Military Review

Lev Sharansky: On the fall of the black falcon ...

Lev Sharansky: On the fall of the black falcon ...

Lightning! An unprecedented event occurred. On the pre-launch test, the Falcon 9 rocket of genius high-tech startups Ilona Mask exploded, which was to put the Israeli satellite 3 into September of orbit. All progressive humanity, Sting and Bjork as from a soul has poured. It suddenly became conscientious and disgusting at heart. September is burning, Sharansky is crying. Do not have time to turn over the calendar again. Reached the damned Putin.

And the first question that every honest and decent person has asked himself is a gay, democratic journalist and Euro-European, who is to blame? The first thing that came to mind is of course Putin. After all, the envy of rusty Soviet cosmonautics to the latest achievements of commercial astronautics named after Ilon Musk, which Bruce Willis and Matt Dimon have already supported, is obvious. But is it really? Did the GRU saboteurs work or was the raven who flew at random to blame? Putin or is it Putin?

Of course, the first impulse of the conscientious intellectual was silent and shyly silent, pretending that nothing had happened. That is what non-living Lechaim Navalny and Rustem Adagamov, earlier on the light of the fire of falling Russian missiles, did. But the main thing is not to reflect, but to distribute. Therefore, the liberal and Ukrainian twitter feeds were unsubscribed “Sorry. It happens and so, trying to hush up the topic as much as possible. After all, Ilon Mask is an idol of the creative class, which means a priori can not be wrong and do something wrong.

And the start-up king was right, and he did everything right. Rocket and cargo were insured for a billion dollars. Why launch into space wildly fashionable reusable (in fact, no) rockets with an unclear prospect of flight success, if you can blow them up before launch and get three hundred percent profit? “But was it really so possible?”, - backward Russians, wondering around in orbit somewhere, will be surprised. Pokemon catchers and novice startups in vintage lofts applaud the genius of hi-tech. After all, the obvious goal of any startup is to make a profit, and not some kind of research in this muddy space. Which can be not at all, but there is a glass edge about which all the rockets are broken. And the invisible hand of the market, resting on a whale and three elephants, itself awards its loyal adherents to a furious capitalization and a high level of investment. After all, we must not live by lies. So win!

Sincerely, Lev Sharansky

Note IN:
Lev Natanovich Sharansky (genus. 22 April 1953) - blog author in LiveJournal Userinfo.png lev_sharansky2
In his posts he represents the collective image of the Soviet intellectual and human rights activist, parodying modern “liberals” using all known liberal cliches. In his notes, we face a conscientious and handshaking human rights activist, dissident, thought giant, father of Russian democracy, a tireless fighter against the bloody regime for freedom and grants.
The real person who keeps a blog on behalf of Sharansky is not known for certain. Observers called several names of the alleged authors, but they all deny their involvement in the creation of Sharansky ...


Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Rus2012
    5 September 2016 13: 48
    ЭNASA CEO comments on Falcon 9 rocket explosion

    Explosion during the pre-flight test of the Falcon 9 rocket at the launch site at Cape Canaveral - this is a risk inherent in the development of new technologiesFormer NASA head Sean O'Keefe said on September 2, RIA Novosti reported.

    "Losing a Falcon 9 is a natural consequence of risk during the technology development phase ... If a developer is unable to test systems prior to normal launch, early adopters will be at much greater risk," said O'Keeffe.

    ... such new technologies - I want to ask?
    Probably, sending cargo into space for the states are "new technologies": there are NO technologies of their own ... and were they WHEN - QUESTION ?!

    Here is what our operators write about this "new technologies" -
    between the "burning" of the rocket on the SC and the launch of I. Musk is finishing something, experimenting, testing, (I mean his team) ...
    Because his team does not have many years of experience, such a check gives them data as close as possible to combat conditions. Those. the entire circuit is assembled at the start, to the first and second stage and to the PN, all the necessary cables from the ground are joined, as well as the filling equipment. The rocket is fully charged, i.e. a full refueling cycle is being worked out.
    You can check along and across all possible cyclograms of pre-start inclusions and checks. This is even more important if in this launch there was some kind of scope of new improvements not previously used by the Mask both on the rocket and on the launch equipment.

    From the forums and comments of specialists in the "rocket and space" profile -
    It was a stupid accident and a vivid demonstration of how not to handle the LV. The mask was lucky for a long time, probably believing that he was the chosen one. Illusions quickly dissipate. But if he takes such burns further, he runs the risk of having problems like a flea dog.
    Mask is trying to eat fish too - to remove competitive masses of payloads (payload) and you yourself know where to sit, at the same time cutting out resources for landing. As a result, he is forced to take an unacceptable risk, such as multiple immersion of composite WBs (balloons) in supercooled oxygen and the use of aluminum for the inner shell thereof instead of inconel.

    Now Space X and NASA are considering real options for accelerated commissioning of the 39 SC (launch complex). According to 40, repair work will be delayed until the middle of next year or longer. Serious destruction. From 39 you can launch the launch vehicle not only to the ISS. In general, the situation is very difficult. It is postponed even further for a very long time - Heavy, all Falcons launches are temporarily stopped, a failure in the ISS commercial supply program remains, only Signuses remain. The transfer of manned flights on the Falcons to at least 2018 and a number of new NASA requirements.
    1. spech
      spech 5 September 2016 15: 28
      If the developer is not able to test the systems before a normal launch, the first users will suffer much more significant risks.

      So there was an Israeli satellite,
      1. Revolver
        Revolver 5 September 2016 16: 45
        If anyone on this business got burnt, it’s insurance companies. But just as I try to shed a bitter tear on them, something doesn’t work out. And for some reason, the heart does not bleed through them. request
        1. jjj
          jjj 5 September 2016 19: 55
          But what about the production of trampolines?
  2. Lord_Bran
    Lord_Bran 5 September 2016 14: 37
    We argue a lot and often with a friend about Elon "I-Created-All-Myself" Mask. It turns out that way. After the recent dispute in the field of factology was outright won by me (about the repeated flights of the Sokoliks - which do not exist - and the POSSIBLE appearance of a "super-heavy" launch vehicle - which MAY BE and will be more expensive than RosKosmos now has), a new argument appeared. The mask IS, but you DO NOT! And it won't !!! ". Then the adequacy disappeared as a phenomenon. Not a bad man, a loyal friend, but a liberal-oriented fan of Navalnyashka. GENERALLY ceases to adequately react to the world after realizing that the facts are not on its side.
    Recently I realized that this is a collective image of all Russian liberals: does Russia have it? - Bad by definition! Stealing in the USA? - Lies Kiselev! They steal more from us !!!
    What motivates such people is unclear ....
    1. bk316
      bk316 5 September 2016 18: 45
      And you have your first experience of close communication with the liberals, congratulations!

      And for many years I’ve been dealing with several like this.
      The same thing.
      But the point is not "everything is bad with us, everything is great in the USA."
      They generally live in a fictional world, sort of augmented liberal stamps (bloody gebnya, raska, quilted jackets, invisible hand of the market, universal values) reality. And categorically refuse to leave this reality.
      This is of course a mental deviation, I personally think that this is the result of a trauma: something in their life did not work out, here they have gone into this reality.
    2. Signore Tomato
      Signore Tomato 6 September 2016 19: 10
      Recently one of these called me "quilted jacket". wink
      I said that I had never heard a better compliment. He explained why I was so happy: "In the 45th year, my grandfather, in a VATNIK, put cancer all over Europe, By the way, together with his father, he was also a warrior."
      Liberastia is a cancer of conscience.
      Metastases strike a conscience and conscience does not understand what is own and what is foreign.
  3. EvgNik
    EvgNik 5 September 2016 15: 43
    Lightning! An unprecedented event has occurred. At a pre-launch test, the Falcon 9 rocket genius hi-tech startups Ilona Mask exploded

    Again Musk.
    Or another Musk? There may be many of them - but they all look alike - they don’t know a damn thing, but they undertake to do it. And they take on sickly tasks with feeble forces. Good luck, Masks show!
  4. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 5 September 2016 16: 13
    What is the essence of a rotten startup Mask?

    1. Total economy. The State Department donated technology to him; CIA employees dumped a fat government order; launchers give. And it’s not enough for him - you still need to save. At all - to get a plus (I don’t know the truth, he believes or not). Up to attracting free students.
    2. Wild race and running around. He needs a high pace of launches - to get mythical profits. After 2-3 weeks it starts up. The likelihood of a fatal error is growing. A normal start-up company does not hold. It was only the USSR with a trillion GDP that could launch up to 125 missiles per year; every three days.
    3. Doubtful ideas. Conventionally reusable first stage - although it is doubtful that economic (non-technical) reusability with the modern development of rocket technology can be achieved. Although no one will argue - the second-hand step is definitely a decrease in reliability; it cannot be otherwise. Conditionally reusable Dragon with the same problems + with the problem - but what was he going to carry in tons from orbit? Is there a cargo flow up, but down?
    The concept of pre-launch burning of the first stage, with a complete set of missiles (including with a payload). Combining the functions of the engines of orbital maneuvering with the engines of the emergency rescue system. This is again just for the sake of economy - well, he does not want to put a normal CAC on top of the rocket. This is minus a ton or more of the payload. Supercooled fuel components (one can only hope that the change in viscosity and other physical parameters was taken into account, and not left to chance). Printing engines on 3D printers. And so on. Everything is very revolutionary - does it need to be reminded that in general a revolution is a colossal risk.
    4. Permanent mass chatter, deception and cheating. All sane people have long understood that any of his boltologies about specific dates is true plus two years to the announced date. But the illusion of rapid progress is being created. The Red Martian Dragon is a boltology not only in terms, but in general in concept. Heavy Heavy Falcon Heavy with 27 small-sized engines in the first stage - beyond reason.

    This is all Maskov’s deceitful startup. Falcon-9 is an ordinary ordinary rocket, prone to accidents, with an average cost (real). It is no worse than others, but no better, so that the liberals, maskoids and other sodomites do not chat.
  5. Gost171
    Gost171 6 September 2016 02: 43
    Or maybe it's all a concept? After all, Von Braun (the founder of NASA) was a narrow-profile specialist: that is, the missiles only needed to take off and head in a certain direction. Landing, as such, was of no interest to anyone, and if it puffed at the time of launch, there’s 50%
    1. Leto
      Leto 6 September 2016 13: 32
      After all, Von Braun (the founder of NASA) was a narrow-profile specialist: that is, the missiles only needed to take off and head in a certain direction. Landing, as such, was of no interest to anyone, and if it puffed at the time of launch, there’s 50%

      V.F. Brown was an engineer, and I. Mask an entrepreneur. He simply promotes a concept that he considers profitable and provides the company's engineers with the conditions for its implementation.
  6. romandostalo
    romandostalo 6 September 2016 05: 14
    Actually it’s very interesting. So, what kind of bolt is here, M6, but let's try the M8 and insure just in case!
    1. Leto
      Leto 6 September 2016 13: 34
      Actually it’s very interesting. So, what kind of bolt is here, M6, but let's try the M8 and insure just in case!

      A reference to the insurance is far-fetched, I. Musk will not get any benefit, on the contrary, under the threat of 10 launches that his company should carry out before the end of the year, plus undoubtedly a reputation, and it costs much more than a billion dollars.
  7. sandroart
    sandroart 6 September 2016 09: 45
    NO! Here, when missiles with Holonassa fell, and often so, causing damage to national security, everything was definitely not clean there. As our satellite is not being taken out, it takes off like ours falls. This is my suspicion.
  8. Rus2012
    6 September 2016 14: 10
    Quote: Leto
    I. Musk will not receive benefits, on the contrary, under the threat of 10 launches that his company must implement before the end of the year,

    ... you listed, not the worst.
    Much more serious in the short to medium term (from the discussion in I-net) -
    1 Loss of a single SK (second SK is not ready)
    2 Delays in the flights of ALL Falcons
    3 NASA Additional Requirements.
    4 Requirements for a change of concept (time and money)
    5 Delays in manned flights
    6 Delays Falcon Heavy
    7 A possible NASA refusal from Space X services in the long term. NASA can only choose a Boeing and fly to the ISS only on ST-100 after the 2020 year.
    The problem is that NASA wants to put forward additional conditions and requirements for the Falcons and slightly revise the Space X concept for manned flights. And this time and money and regular delays until 2019 of the year due to new requirements and, therefore, additional flights to the Unions from Roskosmos, which fed everyone in the USA. In the Senate for 5 years they have been saying that it is necessary to soon end the monopolistic position of the Unions in delivering astronauts to the ISS, and the deadlines have moved to 3 of the year and are shifting even more ...