SpaceX conducts successful static launch of Falcon 9 rocket

Remember Space Exploration Technologies Corp, otherwise known as SpaceX? You know, the private space transport company started by PayPal founder Elon Musk that won the NASA Commercial Commercial Orbital Transportation Services competition for its Falcon rocket? Last we heard from SpaceX it had lost Falcon 1 during a test launch, but this week its Falcon 9 launch vehicle was successfully fired up. While it didn't go anywhere, the successful static launch was good news for the company, and the test run was even two months ahead of schedule, which could mean good things for the rockets' ultimate place in runs to the International Space Station once the Space Shuttle goes out of service in 2010.

[cody @ Aug 3rd 2008 1:27AM]

It's funny that you guys would post this considering an attempted launch of their Falcon 1 rocket exploded two minutes after launch just 2 hours ago.

Nice.

[Jaylord @ Aug 3rd 2008 5:00PM]

They're much more concerned with pigeons playing games on the iPhone. Clearly this is more important to the readers as well, judging by the number of comments. Although, to be fair, it was actually a very entertaining video.

[Jhongerkong @ Aug 3rd 2008 1:55AM]

Missed opportunity by not calling it the Falcon Punch rocket. That name would own everything.

[andres @ Aug 3rd 2008 2:09AM]

abbreviated for falcon 9000 punch

[Michael LaFramboise @ Aug 3rd 2008 2:22AM]

OVER 9000 at that!!!

[Cahya @ Aug 3rd 2008 2:04AM]

Wonderful Blog.
Nice to see your blog.

[Michael LaFramboise @ Aug 3rd 2008 2:22AM]

Welcome to the internet :)

[nerdtalker @ Aug 3rd 2008 2:28AM]

It's totally just one person posting, you know, hence the "you."

Welcome to the intarblogosphere.

[Muhammed @ Aug 3rd 2008 2:04AM]

now all we need is oxygen and water, and Mars would be the second earth.

[Yevon @ Aug 3rd 2008 2:10AM]

Yeah, once you get over the massive temperature fluctuations and the huge storms, it is quite cozy.

[Michael LaFramboise @ Aug 3rd 2008 2:23AM]

That plus work out a way to go 10x as fast as what is possible now... I'm not too keen on sitting in a rocket for 12 month till I get to Mars...

[who? @ Aug 3rd 2008 2:42AM]

If by 'oxygen' he meant air, as in the same stuff that makes up our atmosphere and prevents major temperature fluctuations, then he is entirely correct.

[Colin Potter @ Aug 3rd 2008 4:19AM]

"Yeah, once you get over the massive temperature fluctuations and the huge storms, it is quite cozy"

Obviously you've never lived in Western Canada

[Toink @ Aug 3rd 2008 2:09AM]

Update at 1:01 am EDT - SpaceX is reporting that the booster on the rocket did not separate correctly. Diane Murphy, the SpaceX vice president of marketing and communications released the following statement tonight:

"It was obviously a big disappoint not to reach orbit on this Flight 003 of the Falcon 1. On the plus side, the flight of our first stage with the new Merlin 1C regenerative engine that will be used in Falcon 9 was picture-perfect. Unfortunately, a problem occurred at stage separation causing the stages to be held together. This is under investigation."

So, DOWN it went.... Whooopsies!

[some dude @ Aug 3rd 2008 2:11AM]

Yeah it's pretty ironic to be tooting SpaceX's horn a mere two hours since they lost their recent orbital attempt. I realize you don't have a newsroom, but one would hope that Engadget would be aware of this potentially historic event, and may...I don't know...decide to find out what happened with that since it's so close to the time you've decided to run this post.

[Steve A. @ Aug 3rd 2008 2:24AM]

I wouldn't call it irony. I'd call it blog writers attempting to be journalists - and failing quite nicely.

Good job guys. Just hours after SpaceX has their third failure in a row for launches, you post this drivel.

[Paul @ Aug 3rd 2008 2:46AM]

Yup, pretty darned hilarious. This story was actually posted 2 hours after the mishap and even quite a few minutes after the press conference explaining the what (basically) had happened. I'm not sure how the posting process works at Engadget, but yeah, if there isn't an editorial delay of 12 or more hours (reaching back to the announcement of today's launch attempt), then this is so untimely as to be ridiculously damning. FWIW, the Giz had up-to-the-minute coverage, at least in the comments section for the story announcing the Falcon 1's 3rd launch attempt...

That said, since this isn't a space flight blog, I'll cut you some slack. I'm sure you're relieved. :)

[Jake @ Aug 3rd 2008 4:26AM]

It's not a static launch-- it's typically called a static fire test. I've never heard a test firing of a rocket referred to as a launch before.

[peter @ Aug 3rd 2008 5:06AM]

are you bored
this was two years ago
so wtf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gL1xUWgBlFw

[Rick @ Aug 3rd 2008 10:20AM]

That video isn't a SpaceX failure. This was a NASA failure 4 or 5 years at Cape Kennedy.

[Jake @ Aug 3rd 2008 1:03PM]

That was actually a Delta II failure from more than 10 years ago.

[rita hainsworth @ Aug 3rd 2008 6:54AM]

Do they take paypal?

[Dude @ Aug 3rd 2008 12:59PM]

the word commercial is in there twice...

[Jaylord @ Aug 3rd 2008 3:21PM]

Yah, dude. Haven't you heard of meta-commercialization? Companies themselves are going to be exchanged willy-nilly like goods, so now executives will feel the sting that blue collar workers feel when their jobs are outsourced to China. Who will be doing the exchanging, you ask? Why, the Illuminati, of course!

[Justin E @ Aug 3rd 2008 1:39PM]

If Mr. Fruhlinger were to skim the comments, he would realize that this story desperately needs an update.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121774627583807749.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

[Deputy Doffoos @ Aug 3rd 2008 4:29PM]

Read between the lines guys!!!!

You need Direct X 9 to launch this rocket.

That's what I read.

[RoboDan @ Aug 3rd 2008 9:37PM]

Now if only PayPal would go the way of Flights 1-3