• 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 22367
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Sep 01, 2016 3:22 pm

SeJoWa wrote:
especially with the satellite also gone


That's a hard pill to swallow.

Furthermore the launch pad is probably damaged, making launches for now impossible.
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
SeJoWa
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:11 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Sep 01, 2016 4:02 pm

According to the Financial Times, this combo was not set for a launch yet. Quote/

The Amos-6 satellite destroyed in the explosion was due to be used in Facebook’s effort to offer broadband internet connectivity in areas of Africa that are currently not well served. SES, operator of the satellite network that the Amos-6 was due to join, announced the deal with the social network in April.

The rocket involved in Thursday’s incident was not due for immediate launch but had been undergoing a test firing, according to SpaceX. Multiple social media users reported a loud explosion just after 9am local time and posted pictures of smoke billowing from the devastated launch pad.

/Unquote, source: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d35b7bd8-704c ... 4b926.html
 
bmacleod
Posts: 2667
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 3:10 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Sep 01, 2016 4:24 pm

Yet another expensive SpaceX accident.

Any idea of the costs involved (rocket + payload)?

Hopefully Facebook can afford cost to replace destroyed satellite...
"What good are wings without the courage to fly?" - Atticus
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4312
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Sep 01, 2016 4:37 pm

bmacleod wrote:
Yet another expensive SpaceX accident.

Any idea of the costs involved (rocket + payload)?

Hopefully Facebook can afford cost to replace destroyed satellite...


Facebook don't own the satellite, they were merely leasing Ka-band spot beams from Spacecom, the owners and operators. The payload is insured, so thats something - the payload was around $200Million, and the Falcon 9 FT would have been around $60Million.
 
SeJoWa
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:11 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Sep 01, 2016 5:49 pm

moo wrote:
Facebook don't own the satellite, they were merely leasing Ka-band spot beams from Spacecom, the owners and operators. The payload is insured, so thats something - the payload was around $200Million, and the Falcon 9 FT would have been around $60Million.


And the cost of insuring a launch with SpaceX just increased by a non-trivial sum.
 
SeJoWa
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:11 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Sep 01, 2016 6:44 pm

Wow.

Youtube video by USLaunchReport: SpaceX - Static Fire Anomaly - AMOS-6 - 09-01-2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BgJEXQkjNQ

Additional info via Elon Musk:
Loss of Falcon vehicle today during propellant fill operation. Originated around upper stage oxygen tank. Cause still unknown. More soon.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/771394161756942336

Edit - Addendum:
Tory Bruno of ULA showed class and offered to help in response to the tweet above. Thumbs up!
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14991
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Sep 01, 2016 7:22 pm

SeJoWa wrote:
Wow.

Youtube video by USLaunchReport: SpaceX - Static Fire Anomaly - AMOS-6 - 09-01-2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BgJEXQkjNQ


Pretty boring video, right up till the 1:10 mark, then, mein gott!!!

The camera must be quite a distance away, given how long it took the sound of the explosion to travel!
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 22367
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Sep 01, 2016 7:39 pm

If you look closely you can see the $200m payload falling to the ground.

Image
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4312
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Sep 01, 2016 7:49 pm

Looks like a failure in the second stage, which is most odd...
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 558
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Sep 01, 2016 10:32 pm

A few ideas being kicked around elsewhere are over-pressurization, perhaps due to a problem with the valve that controls LOX boiloff or else with the ground service equipment, or an accidental activation of the 2nd stage flight termination system. Obviously, that's just speculation and will remain so until the engineers with actual access to the data and hardware give their input.

Whatever it was, the initial event was energetic - it went from everything looking ordinary to the 2nd stage being obscured by the explosion in a single video frame.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 22367
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Sep 02, 2016 9:15 pm

Oroka wrote:
But as Elon likes to say... "Rockets are tricky..."


Yep. Yesterday's explosion was our occasional reminder that space is hard.
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 4016
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Tue Sep 13, 2016 9:04 am

It had so far seemed that Musk and SpaceX were running the race for affordable and reusable space launchers on their own.
Not that New Shepard wasn't cool stuff, but it wasn't exactly the same league. But Bezos and Blue Origin have now thrown down the gauntlet when they gave more details about their 'New Glenn' reusable rocket.

It will be massive, much more so than even Falcon heavy...

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-37342181

Can't wait.
I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4312
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Tue Sep 13, 2016 12:22 pm

Francoflier wrote:
It had so far seemed that Musk and SpaceX were running the race for affordable and reusable space launchers on their own.
Not that New Shepard wasn't cool stuff, but it wasn't exactly the same league. But Bezos and Blue Origin have now thrown down the gauntlet when they gave more details about their 'New Glenn' reusable rocket.

It will be massive, much more so than even Falcon heavy...

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-37342181

Can't wait.


Meh.

I shall say again, meh.

Blue Origin still have significantly more to prove than SpaceX, they arent even in the same market yet and its going to take them significant amount of time and money to get in the same market.

Right now, Blue Origin have done only a bit more than thousands of amateur rocketeers around the world - sure, they went bigger, and they have landed a vehicle upright, but all they have done flight wise is go straight up and come straight back down. Theres a lot more to be done before they are on the same step as SpaceX.

If they succeed, and good luck to them, great. The New Glenn sounds impressive and I will watch the launch and recovery - it will be big. But theres a lot of work to get there - I would rather have seen an orbital version of New Shepard first, just like SpaceX started out with the Falcon 1 to get experience of putting stuff into orbit.
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 558
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Wed Sep 14, 2016 3:23 am

Blue Origin has a long ways to go, not only in getting to orbit, but in scaling up their designs. It sounds like they're fairly well along with BE-4 engine development, which is critical, but there's scant info that I've seen about Blue Origin building the facilities to produce the full rocket, and a lot of testing and learning in between concept renderings and actual first flight.

If Blue Origin continues at their historical pace, New Glenn is a decade or more away from first flight. However, Bezos has significantly more personal wealth than Elon Musk, so he clearly has the resources to accelerate that radically if he so desires.

To give a superficial hint of where Blue Origin is today, I did some fiddling with the comparison image they released for New Glenn, adding in a New Shepard, assumed to be 53' tall (my own estimate from various images):

Image
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 22367
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Wed Sep 14, 2016 12:42 pm

SpaceX hopes to fly again by November, delays Falcon Heavy:

https://www.engadget.com/2016/09/13/spa ... con-heavy/

The delay should not come as a surprise.
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4312
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Wed Sep 14, 2016 6:10 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
SpaceX hopes to fly again by November, delays Falcon Heavy:

https://www.engadget.com/2016/09/13/spa ... con-heavy/

The delay should not come as a surprise.


Thats odd, since they had delayed the Falcon Heavy to 2017 a few weeks before this incident...

Me thinks theres some PR arse covering going on here.
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 558
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Sep 15, 2016 10:30 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
SpaceX hopes to fly again by November, delays Falcon Heavy:

https://www.engadget.com/2016/09/13/spa ... con-heavy/

The delay should not come as a surprise.


I've seen mixed reporting on her latest comments, with some basically making it sound like SpaceX knows exactly what went wrong and will have it fixed and ready to fly no later than November.

Reading the Engadget article carefully, it sounds like she is actually suggesting they will have completed their work to prepare LC-39A for launches by November, so if they're able to figure out and fix the cause by then, that's their "best hope" (Shotwell's words). In other words, "no earlier than November", not "by November." The accident was at LC-40, which is the pad SpaceX has been using for years. LC-39A (former shuttle pad) is being converted to allow higher flight rates and support both Falcon Heavy and Dragon 2 manned flights.

moo wrote:
Thats odd, since they had delayed the Falcon Heavy to 2017 a few weeks before this incident...

Me thinks theres some PR arse covering going on here.


Not needed. The Falcon Heavy first flight has been delayed numerous times, and they've never had a need to make excuses for those slides, as there is no deadline. The short list of customers for that variant do not yet have dates agreed to, and I expect will not until after the Falcon Heavy demo flight.

For Falcon 9, however, there are customers waiting. Similarly, SpaceX doesn't get paid until they're launched - SpaceX may be funded by incredibly accommodating investors, but they don't have unlimited resources and need to keep cash flow in mind. Falcon Heavy's test flight has to be fit in around those launches.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4312
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Sep 16, 2016 1:48 pm

iamlucky13 wrote:

moo wrote:
Thats odd, since they had delayed the Falcon Heavy to 2017 a few weeks before this incident...

Me thinks theres some PR arse covering going on here.


Not needed. The Falcon Heavy first flight has been delayed numerous times, and they've never had a need to make excuses for those slides, as there is no deadline. The short list of customers for that variant do not yet have dates agreed to, and I expect will not until after the Falcon Heavy demo flight.

For Falcon 9, however, there are customers waiting. Similarly, SpaceX doesn't get paid until they're launched - SpaceX may be funded by incredibly accommodating investors, but they don't have unlimited resources and need to keep cash flow in mind. Falcon Heavy's test flight has to be fit in around those launches.


Please do offer a reasonable explanation why Gwynne Shotwell said at the press conference that the Falcon Heavy launch will be pushed back into 2017 as a result of the issues after this incident, when this had already been confirmed at the start of August (and rumoured well before that)...?

Seems fishy to me.
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 558
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Sep 17, 2016 3:56 pm

Because of the space needed in the horizontal integration facility and labor to complete some of the paying customer launches they're committed to. Those customers have spent large amounts of money on their satellites. Those satellites don't start generating revenue until they're launched. They will only have limited tolerance for SpaceX costing them money in order to do a test supporting SpaceX's future profit.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4312
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Sep 17, 2016 5:12 pm

iamlucky13 wrote:
Because of the space needed in the horizontal integration facility and labor to complete some of the paying customer launches they're committed to. Those customers have spent large amounts of money on their satellites. Those satellites don't start generating revenue until they're launched. They will only have limited tolerance for SpaceX costing them money in order to do a test supporting SpaceX's future profit.


That doesn't answer my point, and it seems you don't even understand it.

Gwynne Shotwell said in the press conference that the Falcon Heavy would be pushed back from its 2016 slot to 2017 as a result of the issues after the incident.

It was already public knowledge that the Falcon Heavy was being pushed back into 2017 *before* the incident. See this very thread for timescales - there is a post from myself on the 22nd of August 2016 in this very thread where I say the FH had already been pushed back into 2017 (and I was going on public info that had been around for a while).

Why are they trying to use the incident as cover for something that was publicly known before the incident...?

I fully accept that the incident is causing SpaceX hardship, and they have launch contracts to fulfill, but going by already known facts, Shotwell should either have nothing to say about the FH schedule (being that it had already slipped), or she should have said that due to the incident it had slipped further into 2017 than previously planned, not that it had slipped from 2016 to 2017.

This is just sloppy PR work - they probably don't want to explain why the FH slipped to 2017 (as KarelXWB said in this thread, there was a press conference planned for the 27th of September, during which they would probably have been asked about the FH schedule slippage - chances are there won't be any focus on the FH in that conference now...) so they are trying to throw it in with the aftermath of the incident as an explanation. Except the slippage was already public knowledge...
 
User avatar
Tugger
Topic Author
Posts: 6323
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Sep 17, 2016 6:32 pm

moo wrote:
That doesn't answer my point, and it seems you don't even understand it.

Gwynne Shotwell said in the press conference that the Falcon Heavy would be pushed back from its 2016 slot to 2017 as a result of the issues after the incident.

It was already public knowledge that the Falcon Heavy was being pushed back into 2017 *before* the incident. See this very thread for timescales - there is a post from myself on the 22nd of August 2016 in this very thread where I say the FH had already been pushed back into 2017 (and I was going on public info that had been around for a while).

Why are they trying to use the incident as cover for something that was publicly known before the incident...?

As far as I can see there was no official announcement by SpaceX that it was pushing the FH launch to 2017 until this one. There was one in March announcing it would not occur before November and it may have been "common knowledge" to those in the industry that it was moving right but as far as official? Where do you see it officially announced like it was in Gwynne's presser?

If that is the case then I don't see "cover" as much as "there is no other choice but to finally announce what everyone knows and this is a good reason publicly". So cover it may be but not hiding something nor is it that unusual. At least in my opinion, you may not agree which is fine.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
User avatar
Tugger
Topic Author
Posts: 6323
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Sep 23, 2016 7:37 pm

They may have found the cause of the loss during the launch prep on September 1. Not the definitive root cause yet but:
At this stage of the investigation, preliminary review of the data and debris suggests that a large breach in the cryogenic helium system of the second stage liquid oxygen tank took place. All plausible causes are being tracked in an extensive fault tree and carefully investigated. Through the fault tree and data review process, we have exonerated any connection with last year’s CRS-7 mishap.


The full SpaceX statement can be found here:
http://spacenews.com/spacex-sept-1-fail ... lium-tank/

So at least progress is being made.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 558
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Mon Sep 26, 2016 3:09 am

Not the cause, but they've narrowed it down, if not to the system where the failure originated, at least to the most significant part of the failure progression. They do not apparently know why the helium system was breached.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 22367
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Mon Sep 26, 2016 1:20 pm

SpaceX successfully fired a scaled-down Raptor engine for the very first time.

Production Raptor goal is specific impulse of 382 seconds and thrust of 3 MN (~310 metric tons) at 300 bar.

Chamber pressure is almost 3X Merlin, so engine is about the same size for a given area ratio.


Image
https://twitter.com/elonmusk
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 22367
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Mon Sep 26, 2016 1:25 pm

Apparently the MCT (Mars Colonial Transporter ) has been renamed to ITS (Interplanetary Transport System):

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/777325549442232320

A live stream for tomorrow's announcement regarding Mars updates will be available on the following link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1YxNYiyALg
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
litz
Posts: 1959
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 6:01 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Wed Sep 28, 2016 5:15 pm

iamlucky13 wrote:
Whatever it was, the initial event was energetic - it went from everything looking ordinary to the 2nd stage being obscured by the explosion in a single video frame.


Apparently it went from completely normal to loss of data in a mere 93 milliseconds.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 22367
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Sep 29, 2016 8:32 am

Here's a must-read article for all space fans:

SpaceX’s Big Fucking Rocket – The Full Story
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
SeJoWa
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:11 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Sep 29, 2016 6:14 pm

Thank you, the same source also wrote a seminal article about Tesla.
 
SeJoWa
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:11 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Thu Oct 06, 2016 10:46 pm

Interview with SpaceX President and CEO Gwynne Shotwell

...
Could you address a recent story that SpaceX suspected that a nefarious actor might have been a contributor to the Sept. 1 failure. I know you can’t eliminate anything in an inquiry, but…

That’s right: You cannot eliminate anything, especially if there are some data points that say it’s possible, but not likely. The more than likely — the overwhelmingly likely — explanation is that we did something to that rocket. And we’re going to find it and we’re going to fix it.
...

http://spacenews.com/spacexs-shotwell-o ... ail-ethos/

Some good questions, worth reading in its entirety!
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 22367
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:02 pm

SpaceX likely found the problem that blew up a Falcon 9 rocket in September:

I think we've gotten to the bottom of the problem. Really surprising problem that's never been encountered before in the history of rocketry, and it basically involves a combination of liquid helium, advanced carbon fiber composites and solid oxygen. Oxygen so cold that it actually enters solid phase. So it's never happened before in history…So this was the toughest puzzle solved that we've ever had to solve. it looks like we're going to be back to launching around mid-december.


http://www.ibtimes.com/spacex-falcon-9- ... ay-2442212
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 22367
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:05 pm

SpaceX tested the ITS lox tank at sea:

https://youtu.be/0NIeNCQFXno
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 22367
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:47 pm

A Falcon 9 Stage 1 arrived at Vandenberg Air Force Base.

https://twitter.com/IridiumBoss/status/ ... 7173725185

SpaceX still hopes to resume launches in December.
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
SeJoWa
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:11 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Fri Dec 02, 2016 9:49 am

There's a very tentative launch date coming from Iridium NEXT of December 16 for the Falcon 9 to deliver a first batch of ten [!] new satellites into LEO.

Source:
http://www.iridiumnext.com/#section-2
<- via
http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/12/ ... cember-16/
 
WIederling
Posts: 3114
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Dec 03, 2016 3:33 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
SpaceX likely found the problem that blew up a Falcon 9 rocket in September:

I think we've gotten to the bottom of the problem. Really surprising problem that's never been encountered before in the history of rocketry, and it basically involves a combination of liquid helium, advanced carbon fiber composites and solid oxygen. Oxygen so cold that it actually enters solid phase. So it's never happened before in history…So this was the toughest puzzle solved that we've ever had to solve. it looks like we're going to be back to launching around mid-december.


http://www.ibtimes.com/spacex-falcon-9- ... ay-2442212


If you play around with Liquid Helium other cryo fluids in the vicinity going solid is not far off.
Especially when another change is going to supercooled liquid Oxygen.
So it's not an "unknonw unknown" but a known unknown. They just did not care all that much.
Murphy is an optimist
 
WIederling
Posts: 3114
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:53 pm

WIederling wrote:
If you play around with Liquid Helium other cryo fluids in the vicinity going solid is not far off.


Helium:
solid <.7K
liquid >.7K <4.2k
gas > 4.2k
vaporization energy: 0.0829 kJ/mol :: 20.725kJ/kg

Oxygen:
solid <54.36
liquid >54.36 < 90.19
gas > 90.19
heat of fusion: 0.444 kJ/mol :: 13.76kJ/kg

Not really a remote chance to get some LOx icicles
Murphy is an optimist
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8763
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sat Dec 03, 2016 10:15 pm

WIederling wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
SpaceX likely found the problem that blew up a Falcon 9 rocket in September:

I think we've gotten to the bottom of the problem. Really surprising problem that's never been encountered before in the history of rocketry, and it basically involves a combination of liquid helium, advanced carbon fiber composites and solid oxygen. Oxygen so cold that it actually enters solid phase. So it's never happened before in history…So this was the toughest puzzle solved that we've ever had to solve. it looks like we're going to be back to launching around mid-december.


http://www.ibtimes.com/spacex-falcon-9- ... ay-2442212


If you play around with Liquid Helium other cryo fluids in the vicinity going solid is not far off.
Especially when another change is going to supercooled liquid Oxygen.
So it's not an "unknonw unknown" but a known unknown. They just did not care all that much.


Right, because SpaceX is known for their engineering ignorance and lacking of "caring."

The statement says that SpaceX believes it was a three-way interaction between LHe, solid LOX, and carbon fiber composites. Clearly there is plenty of unknown in how all three of those interact together.
 
WIederling
Posts: 3114
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sun Dec 04, 2016 9:52 am

DfwRevolution wrote:
Clearly there is plenty of unknown in how all three of those interact together.


Right. and you go over the permutations in a controlled environment that are relevant
_before_ you load the whole shebang on a launch ramp.
( actually the same laxness that Boeing shew on the 787 batterie issue.)
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4312
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sun Dec 04, 2016 2:25 pm

WIederling wrote:
DfwRevolution wrote:
Clearly there is plenty of unknown in how all three of those interact together.


Right. and you go over the permutations in a controlled environment that are relevant
_before_ you load the whole shebang on a launch ramp.
( actually the same laxness that Boeing shew on the 787 batterie issue.)


You can only test for old science, and there is no indication that this is definitely old science - thus may very well be a brand new science, and SpaceX may have learned something brand new in material interaction.

Nothing yet indicates laxness.
 
WIederling
Posts: 3114
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sun Dec 04, 2016 5:16 pm

"You can only test for old science."

No Comprendo.
( actually that is the basic objective of research.)
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4312
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sun Dec 04, 2016 5:52 pm

WIederling wrote:
"You can only test for old science."

No Comprendo.
( actually that is the basic objective of research.)


Precisely my point, actually. Product testing isn't materials research however, as that would fall under materials R&D - and are SpaceX using new materials...? With existing materials, they wouldn't be researching neq cases in chemical and physical interaction between materials, just testing that the materials are within tolerances and acting within known boundaries of material science.

New interactions are found in one of two ways - chance encounters, which is what this sounds like, or dedicated R&D intended to discover brand new properties and interactions. SpaceX wouldnt be doing the latter, they are merely using existing materials in basically normal ways.

So no, this wouldn't come up in standard product testing, not if its previously unknown - SpaceX isn't doing that sort of science.
 
WIederling
Posts: 3114
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:12 pm

"New interactions are found in one of two ways - chance encounters, which is what this sounds like, or dedicated R&D intended to discover brand new properties and interactions. "

If you are a bright kid you test arrangements not previously used.
And you start out with what unwanted effects could one kick off here.
( ... and a rather bog standard task set to be solved by engineers. )

"SpaceX wouldnt be doing the latter, they are merely using existing materials in basically normal ways."

By their own accord SpaceX is at the forefront of technology. They are not in the business producing kids plastic toys.
Murphy is an optimist
 
Oroka
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Sun Dec 04, 2016 10:11 pm

if nothing is risked, it will be somewhere in the 2300s before we put permanent boots on Mars. spacex is pushing the boundaries of our technology, trying to make it commercially profitable, not corporate extortion which is essentially what the status quo right now. take something that exists and throw billions at it to marginally increase its abilities rather than innovating a new way to do something. charge exorbitant fees to do the same thing since the 60s, less if you include the loss of the capacity of the saturn 5.

if columbus didnt dare voyage out into the unknown until he was sure it was safe to our standards today, the americas would have not been discovered for hundreds of years. even the centuries that followed, hundreds of thousands died crossing the ocean, something that had been done for hundreds of years.

spacex is not lazy, we have become afraid of risk. was the apollo program a mistake because of the loss of apollo 1... or was it all worth the sacrifice? how about those lost their lifes on the mayflower or in the following winter? we know alot more about mars than they did about america when they set out.

what is worse, risking a few lives (even hundreds of thousands are a few compared to 7 billion), or having our species stagnate for hundreds of years by playing it safe (and lining corporate pockets)?
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8763
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Mon Dec 05, 2016 1:58 am

WIederling wrote:
DfwRevolution wrote:
Clearly there is plenty of unknown in how all three of those interact together.


Right. and you go over the permutations in a controlled environment that are relevant
_before_ you load the whole shebang on a launch ramp.
( actually the same laxness that Boeing shew on the 787 batterie issue.)


Testing every "permutation" is a practical impossibility in complex mechanical systems. Furthermore, the range of "permutations" within a "controlled environment" can only be defined by making assumptions. When operating at the cutting-edge of technology, there will be unknowns.

Note: I'm just stating this for the benefit of the general community. We know you never make mistakes. It's easy to be the critic, hard to be the artist.
 
WIederling
Posts: 3114
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Mon Dec 05, 2016 8:31 am

DfwRevolution wrote:
Note: I'm just stating this for the benefit of the general community. We know you never make mistakes. It's easy to be the critic, hard to be the artist.


I've "pre"found enough issues for my customers in the last 25 years where they initially thought
they could just move on with their ideas to have a valid opinion in this domain.

No job for vertical educated "cubicle live", obviously.
Murphy is an optimist
 
zanl188
Posts: 3478
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:05 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Mon Jan 02, 2017 10:54 pm

Return to Flight set for 8 Jan.

SpaceX statement regarding the Sept 1 anomaly:

January 2, 2017, 9:00am EST

Over the past four months, officials at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the U.S. Air Force (USAF), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), along with several industry experts, have collaborated with SpaceX on a rigorous investigation to determine the cause of the anomaly that occurred September 1 at Space Launch Complex 40 (SLC-40) at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. This investigation team was established according to SpaceX's accident investigation plan as approved by the FAA. As the primary federal licensing body, the FAA provided oversight and coordination for the investigation.

Investigators scoured more than 3,000 channels of video and telemetry data covering a very brief timeline of events – there were just 93 milliseconds from the first sign of anomalous data to the loss of the second stage, followed by loss of the vehicle. Because the failure occurred on the ground, investigators were also able to review umbilical data, ground-based video, and physical debris. To validate investigation analysis and findings, SpaceX conducted a wide range of tests at its facilities in Hawthorne, California and McGregor, Texas.

The accident investigation team worked systematically through an extensive fault tree analysis and concluded that one of the three composite overwrapped pressure vessels (COPVs) inside the second stage liquid oxygen (LOX) tank failed. Specifically, the investigation team concluded the failure was likely due to the accumulation of oxygen between the COPV liner and overwrap in a void or a buckle in the liner, leading to ignition and the subsequent failure of the COPV.

Each stage of Falcon 9 uses COPVs to store cold helium which is used to maintain tank pressure, and each COPV consists of an aluminum inner liner with a carbon overwrap. The recovered COPVs showed buckles in their liners. Although buckles were not shown to burst a COPV on their own, investigators concluded that super chilled LOX can pool in these buckles under the overwrap. When pressurized, oxygen pooled in this buckle can become trapped; in turn, breaking fibers or friction can ignite the oxygen in the overwrap, causing the COPV to fail. In addition, investigators determined that the loading temperature of the helium was cold enough to create solid oxygen (SOX), which exacerbates the possibility of oxygen becoming trapped as well as the likelihood of friction ignition.

The investigation team identified several credible causes for the COPV failure, all of which involve accumulation of super chilled LOX or SOX in buckles under the overwrap. The corrective actions address all credible causes and focus on changes which avoid the conditions that led to these credible causes. In the short term, this entails changing the COPV configuration to allow warmer temperature helium to be loaded, as well as returning helium loading operations to a prior flight proven configuration based on operations used in over 700 successful COPV loads. In the long term, SpaceX will implement design changes to the COPVs to prevent buckles altogether, which will allow for faster loading operations.​

SpaceX is targeting return to flight from Vandenberg's Space Launch Complex 4E (SLC-4E) with the Iridium NEXT launch on January 8. SpaceX greatly appreciates the support of our customers and partners throughout this process, and we look forward to fulfilling our manifest in 2017 and beyond.
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 22367
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Tue Jan 03, 2017 8:56 am

Finally.

Meanwhile SpaceX teases a Falcon Heavy interstage:

Falcon Heavy interstage being prepped at the rocket factory. When FH flies next year, it will be the most powerful operational rocket in the world by a factor of two.


Image
https://www.instagram.com/p/BOkwrgQAmI8/
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1126
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Wed Jan 04, 2017 12:16 am

Nice. Fingers crossed.
 
parapente
Posts: 1539
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Wed Jan 04, 2017 1:55 pm

I understand the theory that chilling or indeed super chilling gasses down to a liquid state allows more propellant to be loaded into the rocket.This obviously allows it to lift more ( of anything) into orbit.But when this process is taken to such extremes that the gasses actually move a solid state then surely the 'risk reward' ratio changes.Is it necessary to take it to such extremes - particularly as these rockets are to be reused? Why not just chill it to a liquid state but no more?
 
WIederling
Posts: 3114
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Wed Jan 04, 2017 3:51 pm

parapente wrote:
I understand the theory that chilling or indeed super chilling gasses down to a liquid state allows more propellant to be loaded into the rocket.This obviously allows it to lift more ( of anything) into orbit.But when this process is taken to such extremes that the gasses actually move a solid state then surely the 'risk reward' ratio changes.Is it necessary to take it to such extremes - particularly as these rockets are to be reused? Why not just chill it to a liquid state but no more?


It is two different things.
They use supercooled LOX to store more propellant (oxydizer) in the same volume.

To create enough pressure ahead of the turbopumps to avoid cavitation
the tanks are pressured up by Helium. The He tanks are immersed in the LOX.
_to be able to load these fast_ Helium is filled into the tanks as liquid.
liquid helium is colder than the freezing temp of LOX.
This causes the liner in the tanks ( that also was the mandrel for the CFRP overwrap.)
to contract and separate from the overwrap. When pressure builds up the liner
expands but develops folds. This seems to create pockets of LOX that have a
better chance of being cooled to freezing and also irregularly loads the CFRP.
if fibers break they release energy from elastic deformation. puuf. :-)
Murphy is an optimist
 
PITingres
Posts: 1045
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:59 am

Re: SpaceX - Tests, Launches, Developments

Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:34 pm

Denser propellants also mean that you're flowing more mass through the engine, thus getting more thrust, for the same volume flow. I presume you need to tap more power for the turbopumps but that's only a fraction of what you get back in improved mass flow out of the nozzle. It is basically a way of uprating the engine without massive redesigns.
Fly, you fools! Fly!
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos