever and while cool Dragon is still only a capsule great technology but still splashes down. a step back not forward
cool miision but still no Shuttle the coolest vehicle ever!!oh and yetibiker when less than 1% of America's GDP is spent on nasa Its a small price to pay for the great adventure, even Britain, if it was to pull its finger out could afford Nasa's Budget. ps the whole development budget is 500 million for a delivered system so the launch is nothing...
and this is happening as NASA shifts from space shuttle and manned space flight to NASA jets seeding the atmosphere with sulfates to fight global warming. I shit you not! It was in the San Antonio Express News last Sunday.
Rocket fuel is totally different from aircraft fuel so it burns differently as in this case. I wonder how much this whole event cost the US and us living here? Here is Obama talking about a double recession and we are spending billions and billions to launch these rockets why?
@yetibiker08 no money is wasted on space exploration. We need rockets to send men and equipment/satellites to space. Also creates jobs and if privatization of space continues it will create a lot. Not counting other technologies and benefits resulting from it.
Well I guess we could debate all night long and I do like space exploration too but would rather see it used here on earth like perhaps in our oceans. So much to explore there more so than space like building underwater cities, submarine cruise lines, educational centers for kids and the list goes on. Perhaps there is an undertone here indicating that Earth has some issues and NASA is helping the governments look elsewhere?
once again proves that the more we change .... the more we stay the same... i hope this expands humanity... but i also hope that if colinization of the moon and mars happens that it will be much cheaper... so that rich people don't absolutely run the future... good job spacex! ^_^
You know what, I believe in chemical trails now, you guys have converted me.
Because those chemical trails are what you guys snort off glass top tables with razorblades before you post....yeah dude, those are real "chemtrails".
Oh God, the Chemtrail idiots have infested this thread. Can the 911 Truthers be far behind? Hey, maybe we'll even get a Tri-Lateral Commission nutjob to check in.
@cartman1492 Troll Alert, 262 channel views since you joined YT in August of 2006...and out of the 1 billion channels you just happened to find this video to comment on...get a fucking life loser!
All of this talk of "chemical trails" makes me sick. I will sacrifice the atmosphere for the sheer awesomeness and power of a shuttle Solid Booster flame and contrail. Go drive your Prius and believe in global warming all you want.
Not only that, but just because you can't see a "chemical trail" doesn't mean it's not there.
@zaxus211 I have degrees in Engineering and Physics so yeah, I've done my homework. This chemtrail BS is a butch of silly nonsense started by fevered paranoids, most of which still live in mom's basement. Condensation trails are well understood and fully explain what you see following a commercial aircraft flying at 40kft. Condensation trails will persist in the upper atmosphere for an extended time and they are completely harmless.
@cartman1492 You really need to go back to school then. The Condensation only last for no more than 5 minutes. If you look at planes 10 years ago, the trails would disappear after no more than 5 minutes, but with these new planes, the trails last the entire freaking day. People even tested the white stuff that gathers on cars. They found aluminum in that. Now why would there be aluminum in the air? Does the air magically make it now? The only place it could be coming from is the planes.
@joshlete The vast majority of commercial planes flying today were also flying 10 years ago. And I really have no idea where you got this idea that contrails disappeared after 5 minutes 10 years ago. They didn't. They lasted the exact same amount of time then as they do now. If you disagree, please provide evidence to the contrary. If you can't, then shut up and go jerk off to Zeitgeist or some other equivalent conspiracy tripe designed to give stupid people orgasms.
i like this rocket better than the space shuttle only because it doesn't leave a trail of chemicals, gas, exhaust and smoke all the way in to the exosphere...
awesome job space x! you guys are truly pioneers and have taken our species another step closer to space tourism and eventually colonization! keep up the great work!
DONT BUY GOLD THE ZIONIST LIARS ARE IN CHARGE OF THAT ONE , PEOPLE ARE HOLDING FAKE PAPERS ON THIER GOLD BONDS,CHANGE BANKS GO TO YOUR LOCAL ITY BANK , If you do your banking with BANK OF AMERICA, CHASE, WACHOVIA, WELLS FARGO, CITIBANK, US BANK, SUNTRUST BANK, NATIONAL CITY BANK, MORGAN STANLEY, UNION BANK, UBS, MORGAN STANLEY, GOLDMAN SACHS, BRANCH BANKING & TRUST, REGIONS BANK, COMERICA, PNC BANKS CHANGE IT NOW , GO TO ...STOPBANK BLOGSPOT..............PRAISE HIS NAME IN THE HIGHEST YHWH
lol theyre spending 458 million for this. it is a glorious advance for the space industry, and nasa can finally get back to doing out-there science and space exploration instead of being on orbital ferry-duty
they probly puttin a large space gun in space and then shoot large beams around the earth to make everybody think america is the greatest and we repeat this in are heads everyday for ever
interesting video and very informative
ttwilkable 3 weeks ago
Might be a little strange to consider this, but once we actually have space colonies and become a spacefaring race, sports will be so goddamn awesome. Seriously, how do NASA astronauts in zero gravity resist the urge to start reenacting the matrix, or playing space Quidditch using their rocket packs? Space football would be so awesome as well, and space nerf battles, and space ping pong, and oh my god I am so overwhelmed I cant even type
mongorians22 2 months ago
@mongorians22 The best part of all is building things in space! Zero gravity! you can maneuver HUGE heavy objects that on earth would weight over a ton easily.
tehatemachine 2 months ago
@tehatemachine Yes, making the next superhero movie will be easier than ever before :)
But seriously, I would love to see Space X team up with Bigelow Aerospace, both are companies that have great ideas that are actually being tested, and both are commercial companies with a common interest in making space travel an affordable reality.
mongorians22 2 months ago
@mongorians22 yeah the inflatable spacecraft seems to be the most feasible way by far for ROOM! I hear ti's even safer than metal hull's. It's like a bullet proof vest in space from micrometeorites.
tehatemachine 2 months ago
@mongorians22 I'm pretty sure Bigelow already has a few flights booked with SpaceX.
KillahMate 2 weeks ago
The cool thing about the Dragon is that it holds almost twice the crew as the Soyuz but is reusable and runs over $1 billion less to launch than Soyuz. I agree with the comment that governments are inefficient and demand too high of cost for what is needed to carry out these kinds of tasks. Great job by Space X and American ingenuity and drive.
buyogi 2 months ago
@buyogi yup the private industry is the only way to get to space cheaper and safer. Because unlike a government. Companies are very limited with resources and have to used them the most effectively.
tehatemachine 2 months ago
Do Asians work at NASA or SpaceX?
VanillaSnow23 3 months ago
@VanillaSnow23 no not really, maybe a couple.
njdevil281 3 months ago
@njdevil281 no i hear a LOT work at NASA, actually...
VanillaSnow23 3 months ago
@VanillaSnow23 you'd be mistaken.
njdevil281 3 months ago
Comment removed
VanillaSnow23 3 months ago
@njdevil281 Nope. For starts, Indian Americans alone make up 36% of the scientists at NASA, and that's just Indians ;)
VanillaSnow23 3 months ago
@VanillaSnow23 Why did you ask then?
MrJackStill 2 months ago
@MrJackStill Verification.
VanillaSnow23 2 months ago
@VanillaSnow23 lol :)
MrJackStill 2 months ago
Governments suck. They will make technologies inefficiently and will eventually militarize them. The private sector is the engine of innovation and the future of space travel. Fuck Obama and fuck the U.S. government.
LogicalFlawDetector 4 months ago
@LogicalFlawDetector-Of course, if the Kremlin (Kraplin) did everything that you claim the US governent is doing, which, by the way, they are NOT doing, you would have a bunch of wonderful things to say about it, wouldn't you? If they did do the things you claim they do, why didn't ANY of the US space programs become militarized?
ConspiracyTroll 3 months ago
Can anyone compare this to the Saturn 5 so far as performance? I'm wondering if they could use these for a moon mission. I know they can only make it into LEO.
CowboyDiplomacy 4 months ago
@CowboyDiplomacy No, these are just for LEO. Not enough fuel and not NEAR enough cargo capacity.
deathrooster14 2 weeks ago
@burn435353 The biggest difference with SpaceX is that they don't have cost plus contracts meaning they don't simply increase the price that they charge as the project progresses. Unlike most other aerospace contractors, they publicly post their prices and they are fixed. Also everything is built in house which is cheaper. The cost benefit goes to NASA, they can pay for ten Falcon 9 flights for the price of 1 shuttle flight.
ccricers 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
★★Whitehouse.gov has a UFO Disclosure petition★★
posted on the Whitehouse website
whitehouse dot gov/gKC
Non u.s. citizens are allowed link on my profile
ParadigmNews 4 months ago
can someone tell me how spacex is a profitable venture, i can see the possibility of profitability in the future through helium 3 mining on the moon, but currently i can only assume that its being subsidized by NASA, or NASA is paying spacex for launches, if this is so, what is the cost benefit of having a private space exploration company? why isnt nasa just doing this shit, or better yet, why not combine funding and have an international space program
burn435353 5 months ago
@burn435353 It's being heavily subsidized by NASA. By that I mean that much of the development for Dragon and Falcon 9 is paid for already. The rest comes from contracts with other companies for launching satellites. I don't know if they're profiting yet, since I don't think they;ve done anything but test flights. Once they start launching cargo to ISS, they'll be making big bucks.
thesnorklemonkey 4 months ago
@burn435353 It currently states it is, but thats after large amounts contracts with he public sector (NASA). NASAs too ineffiencet for builidng shit so private sector like spaceX builds it. You cant have an internaitional space program with private companies
Exthox 4 months ago
thumbs up if you miss the epic smoke and noise of the space shuttle.
You know, one day, when space travel becomes everyday stuff, NASA should launch a shuttle as some sort of memorial event.
ohkki123 6 months ago
@ohkki123 The epic smoke of the Shuttle was also the epic fail of the Shuttle. Its cause by Solid rocket boosters SRB's. Oversized Estes model rocket engines and unsophisticated. Solid fuel explodes about 2% of the time because of air bubbles in production. One of the reasons Werner Von Braun left NASA was that he was against using solid fuel with manned rockets. SRB's cannot be turned off once started. After the Challenger accident, it turned out that Werner Von Braun was right.
ti994apc 5 months ago
yippee ki yay, Mr. Falcon!
posada432 7 months ago
anybody say Global arming?
they just burned a hole in the atmosphere...lol
it was sick tho...i wish i coulda burned that hole in gods earth...lmao!!
youngflyss 7 months ago
@youngflyss If you really wish to tackle global warming, please turn your attention towards automobiles. Not rockets.
Apollo580 5 months ago
@Apollo580 i pretty sure cars do less damamge than burning a hole into the atmosphere while LEAVING THE PLANET our cars are wayyy away from literally burning a hole...either way im not knocking it because science requires sacrifice....one of those sacrifices will be the planet...we kinda have to destroy this one to colonize a new one...
youngflyss 5 months ago
@youngflyss one rocket launch is harmless compared to a single 747.
While rockets burn more fuel per second, they do so at far higher temperatures (more clean combustion) and pass the thin ozone layer in a few seconds, instead of flying close to it for hours.
ti994apc 5 months ago
@MrAirinys
horse shit!
1138thz 8 months ago
just imagine being there and not knowing that this was going to be launched, you would be like, shit are we going to war
SenyorPony 8 months ago
nominal
just
phenomenal
kbp5520 8 months ago
takes half the time of a space shuttle.
sean890z 9 months ago
I wish the man had gone to the moon. It is not possible that 40 years have benn passed and technology delayed.
samirls 9 months ago
@samirls lol its alwas about money dude look at the budget of nasa for the apollo program something like 5 billion dollars a year and that was in 1960's, 70s today that same budget would equal 11 billion a year we did land on the moon u have to understand it was a whole program with many missions not just the famous apollo 11 which was a "show boat" mission to say we landed on the moon the ones before and the ones that followed actually were for science.
nateextreme0969 9 months ago
haha, step 1 ISS, step 2 moon, step 3, mars, step 4, build on both of the planets
railfanatic844 10 months ago
I want spacex...
TLaitharex 10 months ago 2
And this is SpaceX kicking NASA in the balls.
Next step? Falcon Heavy and a return to the moon.
MrToubrouk 10 months ago
@MrToubrouk SpaceX doesn't compete with NASA. In fact NASA helps SpaceX and will be their main customer.
Jacnas 10 months ago 5
Awesome.
GerbilEssences 10 months ago
It's a cool rocket.
How long till they have a manned capsule ready ? And will the 1st test flight be with NASA astro's or do spacex HAVE ASTRO'S ?
DeejayDREAM 11 months ago
Good the Obama powered rocket works
ImSweetKiss 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
CHECK OUT "2012 UFOs Connections and Revelations" ON YOUTUBE This is a compilation of evidence revealed by former and present American presidents, astronauts, military personnel, politicians along with credible aired UFO footage. This compilation also contains planned revelations regarding knowledge of life beyond Earth along with it's current and ever ongoing presence which is being hidden from the public. This knowledge has been hidden from the public for over 50 years. + MORE.
Futurecop2012B 11 months ago
nooooooo i missed it how i live in jacksonville for gods sake
CardShark989 1 year ago
SpaceX is the future. Now if they could just invent warp drive (heck they have launched a rocket with NINE engines in the first stage, and done it twice perfect)
Zoomer30 1 year ago
LOL Russia they so mad at Superior american technology
evilkitty52 1 year ago
@evilkitty52 Don't under estimate Russia. ISS could not be a reality with out Russian expertise. The US's best rocket Atlas V (until Falcon9) uses a Russian built engine. Russia also realized much earlier how bad of an idea a Shuttle system is. SpaceX will give the US what it really needs, an extremely safe (safest rocket design ever built for humans), practical, low cost ride to space.
ti994apc 1 year ago
@ti994apc to bad the first space x rocket from the cape parachutes failed to deploy and the rest of the rocket hit the water at about a hundred miles per hour (never on the news) and we have heard nothing from the 2nd rocket
donzi1011 1 year ago
@donzi1011 Falcon9 is an "expendable" rocket. No liquid fueled first stage has ever survived re-entry from any rocket. Even know SpaceX would eventually like to recover the 1st stage, its really a mute point in my opinion. You still have 30+ falcon9 disposable launches for the price of one Shuttle. Or, 240 people in space vs only 7 in Shuttle.
ti994apc 1 year ago
@donzi1011 That would be because they havent launched the second one. They dont have a infinite supply of money and are very careful. Yes the first one crashed so? The last falcon 9 performed perfectly. So really....
valcan321 11 months ago
@evilkitty52 They probably mad at ingenuity, flexibility and entrepreneurship, but not technology.
Nadirion1 11 months ago
Take that Russia.
tobigforyou 1 year ago
Interesting report from Russia on "commercial spaceflight's Spacex". Things sure have changed. Falcon 9 and Dragon are only the beginning more details -
karlofhermosabeach 1 year ago
this along with the Virgin galactic is a sighn that the private sector is kicking in haha! soon the cost of space will dramatically drop!
EpiDemic117 1 year ago
this will be the CHEAPEST option of resupplying the ISS with goods. Even cheaper than the soyuz i think.
EpiDemic117 1 year ago
Oh and the Soyuz has had at least 2 accidents we know about, killing 4 cosmonauts. They had the first test flight of the Soyuz style ship, was a mess from the word go. Flight computer went out, one solar wing was jammed so power was very low. Upon landing the parachute did not deploy correctly. The ohter one was more grizzly, the crew left their Salut space station and re-entered. When the hatch was opened they were all dead, the cabin had vented all the air.
Zoomer30 1 year ago
They had JUST started to approach that flight rate in 1986, when Challenger happened, and there had been close calls before that, not to mention spare parts running in short supply, outdated computers that were tough to keep running. '86 was going to have an ave of 2 flights a month, did not happen.
Zoomer30 1 year ago
The gov cant do anything cheap, the shuttle is a perfect example. Sold as a way to get to orbit cheap and safe, its not cheap at all and its safety is a bit dubious as well. To make the math of the shuttle work, they had to sell it as a system that could fly 2-3 times a MONTH and would not require a lot of work between flights.
The truth hurts: The engines pretty much need to be re-built after each flight, so then you need at least 4-5 "flows" to do that launch rate. Cant be done.
Zoomer30 1 year ago
The reason we have NOT gotten out of LEO since 1972 is because of NASA and the fact they have been in business waaaaay longer than they needed to be. All this LEO work should have been handed off to the private sector years ago, then NASA could spend its funds on the cool stuff (The Moon, Mars etc) But they spend all their cash on being a taxi to the space station in a ship that is well beyond its warrenty period. Time to move on.
Zoomer30 1 year ago 2
@Zoomer30 NASA has been working though. Shortly after the apollo missions, they did Skylab, Voyager, Galileo, Hubble, ISS, and many other expeditions. Mostly unmanned. NASA should be used properly for paving the way of space exploration while the private sector follows behind. The shuttle was supposed to be replaced in the late 90's by the venture start that the BUSH administration canceled!
EpiDemic117 1 year ago
@Zoomer30 NASA has been working though. Shortly after the apollo missions, they did Skylab, Voyager, Galileo, Hubble, ISS, and many other expeditions. Mostly unmanned. NASA should be used properly for paving the way of space exploration while the private sector follows behind. The shuttle was supposed to be replaced in the late 90's by the venture start that the BUSH administration canceled!
EpiDemic117 1 year ago
so is there video of the capsule landing in the pacific? have they recovered it?
bv90andy 1 year ago
watch?v=K88HFdTNa8U
What do you say about this?
Kadet79RU 1 year ago
Just to put some sefisticated camera's in orbit 160.1 mega pixel, for homeland security.
alijabaful 1 year ago
bet that baby can carry nukes
ThisBoyTV 1 year ago
@ThisBoyTV Any space craft can carry "nukes" if configured to do so... That's why the West was so concerned about NK launching "satellites".
dreammaker182 1 year ago 3
@tetrasin Noninal:
8.
Aerospace . performing or achieved within expected, acceptable limits; normal and satisfactory: The mission was nominal throughout.
dreammaker182 1 year ago
NASA workers wanting SpaceX to fail ranks up there with Rush Limbaugh wanting President Obama to fail, just makes no sense whatsoever. If NASA workers want to point fingers, point them at Bush, he is the one that set the date for the shuttle ending, and he did that way back in '03 so its not like this is breaking news.
SpaceX is showing us how its done, and Falcon 9 has made a believer out of me, I figured with nine engines theyd be lucky to clear the beach.
Zoomer30 1 year ago 3
Comment removed
AppleMacBookBoi 1 year ago
@Zoomer30 Nasa cannot handle everything so SpaceX and all that is a great idea I agree with you 100%..
AppleMacBookBoi 1 year ago
@Zoomer30 I am not a fan of bush, but the shuttle was not a good program.
I agree with what neil tyson said about the shuttle program. They werent doing anything beneficial, puting people in a tin can with some sub-par expierements running.
TheKturner05 1 year ago
I bet the spacex people needed clean underwear when that fireball of flame popped up right after liftoff, almost looked like a bad day. Just a RP1 umbilical leaking.
Zoomer30 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
When asked about having the cut the nozzle on the 2nd stage engine due to cracks in the extension, Musk was quoted as saying "She may not look like much but shes got it where it counts kid, and ive made some special modifications myself..."
I am a big fan of SpaceXs work, its time for the other companies to get their act together or this race will be over before anyone else even GETS to the start line.
Zoomer30 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@hutchison * ° ø ° » »
ufohq1 1 year ago
@hutchison * ° ø ° » »
ufohq1 1 year ago
° ø ø ø ø
ufohq1 1 year ago
Falcon punch!!....errr i mean launch!!
EyFmS 1 year ago
Are NASA employees responsible for the thumb downs?
GWhite1001 1 year ago 31
@GWhite1001 NASA employees are out of work either way... Orion was a long ways off anyway and the shuttle should be retired by 2012.
dreammaker182 1 year ago
@GWhite1001 - I doubt it. SpaceX and NASA work together.
A86 1 year ago
@GWhite1001 NASA pays for this whole operation.
njdevil281 1 year ago
@GWhite1001
Ha! I wouldn't bet against that theory! I think we have all had enough of NASA bumbling, over priced tin, and mismanagement of resources. Space X is the future.
1138thz 8 months ago
@GWhite1001
Nope, just russians, they're angry cause they will lose all our business from using the soyuz. lol.
darkmaster388 7 months ago
@GWhite1001 No, because NASA has a contract with SpaceX. Most likely, this is the future of the American Space Program.
Astrogod07 7 months ago 10
NASA needs to open their books and hand over all their TAX PAYER funded data to the public domain. Then more private companies can start building better rockets. A space race in the private sector would see a massive jump in technology and we would be getting to Mars a whole lot quicker methinks.
dannyinaus 1 year ago
nominal, normal and optimal?
0gundamx 1 year ago
How about a "NOMINAL" drinking game? anyone? I'd be blowing chunks by the end of the video!
rsnboy08 1 year ago
phe nominal
cubeloid 1 year ago 2
rocket
Tressco 1 year ago
@rdicko86 Just go to space.com and start reading through the news articles. Good, concise information written in a way that's easy to understand, so you can get a feel for what's happening with the various NASA (and military and private) programs.
aklyon 1 year ago
Yay, private space vehicles!
We need to privatize NASA as soon as possible!
freesk8 1 year ago
@freesk8 NASA is more than just space... They designed the capsule and suits used to bring up the Chilean miners... NASA is a National Aeronautics And Space Administration. That means they also study aircraft as well as space craft and everything in between. NASA is the whole reason that this COTS 1 demonstration flight took place. The SpaceX Dragon will first carry cargo to the ISS FOR NASA. They may carry Astronauts later on as they prove themselves.
dreammaker182 1 year ago
@dreammaker182 The falcon launch is a great step in the direction of privatizing NASA.
All of the functions you mention above should indeed be totally privatized in the long run.
freesk8 1 year ago
@freesk8 Yeah but the fed can do certain types of things better than the private sector... That's because the fed has consistent funding that's pretty much recession proof. Also remember that it was federal dollars from NASA that helped SpaceX to develop their COTS proposal into what we see here. Most of the other companies didn't do so well. The COTS proposals were submitted to NASA right before the recession. A lot of projects didn't make it because of that.
dreammaker182 1 year ago
@dreammaker182 Yeah, it is pretty hard for other proposals to compete with another proposal that is being subsidized by the government.
freesk8 1 year ago
@freesk8 Subsities were awarded based on competition...SpaceX consistently beat the competition. They even beat out proposals by companies that were already in Aerospace including SpaceHab, ATK, Boeing/Lockheed Martin...
Boeing's ATV has already flown cargo to the ISS but lost, Lockheed Martin also worked on the ATV as well as the Japanese H-II (HTV).
SpaceHab has/had Arctus. I don't know it's fate though. SpaceHab has flown modules aboard the Space Shuttle in the past.
dreammaker182 1 year ago
@freesk8 PS: the Dragon also has a crew capability of 7 astronauts... that's the same as the Shuttle... The other COTS proposals didn't have a crewed variant.
dreammaker182 1 year ago 24
no chem trail here
coasttocoasthulk 1 year ago
How about altitude and speed readings????? I know - I know - NOMINAL
frontier1701 1 year ago
Very cool. Miss the launch on CNN this morning thanks for the upload. Kinda sucks if you want to go to space you have to be a millionaire kinda sucks for us that's not a millionaire.
genestarwindjf80 1 year ago
Everything is nominal
catch22af 1 year ago
Aren't Nasa Rapping up their rocket program?? I read that in a science mag.... so i'd say this already redundant...
rdicko86 1 year ago
@rdicko86 You must have read it wrong it's the shuttle not the whole program
hutchison82 1 year ago
@hutchison82 ahh okay.... in the same mag was a plasma rocket designed by this Franklin Chang Diaz that sounds pretty cool..... you may be interested in looking it up... and if they disbanded the shuttle why are they still using rockets? The US air force already declassified the X-37B which is capable of space flight.. so imagine the classified stuff....
rdicko86 1 year ago
Sorry pathetic humans, even if you try to look for life possibility outside,
It's now too late and even impossible to save billions of sinful humans.
2012 is near.
USFullOfLies 1 year ago
@USFullOfLies Your going to be disappointed Jan 1st 2013 are you going to start on another fantasy 2012 was when the Myan's calender ran out do you think its the end of the world every december 31st?
hutchison82 1 year ago
@hutchison82 They'll just start talking about what a close call it was.
SamSpade2010 1 year ago
I bet igorvasilevsky thumbed down this video just because this is NASA. That guys whole life revolves around trolling RT's videos. Amirite?
welcomegohome 1 year ago
Chariots of the gods uh ooh 70's flashback "they practically own south america" optical illusions on mars and the pyramids where built by men ever hear of the simplest answer is usually the correct one and I suppose the moon landings didn't happen as well
hutchison82 1 year ago
even checka-kgb-fsb spies infest rt: russia today! they are all part of the flying saucer alien abduction cover-up! martian coneheads from hydroate chaos and cydonia mars buildt the pyramids on mars moon egypt mexico and china! martian coneheads were the ancient astronauts (read charoits of the gods by eric von daniken)
teamufo1 1 year ago
the pentagon nasa and jpl covers up flying saucers and space aliens! go to w w w . disclosureproject . org...(dr. steven greer and c-seti)
teamufo1 1 year ago
@slayer236071probably because your average 747 doesnt fly on rocket fuel :D
xDarkcynx 1 year ago
space-x-falcon-9 dragon( manned ) cannot get to near earth apollo asteroids or moon luna or mars! to go interplanetary manned to phobos+deimos+mars and ceres in main asteroid belt...you will need hot fission engines!...
6americanflagsonmoon 1 year ago
5-stars! space-x falcon-9 rocket provides american jobs!...nasa spends 55 $ million to russian roskosmos for each american astronaut round trip on proven "cosmonaut-killer" soyuz system! ("interkosmos-usa" sucks!) falcon-9-dragon capsule will carry astronauts to and from the international space station! / @ wisconsin
6americanflagsonmoon 1 year ago
@6americanflagsonmoon >>proven "cosmonaut-killer" soyuz system
Any prove of your statement? There were no crashes of russian manned spacecrafts since 1971. Soyuz-1 and Soyuz-11 killed 4 cosmonauts ......BTW shuttle killed 14 astranauts
kibabiba 1 year ago
@kibabiba
Shuttles hold more people, and are far more advanced, than the Soyuz craft. You can't measure the failures by casualties, as an accident can happen with any number of people aboard. Assuming that a space shuttle accident would kill everyone aboard, there have been 2 accidents, Challenger and Columbia. Assuming a Soyuz accident would kill everyone aboard, there have also been 2 accidents, Soyuz 1 and Soyuz 11. So you can't say that Soyuz has a better record, just less room for people.
MrAmerica1995 1 year ago
@MrAmerica1995 I just was answering to some person who called Soyuz "cosmonaut-killer system".
kibabiba 1 year ago
@MrAmerica1995
Ah, but the shuttle has flown 132 times, whereas Soyuz has launched over 1700 times! so the shuttle's failure rate is 1.51%, and Soyuz manages 0.12%. You can't measure the failures by absolutes. Soyuz definatley has a better track record. Also, the soyuz has an abort mode for every stage of launch - once you light the blue tape under the shuttle's solid boosters, there's nothing you can do...
tl6973 1 year ago
@tl6973
The shuttle's failures were both completely preventable, and were the fault of Nasa management, not the craft itself. The flight before Challenger's last, one by Atlantis, nearly had the same failure(the o-ring in a SRB shrank due to cold weather, and could not seal properly) and NASA was very aware of this, but launched anyway. When Columbia launched, NASA new about the foam that hit its wing, but decided to come to a decision AFTER it landed(obviously, Columbia broke up on landing.)
MrAmerica1995 1 year ago
If you look at it the tech is all used here on Earth and alot of the tech is used for ocean reseach also billions are spent around the world on investigating the seas, underwater cities and submarine cruise liners have you watched too much Disney future videos oh and Goverment cover ups as well?
hutchison82 1 year ago
Chemtrails and aircraft shedding aluminium I live near an airport with lots of high flying aircraft and have never seen a trail last all day also its not the aircraft its the fuel and old aircraft use it too also you chemtrail boys ever heard of Volcanoes they throw out a hell of alot of chemtrails... Iceland anyone?
hutchison82 1 year ago
Leaving this important task to Private Indrustry is very risky, After a couple of sucessuful lanuches the narrow-minded managers will start cutting corners and the whole thing will collapse, then they will move on ( not accountable to anyone, with money in the bank ), The Sick State of America.
This will end like the real estate bubble machine.
ad2181 1 year ago
Leaving this important task to Private Indrustry is very risky, After a couple of sucessuful lanuches the narrow-minded managers will start cutting corners and the whole thing will collapse, then they will move on ( not accountable to anyone, with money in the bank ), The Sick State of America.
This will end like the real estate bubble machine.
ad2181 1 year ago
The Shuttle's are only a third the way through their lives and should never have been cancelled and the first thing Obama should have done is recind the order. The Shuttle is the most vesitile ship ever and while cool Dragon is still only a capsule great technology but still splashes down. a step back not forward
hutchison82 1 year ago
cool miision but still no Shuttle the coolest vehicle ever!!oh and yetibiker when less than 1% of America's GDP is spent on nasa Its a small price to pay for the great adventure, even Britain, if it was to pull its finger out could afford Nasa's Budget. ps the whole development budget is 500 million for a delivered system so the launch is nothing...
hutchison82 1 year ago
and this is happening as NASA shifts from space shuttle and manned space flight to NASA jets seeding the atmosphere with sulfates to fight global warming. I shit you not! It was in the San Antonio Express News last Sunday.
philais 1 year ago
Rocket fuel is totally different from aircraft fuel so it burns differently as in this case. I wonder how much this whole event cost the US and us living here? Here is Obama talking about a double recession and we are spending billions and billions to launch these rockets why?
yetibiker08 1 year ago
@yetibiker08 no money is wasted on space exploration. We need rockets to send men and equipment/satellites to space. Also creates jobs and if privatization of space continues it will create a lot. Not counting other technologies and benefits resulting from it.
giovillan2 1 year ago
@giovillan2
Well I guess we could debate all night long and I do like space exploration too but would rather see it used here on earth like perhaps in our oceans. So much to explore there more so than space like building underwater cities, submarine cruise lines, educational centers for kids and the list goes on. Perhaps there is an undertone here indicating that Earth has some issues and NASA is helping the governments look elsewhere?
yetibiker08 1 year ago
once again proves that the more we change .... the more we stay the same... i hope this expands humanity... but i also hope that if colinization of the moon and mars happens that it will be much cheaper... so that rich people don't absolutely run the future... good job spacex! ^_^
marioman102594 1 year ago
**THAT ROCKET NEEDS A ....LITTLE WINDOW...THAT YOU CAN SIT A ...VIDEO CAMERA IN...AND SHOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE....UP CLOSE....**
radiodiary1 1 year ago
looks sweet
BulgarianInCanada 1 year ago
You know what, I believe in chemical trails now, you guys have converted me.
Because those chemical trails are what you guys snort off glass top tables with razorblades before you post....yeah dude, those are real "chemtrails".
Such silly nonsense.
xeronicus 1 year ago
Hey look at the jet!
captainsc1967 1 year ago
Oh God, the Chemtrail idiots have infested this thread. Can the 911 Truthers be far behind? Hey, maybe we'll even get a Tri-Lateral Commission nutjob to check in.
cartman1492 1 year ago
@cartman1492 Troll Alert, 262 channel views since you joined YT in August of 2006...and out of the 1 billion channels you just happened to find this video to comment on...get a fucking life loser!
gerrilea1 1 year ago
All of this talk of "chemical trails" makes me sick. I will sacrifice the atmosphere for the sheer awesomeness and power of a shuttle Solid Booster flame and contrail. Go drive your Prius and believe in global warming all you want.
Not only that, but just because you can't see a "chemical trail" doesn't mean it's not there.
DPatell 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
must feel pretty good to be a billionaire
1xtra299 1 year ago
Comment removed
1xtra299 1 year ago
if you dont believe in chemtrails you have not done your homework.
zaxus211 1 year ago
@zaxus211 I have degrees in Engineering and Physics so yeah, I've done my homework. This chemtrail BS is a butch of silly nonsense started by fevered paranoids, most of which still live in mom's basement. Condensation trails are well understood and fully explain what you see following a commercial aircraft flying at 40kft. Condensation trails will persist in the upper atmosphere for an extended time and they are completely harmless.
cartman1492 1 year ago
@cartman1492 You really need to go back to school then. The Condensation only last for no more than 5 minutes. If you look at planes 10 years ago, the trails would disappear after no more than 5 minutes, but with these new planes, the trails last the entire freaking day. People even tested the white stuff that gathers on cars. They found aluminum in that. Now why would there be aluminum in the air? Does the air magically make it now? The only place it could be coming from is the planes.
joshlete 1 year ago
@joshlete The vast majority of commercial planes flying today were also flying 10 years ago. And I really have no idea where you got this idea that contrails disappeared after 5 minutes 10 years ago. They didn't. They lasted the exact same amount of time then as they do now. If you disagree, please provide evidence to the contrary. If you can't, then shut up and go jerk off to Zeitgeist or some other equivalent conspiracy tripe designed to give stupid people orgasms.
pikeman327 1 year ago
@joshlete
The fuel they use now is not for combustion it is for something else!
yetibiker08 1 year ago
Congratulations! Hope NASA will continue to amaze the world with new discoveries!
80136060 1 year ago
i like this rocket better than the space shuttle only because it doesn't leave a trail of chemicals, gas, exhaust and smoke all the way in to the exosphere...
akelodmc 1 year ago
awesome job space x! you guys are truly pioneers and have taken our species another step closer to space tourism and eventually colonization! keep up the great work!
lunarelf 1 year ago
if i book a flight to mars il sure take spacex
lmola501 1 year ago
Anyone seen THE EVENT? The send a rocket as Satellite into space to send signals to call Aliens!!
Hmmmm. Space craft X hmm hmmm ??
Isaiah53v5 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DONT BUY GOLD THE ZIONIST LIARS ARE IN CHARGE OF THAT ONE , PEOPLE ARE HOLDING FAKE PAPERS ON THIER GOLD BONDS,CHANGE BANKS GO TO YOUR LOCAL ITY BANK , If you do your banking with BANK OF AMERICA, CHASE, WACHOVIA, WELLS FARGO, CITIBANK, US BANK, SUNTRUST BANK, NATIONAL CITY BANK, MORGAN STANLEY, UNION BANK, UBS, MORGAN STANLEY, GOLDMAN SACHS, BRANCH BANKING & TRUST, REGIONS BANK, COMERICA, PNC BANKS CHANGE IT NOW , GO TO ...STOPBANK BLOGSPOT..............PRAISE HIS NAME IN THE HIGHEST YHWH
godsfool713 1 year ago
Taxi trips for astronauts may follow.
martindanny 1 year ago
Comment removed
wallacethedog 1 year ago
lol theyre spending 458 million for this. it is a glorious advance for the space industry, and nasa can finally get back to doing out-there science and space exploration instead of being on orbital ferry-duty
wallacethedog 1 year ago
where does a private company get the billions for a spacerace? or even the permits?
then they hack around on iran because they are trying to start there own space programm
lookingforthemeaning 1 year ago
go team Tesla!
matrixx29 1 year ago
Iron Fenominal.
someman7 1 year ago
Bye bye rich people! :)
crozzan 1 year ago
they probly puttin a large space gun in space and then shoot large beams around the earth to make everybody think america is the greatest and we repeat this in are heads everyday for ever
jelleeee1 1 year ago
Makes you realise that soon, all countries will have ICBM's.
Dubwise78 1 year ago
go nasa from russia i hope spece race is not over
pavel280488AA 1 year ago 22
@pavel280488AA This isn't NASA, it's a private American company called SpaceX.
Nater245689 1 year ago
@Nater245689 ок go Spacex
pavel280488AA 1 year ago
@pavel280488AA They have plans for rockets that will be bigger than the Saturn V. Look at their Falcon X Heavy and Falcon XX plans.
Nater245689 1 year ago
@Nater245689 I read in wikipedia now, thanks man, very interesting
pavel280488AA 1 year ago
@pavel280488AA it is intill someone invents a way of producing more energy with less weight. :( oh to see what the future holds..