Jump to content
The World News Media

SpaceX preparing for a return to flight on Monday, August 14


Guest

Recommended Posts

  • Guest

After almost exactly one month without the roar of rockets, SpaceX is preparing to return Kennedy Space Center to active launch status with its twelfth Commercial Resupply Services mission.

The static fire of Dragon’s first stage, 1039, is scheduled for no earlier than tomorrow, August 10th, with the launch planned for 9:56 a.m. PST/12:56 p.m. EST on Monday, August 14th. In what has become routine for CRS missions, 1039 will return to SpaceX’s Florida-based LZ-1 landing facility after it separates from the second stage.

The Dragon it is to launch to the International Space Station marks its own milestone as the last “new” vehicle that SpaceX will launch during its remaining eight CRS-1 missions. Following CRS-12, every subsequent CRS launch will utilize reused hardware. Discussed at the ISS R&D Conference just a few weeks ago, Musk revealed that while the reused flight of CRS-11’s Dragon likely cost at least as much or more than flying new hardware, future reuses of Dragon would likely drop the cost by as much as half, resulting in significant cost savings for the company. As of June 2016, CRS-12 is expected to bring with it 7,300 lbs of cargo.

crs11-capture-1024x682.jpg

3 years later, CRS-4Â’s capsule is captured once more at the ISS as CRS-11. This placed Dragon in a league of just three other orbital capsules to have ever been reused. (Photo: Jack Fischer)

Over the course of the last three weeks, CRS-12Â’s launch date has pinballed around due to issues with a ULA payload originally intended to launch before SpaceX. After suffering damage during integration, the satellite had to be repaired and the launch date delayed. As the delay lengthened, SpaceX jumped ahead of ULA and was scheduled to launch on Sunday, August 13th. Launch was initially scheduled for August 10th, pushed to August 14th, moved up to August 13th, and then moved back to August 14th as of yesterday. Access to space is never without drama, although this level of launch date bouncing is rather unusual.

The weather at Cape Canaveral looks to be quite bad during CRS-12Â’s launch week, with a high probability of both rain and lightning. As we get closer to the launch date, weÂ’ll see if SpaceX chooses to continue with the planned Monday attempt. After a month without East Coast launches* as a result of required range maintenance, it will be exciting to see the U.S. return to flight regardless of the launch date.

Source 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 300
  • Replies 0
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Popular Days

Popular Days

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...




  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my perspective, when the Smithsonian Magazine covers a topic, I am inclined to trust their expertise. As for the shadows here, I see no benefit in entertaining irrational ideas from others. Let them hold onto their own beliefs. We shouldn't further enable their self-deception and misleading of the public.  
    • Hey Self! 🤣I came across this interesting conspiracy theory. There are scholars who firmly believe in the authenticity of those artifacts. I value having conversations with myself. The suggestion of a mentally ill person has led to the most obscure manifestation of a group of sorrowful individuals. 😁
    • I have considered all of their arguments. Some even apply VAT 4956 to their scenarios, which is acceptable. Anyone can use secular evidence if they genuinely seek understanding. Nonetheless, whether drawing from scripture or secular history, 607 is a plausible timeframe to believe in. People often misuse words like "destruction", "devastation", and "desolation" in an inconsistent manner, similar to words like "besiege", "destroy", and "sack". When these terms are misapplied to man-made events, they lose their true meaning. This is why with past historians, the have labeled it as follows: First Capture of Jerusalem 606 BC Second Capture of Jerusalem 598 BC Third Capture of Jerusalem 587 BC Without taking into account anything else.  Regarding the second account, if we solely rely on secular chronology, the ancient scribes made military adaptations to align with the events recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles. However, the question arises: Can we consider this adaptation as accurate?  Scribes sought to include military components in their stories rather than focusing solely on biblical aspects. Similarly, astronomers, who were also scholars, made their observations at the king's request to divine omens, rather than to understand the plight of the Jewish people. Regarding the third capture, we can only speculate because there are no definitive tablets like the Babylonian chronicles that state 598. It is possible that before the great tribulation, Satan will have influenced someone to forge more Babylonian chronicles in order to discredit the truth and present false evidence from the British Museum, claiming that the secular view was right all along. This could include documents supposedly translated after being found in 1935, while others were found in the 1800s. The Jewish antiquities authorities have acknowledged the discovery of forged items, while the British Museum has not made similar acknowledgments. It is evident that the British Museum has been compelled to confess to having looted or stolen artifacts which they are unwilling to return. Consequently, I find it difficult to place my trust in the hands of those who engage in such activities. One of the most notable instances of deception concerning Jewish antiquities was the widely known case of the ossuary belonging to James, the brother of Jesus. I was astonished by the judge's inexplicable justification for acquittal, as it was evident that his primary concern was preserving the reputation of the Jewish nation, rather than unearthing the truth behind the fraudulent artifact. The judge before even acknowledged it. "In his decision, the judge was careful to say his acquittal of Golan did not mean the artifacts were necessarily genuine, only that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Golan had faked them." The burden of proof is essential. This individual not only forged the "Jehoash Tablet," but also cannot be retried for his deceit. Why are they so insistent on its authenticity? To support their narrative about the first temple of Jerusalem. Anything to appease the public, and deceive God. But then again, after the Exodus, when did they truly please God? So, when it comes to secular history, it's like a game of cat and mouse.  
    • I'm not bothered by being singled out, as you seem to be accustomed to defending and protecting yourselves, but it's a good idea to keep your dog on a leash. Speaking of which, in a different thread, TTH mentioned that it would be great if everyone here shared their life stories. As both of you are the librarians here, I kindly ask you to minimize any signs of intimidation or insincerity. It is you people who need to be "banned" here. However, it is quite evident that you hold a negative influence, which God recognizes, therefore you are banned from your own conscience in His eyes.
    • One issue with historian Flavius Josephus is that he suggests that the Royal Captain of the (Guard) can also be regarded as General Nebuzaradan. A confusion arises from Josephus' account of the captives mentioned in Jeremiah, as he claims that they were taken from Egypt instead of Babylon. Since Nebuchadnezzar was occupied in Rilah, he directed his generals to lay siege to Jerusalem. This could potentially account for the numerous dispatches that Nebuchadnezzar would have sent to the west, but the considerable distance to Borsippa still poses a challenge. As a result, the Babylonians managed to gain control of regions such as Aram (Syria), Ammon, and Moab. The only territories that remained were the coastal cities, where the Egyptians held sway. King Josiah decided to form an alliance with Babylon instead of being under Egyptian rule. So, that part of the territory was covered until King Josiah was defeated.  It's interesting how they started back then in 4129, but still end up with the same conclusion with Zedekiah's Defeat 3522 607 B.C. 3419 607 B.C. even though their AM is different.  
  • Members

    • Pudgy

      Pudgy 2,408

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CBell

      CBell 3

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.4k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,679
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Techredirector
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.