I find it unfortunate that they have to analyse every prior Falcon launch. Of course I understand why (if there was an indicator of a possible issue that wasn’t analysed and anything ever happened there’d be hell to pay).But they have way more data on Falcon than any other launch vehicle NASA uses. They have also analysed all prior FH launches. It saddens me that data from 71 prior launches this year wouldn’t be enough and it would have to be 72 if Starlink 6-22 launches.
Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 10/11/2023 08:22 pmI find it unfortunate that they have to analyse every prior Falcon launch. Of course I understand why (if there was an indicator of a possible issue that wasn’t analysed and anything ever happened there’d be hell to pay).But they have way more data on Falcon than any other launch vehicle NASA uses. They have also analysed all prior FH launches. It saddens me that data from 71 prior launches this year wouldn’t be enough and it would have to be 72 if Starlink 6-22 launches.It has nothing to do with the amount of data. NASA wants the data of the last mission before theirs.
Quote from: Jim on 10/11/2023 09:34 pmQuote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 10/11/2023 08:22 pmI find it unfortunate that they have to analyse every prior Falcon launch. Of course I understand why (if there was an indicator of a possible issue that wasn’t analysed and anything ever happened there’d be hell to pay).But they have way more data on Falcon than any other launch vehicle NASA uses. They have also analysed all prior FH launches. It saddens me that data from 71 prior launches this year wouldn’t be enough and it would have to be 72 if Starlink 6-22 launches.It has nothing to do with the amount of data. NASA wants the data of the last mission before theirs.But does that 'want' hold up to logical scrutiny when applied in to the current context? [...] I'm with FST that it does NOT hold up.
Quote from: mn on 10/11/2023 10:06 pmQuote from: Jim on 10/11/2023 09:34 pmQuote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 10/11/2023 08:22 pmI find it unfortunate that they have to analyse every prior Falcon launch. Of course I understand why (if there was an indicator of a possible issue that wasn’t analysed and anything ever happened there’d be hell to pay).But they have way more data on Falcon than any other launch vehicle NASA uses. They have also analysed all prior FH launches. It saddens me that data from 71 prior launches this year wouldn’t be enough and it would have to be 72 if Starlink 6-22 launches.It has nothing to do with the amount of data. NASA wants the data of the last mission before theirs.But does that 'want' hold up to logical scrutiny when applied in to the current context? [...] I'm with FST that it does NOT hold up.And you're basing this on what knowledge or insight? Are you sitting in on the data reviews? Do you have any idea what you're talking about? If you're going to slag NASA for this please let us know what credentials and involvement you have in this process.The arm-chair quarterbacking around here can be really something else.
Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 10/11/2023 08:22 pmI find it unfortunate that they have to analyse every prior Falcon launch. Of course I understand why (if there was an indicator of a possible issue that wasn’t analysed and anything ever happened there’d be hell to pay).But they have way more data on Falcon than any other launch vehicle NASA uses. They have also analysed all prior FH launches. It saddens me that data from 71 prior launches this year wouldn’t be enough and it would have to be 72 if Starlink 6-22 launches.Rules likely from the days of ULA launching a few missions a year, and being a bureaucracy, they can't update or flex them
Oh yes we know they 'want' it.But does that 'want' hold up to logical scrutiny when applied in to the current context?I'm with FST that it does NOT hold up.If we need the data from the latest launch before we go ahead, then logically if the latest launch didn't launch yet we should have to wait for it to launch. (yes I know that doesn't make any sense, and that is exactly my point)(The rule made sense once upon a time)
The whole reason for telemetry is the next mission.
Quote from: cpushack on 10/11/2023 09:32 pmQuote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 10/11/2023 08:22 pmI find it unfortunate that they have to analyse every prior Falcon launch. Of course I understand why (if there was an indicator of a possible issue that wasn’t analysed and anything ever happened there’d be hell to pay).But they have way more data on Falcon than any other launch vehicle NASA uses. They have also analysed all prior FH launches. It saddens me that data from 71 prior launches this year wouldn’t be enough and it would have to be 72 if Starlink 6-22 launches.Rules likely from the days of ULA launching a few missions a year, and being a bureaucracy, they can't update or flex them wrong
Quote from: Jim on 10/11/2023 11:57 pmThe whole reason for telemetry is the next mission.not if the last one didn't make it.
Quote from: Jim on 10/11/2023 09:34 pmIt has nothing to do with the amount of data. NASA wants the data of the last mission before theirs.Oh yes we know they 'want' it.But does that 'want' hold up to logical scrutiny when applied in to the current context?
It has nothing to do with the amount of data. NASA wants the data of the last mission before theirs.
Quote from: mn on 10/11/2023 10:06 pmQuote from: Jim on 10/11/2023 09:34 pmIt has nothing to do with the amount of data. NASA wants the data of the last mission before theirs.Oh yes we know they 'want' it.But does that 'want' hold up to logical scrutiny when applied in to the current context?....As an extreme example, it's not possible for commercial airplane flights to wait until all previous flights have completed, even though this could be considered optimal for safety.....
Quote from: LouScheffer on 10/12/2023 03:37 amQuote from: mn on 10/11/2023 10:06 pmQuote from: Jim on 10/11/2023 09:34 pmIt has nothing to do with the amount of data. NASA wants the data of the last mission before theirs.Oh yes we know they 'want' it.But does that 'want' hold up to logical scrutiny when applied in to the current context?....As an extreme example, it's not possible for commercial airplane flights to wait until all previous flights have completed, even though this could be considered optimal for safety.....You are missing an important detail in your example.Regular flights can continue as usual, but when a very important flight comes up then all flights that cannot complete before this very important flight departs have to be delayed.
Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 10/11/2023 08:22 pmI find it unfortunate that they have to analyse every prior Falcon launch. Of course I understand why (if there was an indicator of a possible issue that wasn’t analysed and anything ever happened there’d be hell to pay).But they have way more data on Falcon than any other launch vehicle NASA uses. They have also analysed all prior FH launches. It saddens me that data from 71 prior launches this year wouldn’t be enough and it would have to be 72 if Starlink 6-22 launches.Would it sadden you more if they have the option to look at the data, choose not to, and miss something as a result that causes the launch to fail?I understand it can look like a burden, but having more flights with more data is an opportunity no other launcher has or has ever had. They're just doing their due diligence to take advantage of that.