I just watched a rocket explode on NASA TV

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > General Bullshit > I just watched a rocket explode on NASA TV

Sheng-Ji Yang: Mar 5, 2014

Concerned Citizen posted:

my favorite part is the kickstarter satellite/telescope that raised over a million dollars in funding was destroyed in the explosion

guess they should have hit that last stretch goal

lmao

# ? Oct 29, 2014 01:50

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 18, 2024 18:19

Sheng-Ji Yang: Mar 5, 2014

at least doobie's dog shack got built and didnt explode in a massive fireball (yet)

# ? Oct 29, 2014 01:51

Plafop: Oct 11, 2012; by Ralp

Sheng-ji Yang posted:

at least doobie's dog shack got built and didnt explode in a massive fireball (yet)

doobie is more successful in his endeavors than NASA trying to get a rocket barely out of the atmosphere. LMAO, what a joke.

# ? Oct 29, 2014 01:52

ethanol: Jul 13, 2007

Rasta_Al posted:

The preliminary investigation found the problem was located in a fuel injector located midway up the engine housing. The fuel injector (manufactured in Shanghai) was found to be clogged with a Robert Cop brand action figure, which is manufactured in the same facility.

# ? Oct 29, 2014 01:52

etalian: Mar 20, 2006

Plafop posted:

doobie is more successful in his endeavors than NASA trying to get a rocket barely out of the atmosphere. LMAO, what a joke.

It's not NASA, it's actually a COTS program which means the government pays SpaceX/Orbital Sciences to build both the rocket and payload.

# ? Oct 29, 2014 01:54

Concerned Citizen: Jul 22, 2007; Ramrod XTreme

Sheng-ji Yang posted:

at least doobie's dog shack got built and didnt explode in a massive fireball (yet)

that's what nasa gets for trying to install the vent hood themselves

# ? Oct 29, 2014 01:56

TEAYCHES: Jun 23, 2002

etalian posted:

It's not NASA, it's actually a COTS program which means the government pays SpaceX/Orbital Sciences to build both the rocket and payload.

what does the us government do these days that isnt just contracted out to the lowest bidder

# ? Oct 29, 2014 01:57

Cyberball 2072: Feb 17, 2014; by Lowtax

Plafop posted:

doobie is more successful in his endeavors than NASA trying to get a rocket barely out of the atmosphere. LMAO, what a joke.

I'm pretty sure NASA has gotten rockets up before.

# ? Oct 29, 2014 01:58

etalian: Mar 20, 2006

TEAYCHES posted:

what does the us government do these days that isnt just contracted out to the lowest bidder

government is basically outsourcing failure in everything from Iraq to rockets.

# ? Oct 29, 2014 01:59

demonR6: Sep 4, 2012; There are too many stupid people in the world. I'm not saying we should kill them all or anything. Just take the warning labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself.; Lipstick Apathy

Kennedy Space Center is having a good laugh right now.

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:00

ethanol: Jul 13, 2007

nasa press conference at 9 est on their live stream

if you're into listening a confused white person stumble a bunch of words about how it will take months to figure it out

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:00

Funkstar Deluxe: May 7, 2007; 「☆☆☆」

So is this press conference gonna start or what?

I wanna listen to them talk about what went wrong, yo

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:04

Luvcow: Jul 1, 2007; One day nearer spring

Plafop posted:

The difference is one is for national defense which has a purpose and one is for loving around in space that serves no purpose.

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:06

SpeedGem: Sep 19, 2012; by Ralp

Funkstar Deluxe posted:

So is this press conference gonna start or what?

I wanna listen to them talk about what went wrong, yo

Probably a bad weld or a faulty o-ring.

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:07

Stoic Commie: Aug 29, 2005; by XyloJW

ethanol posted:

nasa press conference at 9 est on their live stream

if you're into listening a confused white person stumble a bunch of words about how it will take months to figure it out

lmao white people amirite

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:08

etalian: Mar 20, 2006

I imagine most of the area around the launch site pad is completely destroyed too.

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:09

somethingawful bf: Jun 17, 2005

THEY TRYUING TO SEND THIS ROCKET TO ISIS IN SPACE????

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:10

etalian: Mar 20, 2006

ISIS in space is the low budget sequel.

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:13

thunderspanks: Nov 5, 2003; crucify this

"Yeah guys, turns out it's really hard. Also, uh, if you find any wreckage please don't touch it."

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:22

Jemmy Ducks: Sep 21, 2013

The Orbital VP is telling people not to pick up souvenirs from the crash site

Who wants a piece of shrapnel from a rocket that made it forty feet?

e; f, b

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:22

etalian: Mar 20, 2006

Putin sabotaged to rocket to humiliate Ukraine

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:23

Tsinava: Nov 15, 2009; by Ralp

Russia is probably laughing real hard at us right now.

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:23

Sheng-Ji Yang: Mar 5, 2014

etalian posted:

Putin sabotaged to rocket to humiliate Ukraine

RT: the ukrainian people sabotaged the rocket to protest american imperialism :ussr:

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:24

1gnoirents: Jun 28, 2014; hello

Rockets explode , cars crash, toddlers shoot dudes in the face.

I would think its pretty amazing its been this long since an explosion but then I realized its cause nasa hasn't been doing poo poo

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:25

MrQwerty: Apr 15, 2003; Staunch and proud ally of Big Pharma! We stand with you!

launching things into space purely for profit will never be a viable business because of the faults inherent in capitalist business models

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:29

Plafop: Oct 11, 2012; by Ralp

MrQwerty posted:

launching things into space purely for profit will never be a viable business because it's loving stupid

fixed that for ya, don't have to thank me

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:30

Lawman 0: Aug 17, 2010

MrQwerty posted:

launching things into space purely for profit will never be a viable business because of the faults inherent in capitalist business models

*goes back to watching tv delivered by satellite*

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:31

Sheng-Ji Yang: Mar 5, 2014

MrQwerty posted:

launching things into space purely for profit will never be a viable business because of the faults inherent in capitalist business models

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:31

MrQwerty: Apr 15, 2003; Staunch and proud ally of Big Pharma! We stand with you!

Plafop posted:

fixed that for ya, don't have to thank me

nah launching things into space is cool and valuable but it is not a viable business outside telecom

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:31

etalian: Mar 20, 2006

Lawman 0 posted:

*goes back to watching porn delivered by satellite*

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:32

SpeedGem: Sep 19, 2012; by Ralp

Plafop posted:

fixed that for ya, don't have to thank me

Hey man that one asteroid just turned the gold and diamond markets to pennies on the dollar. Space mining is gonna be the best troll.

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:32

Plafop: Oct 11, 2012; by Ralp

MrQwerty posted:

it is not a viable business

fixed that for ya, don't have to thank me

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:33

TEAYCHES: Jun 23, 2002

imo this whole incident proves that socialism is good and correct. stop contracting this poo poo out retards

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:34

SpeedGem: Sep 19, 2012; by Ralp

In the year 2136 when all asteriods are mined and the gravity displacement is revealed, the outer planets are moving towards earth.

welp

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:36

Leperflesh: May 17, 2007

The total amount spent by NASA from 1958 through 2011 is $526.18 Billion in nominal (non-inflation adjusted) dollars.

Adjusting for inflation, that's $790 Billion.
That budget includes not only the manned space programs but every space mission, mars robot, the Hubble telescope, hundreds of satellites, all manner of upper atmospheric research programs, and so forth.

As a percentage of the US budget, NASA's budget peaked in 1967 (at 3.45%). In recent years it's been around half a percent, and under half a percent the last two or three years.

The shuttle program totaled a little under $200B, or about $1.5B per flight in 2010 dollars. So that'd be about a quarter of the total lifetime NASA expenditures.

In the US Federal 2007 budget, the government spent about 98 times more money on social programs (Department of Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Veterans Affairs, Social Security, Agriculture, and Labor) - so that's excluding social security and medicare.

That same year, the US federal government allocated $609B to defense ($652B if you include Dept. of Homeland Security expenditures).

quote:

As one anecdotal example, consider that each B-2 stealth bomber cost the US taxpayer roughly $2.2 billion. Then consider that the New Horizons robotic mission to Pluto, which will answer fundamental questions about the solar system, was nearly canceled for lack of funds. The total cost of the New Horizons mission, including the launch vehicle, added up to $650 million. In other words, the New Horizons mission to Pluto cost less than a third the cost of a single B-2 bomber.

_source

The 2013 NASA budget was cut by $59M compared to 2012. In the same budget, the military got an increase to its budget of about $20B. In other words, NASA got a haircut while the military budget inflated by more than the total amount spent on NASA that year.

NASA's budget has been repeatedly gutted. When a rocket blows up on the launch pad because it was cheaply made by a lovely (new) subcontractor who is literally reusing cold-war-era Soviet rocket engines to save money, that's not a sign that NASA's budget is too high - it's the opposite. The push for low-cost solutions to the space program is directly related to its success rate.

If we need and can afford to increase our military budget by twenty billion dollars then we sure as hell can afford to build rockets in America instead of buying leftover rocket engines from Russia and the Ukraine. If we can afford to blow multiple billions of dollars on lovely fighter jets that don't work, we can afford to spend a few million dollars on rockets launching research satellites or support material to the ISS. If we can afford to spend $13B on a new aircraft carrier (we've got plans to build four more) when we already have 20 (and no other country on Earth has more than 4), than we can afford to spend $17B a year on NASA.

If you think the government needs to cut waste from its budget, look at the military first.

Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 02:42 on Oct 29, 2014

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:37

mandatory lesbian: Dec 18, 2012

Funkstar Deluxe posted:

So is this press conference gonna start or what?

I wanna listen to them talk about what went wrong, yo

wait is there gonna be one on the stream or somewhere else

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:37

TEAYCHES: Jun 23, 2002

Leperflesh posted:

The total amount spent by NASA from 1958 through 2011 is $526.18 Billion in nominal (non-inflation adjusted) dollars.

Adjusting for inflation, that's $790 Billion.
That budget includes not only the manned space programs but every space mission, mars robot, the Hubble telescope, hundreds of satellites, all manner of upper atmospheric research programs, and so forth.

As a percentage of the US budget, NASA's budget peaked in 1967 (at 3.45%). In recent years it's been around half a percent, and under half a percent the last two or three years.

The shuttle program totaled a little under $200B, or about $1.5B per flight in 2010 dollars. So that'd be about a quarter of the total lifetime NASA expenditures.

In the US Federal 2007 budget, the government spent about 98 times more money on social programs (Department of Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Veterans Affairs, Social Security, Agriculture, and Labor) - so that's excluding social security and medicare.

That same year, the US federal government allocated $609B to defense ($652B if you include Dept. of Homeland Security expenditures).
_source

The 2013 NASA budget was cut by $59M compared to 2012. In the same budget, the military got an increase to its budget of about $20B. In other words, NASA got a haircut while the military budget inflated by more than the total amount spent on NASA that year.

NASA's budget has been repeatedly gutted. When a rocket blows up on the launch pad because it was cheaply made by a lovely (new) subcontractor who is literally reusing cold-war-era Soviet rocket engines to save money, that's not a sign that NASA's budget is too high - it's the opposite. The push for low-cost solutions to the space program is directly related to its success rate.

If we need and can afford to increase our military budget by twenty billion dollars then we sure as hell can afford to build rockets in America instead of buying leftover rocket engines from Russia and the Ukraine. If we can afford to blow multiple billions of dollars on lovely fighter jets that don't work, we can afford to spend a few million dollars on rockets launching research satellites or support material to the ISS. If we can afford to spend $13B on a new aircraft carrier (we've got plans to build four more) when we already have 20 (and no other country on Earth has more 4), than we can afford to spend $17B a year on NASA.

If you think the government needs to cut waste from its budget, look at the military first.

sounds loving gay. they should just privatize that poo poo. they are already more than halfway there contracting it all out

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:39

1gnoirents: Jun 28, 2014; hello

Leperflesh posted:

The total amount spent by NASA from 1958 through 2011 is $526.18 Billion in nominal (non-inflation adjusted) dollars.

Adjusting for inflation, that's $790 Billion.
That budget includes not only the manned space programs but every space mission, mars robot, the Hubble telescope, hundreds of satellites, all manner of upper atmospheric research programs, and so forth.

As a percentage of the US budget, NASA's budget peaked in 1967 (at 3.45%). In recent years it's been around half a percent, and under half a percent the last two or three years.

The shuttle program totaled a little under $200B, or about $1.5B per flight in 2010 dollars. So that'd be about a quarter of the total lifetime NASA expenditures.

In the US Federal 2007 budget, the government spent about 98 times more money on social programs (Department of Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Veterans Affairs, Social Security, Agriculture, and Labor) - so that's excluding social security and medicare.

That same year, the US federal government allocated $609B to defense ($652B if you include Dept. of Homeland Security expenditures).
_source

The 2013 NASA budget was cut by $59M compared to 2012. In the same budget, the military got an increase to its budget of about $20B. In other words, NASA got a haircut while the military budget inflated by more than the total amount spent on NASA that year.

NASA's budget has been repeatedly gutted. When a rocket blows up on the launch pad because it was cheaply made by a lovely (new) subcontractor who is literally reusing cold-war-era Soviet rocket engines to save money, that's not a sign that NASA's budget is too high - it's the opposite. The push for low-cost solutions to the space program is directly related to its success rate.

If we need and can afford to increase our military budget by twenty billion dollars then we sure as hell can afford to build rockets in America instead of buying leftover rocket engines from Russia and the Ukraine. If we can afford to blow multiple billions of dollars on lovely fighter jets that don't work, we can afford to spend a few million dollars on rockets launching research satellites or support material to the ISS. If we can afford to spend $13B on a new aircraft carrier (we've got plans to build four more) when we already have 20 (and no other country on Earth has more 4), than we can afford to spend $17B a year on NASA.

If you think the government needs to cut waste from its budget, look at the military first.

It's over dude, we just need to look for ways to make money off space. Then suddenly space technology will be saved via private sector

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:39

Sheng-Ji Yang: Mar 5, 2014

they should abolish nasa purely because itd make nerds mad and thats always funny

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:40

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 18, 2024 18:19

Plafop: Oct 11, 2012; by Ralp

Leperflesh posted:

*a bunch of dumb words*

If you think the government needs to cut waste from its budget, look at the military first.

Sure, we spend billions of dollars blowing ours noses on hundred dollar bills, but have you SEEN the cost of defending our country?? That's the real problem.

# ? Oct 29, 2014 02:43

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > General Bullshit > I just watched a rocket explode on NASA TV

«‹›9 »