It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

UFO Destroyed the Falcon-9 Rocket /SpaceX/Facebook & Israeli Aerospace Industries

page: 32
144
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 03:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Jubei42

I wasn't joking and I really don't care what you think.

It was an act of god

Right?




posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 03:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Peeple
No.
It was a design, or other technical flaw.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 03:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I don't think the result of the investigation will show someone to be held responsible.
Let's wait, right? 7 days investigation and it probably will take a while longer.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 03:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

In all likelihood, yes. It will take a while longer. Took a very long time to find out what happened to Challenger. Longer before another shuttle flew.

SpaceX has a lot riding on it. People are thinking twice about putting their 100 million dollar bird on a Falcon. Even if their options are limited.

They are going to make damned sure they know what happened before they do anything.

edit on 9/8/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 03:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

And Changzheng will happily step in. It's a mess, either way.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 07:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

My bet is that the guys at VT are correct and it was an x-ray laser that was used. Lithium exposed to x-ray causes a nuclear trigger reaction. With amplified x-ray the effect would be more profound as we saw. Darn those lithium batteries!




posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 07:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: Phage

I don't think the result of the investigation will show someone to be held responsible.
Let's wait, right? 7 days investigation and it probably will take a while longer.

It took over three weeks to find the immediate cause of the last Falcon 9 explosion that happened during launch ascent in June 2015. That immediate cause of the failure was found to be a strut that was supporting a high-pressure helium tank.

However, the complete investigation takes a lot longer....

Sure, they relatively quickly learned that the helium tank strut failed, but they still didn't know why exactly the strut failed. Was it under-designed for the expected loads put on it? Was there for some reason more load put on the strut than they expected? Did something else fail and then damage the strut, causing a cascading failure. Was the strut designed well, but was manufactured improperly?

All of those questions took longer to answer, and some may never be answered.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 09:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Same here !
This is a big hit to Elon



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 01:16 PM
link   
www.space.com...

watching this video with the speed turned down to 0.25 in the settings down bottom right corner of youtube and to me there is no way that, that was a bird that flew by exactly at the moment it exploded, there are a lot of pages in this thread has anybody came up with a good reason as to what it could be? im puzzled...



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Davg80

Nope.
It's bug vs UFO



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 01:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Davg80
www.space.com...

watching this video with the speed turned down to 0.25 in the settings down bottom right corner of youtube and to me there is no way that, that was a bird that flew by exactly at the moment it exploded, there are a lot of pages in this thread has anybody came up with a good reason as to what it could be? im puzzled...


Some people have suggested that it was possibly a bug, not a bird...And that it was somewhere closer to the camera rather than closer to the rocket.

It's difficult to discern distance it was from the camera because they camera seemed to be using a telephoto, but due to the use of the telephoto, it could have been 100 or so feet away from the camera, rather than being anywhere near the rocket itself...

Therefore, it could have been far enough away as to not be the terribly unfocused blob it would be if it were just a couple of feet from the camera, but it was close enough that it would move through the camera's image frame very quickly (because the width of the camera image frame is very short relatively close to the camera, especially using the telephoto), thus looking like it was fast.


edit on 2016/9/8 by Box of Rain because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 05:46 PM
link   
Has anyone considered the possibility that this was a projectile from the ulta over the top secret Illudium Q-36 explosive space modulator?



posted on Sep, 9 2016 @ 12:39 AM
link   
a reply to: juniorwolverine

Who or what is Elon?



posted on Sep, 9 2016 @ 03:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

A Musk



posted on Sep, 9 2016 @ 04:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

A what?



posted on Sep, 9 2016 @ 04:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Elon Musk. Founder and CEO of spacex.



posted on Sep, 9 2016 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Read and weep you sceptics, inverse article, quoting Musks twitter, as he was asked if there is some truth to the youtube videos claiming something hit the rocket,

"We have not ruled that out."

thank you Mr. Musk. He just shot up in my personal hero ranking to Number 1! Unchallenged with a huge gap!

Oh and here his twitter, if you need verification.


edit on 9-9-2016 by Peeple because: Add



posted on Sep, 9 2016 @ 02:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

No weeping here and yes I am a skeptic of the notion that the laser-weaponized bug in the camera shot caused the explosion. I suppose it's possible that something else not caught on camera may have hit it.

However, I betting this is why he is not ruling anything out... including a close fly-by from Tinkerbell.


Unless Musk and SpaceX can prove that the explosion was not their fault — specifically, that it was an act of sabotage — all further launches will be postponed until at least March, 2017.



posted on Sep, 9 2016 @ 03:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: lakenheath24
Has anyone considered the possibility that this was a projectile from the ulta over the top secret Illudium Q-36 explosive space modulator?


Everybody knows the illudiim Q-36 is outdated


Except for you apparently. I think you need to read up on your modulators my friend.



posted on Sep, 9 2016 @ 03:25 PM
link   
a reply to: GoShredAK

My apologies, I only have peripheral knowledge of space modulators, though having said that, even early Mk1 models have the modulatory power to excite lithium batteries into exploding.
My experience is in Minuteman 2 ICBM's. I ruled that out though as A.) That would be costly, B.) The RV is a bit bigger than the praying mantis/ufo/parakeet in the video, and C.) Such an launch would have excited the Russians and been all over RT News .



new topics

top topics



 
144
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join