SpaceX

[Boac]

Damn - I had such plans...................

[TheGreenGoblin]

I agree with everything you have just written/said, but my human madness trumps my logic in this, for the moment...

This kind of thing panders to our human delusion of primacy and mitigates against our knowledge and fear of the potential meaninglessness of our lives cast against an uncaring and potentially, and unfathomable, universe!

I revel in this, and bask in the futility of mankind of which I am one...

While all efforts to civilize Africa are going backwards, WTF are we looking off Earth?

Maybe a kind of "stop the world, I want to get off kind of thing!"...

[TheGreenGoblin]

I agree with everything you have just written/said, but my human madness trumps my logic in this, for the moment...

This kind of thing panders to our human delusion of primacy and mitigates against our knowledge and fear of the potential meaninglessness of our lives cast against an uncaring and potentially, and unfathomable, universe!

I revel in this, and bask in the futility of mankind of which I am one...

While all efforts to civilize Africa are going backwards, WTF are we looking off Earth?

Maybe a kind of "stop the world, I want to get off kind of thing!"...

But G-CPTN is correct our sun will eventually grow into a red giant and all the planets in the Goldilocks zone of our solar system will be enveloped or rendered uninhabitable, although we shall have long become extinct before that occurs methinks (he said happily)! I would be surprised if the human race survives the next 500 years and whatever the case, the universe cares not a jot. There is something very comforting in that thought.

[ian16th]

I agree with everything you have just written/said, but my human madness trumps my logic in this, for the moment...

This kind of thing panders to our human delusion of primacy and mitigates against our knowledge and fear of the potential meaninglessness of our lives cast against an uncaring and potentially, and unfathomable, universe!

I revel in this, and bask in the futility of mankind of which I am one...

While all efforts to civilize Africa are going backwards, WTF are we looking off Earth?

Maybe a kind of "stop the world, I want to get off kind of thing!"...

Saw that show in London, with Tony Newley, June 1962!

[Boac]

A tiny smidgen more information than we had before (from the Express), edited:

"SpaceX said: "SN9 successfully performed a propellant transition to the internal header tanks, which hold landing propellant, before reorienting itself for reentry and a controlled aerodynamic descent.

According to SpaceX, one of the spacecraft's three engines gave out just before landing.

As SN9 approached the ground it fired its engines in a bid to flip upright again.

Close-up video of the attempt, however, shows one of the engines did not fire and debris was seen flying away from the rocket." "

[TheGreenGoblin]

A tiny smidgen more information than we had before (from the Express), edited:

"SpaceX said: "SN9 successfully performed a propellant transition to the internal header tanks, which hold landing propellant, before reorienting itself for reentry and a controlled aerodynamic descent.

According to SpaceX, one of the spacecraft's three engines gave out just before landing.

As SN9 approached the ground it fired its engines in a bid to flip upright again.

Close-up video of the attempt, however, shows one of the engines did not fire and debris was seen flying away from the rocket." "

A bit more context with respect to the SN8 issue...

During the SN8 mission in December 2020, despite having the outward appearance of a flameout for the SN8 flight, we now know that each of the three Raptor engines shutting down in sequence was expected to slow SN9’s ascent to hover at altitude momentarily and then execute the signature “belly flop,” a controlled free fall on its side leading to the final landing “flip maneuver” to re-orient itself vertically for landing.

SpaceX later said the cause for the SN8 failure was low pressure in the fuel header tank inside the nose cone. The company said it remedied this deficiency by implementing a new additional fuel transfer technique mid-flight to add additional propellant to that header tank from main reserves as described in their website summary for the flight.

As of right now, it is unclear what caused one of the Raptor engines to not re-ignite for the Starship SN9 landing flip and burn maneuver.

Further detail...

One can't but speculate whether or not is is a void in the fuel supply caused by the "belly flop" manoeuvre itself which is causing problems with the fuel pump/turbine on the lower engine which failed to restart and seemed to shed material in this case?

[TheGreenGoblin]

While all efforts to civilize Africa are going backwards, WTF are we looking off Earth?

Maybe a kind of "stop the world, I want to get off kind of thing!"...

Saw that show in London, with Tony Newley, June 1962!

My mom brought the album of the stage play, which she had seen in London in 1961 while pregnant with me, after she go back to SA, which I really enjoyed later as a child, probably because she seemed to enjoy it so much. Sadly I have never seen the play itself, but hope they might bring it back to London one day. The 1966 film wasn't bad at all.



Nothing like a bit of an arts discussion here on this rocketry thread...

[TheGreenGoblin]

An interesting take on SpaceX's strategy with the SN prototypes...

SN9 crash in perspective...

[PHXPhlyer]

FAA to oversee investigation of SpaceX Mars rocket prototype's explosive landing

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/02/tech/spa ... index.html

FAA to oversee investigation of SpaceX Mars rocket prototype's explosive landing
Jackie Wattles
By Jackie Wattles, CNN Business

Austin, Texas (CNN Business)The Federal Aviation Administration said it will oversee an investigation into a crash landing of a SpaceX prototype rocket on Tuesday. The announcement comes after the FAA forced SpaceX to delay the launch as it investigated a previous explosion of a similar rocket prototype.

The destroyed vehicle, SpaceX's Starship SN9, was an early prototype for a rocket the company hopes will carry the first humans to Mars. Launched in a high-altitude test flight Tuesday, the vehicle traveled a few miles up in the air, hovered for a moment, and then conducted a belly flop-like maneuver on descent before making an explosive landing back on the launch pad.
"The FAA's top priority in regulating commercial space transportation is ensuring that operations are safe, even if there is an anomaly," an agency spokesperson said in a statement, using the industry term for a launch failure. "The FAA will oversee the investigation of today's landing mishap involving the SpaceX Starship SN9 prototype in Boca Chica, Texas. Although this was an uncrewed test flight, the investigation will identify the root cause of today's mishap and possible opportunities to further enhance safety as the program develops."

When asked how the investigation would be carried out, the spokesperson said "we have nothing further to add tonight."
But public FAA documents say that when a rocket "mishap" occurs, the FAA's Office of Commercial Space Transportation "may elect to conduct the investigation or authorize the launch operator to conduct the investigation" under FAA supervision.
The FAA defines a mishap as a "launch or reentry accident, launch or reentry incident, launch site accident, failure to complete a launch or reentry as planned, or an unplanned event or series of events resulting in up to $25,000 worth of damage, a fatality or serious injury.
SpaceX said Wednesday morning that during the launch the rocket's three engines ignited, throttled off, and then two of the engines attempted to re-ignited for the landing, but only one successfully powered back on, causing the rocket burst into a fireball when it returned to the launch pad.
SpaceX engineer John Insprucker said on the company's livestream of the event that much of the test flight "looked to be very good," and engineers were able to gather data to help improve the Starship design throughout the flight, which reached about 10 km, or six miles, high.
"We demonstrated the ability to transition the engines to the landing propellant tanks, the subsonic reentry looked very good and stable," Insprucker said. "We've just got to work on that landing a little bit."
The test launch comes after the 160-foot tall rocket prototype had been stranded on its launchpad in the Texas over the weekend. It was poised to take off for the test launch last week, but it stayed grounded because SpaceX violated a public safety agreement it had with federal regulators during a previous test launch, according to the Federal Aviation Administration.

Last Thursday, with Starship SN9 fueled and able to launch at any moment, the FAA sent out a surprising advisory that said the launch had been scrubbed.
The FAA, which oversees US airspace as well as licenses rocket launches, ordered SpaceX to halt operations at its testing facilities in South Texas "that could affect public safety," the agency said. After previously declining to comment on its investigation, which was first reported by The Verge, the FAA said Tuesday that it concluded this week that SpaceX took "corrective action" and is now complying with public safety rules. The agency did not disclose the nature of the public safety issue or what corrective action was undertaken.

The FAA reinstated SpaceX's authorization to launch its rocket prototypes late Monday, according to a statement from the agency.
The company did not respond to requests for comment for this story, nor has it responded to requests for comment in more than eight months.
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, who used Twitter to publicly bash the FAA last week, wrote Tuesday morning that he would be "Off Twitter for a while."
At the root of the rift between SpaceX and the FAA was a test launch SpaceX carried out in December of SN9's predecessor, known as Starship SN8, which also exploded on the launch pad. Prior to that launch, SpaceX had "sought a waiver to exceed the maximum public risk allowed by federal safety regulations," according to the FAA. The agency denied that waiver request.
But SpaceX proceeded with the test launch anyway, conducting a high-altitude "hop test" that saw it successfully reach its desired altitude and maneuver through a series of in-air acrobatics before it explosively crash landed back at its launch site. Before the launch, Musk predicted that SN8 would have a one-in-three chance of surviving the test flight.
Despite the tweet, the FAA said in a statement Tuesday that SpaceX failed to assess and document the risks to "public health and safety" associated with a crash or explosion, violating a federal regulation.
"The FAA required SpaceX to conduct an investigation of the incident, including a comprehensive review of the company's safety culture, operational decision-making and process discipline," an FAA spokesperson said in a statement Tuesday. "All testing that could affect public safety at the Boca Chica launch site was suspended until the investigation was completed and the FAA approved the company's corrective actions."
The FAA did not say what the corrective actions were. The spokesperson added that the FAA plans to take "no further enforcement action on SN8 matter."
"The FAA-approved corrective actions implemented by SpaceX enhanced public safety. Those actions were incorporated into today's SN9 launch," the statement reads.

The FAA was already focused on reconfiguring its launch licensing process to make it more "streamlined." But it's not clear if the updated procedures, which are expected to go into effect in the near future, would have helped SpaceX quickly obtain authorization to loosen the public safety restrictions on its launch license that it requested prior to the SN8 launch.
SpaceX already has yet another Starship prototype, SN10, assembled. It's not clear when the company will attempt to launch it, but over the weekend, the company rolled the vehicle out a launch pad adjacent to where the SN9 took off.

PP

[Boac]

Insprucker said. "We've just got to work on that landing a little bit."

No *****, Sherlock.............

Well written article there, PP Ah, but it is CNN...........

"Starship SN8, which also exploded on the launch pad." Er - not quite?

[PHXPhlyer]

Technically, the launch and landing pad are one and the same.
So accurate.

PP

[k3k3]

Weee Phutt

That brought back a plethora of memories, thank you!

[Boac]

Technically, the launch and landing pad are one and the same.

The landing pad is far enough away to prevent SN10 being destroyed!

[Boac]

NB Source is Daily Express!!

Apart from trying to find out why the Raptor self-destroyed, SpaceX appear to have come to the (obvious?) conclusion that they should light all three on recovery and shut down one when two are established.

Personally I would keep 3 running........................

[TheGreenGoblin]

I wonder what ability SpaceX has to "replumb" SN10 in situ on the launch pad. where it stands now! Firing the same setup with some software tweaks might suffice but then again, maybe the basic physical configuration needs to be tweaked!

[TheGreenGoblin]

More on the engine trifecta...

https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-elon-m ... explosion/

[Boac]

Time for the popcorn again - expected static fire test this week with a 'possible' launch on Friday.

[TheGreenGoblin]

Time for the popcorn again - expected static fire test this week with a 'possible' launch on Friday.

Popcorn and cocoa!

[Boac]

Suggestions that all 3 Raptor engines on SN10 have been replaced following SN9's 'display' - longer blue touch paper? SpaceX were lucky SN10 was not taken out in the 'landing' of SN9 - I did wonder why they had brought it out and parked it there, I must admit

[Boac]

A launch this week looking much less likely.

The 'landing pad' (aka the 'crash' pad) has been repaired AND WIDENED!!!?? I thought the one thing SpaceX have proved beyond doubt is the ability to crash precisely in the right place