SpaceX 2023
Re: SpaceX 2023
You gotta admit, that stack holding together while doing doughnuts at 1,000 MPH is pretty impressive.
Re: SpaceX 2023
Another picture of the damage to the pad.
Supposedly the concrete pilings supporting the launch stand are sunk 100 feet plus into the Earth.
Supposedly the concrete pilings supporting the launch stand are sunk 100 feet plus into the Earth.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
Craiglxviii
- Posts: 3431
- Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 7:25 am
-
Bernard Woolley
- Posts: 1141
- Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 4:06 pm
- Location: Earth
Re: SpaceX 2023
I’m reading on Twitter that Musk overruled his engineers on launch timing and design of both the vehicle and launchpad. Also, that the RUD may be related to FOD from the launchpad hitting the rocket.
Does sound very Elon “I’m not as smart as I think I am” Musk. I’m also not convinced that having something like 30 engines is a good idea.
Does sound very Elon “I’m not as smart as I think I am” Musk. I’m also not convinced that having something like 30 engines is a good idea.
“Frankly, I had enjoyed the war… and why do people want peace if the war is so much fun?” - Lieutenant General Sir Adrian Carton de Wiart
- jemhouston
- Posts: 5851
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 12:38 am
Re: SpaceX 2023
It depends, how many can they lose and when to Abort to Orbit? How many do they need to get high enough to Return to Launch site?
While the plumbing is complex, have a bunch of less power engines might allow for better margins.
One nice thing about being at JSC, I can least appear I know what questions to ask.
While the plumbing is complex, have a bunch of less power engines might allow for better margins.
One nice thing about being at JSC, I can least appear I know what questions to ask.
Re: SpaceX 2023
Musk:
3 months ago, we started building a massive water-cooled, steel plate to go under the launch mount.
Wasn’t ready in time & we wrongly thought, based on static fire data, that Fondag would make it through 1 launch.
Looks like we can be ready to launch again in 1 to 2 months.
-
Kunkmiester
- Posts: 411
- Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 1:16 pm
Re: SpaceX 2023
They had six out on this flight. I think it depends on when. They lose them and where.jemhouston wrote: ↑Sat Apr 22, 2023 1:46 am It depends, how many can they lose and when to Abort to Orbit? How many do they need to get high enough to Return to Launch site?
While the plumbing is complex, have a bunch of less power engines might allow for better margins.
One nice thing about being at JSC, I can least appear I know what questions to ask.![]()
Re: SpaceX 2023
They lost two of the gimbaling engines in the center.Kunkmiester wrote: ↑Sat Apr 22, 2023 2:35 amThey had six out on this flight. I think it depends on when. They lose them and where.jemhouston wrote: ↑Sat Apr 22, 2023 1:46 am It depends, how many can they lose and when to Abort to Orbit? How many do they need to get high enough to Return to Launch site?
While the plumbing is complex, have a bunch of less power engines might allow for better margins.
One nice thing about being at JSC, I can least appear I know what questions to ask.![]()
- jemhouston
- Posts: 5851
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 12:38 am
Re: SpaceX 2023
Abort moods from the Shuttle Issue
RTLS - Return to Launch Site - Probably the most dangerous since you need to a 180 while fast and low.
TAL - Transoceanic abort landing - Landing somewhere in Africa, Western Europe or the Atlantic Ocean (at Lajes Field in the Azores)
AOA - One orbit landing at Edwards or back at KSC
ATO - Abort to Orbit. Different orbit but usable. They did during STS-51-F.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_abort_modes
I'm not sure what SpaceX uses
RTLS - Return to Launch Site - Probably the most dangerous since you need to a 180 while fast and low.
TAL - Transoceanic abort landing - Landing somewhere in Africa, Western Europe or the Atlantic Ocean (at Lajes Field in the Azores)
AOA - One orbit landing at Edwards or back at KSC
ATO - Abort to Orbit. Different orbit but usable. They did during STS-51-F.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_abort_modes
I'm not sure what SpaceX uses
-
Bernard Woolley
- Posts: 1141
- Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 4:06 pm
- Location: Earth
Re: SpaceX 2023
By "we", does he me "I wrongly thought"? SpaceX engineers thought that somehow they'd be okay when experience from launching rockets suggests otherwise? Either the engineers at SpaceX are not as good as we've been led to believe, or Musk is telling porky pies.
“Frankly, I had enjoyed the war… and why do people want peace if the war is so much fun?” - Lieutenant General Sir Adrian Carton de Wiart
-
Craiglxviii
- Posts: 3431
- Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 7:25 am
Re: SpaceX 2023
The royal “we”Bernard Woolley wrote: ↑Sat Apr 22, 2023 12:04 pmBy "we", does he me "I wrongly thought"? SpaceX engineers thought that somehow they'd be okay when experience from launching rockets suggests otherwise? Either the engineers at SpaceX are not as good as we've been led to believe, or Musk is telling porky pies.
-
Bernard Woolley
- Posts: 1141
- Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 4:06 pm
- Location: Earth
Re: SpaceX 2023
I thought so. My guess is that 'Super Genius' Musk overrode the engineers.
“Frankly, I had enjoyed the war… and why do people want peace if the war is so much fun?” - Lieutenant General Sir Adrian Carton de Wiart
- jemhouston
- Posts: 5851
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 12:38 am
-
Rocket J Squrriel
- Posts: 1033
- Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 5:23 pm
Re: SpaceX 2023
I believe astronaut John Young mentioned that he didn't wish to commit suicide when it was suggested that the first shuttle flight be an RTLS test.jemhouston wrote: ↑Sat Apr 22, 2023 10:55 am Abort moods from the Shuttle Issue
RTLS - Return to Launch Site - Probably the most dangerous since you need to a 180 while fast and low.
TAL - Transoceanic abort landing - Landing somewhere in Africa, Western Europe or the Atlantic Ocean (at Lajes Field in the Azores)
AOA - One orbit landing at Edwards or back at KSC
ATO - Abort to Orbit. Different orbit but usable. They did during STS-51-F.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_abort_modes
I'm not sure what SpaceX uses
On the STS-51F when they lost the one engine they overrode the computers to force them to keep the remaining two running no matter what.
With the TAL I guess there could be coffin corners depending on the shuttle load, trajectory, if they lost 1 or 2 engines, and when it happens. Coffin being they won't make it across the pond. Shuttles couldn't ditch so I gather the sites had plenty of air rescue parajumpers on hand.
Westray: That this is some sort of coincidence. Because they don't really believe in coincidences. They've heard of them. They've just never seen one.
- jemhouston
- Posts: 5851
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 12:38 am
Re: SpaceX 2023
Anything other than Abort to Orbit was filled with risks. There was abort to a site on US East Coast North of Florida.
-
Craiglxviii
- Posts: 3431
- Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 7:25 am
Re: SpaceX 2023
Lakenheath too.jemhouston wrote: ↑Sun Apr 23, 2023 11:59 pm Anything other than Abort to Orbit was filled with risks. There was abort to a site on US East Coast North of Florida.
A Shuttle coming in over the Heathrow & Gatwick approaches (and central London) might have been… interesting!
- jemhouston
- Posts: 5851
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 12:38 am
Re: SpaceX 2023
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_S ... ding_sitesCraiglxviii wrote: ↑Mon Apr 24, 2023 9:51 amLakenheath too.jemhouston wrote: ↑Sun Apr 23, 2023 11:59 pm Anything other than Abort to Orbit was filled with risks. There was abort to a site on US East Coast North of Florida.
A Shuttle coming in over the Heathrow & Gatwick approaches (and central London) might have been… interesting!
-
Rocket J Squrriel
- Posts: 1033
- Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 5:23 pm
Re: SpaceX 2023
One of the abort sites for Vandenberg launches was Easter Island. NASA & the USAF forgot to check the place out before naming it I gather. The runway was not long enough for the 747 transport aircraft to land and then figure how to lift the shuttle on top of it. I think they also forgot to ask the Chilian government if they could do it in the first place.
Oh and I forgot.... The shuttle carrier didn't have enough range so adding inflight refueling was thought about.
Oh and I forgot.... The shuttle carrier didn't have enough range so adding inflight refueling was thought about.
Westray: That this is some sort of coincidence. Because they don't really believe in coincidences. They've heard of them. They've just never seen one.
-
Johnnie Lyle
- Posts: 3723
- Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 2:27 pm
Re: SpaceX 2023
SpaceX has a lot of young talent willing to work Musk’s hours, but they also shed a lot of employees who tire of that.Bernard Woolley wrote: ↑Sat Apr 22, 2023 12:04 pmBy "we", does he me "I wrongly thought"? SpaceX engineers thought that somehow they'd be okay when experience from launching rockets suggests otherwise? Either the engineers at SpaceX are not as good as we've been led to believe, or Musk is telling porky pies.
So it is plausible the engineers lack the experience to go “hey, wait a minute” - especially if there’s lots of turnover.
Re: SpaceX 2023
There's probably at least some truth to that. I have a friend at another New Space (TM) company and there's a lot of "what do those geezers in legacy aerospace know?" going on there. Heck, even at my employer we're still dealing with the ramifications of hiring too many junior and inexperienced folks to do our new designs 15 years ago.Johnnie Lyle wrote: ↑Mon Apr 24, 2023 10:55 pmSpaceX has a lot of young talent willing to work Musk’s hours, but they also shed a lot of employees who tire of that.Bernard Woolley wrote: ↑Sat Apr 22, 2023 12:04 pmBy "we", does he me "I wrongly thought"? SpaceX engineers thought that somehow they'd be okay when experience from launching rockets suggests otherwise? Either the engineers at SpaceX are not as good as we've been led to believe, or Musk is telling porky pies.
So it is plausible the engineers lack the experience to go “hey, wait a minute” - especially if there’s lots of turnover.
Of course, there's also the golden rule playing out (he who has the gold, makes the rules). When it comes down to decisions Musk basically gets to make the decisions and get what he wants because he's paying for it all.
I view the damage to the launch site as somewhat of an own goal--even Musk admitted a while back that "it might turn out to be a mistake" to not fit deflectors, deluge, etc.--but I think at least on the ship end of things it was probably a pretty good and useful test. Too many people are looking at it like a final test of a final design, but this isn't too much beyond the blowing up of rocket engines that every manufacturer goes through, just at the whole vehicle level vs. the component level.
