This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Commercialization

SpaceX Launch Scrubbed Again – But No One Could See It Happen

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
June 23, 2014
Filed under ,

SpaceX launch delayed again, this time because of weather, Reuters
“For Saturday’s launch attempt, the California-based company, owned and operated by technology entrepreneur Elon Musk, canceled its webcast and provided no commentary about the launch countdown, a public service offered even for classified Department of Defense satellite launches. “For the first time since the end of the Cold War, a space launch from Cape Canaveral will not be broadcast to the press and the public,” Spaceflightnow.com, which provides live launch coverage, wrote on its website.”
Keith’s note: This lack of visibility is rather unusual for SpaceX – a company that has gone out of its way to use social media and traditional media – with great success – to get word about its products and services to the widest audience possible. Indeed, just a week or so ago there was a large reception for the Dragon V2 in Washington DC and the news media was all over it. Flash forward. SpaceX explained this absence of a webcast yesterday as being due to the fact that these launches were becoming routine and that the webcasts are no longer needed. This was a little odd given that they had a webcast for the Friday launch attempt 24 hours earlier.
Yes, they are a private company and this is a commercial activity, so they have every right to do this. But that does not mean its the smart thing to do. As for SpaceX falcon launches being “routine” – since when is a rocket launch where the first stage uses landing legs to return to Earth “routine”?
That said, the reaction on the Twitterverse yesterday – albeit from space enthusiasts and space media – was swift and loud. The hashtag “#FalconNein” quickly appeared. One would hope that SpaceX is paying attention and realizes that they are doing something cool – as are other space companies – and that the more visible all of this launch stuff is, the more excitement is generated – and the greater the public appreciation for the reality of space utilization becomes.
People like to watch SpaceX launches – and other launches – because they are cool. Cool sells. And if and when something goes wrong people root for the company to fix the problem so they can see cool things again.
SpaceX Falcon 9 Reusable Flies with Fins (video), earlier post
ULA Media Blitz, earlier post
Keith’s update: Sunday afternon SpaceX sent an email out to some space news media (but not all space news media): “Today’s ORBCOMM launch attempt has been scrubbed to address a potential concern identified during pre-flight checks. The vehicle and payload are in good condition, and engineering teams will take the extra time to ensure the highest possible level of mission assurance prior to flight. The rocket will remain vertical on the launch pad with the next available launch opportunity targeting Tuesday, June 24th.”

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

62 responses to “SpaceX Launch Scrubbed Again – But No One Could See It Happen”

  1. MarcNBarrett says:
    0
    0

    SpaceX is the “hip”, “cool” thing right now. But they could become “uncool” very quickly if they look like they are hiding something. Perhaps they are worried about having a major launch failure webcast live? If so, doesn’t sound like someone high up at SpaceX (perhaps Musk himself) is 100% confident in the rockets.

    • LPHartswick says:
      0
      0

      I think our national space program should be based entirely on hip & cool…don’t you? 😉

  2. Antilope7724 says:
    0
    0

    This is probably a growing trend by private space companies, to only show things in the best light possible and not mention the rest. Sierra Nevada still hasn’t released the entire video of the Dream Chaser crash landing. Now SpaceX decides to censor launch coverage due to ongoing glitches. Reminds me of the bad old days of trying to follow the Soviet space program.

    • Anonymous says:
      0
      0

      They all lose credibility by being secretive.

    • John Thomas says:
      0
      0

      This is not new to SpaceX. They have typically been private and slow to disclose things. If anything, other private companies might copy SpaceX.

    • fcrary says:
      0
      0

      Actually, “a growing trend by private space companies, to only show things in the best light possible and not mention the rest” doesn’t really reflect how things work. This practice is common to essentially all aerospace companies and NASA centers, and it has been for as long as I’ve worked in the field (a bit over 20 years.) I personally think NASA “public information offices” should be about informing the public, not bolstering the public image of the relevant project or institution, and NASA-funded companies should have a similar obligation, But that just isn’t how things work today.

    • Vsmack says:
      0
      0

      Sierra Nevada Hid nothing from NASA, Space X hides everything. And by the way there is no one else in this competition trying to land a vehicle vs. a rescue

  3. Anonymous says:
    0
    0

    Not sure who at SpaceX (or was it Orbcom?) authorized this secrecy but launch aborts, scrubs or a failure won’t escape the notice of ULA or Senator Shelby. Even their Twitter page wasn’t updated!!!

  4. RocketEconomist327 says:
    0
    0

    SpaceX, by not webcasting their launch, really hurts the transparency issue which is currently being raised by Senator Shelby. Its unwise.

    SpaceX has every right now to webcast and make a production out of their launches. It is also the right of Senators and Congressmen to raise questions as well.

    Many of us realize or have knowledge of the issues with this vehicle – in particular – the second stage. Maybe Elon doesn’t want a problem streamed all over the net. Either way, a bad day is a bad day, and this is not helping inside or outside the beltway.

  5. Hug Doug ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ says:
    0
    0

    the last launch had some 65,000 people watching on the SpaceX livestream. I was one of them. I’d say the interest is there. the only good reason i can think of they wouldn’t do the livestream is if there was some sort of technical difficulty with the stream itself. i heard there were problems with the video feed on Friday.

  6. Bennett In Vermont says:
    0
    0

    Well, SpaceX heard their fan base. Today’s launch (Sunday) was going to have a webcast, now moot as the weather is too poor to justify attempting a launch.

    I’m okay with SpaceX discontinuing the “talking heads” part of the webcast and simply go with restrained commentary and camera feeds. I’d much rather they focus on first stage landing feeds!

  7. DTARS says:
    0
    0

    Space utilization

    Not wasteful Space exploration that doesn’t affect you and me.

    Not Space Settlement that still seems way out there in the future.

    But the practical Utilization of Space that benifits you and me.

    Hummmm 🙂

  8. Steve Pemberton says:
    0
    0

    From the SpaceX website:

    Friday June 20th – “Live launch webcast will begin at 5:35 pm ET”

    Saturday June 21st – “There will not be a live webcast for this launch attempt, but we will provide updates as available.”

    Sunday June 22nd – “SpaceX is planning to live webcast the Orbcomm OG2 launch here starting at 2:16 pm PT/ 5:16 pm ET.”

    (The Sunday attempt has now been scrubbed, earliest next attempt is Tuesday the 24th)

    On the surface, Saturday’s lack of webcast would appear to be just an anomaly. However we are left with sorting out the perplexing comment supposedly made by SpaceX spokesperson Emily Shanklin indicating that the webcasts take a lot of resources are not really needed anymore. Hopefully that is just her opinion and not the actual company direction. Or following her reasoning, maybe they can save even more resources by eliminating spokespersons?

  9. duheagle says:
    0
    0

    It’s certainly within SpaceX’s rights not to webcast a launch, but it’s also pretty clearly an unforced error on their part. Fortunately, they seem to be doing a quick 180 on this.

  10. DTARS says:
    0
    0

    If a bird blows up on the stand video or no video makes little difference.

  11. DTARS says:
    0
    0

    Spacex launches more rockets per year than anyone if you include grasshopper and F9R tests.

    Wouldn’t live F9R be more Interesting “cool to watch” than plain old orbital lift offs?

    Next week on Thursday Spacex will test F9R with legs up at launch. Tune into our web cast to see if its going to work or not.

    Never know we may drill a hole with this one.

    • DTARS says:
      0
      0

      Spaceman I figured I would be corrected if wrong. Thanks for the info. What do you think of the idea of doing live F9R and dragonfly tests. We have the tech to see what rocket scientists do. Sure would be fun to see more.

      • Hug Doug ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ says:
        0
        0

        i think it’s unlikely that we will ever see “live” testing of F9R Dev 1 or DragonFly, reason being that these are proprietary tests. they do not announce them beforehand and only release the video a few days after the fact in order to protect their trade secrets.

        “We have the tech to see what rocket scientists do” and so do their competitors… and China.

    • vladimirpinchaloafsky says:
      0
      0

      Thanks, hope your PR flack can help us with real information about our space program. What a swindle.

  12. Anonymous says:
    0
    0

    It would be nice to see SpaceX get a few consecutive launches off without system issues that force delays. Yes, their Falcon 9 missions have all flown with success (albeit one mission could not launch a secondary payload), but I think continuing to have scrubs due to system issues will damage confidence inside and outside the beltway more than not televising a launch will.

  13. Spaceman says:
    0
    0

    The lack of visibility is not unusual for SpaceX. They have a finely tuned PR machine. In the past they have immediately cut off the stream on the first sign of an anomaly. Their webcast, like all other PR activities, is purposely set up to generate a positive image. Either they felt there was something about the Saturday attempt that would not look good, or they (for once) seriously miscalculated the public impact of not carrying the webcast.

    • duheagle says:
      0
      0

      In the past they have immediately cut off the stream on the first sign of an anomaly.

      This is simply nonsense. You’re entitled to whatever opinion you chose to hold about SpaceX, but you’re not entitled to simply make stuff up. The streaming video feeds of Falcon 1 flights 2 and 3 both continued well past the point of “anomalies” that doomed these missions. I particularly remember the obvious collision between the first stage and the second stage engine bell after MECO and stage separation fed live from the camera positioned alongside the second stage engine. It’s worth pointing out that SpaceX also kept the feed going all the way to orbit on the Falcon 9-Dragon mission in which a first stage Merlin 1-C engine failed less than two minutes into flight.

  14. John Thomas says:
    0
    0

    I understand they still haven’t launched more than 2 to orbit in a year.

  15. vladimirpinchaloafsky says:
    0
    0

    Edit

  16. vladimirpinchaloafsky says:
    0
    0

    US government should be doing this. I’m against billions in no bid contracts to a hustler type, he’s got his hands full with the two other businesses that SP calls B-, space travel is still a military province and should be handled by NASA.

    • BeanCounterFromDownUnder says:
      0
      0

      FGS, get your facts together before posting Vlad.
      Here’s where you’re just plain wrong:
      1. Billions have not gone to SpaceX in no-bid contests. Their funding comes from:
      Musk in terms of his private investment
      Venture capitalists
      Employees
      AF for a small part of F1 development
      Competed COTS and CC Programs by NASA
      Commercially competed launches and pre-payments
      2. Space travel no longer has anything to do with the DoD or any military agency. Sure they buy launches of military satellites but this isn’t one of those times.
      3. NASA is not a military agency, it’s completely civilian.
      This launch is for a commercial customer. Why should the U.S. government be doing these launches?
      You can find this info’ on Wiki or any of many other sources in the press. Where have you been hiding?
      Cheers

      • vladimirpinchaloafsky says:
        0
        0

        wrong, it was the $billions in contracts for spacex that he used to bail-out tesla, did you listen to the interview on 60 minutes last month? he used the spacex dough for the car company! totally outrageous!

        • duheagle says:
          0
          0

          Yeah, I watched that episode. You must have been watching it on acid as I have no recollection of any remarks remotely resembling your allegations here. At no point was Elon shown leading a parade of pink elephants either.

      • duheagle says:
        0
        0

        Consider the user ID Vlad is commenting under, then ask yourself what he’s doing here, i.e., dropping little turdballs into the thread. It’s not like he didn’t warn us.

    • Michael Spencer says:
      0
      0

      What??

      • vladimirpinchaloafsky says:
        0
        0

        We should not cede a facet of vital national security to private firm, especially to an entity that shows lack of respect for honesty and transparency. Bad move.

    • Paul451 says:
      0
      0

      It’s a commercial launch, you muppet. Orbcomm OG2 commsat by Sierra Nevada.

      • vladimirpinchaloafsky says:
        0
        0

        scrubbed again, canceled until at least july because darth paypal doesn’t have the skills, bad idea to give billions in no-bids to a hustler like that, why is our government allowing a military installation to be used by a commercial enterprise? you have it backwards, NASA is part of the Air Force and we should not cede control of space to darth paypal.

        • Hug Doug ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ says:
          0
          0

          NASA is not part of the Air Force. it’s a civilian agency, not run by the military at all.

  17. John Gardi says:
    0
    0

    Folks:

    I emailed SpaceX yesterday and gave them a piece of my mind. Their reply to me today was that “We heard your feedback and are planning to provide a webcast for public viewing”. No indication that they would provide webcasts in the future though.

    Did anyone else get such an email reply? If so, was the wording the same, as in a ‘form email’. I have had some back and forth with them in the past and this one sounded a li’le less personal than previous ones (I really did rake them over the coals for not anticipating the fallout this would cause!).

    From my email to SpaceX:

    “If you had told me you were cancelling the webcast before it happened, I could have told you what the outcome would have been. The fact that Emily posted that “We’ve actually been ready to move away from the webcasts for awhile” shows me how clueless you folks are when it comes to public relations. SpaceX may make the best rockets on the planet, but at PR, you really suck! If you had consulted a few folks (like me) out of house, this would have never happened.”

    Amazing they sent me a reply at all!

    tinker

    • Todd Austin says:
      0
      0

      Tinker, from comments on the SpaceX subreddit, it’s clear that what you received is a personalized form letter. They sent precisely the same text to everyone.

      • John Gardi says:
        0
        0

        Todd:

        I thought so. The SpaceX PR & Media Dept. seems to have a revolving door policy too, as folks come and go (permanently) a lot.

        Good to here others emailed SpaceX too. I posted the eddress on Twitter and a few folks picked up on it.

        I usually don’t bother with reddit, not focused enough for me.

        tinker

        • Enceladus says:
          0
          0

          You would think Space-X would have treated you better since you have been a total mouthpiece for them forever it seems…….

    • Anonymous says:
      0
      0

      You weren’t owed a personalized response, and frankly given the unprofessional and insulting way you worded your email, I’m surprised you got any response at all. I think what you received was better than what your email merited.

      • John Gardi says:
        0
        0

        Psi2:

        I disagree, they deserved every word!

        SpaceX has something their competitors don’t… real public interest. Not just your average space geeks but folks that are banking a lot of hope that SpaceX can really succeed in making space launch cheap, reliable and often! No entity on the planet has as far-reaching goals as SpaceX.

        They have a long way to go and they need our collective public support (which is growing) more than ever.

        SpaceX did not anticipate the push-back they got for cancelling the webcast… and on such short notice too. If they were ‘planning’ to stop the webcasts for a while, that was an epic fail on their part.

        They needed to be told that in the strongest terms possible because I actually do care if they succeed!

        So, what’s wrong with my logic?

        tinker

        BTW: When’s the last time you went to bat for something you believe in under your own name? Just sayin’…

        • Saturn1300 says:
          0
          0

          Brave or foolhardy to give your own name? I started with AOL before Windows. They would not allow use of real names. I am being stalked and harassed by Saturday morning Bible people. 2 examples are of them coming too my home and then the same people showing up at a business the next week. This was 10 years apart. I am a nobody. Why the atttention? I am worried there might be a real crazy one and try to kill me. The only thing I can trace it too, is some letters to the editor, where I had to give my name. I must have said something to really make them mad. I advise not to challenge someone to give their own name. There are too many crazies out there. Keith should not allow anyone to give their own name. Any comment can be challenged by facts and people hopefully will not like to be shown wrong and be nice. Words will never hurt us.

          • John Gardi says:
            0
            0

            S13:

            We too have had our spats but they always seem to be resolved with respect!

            I wasn’t challenging Psi2 to reveal his (or her) name, only that some of us do so as a means to really put our beliefs on the line in a very personal way. Also, I can take care of myself when it comes to push-back coming my way! I’m quick to apologize too when I’ve erred and learn from the experience. This is not one of those times! 🙂

            Cheers:

            tinker

        • Anonymous says:
          0
          0

          What are you “just sayin”? Don’t prevaricate.

          I don’t care whose name you used. You didn’t give any respect, so you didn’t merit any respect in return. That SpaceX responded to you at all speaks well of them.

          I don’t need to provide you with any reports on what I’ve stood up to or what I’ve done. This isn’t a chest thumping contest.

          There are many more words that would have been equally strong if not more than the ones you used, and those words could have been used while still conveying dignity. Frankly, your email comes off like something written by an angry, spoiled teenager, not something written by an adult and a professional.

          • John Gardi says:
            0
            0

            Psi2:

            I had to look the ‘big word’ up!

            pre·var·i·cate
            priˈvariˌkāt/
            verb
            verb: prevaricate; 3rd person present: prevaricates; past tense: prevaricated; past participle: prevaricated; gerund or present participle: prevaricating
            speak or act in an evasive way.
            “he seemed to prevaricate when journalists asked pointed questions”
            synonyms:be evasive, beat around the bush, hedge, fence, shilly-shally, dodge (the issue), sidestep (the issue), equivocate waffle; More
            temporize, stall (for time);
            hem and haw;
            raretergiversate
            “you have prevaricated so often through this testimony that the truth has become unrecognizable”

            I wasn’t!

            tinker

        • Jafafa Hots says:
          0
          0

          Unless you’re in the market for a launch, SpaceX doesn’t owe you anything.

          Welcome to privatized space.

      • BeanCounterFromDownUnder says:
        0
        0

        Perhaps John was a bit blunt about it but I’d say he represented pretty well what most SpaceX fanbois were thinking at least. 🙂
        Cheers

  18. NewSpacePaleontologist says:
    0
    0

    SpaceX is right about this becoming routine – the scrubs and delays are certainly becoming routine. That was part of the PR problem with Shuttle – delays led to perception of incompetence. At least with Shuttle we knew exactly what went wrong and what was being done to fix it.

    Only 12 more to go this year – 2 a month. This is certainly not Elon hyperbole. Lots of delay or scrub opportunity but those will probably be the governments’ or ULAs fault.

    As you say – government vs. private. They keep their Commercial Resupply problems very private. Makes me wonder about how forthcoming they will be when they have humans on board. Maybe Shelby is correct.

    • duheagle says:
      0
      0

      They keep their Commercial Resupply problems very private.

      And those would be what, exactly?

      • Paul451 says:
        0
        0

        They’ve had a weird problem with water ingress on splashdown. They thought they fixed it after the first, but it happened again on the third.

        • duheagle says:
          0
          0

          Yeah, I’ve heard about that problem too. So much for it being kept “very private.” I’ve also heard that the problem is with a pressure equalization valve that allows water to enter after splashdown. SpaceX intends to modify either the valve or its mode of operation on the next CRS mission to preclude water entry.

    • LPHartswick says:
      0
      0

      Yeah, what a shock!

  19. Saturn1300 says:
    0
    0

    They said on the webcast that the next flight will be in one month.

  20. Saturn1300 says:
    0
    0

    Keith says Web casts are free. I am in the TBA. I could show the view from here. Contrails or light is about all though. I do have a good image of a contrail all twisted by the upper winds. There ought to be someone around KSC, as a hobby, could show a launch. The first static fire of the F9 was shown from a webcam on a pole looking over a fence. I wonder if security ever got them. I guess Keith does not still have the KSC reporter he had. He could set up a webcam. These streaming companies love that free content. They need something to broadcast. That is why they do it free.

    • John Gardi says:
      0
      0

      S13:

      I remember someone in Orlando got some great video of a Falcon launch! I think it was SES-8’s launch. You could even see cold gas thrusters firing after 1st stage separation.

      Here it is:

      https://www.youtube.com/wat

      tinker

      • Hug Doug ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ says:
        0
        0

        thruster firings very visible starting at about 3:52, if you want to skip ahead

  21. J C says:
    0
    0

    Sounds to me like they made a PR miscalculation and it bit them. It also sounds like they felt the pushback and responded. That’s a bit mundane as opposed to a nice juicy conspiracy or predictions that they’re about to fall on their face, but hey, life is boring that way sometimes. Yeah, they’re having their share of glitches, but look at what they’re compared to. The Russian have been flying Soyuz’s since I was a kid, and I’m old enough to be a grandfather.

    Every so often around Huntsville, you see some obviously nerdy-sort of guys wearing a t-shirt that says, “As a matter of fact, it IS rocket science.” It’s easy to forget that.

  22. John Thomas says:
    0
    0

    Wikipedia shows only 3 successful launches in 2013 (3/1, 9/29, 12/3) and 4 over the course of a year from 2013 to 2014 so that’s more than 2 a year. Still not as many as ULA.

  23. Coach Kopan says:
    0
    0

    Maybe it’s because sabotage by rogue ULA personnel or other BigSpace outfits has been occurring with the ground systems and spacecraft. #LunaticFringe #NextConspiracyTheory #ROFL

  24. vladimirpinchaloafsky says:
    0
    0

    Scrubbed again until at least july because they lack the proficiency to pull it off.

    • Hug Doug ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ says:
      0
      0

      Scrubbed ’till July due to range maintenence, actually.

      http://www.floridatoday.com

      naturally, both SpaceX and Orbcomm are going to use this extra time to make sure all is ready for the next launch opportunity.

      besides, SpaceX has already launched the Falcon 9 v1.1 four times. what makes you think they are unable to “pull it off” as you say??

      • duheagle says:
        0
        0

        Probably the same thing that makes him think NASA is part of the AIr Force and that Elon used NASA money to bail out Tesla. Vlad seems not only to be pinching loaves, but smoking them afterwards.