r/space•
chadj

Did Falcon 9 make the second upper stage burn?

A potential issue with the second upper stage burn was reported on Twitter from Jonathan McDowell.

https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/255298036245340163

I'm curious if anyone has additional information on the second upper stage burn.

The following article also mentions this same source : http://cosmiclog.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/08/14297705-spacex-launch-problems-come-to-light-dragons-ok-but-did-satellite-go-awry?lite

However, satellite-watcher Jonathan McDowell reports that the second stage apparently did not restart as planned, and the satellite was placed into a lower orbit than it should have been (203 by 323 kilometers rather than 350 by 750 kilometers). McDowell's assessment is based on data from the Space-Track satellite catalog rather than information from SpaceX or Orbcomm.

Posted Oct 8, 2012, 9:53 PM UTC · edited

59
Nissl•

Nope. Orbcomm just confirmed that the second upper stage burn did not take place. Supposedly a safety precaution.

4
chadjOP•

Thanks for the link!

1
ioncloud9•

Hmm strange. The first stage that had long since been discarded had a problem yet the second stage couldnt restart because of rules? That really sucks for Orbcomm.

2
cratermoon•

As I understand it, the problem was that the trajectory was off enough that the Falcon 9 missed what's called a "safety gate" for ISS, meaning that it couldn't execute the 2nd burn because of concerns that either the satellite or the discarded upper stage would end up in an orbit too close to the space station.

3
Wooomp•

That is a bummer it didn't get the stage two going. The rules are set by the big ticket buyer. I hope that people don't blow this outta proportion. there was alot of eyes on this launch

2
cpsystem32•

lame. space laws are already hurting commercial progress

0
cratermoon•

Explain?

1
brittmtb•

No, design a rocket that can fly within the mission parameters.

1