Edit: Next launch window is tomorrow at 4:10pm eastern time. However the weather outlook isn't much better.
Why is it so precise?
Not so much the earth as ISS.
The earth rotates at 24900mi/day or about 1040mph.
The ISS, to maintain its orbit, travels at 17150mph or about 5 miles per second.
So in two minutes, it travels about 600 miles.
Anyone know how they detect lightnings? Is it just cameras, or do they have planes flying around?
That site works by a using a network of cheap EMP detectors. It uses the timing differences from each sensor to trilaterate the position of the lightning strike.
This specific delay though was caused by convective clouds being too close to the launch. This was probably determined with either ground based radar, or visible/IR images from satellites.
There is a considerable body of research on detecting the presence and range of lightning: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_detection
What is the cost to scrub a launch due to the weather at the last minute?
Right now, there is a major thunderstorm system north of the launch area, and a smaller one south of it. They were trying to launch through the gap.
[1] http://www.accuweather.com/en/us/cape-canaveral-fl/32920/wea... [2] http://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?filename=4&artic...
It's a great idea - I think there are a bunch of similar applications that could leverage phones like this.
Early initial targets are large convective systems (like these) that are difficult to predict. Our dense barometer network should resolve them far better than other existing networks.
We also do Current Conditions like WU, but that idea needs a lot of work before anyone makes a valuable product on it alone. Typically those readings are used to validate and tweak models, not make forecasts.
Other sensors that will prove useful: cell signal strength, thermometer, humidity, UV sensor, ambient light sensor, etc.
And yes, there are lots of other uses! Like earthquake mapping and alerting, I wrote a blog post mentioning some ideas and the importance for the code to be open source: http://www.jacobsheehy.com/2014/02/open-source-software-is-i...
There is a cost to postponing the launch, but compared to having their rocket blown up by lightning on launch, it's nothing.
As far as I know, the budget for these launches already includes x number of retries - since scrubbing launches and retrying in another window is actually standard procedure - so they are not "loosing" as much money as you think. It's only if they exceed the # of retry attempts that they've budgeted for that a solution like yours becomes viable, and even then, you're not fighting against "the cost of getting things set up".
You're fighting against the cost of having their rocket blown up on launch because of bad or unforseen weather events. That's why they scrub - not because the weather is too bad to fly - it's because there could be an unforseen event happening because an anvil cloud (which has lightning in it) - merges with another large storm formation at 10 nm - basically, it's insurance against the rocket blowing up.
If you can insure your weather detection solution in the high hundreds of millions for a positive launch, then there would be a market for it.
And to be successful, your product will need to cut that 3 min downwards, not upwards.
So that mission control can have a better confidence of scrubbing a launch, say within 10-s of launch time vs 3 min.
You get what I mean? Better weather detection allows mission control to delay longer until the best guess estimate of when to hit the STOP button, not so that they can plan ahead to put a launch at xyz date/time because a weather prediction system says so.
Probably not. They were a go up until just three minutes before launch. I doubt any extant or near-future forecasting system is able to tell you that a specific storm cell will be in a specific spot at an exact minute all that far in advance.
Well, this is exactly my plan, and I'm going to do it ASAP. Prototype should be done by summer. There are millions of little weather stations all over Florida that nobody is using (smartphones). By connecting those stations together and pulling the live sensor data into forecasts, I do in fact believe that these small thunderstorm cells should be very well-forecasted if we take in this dense dataset.
This forecast system doesn't exist yet, you're right. But it should exist in the next couple months/years, and when it does, it should be able to provide this kind of forecast.
BUT only if that is worth money to a group like SpaceX - is it? That's really my question. I know I can build the technology, but will anyone like SpaceX buy, and at what price?
Accurate forecasts are no doubt extremely valuable in many cases, but for this specific case I don't see it changing much.
http://www.lightningmaps.org/realtime shows lightning in realtime as they're detected by stations across the planet. If you turn on the "stations" display, you can see detectors in Utah spotting lightning in the Gulf of Mexico.
OTOH, why not just ping @elonmusk on twitter?
I've sent @elonmusk a few messages over the years but no replies so far. I am @vallesmarineris, so I think one day he'll notice that I already live on Mars and we'll chat.
It always reminds me about this interchange: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8292091
Probably easier to google up someone on the launch team and ask them.
Hopefully the weather gods are more forgiving tomorrow.