Author Topic: LIVE: SpaceX Falcon 9 v1.1 - CASSIOPE - Sept. 29 - LAUNCH UPDATES  (Read 237866 times)

Offline russianhalo117

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3860
  • AR USA / Berlin, DE / Moscow, RF
  • Liked: 754
  • Likes Given: 459
Why does CUSAT 2 keep coming up? It never even launched. Can we assume that object is also "F9 Deb"?

It's the Falcon 9 second stage.  Somehow STRATCOM thinks that CUSAT 2 was attached to it. I am sure they'll fix it soon.
The reason why is STRATCOM never received the memo from the CUSAT 2 Team and the memo from Elon that it was not on board. ;)   Maybe STRATCOM's CUSAT 2 entry is actually replaced by ElonSat 1, which is either a cheese or Ice Cream longitivtiy test.

Online edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12849
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3605
  • Likes Given: 616
With so many objects, are we still buying the "insulation" story?

 - Ed Kyle

Offline JBF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1301
  • Liked: 349
  • Likes Given: 498
With so many objects, are we still buying the "insulation" story?

 - Ed Kyle

Please remember he qualified that statement when he made it.
"In principle, rocket engines are simple, but that’s the last place rocket engines are ever simple." Jeff Bezos

Online Herb Schaltegger

With so many objects, are we still buying the "insulation" story?

 - Ed Kyle

Do we have any real idea what the debris objects are if not insulation? And if so, based on what (other than orbital longevity of the items)?
Ad astra per aspirin ...

Offline mr. mark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1994
  • Liked: 169
  • Likes Given: 0
With so many objects, are we still buying the "insulation" story?

 - Ed Kyle

Do we have any real idea what the debris objects are if not insulation? And if so, based on what (other than orbital longevity of the items)?
To be blunt no one here knows anything for certain. It's all just speculation. Most likely, this will never be fully cleared up. I don't think SpaceX will be giving a qualified response that is satisfactory to everyone. They've already moved on to the next launch.
« Last Edit: 10/15/2013 05:23 AM by mr. mark »

Offline AnjaZoe

  • Member
  • Posts: 72
  • Germany
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 14
I don't think SpaceX will be giving a qualified response that is satisfactory to everyone. They've already moved on to the next launch.

So much for a thorough root cause analysis.

Zoe
The only place where success comes before work is in the dictionary

Online Silmfeanor

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1164
  • Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • Liked: 217
  • Likes Given: 458
I don't think SpaceX will be giving a qualified response that is satisfactory to everyone. They've already moved on to the next launch.

So much for a thorough root cause analysis.

Zoe

Oh please. You have no knowledge of what happened exactly, what information they have or do not have, and what steps they have taken to mitigate the problem.
Implying that they have not done a thorough root cause analysis is disingenuous. They have no reason whatsoever to give a qualified response to everyone; Mark is right. They only have to give a qualified response to their partners, not to the public.
The fact we do not get to know what exactly went wrong is not sufficient cause to argue that they have not done thorough root cause analysis.

Offline fatjohn1408

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 13
IF it was insulation coming off, how come pieces 39277 and 39278 have a semi-major axis that is 50-55 km larger than the F9 upper stage? Where did the energy come from?

Online kenny008

  • Member
  • Posts: 94
  • Knoxville, TN
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 167
I don't believe mr. mark is implying SpaceX is not performing a root cause analysis. I believe he is saying that there are some who probably won't "buy" the answers no matter what the result is.

Offline AnjaZoe

  • Member
  • Posts: 72
  • Germany
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 14
In order to be able to "buy" or not buy an answer, the answer is required to be given in the first place. Not having answers leads to questions and speculations, which itself eventually leads to flak from the fanboys  ;)

I think that fatjohn's question is a good one, I'm curious to what the responses to it will be.

Zoe
The only place where success comes before work is in the dictionary

Offline fatjohn1408

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 13
IF it was insulation coming off, how come pieces 39277 and 39278 have a semi-major axis that is 50-55 km larger than the F9 upper stage? Where did the energy come from?

If I'm correct it corresponds with the equivalent energy of about 15m/s Delta-V

Online kenny008

  • Member
  • Posts: 94
  • Knoxville, TN
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 167
In order to be able to "buy" or not buy an answer, the answer is required to be given in the first place. Not having answers leads to questions and speculations, which itself eventually leads to flak from the fanboys  ;)

I think that fatjohn's question is a good one, I'm curious to what the responses to it will be.

Zoe

I'm with you, Zoe. While that info would be wonderful, I doubt satisfying internet speculations is at the top of their to-do list. I'd hazard to guess that their customers will have a satisfactory answer, but we may not get that.

I get a little frustrated sometimes with the implied lack if truthfulness that sometimes appears, just because we aren't privy to all the data.

Offline gwiz

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 441
  • Cornwall
  • Liked: 57
  • Likes Given: 1
IF it was insulation coming off, how come pieces 39277 and 39278 have a semi-major axis that is 50-55 km larger than the F9 upper stage? Where did the energy come from?

If I'm correct it corresponds with the equivalent energy of about 15m/s Delta-V
Insulation caught by the venting from the stage could easily get that sort of push.  The fact that it is insulation is shown by the rapid atmospheric decay, which is a sign of a high surface area to mass ratio.

Offline fatjohn1408

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 13
IF it was insulation coming off, how come pieces 39277 and 39278 have a semi-major axis that is 50-55 km larger than the F9 upper stage? Where did the energy come from?

If I'm correct it corresponds with the equivalent energy of about 15m/s Delta-V
Insulation caught by the venting from the stage could easily get that sort of push.  The fact that it is insulation is shown by the rapid atmospheric decay, which is a sign of a high surface area to mass ratio.

Perhaps, pretty severe venting though 30+ mph.
But if it is all insulation, I hope they'll do something about that too. Not all missions will go to orbits where that insulation will rapidly decay (the two objects that I highlighted have perigee's of over 450 km). 20 scattered pieces of foam for every launch means ~240 pieces per year according to their manifest. Thanks but no thanks.

Offline mwfair

Why have there been no details posted, especially video, related to the 1st stage reentry, not-as-hard-as-usual ocean intersection, and parts recovery.  SpaceX made significant mention of this post-launch, and indicated that video would be posted by weeks end.  I searched the web and NSF, but found nothing.  Anyone know any more details about impact speed and what survived?
Mike Fair

Online Silmfeanor

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1164
  • Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • Liked: 217
  • Likes Given: 458
Quote
Why have there been no details posted, especially video, related to the 1st stage reentry, not-as-hard-as-usual ocean intersection, and parts recovery. 
L2 has some!

Quote
SpaceX made significant mention of this post-launch, and indicated that video would be posted by weeks end.  I searched the web and NSF, but found nothing
That was Elon during a teleconference, not SpaceX. He has a bit of a tendency to overpromise his video releases. I can also imagine Elon saw the video, said it was cool, and wanted to release it - only for company laywers to note some ITAR related stuff in them, or PR deciding that a video of a spinning first stage is not good PR - kinda like people still commenting on hot-fire tests on pad with "it failed! it didn't lift off! booh spacex!".

Also, it might still come out. Highlight video, anyone? Don't know if they will make one, but that's where I'd look for images of this. Perhaps there won't be one, though since they missed some of the video from the webcast and they decide incomplete video is worse than no video.
So, you did not miss anything regarding the video.

Here's some info from an in-the-know site with some details about what they recovered!  ;)
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/10/musk-plans-reusability-falcon-9-rocket/
Quote
“The first stage hit the water relatively hard,” noted Musk. Despite the impact, SpaceX still managed to recover portions of the first stage which includes according to preliminary reports, the inter-stage, a number of the components from the engine bay, and some of the composite overwrap pressure vessels.

Offline mlindner

  • Software Engineer
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1887
  • Space Capitalist
  • Silicon Valley, CA -- previously in Ann Arbor, MI
  • Liked: 465
  • Likes Given: 188
IF it was insulation coming off, how come pieces 39277 and 39278 have a semi-major axis that is 50-55 km larger than the F9 upper stage? Where did the energy come from?

Presuming its pieces of insulation, if a lightweight piece of insulation gets caught in the exhaust gasses while the stage is accelerating in the opposite direction then I could imagine quite the spread in velocities from that.

If its foam of some sort then they would have a significant drag/mass ratio and would lose velocity much faster than the stage.

These two effects could combine for an even greater difference. There could be others. I came up with these off the top of my head without any deep thought on the issue. We're not talking about well controlled craft here.
« Last Edit: 10/15/2013 02:58 PM by mlindner »
Internal combustion engine in space. It's just a Bad Idea.TM - Robotbeat

Offline mr. mark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1994
  • Liked: 169
  • Likes Given: 0
In order to be able to "buy" or not buy an answer, the answer is required to be given in the first place. Not having answers leads to questions and speculations, which itself eventually leads to flak from the fanboys  ;)

I think that fatjohn's question is a good one, I'm curious to what the responses to it will be.

Zoe

I'm with you, Zoe. While that info would be wonderful, I doubt satisfying internet speculations is at the top of their to-do list. I'd hazard to guess that their customers will have a satisfactory answer, but we may not get that.

I get a little frustrated sometimes with the implied lack if truthfulness that sometimes appears, just because we aren't privy to all the data.
Exactly my point. I am sure the answer is known and has been told to the required parties. There is no reason to inform us. We most likely will be kept in the dark.

Offline mlindner

  • Software Engineer
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1887
  • Space Capitalist
  • Silicon Valley, CA -- previously in Ann Arbor, MI
  • Liked: 465
  • Likes Given: 188
Quote
Why have there been no details posted, especially video, related to the 1st stage reentry, not-as-hard-as-usual ocean intersection, and parts recovery. 
L2 has some!

Where? Link? I never saw any video.
Internal combustion engine in space. It's just a Bad Idea.TM - Robotbeat

Offline AnjaZoe

  • Member
  • Posts: 72
  • Germany
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 14
Exactly my point. I am sure the answer is known and has been told to the required parties. There is no reason to inform us. We most likely will be kept in the dark.

It does not affect me (as a non US citizen), but considering that so many millions of tax dollars went to Space-X, I would be disappointed if all the return I get is some video with drop outs and some text messages with 140 characters length. But of course, ymmv.


Zoe
The only place where success comes before work is in the dictionary

Tags: