O nouă lansare reuşită pentru SpaceX şi US Air Force

În data de 7 Septembrie 2017, istoria zborurilor spaţiale a consemnat o nouă lansare reuşită (urmată de deja şi mai obişnuita recuperare a primei trepte) pentru Space X şi US Air Force. Se ştie că în urma unor eforturi susţinute, Space X a obţinut certificarea de a lansa pentru armata SUA sateliţi militari.

Această lansare a marcat debutul celei de-a cincea misiuni a X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle, cea de-a patra fiind încheiată cu succes în 7 Mai anul curent, după 718 zile petrecute pe orbită. Misiunea oficială a X-37 B este de a face teste pe orbită, însă natura şi obiectul testelor nu au fost dezvăluite până acum de armata SUA. Pentru pasionaţi, lansarea:

A fost prima dată când SpaceX a lansat X-37 B, misiunile anterioare fiind lansate de racheta Atlas V aparţinând United Launch Alliance (ULA).

X-37 B OTV este construită de Boeing, are o lungime de aproximativ 9,5 metri şi o anvergură de aproximativ 4,6 metri. Destinaţia şi scopul navetei au condus la numeroase teorii şi speculaţii, care mai de care mai conspiraţioniste.

Nicolae Hariuc

Surse:

https://www.defensenews.com/space/2017/08/31/air-forces-space-plane-set-to-launch-again-sept-7/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MILSPACE&utm_term=Editorial%20-%20Military%20Space%20Report

https://www.defensenews.com/news/your-air-force/2017/09/07/spacex-launches-us-air-forces-secret-mini-shuttle/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DFN%20DNR%209/7/17&utm_term=Editorial%20-%20Daily%20News%20Roundup

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2017/09/07/spacex-launches-us-air-forces-secret-mini-shuttle/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=09.08.2017&utm_term=Editorial%20-%20Early%20Bird%20Brief

34 Comments:

  1. rod of god theoory ati auzit?

  2. aproape 2 ani in spatiu, pentru o naveta fara pilot este un record. la acest moment , SUA nu au rival la programele spatiale, ceilalti sunt mult in urma.

    • Ce are SUA in plus fata de ceilalti, in opinia mea, este initiativa privata cea mai dezvoltata in acest domeniu. In rest vorbim de agentii de stat.

    • Se misca si altii, indeosebi europenii……
      Faimoasele SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar) de zic unii ca bat prin ziduri (LOL) sunt bazate pe doi senzori, cu spatiu intre ei, ca la o vedere stereoscopica. Setul facut de americani acum niste ani folosea un fel de catarg extins din naveta spatiala.
      Mai nou, o misiune europeana, Tandem, foloseste doi sateliti independenti; astia orbiteaza sub control stric, la un spatiu bine determinat, astfel ca rezulta un produs net superior. High tech…. Rezolutia declarata, pentru civilie probabil, 12,5 m….

      Nu stiu ce or face rusii in realitate, dar cred ca o lalaie. Am vazut un fel de plangeri pe un forum, se simteau in urma….

  3. Super program privat. Si încà sunt surprins de precizia recuperàrii primului etaj, desi am mai vàzut-o. Buni ingineri si bunà tehnologie !

    • Si la ce costuri… SpaceX e un soi de low cost al zborului cosmic. Ce inseamna initiativa privata prin comparatie cu initiativa de stat.

      • Asa de low, cà uneori pierde bani.
        La lansarea stelitului Formosa 5 au plàtit ei pânà la urmà lansarea satelitului.

        Initial prevàzut pentru Falcon 1e (23 mil. $ lansarea), au folosit pânà la urmà un Falcon 9 (62 mil. lansarea), plus idemnitàti de întârziere.
        Pânà la urmà Space X a pierdut 14 mil. $ la „afacerea” asta în loc de profitul obisnuit de 40% din cifra de afaceri.

        http://www.usinenouvelle.com/article/comment-spacex-va-perdre-des-millions-avec-un-seul-lancement.N579063

        • As fi foarte curios sa le vad bilantul… Stiam ca vor sa se listeze, moment in care (daca nu gresesc) absolut toate informatiile financiare vor fi publice.
          Este foarte greu sa faci low-cost si sa faci si profit daca e sa continuam analogia cu aviatia comerciala.
          Una din „inovatiile” care probabil au contribuit mult la reducerea costurilor este reutilizarea primei trepte.
          Ce s-a intamplat de-au trebuit sa foloseasca Falcon 9 in loc de 1 (iarta-mi ignoranta, nu stiam ca exista)? Probleme tehnice, estimari tehnice gresite? Cineva a gresit acolo, as fi curios sa vad unde…

          • Lansarea era prevàzutà cu Falcon 1e initial; si dupà aceea s-au concentrat pe Falcon 9 deci nu mai aveau lansator de 1000 kg. Au avut douà explozii la lansare pe Falcon 9 si au pierdut musterii care sà combine lansarea si nu au mai gàsit.
            În mod normal, câstigà 25 mil $ la o lansare vândutà 62 mil $ cu Falcon 9.
            Dar cum au vândut-o pe Falcon 1, care costa numai 23 mil $ lansarea…
            Trebuiau sà plàteascà 1,25 % din pretul lansàrii, pe lunà de întârziere.

            • Lansarea nu avea cum sa fie prevazuta cu un Falcon 1 pentru ca Falcon 1 nu mai este in productie din anul de gratie 2009. Singura clauza pecuniara din contractul cu Taiwan ar fi fost o penalitate egala cu 1,25% din valoarea contractului pentru fiecare luna de intarziere a lansarii.

              • @Alex
                Lansarea era prevàzutà pentru Falcon 1. Contractul de lansare pentru FormoSat-5 era din 2010.

                „FormoSat-5 has been on SpaceX’s launch manifest since 2010 when the National Space Organization of Taiwan signed with the company for $23 million, booking the satellite on a Falcon 1e launch vehicle SpaceX expected to put on the market in 2011. However, the company withdrew the Falcon 1 altogether after five launches in order to focus on the larger Falcon 9 vehicle, also skipping the earlier proposed Falcon 5.

                This meant that satellites originally assigned to Falcon 1s would move to Falcon 9 which, in some cases like Orbcomm, allowed satellites that were to launch one at a time to be grouped together to take advantage of the higher performance of the Falcon 9.”

                https://spaceflight101.com/falcon-9-formosat-5/spacex-falcon-9-lifts-taiwanese-formosat-5

                  • Asta este. Mai multe surse indicà acelasi lucru. De asta i-a costat asa de mult pe SpaceX tàràsenia asta.

                    „SPACEX IS POISED to fire off a fresh Falcon 9 rocket on Thursday, delivering a comically tiny payload for Taiwan’s National Space Organization. At 1,047 pounds, the Formosat-5 Earth-observing satellite is almost light enough for a human to deadlift—but it’ll launch atop a Falcon 9 rocket with 50 times more capacity. The overkill is thanks to a years-long delay, and SpaceX will take a substantial financial hit to make good on a contract it signed in 2010.

                    Originally, the sat was supposed to fly on SpaceX’s Falcon 1e, an upgraded version of its first orbital-class Falcon 1 rocket with a lift capability of 2,200 pounds. And according to industry analysis site Space Intel Report, they paid $23 million for the privilege—compared to the typical $62 million for a commercial Falcon 9 launch today.
                    So how did Taiwan hitch a discounted ride on a Falcon 9? Delay after delay. SpaceX hoped to deliver Formosat-5 as early as 2013 by launching the small-lift vehicle from a pad on Omelek Island in the military-controlled Kwajalein Atoll southwest of Hawaii. But because of low demand, the company scrapped the single-engine Falcon 1e in the summer of 2011, refocusing its efforts on developing new versions of the Falcon 9. Regardless of how SpaceX launches Formosat-5, the price remains firm for the customer.
                    After the Formosat-5 mission was moved to the Falcon 9, SpaceX targeted its launch for 2015, searching for another paying customer to share space onboard. Launch middleman Spaceflight was in talks with SpaceX to fly its Sherpa rideshare spacecraft on the mission. The Sherpa is a tow vehicle and deployment system for smaller, privately owned satellites; Spaceflight would have flown 90 of them, many from Earth-imaging company Planet, on the Formosat-5 mission.
                    But the mission suffered even more setbacks after SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon spacecraft was destroyed during a launch to the space station in June of 2015. Then, the following summer, SpaceX lost another Falcon 9 after an explosion at its Cape Canaveral launch pad. The incident forced Planet to pull its satellites from Sherpa and launch on an Indian rocket instead—leaving Taiwan’s National Space Organization as the sole passenger on Thursday’s mission.”

                    https://www.wired.com/story/spacex-will-lose-millions-on-its-taiwanese-satellite-launch

          • Exclusive Peek at SpaceX Data Shows Loss in 2015, Heavy Expectations for Nascent Internet Service
            Internal documents reveal aerospace company has thin bottom line vulnerable to accidents, hopes planned satellite-internet business will finance eventual Mars missions
            A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket launched in April at Cape Canaveral, Fla.
            A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket launched in April at Cape Canaveral, Fla. Photo: NASA/Getty Images
            By Rolfe Winkler and
            Andy Pasztor
            Updated Jan. 13, 2017 1:18 p.m. ET
            207 COMMENTS

            One hundred and thirty nine seconds is all it took for an unmanned rocket to explode after blastoff and turn Elon Musk’s booming Space Exploration Technologies Corp. into a geyser of red ink.

            That June 2015 disaster, followed by months of launch delays, contributed to a quarter-billion dollar annual loss and a 6% drop in revenue, after several years of surging sales and small profits.

            Internal financial documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal and interviews with former SpaceX employees depict robust growth in new rocket-launch contracts and a thin bottom line that is vulnerable when things go awry. They also show the company putting steep revenue expectations on a nascent satellite-internet business it hopes will eventually dwarf the rocket division and help finance its goal of manned missions to Mars.

            A second explosion during testing on the launchpad in September grounded SpaceX again, adding to losses and causing a four-month delay. Its next launch is planned for Saturday, when it will seek to regain momentum in the face of depressed revenue, jittery customers and a rising backlog of missions.

            SpaceX, based in Hawthorne, Calif., transformed the aerospace industry with innovative rocket features and Silicon Valley-style software design principles mandated by Mr. Musk, its billionaire founder and chief executive. The 15-year-old company became the first American firm in years to compete for commercial launch contracts, and the first company to launch and return a spacecraft from orbit.

            SpaceX declined to comment on details of its finances but said it has a solid record of success and strong customer relationships. “We have more than 70 future launches on our manifest representing over $10 billion in contracts,” said SpaceX Chief Financial Officer Bret Johnson. “The company is in a financially strong position and is well positioned for future growth,” adding it has over $1 billion of cash and no debt.

            The Journal reviewed SpaceX’s financial results from 2011 through the end of 2015 as well as forecasts through the next decade. As a private company, SpaceX isn’t obligated to publicly disclose the figures, and the information has never been widely shared.

            Mr. Musk, who owns 54% of SpaceX and holds 78% of company votes, has said he isn’t interested in going public until the company is able to transport humans to Mars, which he has said he hopes will happen in 2024. To reach the red planet, SpaceX would need to develop a rocket many times more powerful than its fourth-generation model, which hasn’t flown and is four years behind schedule.

            SpaceX projected the satellite-internet business would have over 40 million subscribers and bring in more than $30 billion in revenue by 2025, according to the documents. The internet service is currently in planning stages without a factory or a full-fledged team of engineers, according to industry officials and earlier comments by company President Gwynne Shotwell.

            SpaceX’s rocket business hasn’t pulled off consistent launches. From 2010 to June 2015, it managed 18 successful launches in a row before its first accident, versus more than 100 straight so far by its main U.S. rival, a joint venture between Boeing Co. and Lockheed Martin Corp. , and more than 75 successful consecutive liftoffs for Europe’s Arianespace SA.

            SpaceX delivered small operating profits in 2013 and 2014, as revenue jumped to $1 billion from $680 million thanks to contracts from NASA and commercial satellite operators.

            The company lost $260 million in 2015 when one of its Falcon 9 rockets, carrying two tons of cargo to the international space station, exploded shortly after liftoff in June of that year. The accident thwarted SpaceX’s plans to launch more than a dozen rockets that year; instead it launched six.

            The disruptions have led some customers to look for alternatives. Last year satellite operators Inmarsat PLC and ViaSat Inc. each shifted one SpaceX launch to Arianespace, citing the delays, although they both retain slots on later missions.

            NASA is conducting a safety review of plans to have SpaceX carry astronauts into orbit. SpaceX has said it was committed to working with NASA to resolve safety issues before starting manned launches.

            Mr. Musk targeted 27 launches for this year; its high-water mark is eight. By 2019, he projected SpaceX will launch 52, or one a week, according to the documents.
            Founder and CEO Elon Musk hopes to be able to transport humans to Mars in the next decade.
            Founder and CEO Elon Musk hopes to be able to transport humans to Mars in the next decade. Photo: Susana Gonzalez/Bloomberg News

            SpaceX is building a new spaceport near Brownsville, Texas, expected to host its first launch in 2018, to help address its backlog and get its planned internet business rolling.

            Mr. Musk, who also runs Tesla Motors Inc., created SpaceX in 2002 to reliably launch satellites and other spacecraft at a low cost, historically considered contradictory goals in the rocket industry. To do so, he developed a steady stream of booster upgrades that have pushed technology and reduced the price of putting cargo in orbit.

            SpaceX phases in significant changes as they become ready, rather than following the industry standard of waiting for a fully overhauled design. This “iterative” approach is typical in Silicon Valley, where software companies quickly roll out new features and fix bugs. SpaceX says it lowers costs and improves efficiency.

            Unlike most rocket makers that rely on suppliers, SpaceX manufactures and assembles more than 70% of its rocket parts to help keep costs lower. SpaceX’s roughly $60 million launch fee for Falcon 9 is one-quarter to one-half of what the Boeing-Lockheed venture typically charges.

            Enticed by lower prices, the world’s largest commercial satellite operators plunked down hefty deposits for future launches. The Falcon 9 had a mostly flawless record delivering payloads to space until the June 2015 accident.

            SpaceX’s success enticed Google-parent Alphabet Inc. and Fidelity Investments to invest a total of $1 billion in early 2015, valuing SpaceX at $12 billion, and Mr. Musk’s stake at over $6 billion. Fidelity has since marked up its stake to a price implying a valuation over $16 billion, more than double the market cap of publicly traded satellite and rocket company Orbital ATK Inc., which has about four times the annual revenue.

            By the summer of 2015, SpaceX teams looked forward to the maiden flight of its fourth-generation rocket, the Falcon Heavy, a bulked-up version of the Falcon 9. But the explosion that June of a Falcon 9 temporarily grounded flights.

            The company determined the culprit was a 24-inch long strut, or low-tech metal support structure, that hadn’t been properly inspected. The company spent six months in a revamp of quality-control checks and companywide safety procedures.

            The second accident last fall destroyed a $200 million commercial satellite and ratcheted up NASA’s concerns. The cause was attributed to problems with new fueling procedures related to SpaceX’s decision to use colder fuel to boost power.

            The financial documents show SpaceX had a strong balance sheet to withstand the first explosion, sitting on $1.3 billion in cash at the end of 2015, thanks partly to the Alphabet and Fidelity investments, as well as huge upfront payments for development work and launch reservations. Yet the cash generated by the business was less than the amount invested back into it.

            A longstanding phrase on SpaceX’s website said it was “profitable and cash-flow positive.” The internal financial documents reviewed by the Journal, though, show an operating loss every quarter, and also negative cash flow of roughly $15 million.
            Investigators believe that the SpaceX Falcon 9 blast in September was likely caused by issues linked to fueling procedures. Photo: USLaunchReport.com

            Three weeks after the September accident, SpaceX removed the phrase from its website, suggesting both profit and cash flow had moved into the red for 2016. Senior SpaceX officials haven’t made public statements about the company’s profitability.

            SpaceX forecast it would have $1.8 billion in revenue and $55 million in operating profit in 2016, according to the documents, which were prepared in early 2016. Those targets are unlikely to have been met, because the company only launched eight rockets instead of its planned 20, just two more than 2015, when revenue was $945 million.

            Using the investment from Alphabet, SpaceX plans to eventually launch its own constellation of over 4,000 communications satellites—about 70 times the size of any current communications array—to provide global internet access, forecasting the first phase to go online by 2018, according to the documents.
            SpaceX is the first company to launch and return a spacecraft from orbit. Above, a recovered section of a Falcon 9 rocket in Cape Canaveral, Fla., in May.
            SpaceX is the first company to launch and return a spacecraft from orbit. Above, a recovered section of a Falcon 9 rocket in Cape Canaveral, Fla., in May. Photo: Joe Skipper/Reuters

            The company expects revenue from the satellite business to overtake SpaceX’s core launch division by 2020, and by 2025 to generate an operating profit of between $15 billion and $20 billion, according to the documents.

            SpaceX’s rocket-launch business competes in an industry that produces only $4.5 billion in total annual revenue, according to Carissa Christensen, chief executive of consulting firm Tauri Space and Technology. Potential profits of the internet service could help justify SpaceX’s huge valuation.

            Rival OneWeb Ltd., of Arlington, Va., is ahead on its plan to provide internet service from more than 640 satellites. OneWeb, which has priority rights internationally to radio frequencies needed to deliver internet signals, last month raised $1 billion from Japan’s SoftBank Group and is already lining up suppliers and building a factory in Florida to make its satellites.

            Write to Rolfe Winkler at rolfe.winkler@wsj.com and Andy Pasztor at andy.pasztor@wsj.com
            Recommended Videos

            https://m.wsj.net/video/20170912/091217_apple1/091217_apple1_115x65.jpg
            Apple’s iPhone Event in Under 4 Minutes
            https://m.wsj.net/video/20170913/091217mercprojectone/091217mercprojectone_115x65.jpg
            Mercedes-Benz Unveils F1-Inspired Hypercar
            https://m.wsj.net/video/20170912/091217applesf2/091217applesf2_115x65.jpg
            iPhone X & iPhone 8: First Look Video
            https://m.wsj.net/video/20160913/091316auswine/091316auswine_115x65.jpg
            The Science of Saving Wines From Climate Change
            https://m.wsj.net/video/20160914/091416techblock/091416techblock_115x65.jpg
            India’s Online Gender Divide

            Most Popular Articles

            iPhone X vs iPhone 8: What Are the Big Differences?
            iPhone X vs iPhone 8: What Are the Big Differences?
            The Cruelty of Barack Obama
            Opinion: The Cruelty of Barack Obama
            Apple Unveils New iPhone X to Fend Off Growing Competition
            Apple Unveils New iPhone X to Fend Off Growing Competition
            What It’s Like to Be Smeared by the Southern Poverty Law Center
            Opinion: What It’s Like to Be Smeared by the Southern Poverty Law Center
            Straight Talk for College Women
            Opinion: Straight Talk for College Women

            WSJ Member Message
            Your Briefing on Day’s Top Stories
            GET NEWSLETTER
            SHOW COMMENTS (207)
            What to Read Next…
            personal technology: geoffrey fowler
            iPhone X First Look: About Face
            review & outlook (u.s.)
            How Florida Saved Taxpayers
            technology
            Apple Unveils New iPhone X to Fend Off Growing Competition
            u.s. news
            Florida Turns to Recovery After Irma
            asia news
            What a War With North Korea Might Look Like
            Independent of The Wall Street Journal newsroom
            industries
            Apple’s ‘disappointing’ iPhone X could mean people will keep clinging to older phones

            Independent of The Wall Street Journal newsroom
            Tequila Titan Lists Plaza Hotel Penthouse for $34.95M

            • Foarte interesant, multumesc!
              Musk e deja renumit ca nu-si indeplineste promisiunile la timp, cam toate proiectele lor au intarzieri…
              Opereaza cu o margine de profit mica si orice sincopa produce pierderi mai mari decat in cazul ULA sa zicem.
              Nici Tesla nu se simte prea bine financiar vorbind.
              Insa, in opinia mea, SpaceX merita tot sprijinul NASA si, pentru moment, il au.
              In alta ordine de idei mi-as da salariul pe o luna sa stiu ce testeaza cu X-37 B, vad ca lumea s-a abtinut de la speculatii… 🙂

              • US Air Force Space Command and National Reconnaissance Office sunt musterii principali pana cand (daca) segmentul de piata cu sateliti de telecomunicatii se va adeveri. NASA joaca la pitici in momentul de fata.

                • Ce se mai aude de US Space Corps?

                  • Absolut nimic. In actualul National Defense Authorization Act pentru anul fiscal 2018 nici nu mai apare. De fapt nu stiu ce au avut in cap papagalii aia doi care au venit cu aceasta idee (rahat probabil). De fapt US Space Corps = US Air Force Space Command in timp ce programele spatiale ale US Navy si US Army erau lasate sa-si faca de cap in continuare. Much ado about nothing.

              • My two cents, nu ca as stii yo mai mult, dar cred ca se fac tot felul de experimente care au in vedere urmatoarea generatie de sateliti de foto-recunoastere.

              • @Alex @Nicolae: daca dezbateti chestiuni legate de SpaceX pe baza unor articole din Wall Street Journal sper ca nu va asteptati sa nu fie biasate de lobbyul masiv al producatorilor traditionali de automobile (concurate de Tesla), a marilor companii de petrol si carbune (concurate de SolarCity), precum si a companiilor Boeing si Lockheed Martin care impreuna formeaza ULA(concurate de SpaceX).
                spre deosebire de ULA, care foloseste motoare RD180 cumparate din Rusia si concepute pe la inceputul anilor 70, „SpaceX manufactures and assembles more than 70% of its rocket parts to help keep costs lower”. e o oarecare diferenta, nu?
                Daca vorbim de probleme fianciare la SpaceX, cum incerca sa sugereze cotit articolul din WSJ, cu siguranta momentul delicat pentru Musk a trecut undeva dupa primele 4,5 lansari ratate, cand, zicea Musk intr-un interviu, mai avea putin si punea lacatul. Acuma situatia e sub control. E normal sa mai ai esecuri cand trimiti in spatiu rachete pe care le-ai conceput tu de la zero le-ai construit tot tu.
                Spre deosebire ULA, care isi propune doar sa faca cat mai multi bani din pix, pentru actionari, Musk vrea sa tarasca toata omenirea dupa el cu un pas inainte, vrea sa ajunga pe marte cu Falcon Heavy, care are la baza 3 Falcon9 cu upgradeurile care se vor mai face pana la lansare. Daca Musk spune ca va duce oameni pe marte in 2024 si ii va duce nu atunci ci in 2034, asta nu inseamna ca e neserios, ci doar ca „imposibilul dureaza un pic mai mult”. Caci este imposibil pentru ORICINE din lumea astasa faca ce face Musk, parerea mea. Asa ca let’s give this guy some credit, shall we?
                daca aveti rabdare sa urmariti audierea din congres a lui Musk si a reprezentantului ULA o sa va lamuriti mai bine despre una, alta: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=he0-SP-BnCQ

                • Asta cu partinirea WSJ nu prea o cred. Daca faci referinta la politica lor editoriala, asta este altceva, dar nu confunda comitetul editorial al ziarului cu politica din redactie. WSJ iti face o simpla radiografie a unor rapoarte financiare din care extrapoleaza niste concluzii pe care nu le poti eticheta a fi partinitoare si nici pe departe nu se vorbeste de probleme financiare. WSJ iti spune alb pe negru care sunt investitorii in SpaceX, iar banii lor asigura sanatatea financiara a firmei. Nu interpreta margini minuscule si un an de pierderi a fi probleme financiare. Incearca sa corelezi finatele firmei la cate lansari a efectuat firma pana acum. Din pacate nu am cum sa export graficele aferente articolului pentru a reda mai bine ce scrie in articol.

                • „Biasate”???WTF? Nu ca as fi un grammar nazi acum. De fapt si Nicolae e „vinovat” de asa ceva in articolul despre Kaijo Jieitai – focusat?

                • Nu spun ca nu-i acord credit omului, personal il admir mult, are carisma. Sesizam doar ca SpaceX e deja cunoscuta pentru nerespectarea termenelor stabilite tot de ei, ceea ce e un fapt cunoscut si acceptat de toata lumea.

                  Este impresionant ce a reusit sa realizeze. De aceea ma intereseaza si „sanatatea” financiara a SpaceX, pentru ca nu-mi doresc sa esueze pe motiv de bani, sau mai degraba, pe motiv de lipsa de bani.

        • Uneori castiga.. cert este ca au spart monopolul ULA asupra lansarilor ieftine… Oricum ULA avea ceva issues la orizont cu embargoul de RD180. Delta este americana cu motoare mai puternice, dar mai scumpa.

  4. Prepararea lui X-37B în vederea lansàrii.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trNsXrJRDHQ

  5. Editat – Cezar, esti offtopic

  6. intre timp in Romania am reusit sa devenim asi in pdf-uri

  7. @Nicolae, da, o data ce intri pe bursa trebuie sa dai dovada de o transparenta foarte mare. Adica registrele tale financiare sunt la vedere, trebuie sa anunti orice afacere/tranzactie imediat, etc. Sunt multe reguli de genul acesta
    Absolut impresionant ce face SpaceX

Germanos.ro

Lasă un răspuns

Adresa ta de email nu va fi publicată. Câmpurile obligatorii sunt marcate cu *