Author Topic: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches  (Read 33191 times)

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49113
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 82996
  • Likes Given: 37295
[Edit to add context from Psyche mission thread - SpaceX originally delayed the F9 Starlink 6-22 launch because there would not have been enough time for NASA to analyse the launch data prior to the following FH Psyche launch]

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.
« Last Edit: 10/12/2023 05:19 pm by zubenelgenubi »

Offline cpushack

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 356
  • Klamath Falls, Oregon
  • Liked: 421
  • Likes Given: 129
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #1 on: 10/11/2023 09:32 pm »
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.

Rules likely from the days of ULA launching a few missions a year, and being a bureaucracy, they can't update or flex them

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #2 on: 10/11/2023 09:34 pm »
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.

It has nothing to do with the amount of data.  NASA wants the data of the last mission before theirs.

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #3 on: 10/11/2023 10:06 pm »
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.

It 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?

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)

Offline abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3092
  • Liked: 3968
  • Likes Given: 5402
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #4 on: 10/11/2023 10:16 pm »
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.
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.
« Last Edit: 10/11/2023 10:19 pm by abaddon »

Offline abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3092
  • Liked: 3968
  • Likes Given: 5402
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #5 on: 10/11/2023 10:21 pm »
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.

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.

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #6 on: 10/11/2023 10:25 pm »
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.

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.

A logical explanation would be far more appreciated.

Edited - rephrased original text
« Last Edit: 10/11/2023 10:41 pm by mn »

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #7 on: 10/11/2023 11:30 pm »
Let's try the logic.

Psyche is scheduled to launch on the 12th, mission xyz is scheduled for the 6th, so the rules dictate that we must review the data from launch xyz before giving the go for launch for Psyche. So far so good.

Now launch xyz gets delayed to the 10th and there won't be enough time to analyze the data before the Psyche launch. We now have two choices.

A: Delay launch xyz.
B: Proceed with the launch of xyz and get only partial data (we'll know within a few minutes if the launch was successful or not.
(For fun I'll add option C), proceed with launch of xyz but don't even look at any data, since no data is better than partial data)

Either option will result in launching Psyche without the benefit of the data from mission xyz.

Now which choice makes more sense?

If all you need is to satisfy a rule that says we must have data from the most recent launch then option A makes sense.

But if you want the most possible data before the Psyche launch then option B is preferable as it would give you partial data rather than no data with option A.

Now if you can explain the flaw in my logic I'll be happy to hear.

Thank you

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #8 on: 10/11/2023 11:50 pm »
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.

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

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #9 on: 10/11/2023 11:57 pm »

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)

wrong.  It doesn't hold up.  The same applies to major tests of components

The whole reason for telemetry is the next mission.

Offline Remes

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 447
  • Germany
  • Liked: 263
  • Likes Given: 146
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #10 on: 10/12/2023 12:01 am »
The whole reason for telemetry is the next mission.
not if the last one didn't make it.

Offline ulm_atms

  • Rocket Junky
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 932
  • To boldly go where no government has gone before.
  • Liked: 1566
  • Likes Given: 801
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #11 on: 10/12/2023 12:04 am »
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.

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
Any chance for a little more info for that answer?  Do you know the reason(s) NASA would ask this of a rocket that has so much history at this point?  I understand the certifications needed for payloads at the begining...but SpaceX already has those so what's up with them needed the last few launches of data at this point?

Offline alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1589
  • Liked: 1628
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #12 on: 10/12/2023 12:10 am »
I'm confused.

Offline jimvela

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1662
  • Liked: 901
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #13 on: 10/12/2023 03:25 am »
The whole reason for telemetry is the next mission.
not if the last one didn't make it.
ESPECIALLY if the last one didn't make it. 

But, the rules around how to handle telemetry reviews needs to catch up with the realities very high cadence launch vehicle families.

Offline LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3432
  • Liked: 6206
  • Likes Given: 870
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #14 on: 10/12/2023 03:37 am »
It 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?
When the time between launches becomes less than the time to do a review to NASA's satisfaction, this rule becomes impossible to follow (because while NASA is reviewing the results from one launch, the next launch takes place.  This in turn needs to be reviewed, and while that's happening another launch takes place, and so on.)

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.

We may be getting close to this limit already.  I don't know how long NASA would like to review the results of the last launch, but SpaceX is launching about every 4 days.  If NASA would like a week to review the last launch they are already screwed.  If NASA would like to keep this rule, they will need to continually speed up their reviews to keep ahead of the increasing launch cadence. 

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49113
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 82996
  • Likes Given: 37295
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #15 on: 10/12/2023 06:24 am »
It has nothing to do with the amount of data.  NASA wants the data of the last mission before theirs.

NASA will know immediately if the proceeding mission was a success, put payload(s) into the correct orbit(s) etc. They will also know if there were any major issues that didn’t impact the mission (such as a booster engine failure that was compensated for).

So time for data review can only be for more subtle potential indicators of problems that didn’t affect the outcome of the last mission, but conceivably might a future one. Clearly that’s a non-zero probability risk.

I think the number of previous missions that have been analysed does have a bearing on how big that risk is. (Although I accept that it’s complicated by the extent to which SpaceX continually makes tweaks/improvements, for which there could be more limited data available.) There are lots of other risks this data analysis doesn’t cover - such as an issue with the specific 2nd stage on the NASA mission that has of course never flown before.

So for me the issue comes down to, at what point does the risk of not analysing the last flight in detail  become small enough that it makes no meaningful difference to the overall risk for the next mission?

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14341
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14205
  • Likes Given: 1398
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #16 on: 10/12/2023 10:42 am »
Good discussion, I was noticing the same thing.

The whole purpose of the review is defeated if the earlier launch is actually postponed to avoid breaking the rule.

If the critical mission is mission "X", you should be able to launch mission Y right before it, if the alternative is to postpone Y so it's after X.

Because then you won't get the data anyway...

Sounds like nobody wants to be in a position where some flaw was detectable in Y, but there will always be some mission Z that goes after X, and what there was a clue in Z?  It never ends.

Agreed that this is a leftover rule from when launches were typically a month apart, and on rare occasions they'd come close.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #17 on: 10/12/2023 11:37 am »
It 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.

/s

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #18 on: 10/12/2023 12:08 pm »
It 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.


Airliner analogies do not apply at this timeframe

Online ThatOldJanxSpirit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 946
  • Liked: 1461
  • Likes Given: 3558
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #19 on: 10/12/2023 12:25 pm »
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.
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.

But delaying that flight so that there is no data for you not to look at (yeah I know) is the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and singing ‘la la la la’ very loudly.

SpaceX has to delay a flight. Psyche gets less data than if that flight actually flew. Some middle managers get to cover their derrières against hypothetical criticism.

Not good.

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14341
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14205
  • Likes Given: 1398
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #20 on: 10/12/2023 01:53 pm »
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.
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.

But delaying that flight so that there is no data for you not to look at (yeah I know) is the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and singing ‘la la la la’ very loudly.

SpaceX has to delay a flight. Psyche gets less data than if that flight actually flew. Some middle managers get to cover their derrières against hypothetical criticism.

Not good.
That's exactly right.

But people prefer that than to (in the event of a failure) have someone else blame them for not reviewing the data.

Better to make that data unavailable to begin with...

Human nature over logic.

When flights were far apart normally, this wasn't a big deal, but nowadays it's nonsensical. One more thing that's waiting for the big reset that will come with full/rapid reusability. (when also airplane analogies will start being fully applicable)
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #21 on: 10/12/2023 02:05 pm »
just more nonsense from the peanut gallery

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #22 on: 10/12/2023 02:27 pm »
Suppose Psyche fails and the cause boils down to something that also affected regular F9 and would have been caught if the delayed flight were allowed to launch?

Who you going to point the finger at then?

Even from a cya perspective this is illogical.

Offline abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3092
  • Liked: 3968
  • Likes Given: 5402
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #23 on: 10/12/2023 03:20 pm »
Non-fatal flight issues are more common than fatal flight issues, we know that for a fact even with the obvious disclosed ones, who knows about ones haven't been publicly disclosed?  NASA has deep insight into all of the telemetry SpaceX collects and doubtless knows about a zillion things that were issues that we don't know about because we didn't see an obvious repercussion (e.g. engine out on the flight that lost the booster on recovery a while back) and there wasn't a later disclosure.

You don't know.  I don't know.  But you know who knows?  NASA.  As someone who works at a job where people all the time make really ignorant guesses as to why something is what it is, I am sympathetic to the NASA folks (some of whom are on this thread) who have to put up with this -- again -- arm-chair quarterbacking from people who have almost zero insight into any of these things.  It's not that people here are dumb - far from it - they are simply uninformed.

So sure, because something seems counter-intuitive to us ignoramuses, NASA must just be dumb.  That's the obvious answer.  Right?  Right.

Online ThatOldJanxSpirit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 946
  • Liked: 1461
  • Likes Given: 3558
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #24 on: 10/12/2023 04:12 pm »
just more nonsense from the peanut gallery

Thank you for your insightful high value added comment Jim.

Would you deign to explain to us lowly ignoramuses how delaying a launch in order to get no data instead of some data is somehow better?

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #25 on: 10/12/2023 04:13 pm »
Non-fatal flight issues are more common than fatal flight issues, we know that for a fact even with the obvious disclosed ones, who knows about ones haven't been publicly disclosed?  NASA has deep insight into all of the telemetry SpaceX collects and doubtless knows about a zillion things that were issues that we don't know about because we didn't see an obvious repercussion (e.g. engine out on the flight that lost the booster on recovery a while back) and there wasn't a later disclosure.

You don't know.  I don't know.  But you know who knows?  NASA.  As someone who works at a job where people all the time make really ignorant guesses as to why something is what it is, I am sympathetic to the NASA folks (some of whom are on this thread) who have to put up with this -- again -- arm-chair quarterbacking from people who have almost zero insight into any of these things.  It's not that people here are dumb - far from it - they are simply uninformed.

So sure, because something seems counter-intuitive to us ignoramuses, NASA must just be dumb.  That's the obvious answer.  Right?  Right.

It would be much better if you can explain how delaying the launch so you get zero data helps?
(Rather than criticizing people who have legitimate logic questions)

That is the question you keep ignoring.

Nobody is saying NASA is stupid. We are arguing that this rule doesn't help in the current context. Nothing wrong with outsiders questioning a decision by the professional insiders, we are just discussing it so we can understand better.

If you can explain how the rule is beneficial I would be happy to hear it and learn something new.

Edit to add: The rule made perfect sense when written. NASA is currently following that rule, that also makes perfect sense, we have learned many times over that following the rules is (usually) the better choice.

All we are discussing is whether the rule still makes sense today (with SpaceX specifically).
« Last Edit: 10/12/2023 05:14 pm by mn »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #26 on: 10/12/2023 04:46 pm »

Would you deign to explain to us lowly ignoramuses how delaying a launch in order to get no data instead of some data is somehow better?

There is no "some" data if you don't have time to review it.  SpaceX self insures Starlink and is willing to take the risks with quick launch cadence.  Plus SpaceX is also manned for it. Some other payloads may or may not take the risk.  The issue is if there was a problem and it also affected the next launch, what do you say?   "we had the data but didn't have the time to look at it"

Many payloads groups are not manned for 24hour ops.  They might be able to handle some surges but not long term.
« Last Edit: 10/12/2023 04:48 pm by Jim »

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #27 on: 10/12/2023 05:06 pm »

Would you deign to explain to us lowly ignoramuses how delaying a launch in order to get no data instead of some data is somehow better?

There is no "some" data if you don't have time to review it.  SpaceX self insures Starlink and is willing to take the risks with quick launch cadence.  Plus SpaceX is also manned for it. Some other payloads may or may not take the risk.  The issue is if there was a problem and it also affected the next launch, what do you say?   "we had the data but didn't have the time to look at it"

Many payloads groups are not manned for 24hour ops.  They might be able to handle some surges but not long term.

Thank you for your reply.

But you are not addressing the only one question everyone is asking: how does delaying the launch improve things vs launching and not fully reviewing the data? How does delaying the launch reduce risk? (as said very eloquently earlier, it is really akin to sticking your fingers in your ears or your head in the sand)
« Last Edit: 10/12/2023 05:08 pm by mn »

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14341
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14205
  • Likes Given: 1398
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #28 on: 10/12/2023 05:08 pm »
just more nonsense from the peanut gallery
Responses like this just prove the point.

You've yet to explain how flying Starlink after Psyche gives better data than flying it a day before Psyche and not doing a full data review on it.

Industry inertia has been around since, well, the dawn of industry.  People take three weeks to learn how things are done, and 30 years can't make them unlearn any of it.  The old joke about the monkey banana experiment predates SpaceX by probably half a century.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #29 on: 10/12/2023 05:17 pm »
It has nothing to do with "better" data.  It never was.
When SpaceX takes on a gov't payload, there are some concessions that it has to make.
« Last Edit: 10/12/2023 05:21 pm by Jim »

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #30 on: 10/12/2023 05:29 pm »
It has nothing to do with "better" data.  It never was.
When SpaceX takes on a gov't payload, there are some concessions that it has to make.

Once again ignoring the question.

Yes of course SpaceX agreed to follow the rules NASA puts down, and of course the rule leads to the flight being delayed.

That doesn't mean the rule still makes sense today.

Forget NASA and SpaceX and this mission, just answer the question: Do you think delaying a launch reduces risk for the next launch? Since you love short answers a simple YES or NO will suffice. Thank you.

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4881
  • Liked: 2792
  • Likes Given: 1099
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #31 on: 10/12/2023 05:33 pm »
There is no "some" data if you don't have time to review it.  SpaceX self insures Starlink and is willing to take the risks with quick launch cadence.  Plus SpaceX is also manned for it. Some other payloads may or may not take the risk.  The issue is if there was a problem and it also affected the next launch, what do you say?   "we had the data but didn't have the time to look at it"
...

So where do you draw the line? Could argue that any prior launch is relevant, regardless of LV or payload. But that would be absurd, yes? So maybe any prior launch on a similar LV? Or on the same LV?

Now that we're negotiating, define same or similar. Then we can talk about that within a give time frame? Most recent? Within the last X hours? What?

What may be intuitively obvious to you is not to the rest of us. Moreover, would expect some explicit and quantifiable numbers, as what you have expressed is opinion, not fact.

We're looking for facts. Thanks.

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8854
  • Lower 48
  • Liked: 60525
  • Likes Given: 1317
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #32 on: 10/12/2023 05:33 pm »
 I wonder if there's some 12 syllable German word for the concept of it being better to not have information so you can't be accused of not acting on it.
Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who couldn't hear the music.

Online ThatOldJanxSpirit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 946
  • Liked: 1461
  • Likes Given: 3558
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #33 on: 10/12/2023 05:40 pm »

Would you deign to explain to us lowly ignoramuses how delaying a launch in order to get no data instead of some data is somehow better?

There is no "some" data if you don't have time to review it.  SpaceX self insures Starlink and is willing to take the risks with quick launch cadence.  Plus SpaceX is also manned for it. Some other payloads may or may not take the risk.  The issue is if there was a problem and it also affected the next launch, what do you say?   "we had the data but didn't have the time to look at it"

Many payloads groups are not manned for 24hour ops.  They might be able to handle some surges but not long term.

What if there was a problem that would have been revealed by Starlink 6-22? What do you say, “we would have had a chance to identify the problem but we decided not to look”.

Of course there is “some data”. Starlink Group 6-22 in orbit is some data. B1067 sitting on ASOG is some data. SpaceX quick review of telemetry is some data.

Nobody is arguing that these are the rules, and that SpaceX should and have complied with them.  Rules are imposed for a purpose, but when those rules are clearly detrimental to all parties involved they need to be challenged.

That’s me out of peanuts!

Online ThatOldJanxSpirit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 946
  • Liked: 1461
  • Likes Given: 3558
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #34 on: 10/12/2023 05:48 pm »
I wonder if there's some 12 syllable German word for the concept of it being better to not have information so you can't be accused of not acting on it.

Vogel-Strauß-Politik

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #35 on: 10/12/2023 06:06 pm »

Of course there is “some data”. Starlink Group 6-22 in orbit is some data. B1067 sitting on ASOG is some data.


Not relevant.   

January 24, 1985 STS 51-C worst SRB o-ring blow by seen.
« Last Edit: 10/12/2023 06:07 pm by Jim »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #36 on: 10/12/2023 06:08 pm »
but when those rules are clearly detrimental to all parties involved they need to be challenged.

There has been nothing detrimental to any party.
« Last Edit: 10/12/2023 06:10 pm by Jim »

Offline matthewkantar

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2118
  • Liked: 2562
  • Likes Given: 2253
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #37 on: 10/12/2023 06:59 pm »
More useful examples for me to use when trying to illustrate the meaning of “hidebound.”

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14341
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14205
  • Likes Given: 1398
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #38 on: 10/12/2023 07:07 pm »
It has nothing to do with "better" data.  It never was.
When SpaceX takes on a gov't payload, there are some concessions that it has to make.
Of course, but that's exactly what people are saying.  These concessions include abiding by the letter of a requirement that no longer makes sense, if it ever did.


ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #39 on: 10/12/2023 07:12 pm »
Sorry if I missed an answer to this, but what makes the most recent launch special when it comes to getting data?

Offline oiorionsbelt

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1767
  • Liked: 1190
  • Likes Given: 2688
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #40 on: 10/12/2023 07:15 pm »
Sorry if I missed an answer to this, but what makes the most recent launch special when it comes to getting data?
That it was most recent is what makes it special

Offline mkent

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 120
  • Aerospace Engineer
  • Liked: 115
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying launches
« Reply #41 on: 10/12/2023 07:19 pm »
Non-fatal flight issues are more common than fatal flight issues…
It would be much better if you can explain how delaying the launch so you get zero data helps?

I see three relevant possibilities.

1) Both the Starlink and the Psyche flights go off without a hitch.  Considering that SpaceX has launched Falcons successfully 200 times in a row, this is the most likely possibility.

2) Another possibility is that a common defect exists in both the Starlink Falcon 9 and the Psyche Falcon Heavy.  In this case, it would be better to launch the Starlink Falcon first and find out.

3) But another possibility is that the Starlink Falcon 9 has a defect not present in the Psyche Falcon Heavy.  In this case, the anomaly investigation might push the Psyche launch out beyond the end of its launch period only to find the Psyche launch vehicle is clean.  We’d incur a 15-month slip and tens of millions in extra expense for nothing.

Whether possibility #2 or possibility #3 is the more likely occurrence is not something easily discerned from the outside, but if non-fatal flight issues are indeed more common than fatal flight issues, it could very well be possibility #3.  NASA seems to have decided that that is indeed the case.  I’m in no position to second-guess them.  I doubt few here are.

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #42 on: 10/12/2023 07:22 pm »
Sorry if I missed an answer to this, but what makes the most recent launch special when it comes to getting data?
That it was most recent is what makes it special
That's a non-answer.

Is there something you'd expect to be able to learn from the most recent launch that you couldn't from the one before that, or any of the others?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #43 on: 10/12/2023 07:26 pm »

Is there something you'd expect to be able to learn from the most recent launch that you couldn't from the one before that, or any of the others?

Component failure

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #44 on: 10/12/2023 07:28 pm »
More useful examples for me to use when trying to illustrate the meaning of “hidebound.”

No, just lack of understanding.

Anyways, it doesn't matter how I answer.  It won't be good enough.  The fix is in and the bias is there and has been for years. SpaceX good, anybody not SpaceX is bad. 

When it comes to groups/websites, it's either Apollo Saturn was greatest and nothing matters since then or it is SpaceX will rule and can do anything and Elon walks on water. 
« Last Edit: 10/12/2023 07:38 pm by Jim »

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #45 on: 10/12/2023 07:43 pm »

Is there something you'd expect to be able to learn from the most recent launch that you couldn't from the one before that, or any of the others?

Component failure
Again, not really an answer. What is it about the most recent launch that makes component failure more likely or provides more data?

Everyone's stating stuff like it is obvious, so sorry if I'm being really dense here, but could someone spell it out to me like I was eight years old or something?

Online ThatOldJanxSpirit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 946
  • Liked: 1461
  • Likes Given: 3558
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #46 on: 10/12/2023 08:24 pm »

Is there something you'd expect to be able to learn from the most recent launch that you couldn't from the one before that, or any of the others?

Component failure
Again, not really an answer. What is it about the most recent launch that makes component failure more likely or provides more data?

Everyone's stating stuff like it is obvious, so sorry if I'm being really dense here, but could someone spell it out to me like I was eight years old or something?

Eli8

NASA requires a full review of the previous F9 mission to determine if there are any issues prior to launching Psyche.
There is insufficient time to do a full review for Starlink 6-22 so it has been delayed.
Jim thinks this is sensible.
Others are arguing that NASA now has no chance of identifying any issues with 6-22 so this denies NASA data and impedes commercial operations.
« Last Edit: 10/12/2023 08:25 pm by ThatOldJanxSpirit »

Offline alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1589
  • Liked: 1628
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #47 on: 10/12/2023 08:41 pm »
So why not just review 7-4 or 6-21? 

This is like Xeno's paradox.

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #48 on: 10/12/2023 08:54 pm »

Is there something you'd expect to be able to learn from the most recent launch that you couldn't from the one before that, or any of the others?

Component failure
Again, not really an answer. What is it about the most recent launch that makes component failure more likely or provides more data?

Everyone's stating stuff like it is obvious, so sorry if I'm being really dense here, but could someone spell it out to me like I was eight years old or something?

Eli8

NASA requires a full review of the previous F9 mission to determine if there are any issues prior to launching Psyche.
There is insufficient time to do a full review for Starlink 6-22 so it has been delayed.
Jim thinks this is sensible.
Others are arguing that NASA now has no chance of identifying any issues with 6-22 so this denies NASA data and impedes commercial operations.
That's an explanation for the content of this thread, I'm looking for an explanation of what information there is in flight n-1 that informs risk decisions about flight n, but that isn't available from flight n-2, n-3, n-4....

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #49 on: 10/12/2023 08:55 pm »

That's an explanation for the content of this thread, I'm looking for an explanation of what information there is in flight n-1 that informs risk decisions about flight n, but that isn't available from flight n-2, n-3, n-4....

A new failure

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4881
  • Liked: 2792
  • Likes Given: 1099
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #50 on: 10/12/2023 09:04 pm »
NASA requires a full review of the previous F9 mission to determine if there are any issues prior to launching Psyche.
There is insufficient time to do a full review for Starlink 6-22 so it has been delayed.
Jim thinks this is sensible.
Others are arguing that NASA now has no chance of identifying any issues with 6-22 so this denies NASA data and impedes commercial operations.

Would challenge that without further clarification (Jim?).
1. NASA can require whatever they require, including delay of  NASA missions (e.g., Psyche). Their business, their requirements.
2. NASA cannot require anything of non-NASA flights. Not NASA's business, not their requirements.
3. Only exception to above would be where public safety is at risk?

Question seems to revolve around #2? Could view it as NASA being reasonably protective-cautious, or sticking their nose where it does not belong.


Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #51 on: 10/12/2023 09:04 pm »

That's an explanation for the content of this thread, I'm looking for an explanation of what information there is in flight n-1 that informs risk decisions about flight n, but that isn't available from flight n-2, n-3, n-4....

A new failure
But that's true for all flights. What's special about the most recent one? Why isn't it just another data point?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #52 on: 10/12/2023 09:12 pm »

That's an explanation for the content of this thread, I'm looking for an explanation of what information there is in flight n-1 that informs risk decisions about flight n, but that isn't available from flight n-2, n-3, n-4....

A new failure
But that's true for all flights. What's special about the most recent one? Why isn't it just another data point?

Because it is new data

Offline whitelancer64


Is there something you'd expect to be able to learn from the most recent launch that you couldn't from the one before that, or any of the others?

Component failure
Again, not really an answer. What is it about the most recent launch that makes component failure more likely or provides more data?

Everyone's stating stuff like it is obvious, so sorry if I'm being really dense here, but could someone spell it out to me like I was eight years old or something?

The best / most up to date data. Particularly helpful with a launch provider like SpaceX that is constantly tweaking ops and updating components. We know they like to push the limits on Starlink launches.

If Falcon 9 design and build were 100% frozen, you'd have a better argument that a launch less than N days prior to Big Launch isn't important enough to review the data on.
« Last Edit: 10/12/2023 09:13 pm by whitelancer64 »
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14341
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14205
  • Likes Given: 1398
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #54 on: 10/12/2023 09:15 pm »

That's an explanation for the content of this thread, I'm looking for an explanation of what information there is in flight n-1 that informs risk decisions about flight n, but that isn't available from flight n-2, n-3, n-4....

A new failure
And if you postpone the Starlink flight to after Psyche - how does that help?


ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #55 on: 10/12/2023 09:17 pm »

That's an explanation for the content of this thread, I'm looking for an explanation of what information there is in flight n-1 that informs risk decisions about flight n, but that isn't available from flight n-2, n-3, n-4....

A new failure
And if you postpone the Starlink flight to after Psyche - how does that help?



3) But another possibility is that the Starlink Falcon 9 has a defect not present in the Psyche Falcon Heavy.  In this case, the anomaly investigation might push the Psyche launch out beyond the end of its launch period only to find the Psyche launch vehicle is clean.  We’d incur a 15-month slip and tens of millions in extra expense for nothing.


Prevents from have to go before Congress, when Psyche buys it and there was problem in the previous launch but the data wasn't reviewed.

It also would affect insurance rates on commercial mission.
« Last Edit: 10/12/2023 09:21 pm by Jim »

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14341
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14205
  • Likes Given: 1398
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #56 on: 10/12/2023 09:24 pm »

That's an explanation for the content of this thread, I'm looking for an explanation of what information there is in flight n-1 that informs risk decisions about flight n, but that isn't available from flight n-2, n-3, n-4....

A new failure
And if you postpone the Starlink flight to after Psyche - how does that help?


https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=59679.msg2531137#msg2531137
Does not answer the question.

If Starlink is set to launch before Psyche, but too close to do post launch review, if you instead delay the Starlink to launch after Psyche, it won't help Payche's chances.

In a marginal way it actually hurts them, because what of Starlink fails in an obvious way detectable without a review.

The only reason to postpone Starlink is people not wanting to be blamed (wrongly) for any Psyche failure.

In the good old days, the delay was no big deal, so the silliness was overlooked.  But now with bi-weekly launches, it's becoming apparent.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #57 on: 10/12/2023 09:39 pm »

That's an explanation for the content of this thread, I'm looking for an explanation of what information there is in flight n-1 that informs risk decisions about flight n, but that isn't available from flight n-2, n-3, n-4....

A new failure
But that's true for all flights. What's special about the most recent one? Why isn't it just another data point?

Because it is new data
Yes, obviously. I think even eight year olds understand that the most recent data is "new".

What makes new data inherently better than older data?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #58 on: 10/12/2023 09:43 pm »

That's an explanation for the content of this thread, I'm looking for an explanation of what information there is in flight n-1 that informs risk decisions about flight n, but that isn't available from flight n-2, n-3, n-4....

A new failure
But that's true for all flights. What's special about the most recent one? Why isn't it just another data point?

Because it is new data
Yes, obviously. I think even eight year olds understand that the most recent data is "new".

What makes new data inherently better than older data?

the launch vehicles are not static.  These are not the same design as a year ago.  Every upperstage is new.

Offline Metalskin

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 150
  • Brisbane, Australia
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 1802
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #59 on: 10/12/2023 09:47 pm »
But that's true for all flights. What's special about the most recent one? Why isn't it just another data point?

Because it is new data

I do agree that NASA's rules are not the best for adapting to the current environment. However I do agree with Jim. Any flight is new data that may reveal a problem. If that new data is not reviewed prior to the next flight then if something goes bad then there is going to be a lot of egg of face, soul searching, etc.

However this is an approach that NASA has learnt the hard way, and to be honest, I see no reason why NASA shouldn't continue this way, until such a time that this approach can be properly reviewed and risk understood.

Bashing Jim is not really called for. I know he can be blunt, and very short, but lets assume that he has a tonne of insight that he cannot share and that insight supports NASA's approach. And as others have said, NASA is way more risk adverse than SpaceX with starlink flights.

Let's stop the antagonism towards Jim and take what he says at face value please.
How inappropriate to call this planet Earth when it is quite clearly Ocean. - Arthur C. Clarke

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14341
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14205
  • Likes Given: 1398
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #60 on: 10/12/2023 10:27 pm »

In the good old days, the delay was no big deal, so the silliness was overlooked.  But now with bi-weekly launches, it's becoming apparent.

You have no place to call it silliness.
Your day will come.

nor is Starlink is not hurting for launch opportunities.
I call it as I see it.

And you still haven't, in any post, explained how the postponement is helping Psyche.

The closest thing you've said (to the truth) is that SpaceX signed up for this practice when they entered the contract, and it's a legal matter, got nothing to do with what's good for any specific flight.

The very formal version of "this is how it's done".
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #61 on: 10/12/2023 10:52 pm »
I call it as I see it.


Yes, through SpaceX tinted glasses.

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #62 on: 10/13/2023 12:06 am »
But that's true for all flights. What's special about the most recent one? Why isn't it just another data point?

Because it is new data

I do agree that NASA's rules are not the best for adapting to the current environment. However I do agree with Jim. Any flight is new data that may reveal a problem. If that new data is not reviewed prior to the next flight then if something goes bad then there is going to be a lot of egg of face, soul searching, etc.

However this is an approach that NASA has learnt the hard way, and to be honest, I see no reason why NASA shouldn't continue this way, until such a time that this approach can be properly reviewed and risk understood.

Bashing Jim is not really called for. I know he can be blunt, and very short, but lets assume that he has a tonne of insight that he cannot share and that insight supports NASA's approach. And as others have said, NASA is way more risk adverse than SpaceX with starlink flights.

Let's stop the antagonism towards Jim and take what he says at face value please.

Thank you for confirming that the only reason to delay is to avoid egg in the face.

As long as you agree that it doesn't actually improve anything...

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6485
  • Liked: 4595
  • Likes Given: 5236
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #63 on: 10/13/2023 01:37 am »

Of course there is “some data”. Starlink Group 6-22 in orbit is some data. B1067 sitting on ASOG is some data.

Not relevant.   

January 24, 1985 STS 51-C worst SRB o-ring blow by seen.

This is an argument against what might be a rational rule.
NASA has an entire year to analyze 51-C but didn’t find the danger that looks so obvious in hindsight, as do most failures.
WHY NASA missed it is the subject of several books and process improvements, but to some the 51-C SRB issues were not under scrutiny.
If something fails after 200+ sequential success, it might also be unscrutinized.  It doesn’t seem like it could be systemic.  One more data point won’t change a statistical distribution.
That will only be obvious in hindsight.

Quote
Many times I can't reveal what I know

Of course, but is this one of those times?
« Last Edit: 10/13/2023 01:38 am by Comga »
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline matthewkantar

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2118
  • Liked: 2562
  • Likes Given: 2253
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #64 on: 10/13/2023 01:51 am »
So why not just review 7-4 or 6-21? 

This is like Xeno's paradox.

More like Schrödinger‘s launch.

Or the ostrich with its head in the sand?

Delaying a commercial launch to cover NASA butts is lame.

There are some failures that are so obvious they need no analysis to require action.

If the Starlink launch is going to blow up on the pad, it could save the Psyche mission. Instead Psyche is in a position to save a run of the mill Starlink flight. 

Online zubenelgenubi

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11564
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Sometimes it feels like Trantor in the time of Hari Seldon
  • Liked: 7686
  • Likes Given: 75195
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #65 on: 10/13/2023 02:33 am »
Observations from a fellow member:
Jim is laconic.  Like the Spartan reply to Philip of Macedon.  He's not a loquacious chap, at least on-line.

First of all, this splinter thread should not be a take-all-comers "rasslin'" match.  If you are not happy with his replies, then maybe someone should further research and write an NSF article about it. ✍️ Jim might consent to be a source?

Please also avoid turning this discussion into a Jim bear-baiting. 🙏 They are illegal, including here in the forum. 🐻🐻‍❄️  It's happened before, and the results are deleted.

[Philip: If I invade Laconia, I shall turn you out.
Spartan ephors' reply: If.]
Support your local planetarium! (COVID-panic and forward: Now more than ever.) My current avatar is saying "i wants to go uppies!" Yes, there are God-given rights. Do you wish to gainsay the Declaration of Independence?

Offline LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3432
  • Liked: 6206
  • Likes Given: 870
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #66 on: 10/13/2023 04:26 am »
Prevents from have to go before Congress, when Psyche buys it and there was problem in the previous launch but the data wasn't reviewed.
I think this cuts to the heart of the problem.

TECHNICALLY, the best strategy would be to launch Starlink, review what data you can, then (if things seem OK) launch Psyche.  If there is some horrible latent bug in F9, another launch is another chance to find it. If there is some subtle bug, there is still a better chance of finding it in the data by launching F9 first, as it can't possibly be found in time to help if the launch is delayed until after Psyche.

POLITICALLY, delaying the F9 launch avoids possible embarrassing questions if Psyche fails.   This may seem stupid to a rational person, but the target audience is not rational people, it's congressmen.  Remember when our President said "If we didn't test so much, we would not have so many cases!".  That's exactly the same attitude.


Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #67 on: 10/13/2023 08:06 am »
the launch vehicles are not static.  These are not the same design as a year ago.  Every upperstage is new.
I get that launches of newer designs need to be analysed, that makes total sense to me.  If you've had two hundred launches of version 1.0, then one launch of v1.1 and yours is going to be the second launch on v1.1 then there's clearly new information to be had.

But I'm still not at all sure I understand how that explains why you'd delay a launch so that it's not the most (chronologically) recent before yours. If you go ahead with the n-1 launch then you haven't lost the data from the n-2 launch, which is what you were going to be analysing anyway.

Anyway, thanks for taking the time to try to explain it me.

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6325
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9662
  • Likes Given: 41
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #68 on: 10/13/2023 10:47 am »
SpaceX are constantly changing not just vehicle designs, but across-the-board processes. Process changes have leave to failures, and even killed vehicles, and in one cost lost a mission. "Well the last launch worked, so everything must be fine" is not a useful standard for confirming system functionality.

AMOS-7 was lost because a process change (LHe load sequencing and load speed) uncovered a new failure mode (solid LOX formation within CoPV weave) in the upper stage. That was not the first launch to use that process change, and there were opportunities to review past load sequences and pick up fibre break noise from the accelerometer telemetry just as it was picked up for AMOS-7. SpaceX chose not to do that sort of detailed review (because that would be a lot of overhead and eat into their cost margins and reduce flight rates) and in this event it bit them.
Crew dragon C204 was lost because of a ground handling process issue, to the point a vehicle design change was deemed the best solution.
GPS III-04 aborted at T-2 and several M1Ds (including one on Crew-1) were replaced across the fleet because of a change in masking procedure for anodization of an internal engine component left lacquer residue that clogged a valve.
Starlink 5 v1.0 lost a core due to an engine failure and early shutdown (late enough for the vehicle to still make the target orbit), because a cleaning process left IPA in a fluid line that subsequently ignited in flight.

SpaceX choose not to perform detailed reviews after each launch, because they're willing to shoulder more risk. They can build more Starlinks, and even customer payloads are insured. NASA do not have this willingness, both for crew launches and for unique science missions that may not have budget to be replicated or may not have another launch window. So NASA looks at the most recent launch, reviews all the data they can get, to try and minimise the change of a new edge-case resulting in a mission failure.

NASA pay extra to SpaceX (over and above the normal commercial launch cost) for these sorts of extra reviews for their missions, and they accept contracts for launches with these conditions known in advance. If NASA is willing to pay for it, and SpaceX is willing to do it, what is exactly the problem?

Offline mandrewa

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 628
  • Liked: 465
  • Likes Given: 8468
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #69 on: 10/13/2023 11:58 am »
AMOS-7 was lost because a process change (LHe load sequencing and load speed) uncovered a new failure mode (solid LOX formation within CoPV weave) in the upper stage.

I thought AMOS-6 AMOS-7 was lost during a test, not a launch.  There were exploring a faster LOX load sequence.  It wasn't the LOX load sequence they had been using in previous launches or that they planned to use in the AMOS-6 AMOS-7 launch.  It was a new data point.

I'm imaging a graph with one axis being fill time and another axis being perhaps pressure and yet another being temperature.  This was just a combination of conditions that they hadn't tried before.

Quote
That was not the first launch to use that process change, and there were opportunities to review past load sequences and pick up fibre break noise from the accelerometer telemetry just as it was picked up for AMOS-7.

If I understand you, you're saying that after the AMOS-6 AMOS-7 accident, they discovered that they could detect "fibre break noise" in the right circumstances.  But I'm guessing that they were not looking to detect any such thing before the accident.

I don't think they should be blamed for not looking for "fibre break noise" in earlier LOX loadings.  I suspect it's only because of the accident that we know that this is something to look for.
« Last Edit: 10/13/2023 12:15 pm by mandrewa »

Offline Brigantine

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 303
  • NZ
  • Liked: 146
  • Likes Given: 445
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #70 on: 10/13/2023 12:02 pm »
This feels like game theory. [I'm not an expert, no inside knowledge, I'm just processing what I've read here and guessing]


If n-1 hasn't launched yet, then the expected value of n to NASA is V1 > (Contract Price + Opportunity Cost of a future mission)
p is the probability that data from launch n-1 (as assessed after full review) does not drop the expected value of launch n (or at least not materially)
V1 is a combination of V2*p + V3*(1-p)
V2 > V1, V3 < (Contract Price + Opportunity Cost of a future mission)

If n-1 doesn't launch, NASA's best play is to go ahead and launch n
If n-1 launches shortly before n is due to launch, then NASA's best play (to maximize their own value) is to delay n and look for excuses to cancel the contract.
If they find an excuse, they cancel. If they don't find an excuse, they increase their own value by a windfall gain (and SpaceX doesn't benefit)

SpaceX could just launch n-1, and let n be delayed at NASA's request - but then they would be in the same bind (whether to launch n+1) but with less launch window left.
So their best play is to deny NASA the option of delaying - i.e. withhold n-1. Don't show your hand too early, keep them guessing.
« Last Edit: 10/13/2023 12:05 pm by Brigantine »

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5190
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2591
  • Likes Given: 2903
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #71 on: 10/13/2023 12:04 pm »
Amos 7 was years ago.  SpaceX has launched over 200 since then without problems.  This last minute review smells of politics. 

Offline ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8454
  • Roanoke, TX
  • Liked: 2379
  • Likes Given: 2077
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #72 on: 10/13/2023 12:06 pm »
AMOS-7 was lost because a process change (LHe load sequencing and load speed) uncovered a new failure mode (solid LOX formation within CoPV weave) in the upper stage.

I thought AMOS-7 was lost during a test, not a launch.  There were exploring a faster LOX load sequence.  It wasn't the LOX load sequence they had been using in previous launches or that they planned to use in the AMOS-7 launch.  It was a new data point.

I'm imaging a graph with one axis being fill time and another axis being perhaps pressure and yet another being temperature.  This was just a combination of conditions that they hadn't tried before.

Quote
That was not the first launch to use that process change, and there were opportunities to review past load sequences and pick up fibre break noise from the accelerometer telemetry just as it was picked up for AMOS-7.

If I understand you, you're saying that after the AMOS-7 accident, they discovered that they could detect "fibre break noise" in the right circumstances.  But I'm guessing that they were not looking to detect any such thing before the accident.

I don't think they should be blamed for not looking for "fibre break noise" in earlier LOX loadings.  I suspect it's only because of the accident that we know that this is something to look for.

I didn’t know there was an AMOS 7. How come Spacecom didn’t make that satellite as a backup for AMOS 6, but rather mount it on Falcon 9 only for it to be lost in the test failure?
« Last Edit: 10/13/2023 12:07 pm by ZachS09 »
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5190
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2591
  • Likes Given: 2903
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #73 on: 10/13/2023 12:21 pm »
Bureaucracies are a weight around advancement and innovation.  The Soviet Union crashed due to an overbearing weight of bureau's.   

Offline CorvusCorax

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1890
  • Germany
  • Liked: 4084
  • Likes Given: 2778
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #74 on: 10/13/2023 12:28 pm »
AMOS-7 was lost because a process change (LHe load sequencing and load speed) uncovered a new failure mode (solid LOX formation within CoPV weave) in the upper stage.

I thought AMOS-7 was lost during a test, not a launch.  There were exploring a faster LOX load sequence.  It wasn't the LOX load sequence they had been using in previous launches or that they planned to use in the AMOS-7 launch.  It was a new data point.

I'm imaging a graph with one axis being fill time and another axis being perhaps pressure and yet another being temperature.  This was just a combination of conditions that they hadn't tried before.

Quote
That was not the first launch to use that process change, and there were opportunities to review past load sequences and pick up fibre break noise from the accelerometer telemetry just as it was picked up for AMOS-7.

If I understand you, you're saying that after the AMOS-7 accident, they discovered that they could detect "fibre break noise" in the right circumstances.  But I'm guessing that they were not looking to detect any such thing before the accident.

I don't think they should be blamed for not looking for "fibre break noise" in earlier LOX loadings.  I suspect it's only because of the accident that we know that this is something to look for.

I didn’t know there was an AMOS 7. How come Spacecom didn’t make that satellite as a backup for AMOS 6, but rather mount it on Falcon 9 only for it to be lost in the test failure?

AMOS-7 was originally launched as AsiaSat 8 on a F9 v 1.1 on on 5 August 2014 - In 2017 the sat was leased to Spacecom and renamed AMOS-7, The sat is in orbit and operational.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AsiaSat_8

Obviously the post meant the ill-fated AMOS-6

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #75 on: 10/13/2023 01:27 pm »
.......
what is exactly the problem?

The problem is that delaying the launch denies NASA data rather than giving them the data you just explained they need.

Let's say you are right and the Psyche vehicle has a new recent change.

Now if 6-22 does not have that change then no difference when it launches (and therefore no reason to delay it)

If hypothetically 6-22 has the same change, now you tell me which would you launch first?

Now of course any future launch could have the same change, so let's never launch Psyche

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #76 on: 10/13/2023 03:25 pm »
Just to complete this thread: Psyche has now launched successfully and is on it's way.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=50260.msg2531383#msg2531383

I hope we can put this thread to rest now. (until next time....)

Offline Tommyboy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 308
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 373
  • Likes Given: 598
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #77 on: 10/13/2023 03:43 pm »
Just to complete this thread: Psyche has now launched successfully and is on it's way.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=50260.msg2531383#msg2531383

I hope we can put this thread to rest now. (until next time....)
Why? We still have no answer how holding back the Starlink launch could/might have affected the chance of success (or failure is your glass half empty) of the Psyche launch.

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #78 on: 10/13/2023 03:57 pm »
Just to complete this thread: Psyche has now launched successfully and is on it's way.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=50260.msg2531383#msg2531383

I hope we can put this thread to rest now. (until next time....)
Why? We still have no answer how holding back the Starlink launch could/might have affected the chance of success (or failure is your glass half empty) of the Psyche launch.

True, but everyone already said their opinion, sometimes you got to let it go.

Offline jimvela

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1662
  • Liked: 901
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #79 on: 10/13/2023 04:12 pm »
Just to complete this thread: Psyche has now launched successfully and is on it's way.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=50260.msg2531383#msg2531383

I hope we can put this thread to rest now. (until next time....)
Why? We still have no answer how holding back the Starlink launch could/might have affected the chance of success (or failure is your glass half empty) of the Psyche launch.

The thread can't formally close until after the starlink launch. 

It would have been a bummer hypothetical if the starlink launch had failed, and then PSYCHE has to decide whether or not to proceed as they have only a limited window.

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14341
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14205
  • Likes Given: 1398
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #80 on: 10/13/2023 04:32 pm »
Observations from a fellow member:
Jim is laconic.  Like the Spartan reply to Philip of Macedon.  He's not a loquacious chap, at least on-line.

First of all, this splinter thread should not be a take-all-comers "rasslin'" match.  If you are not happy with his replies, then maybe someone should further research and write an NSF article about it. Jim might consent to be a source?

Please also avoid turning this discussion into a Jim bear-baiting. They are illegal, including here in the forum.   It's happened before, and the results are deleted.

[Philip: If I invade Laconia, I shall turn you out.
Spartan ephors' reply: If.]
I've waited till after the Psyche launch so people are chiller...

Being laconic has nothing to do with it.  Over all of his posts, Jim never once explained how postponing Starlink till after Psyche improves Psyche's chances of success.

We all understand the contractual obligation SpaceX signed up for. The argument is that it's outdated and serves no useful purpose - actually being counter productive.

Rather than respond to the point, most of his posts are just dismissals or insults.  Nobody else made this about Jim. People just reacted to the non-content.

To the point, as is, not only was Psyche deprived of post launch analysis of Starlink 6-22, but also of the chance to stand down in case 6-22 failed. The former was inevitable but the latter was by choice.  A poor choice.

No favors were done to anyone, except to middle managers that feel like their butts are covered, since they "didn't potentially overlook information" that they now for certain didn't even have.
« Last Edit: 10/13/2023 08:16 pm by meekGee »
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline thirtyone

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 256
  • Liked: 431
  • Likes Given: 354
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #81 on: 10/13/2023 06:02 pm »
Just my two cents into this discussion, but consider this: perhaps the reason SpaceX has had such a high mission success rate *while* improving costs and performance over time *is* because of things like partners like NASA (and SpaceX's engineers internally) do now have exceptionally good processes and opportunities to thoroughly review mission data. They have clearly made design changes and iterations over time (significant for high reliability systems), yet their success rate is exceptional.

Remember, this is how most modern software development works - you literally release new versions of Facebook every day, a product of thousands or tens of thousands of developers, and for the most part it works fine every day. This is only due to exceptionally well engineered deployment and test processes.

It's often a dangerous mistake when people get complacent and forget that the reason things are so reliable *is* because of all that forgotten infrastructure that keeps everything running

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #82 on: 10/13/2023 08:31 pm »

To the point, as is, not only was Psyche deprived of post launch analysis of Starlink 6-22,

That was never going to happen

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14341
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14205
  • Likes Given: 1398
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #83 on: 10/13/2023 09:30 pm »

To the point, as is, not only was Psyche deprived of post launch analysis of Starlink 6-22,

That was never going to happen
Which is what I wrote. That part was inevitable.  But on top of that, they also lost the opportunity to react to an obviously faulty 6-22 launch, and they gained no data.  So a little bit lost, and nothing gained.

Plus, they held up another launch vehicle for over a week, which is maybe a smaller issue, but it just adds to the overall inaneness of this practice.
« Last Edit: 10/13/2023 09:31 pm by meekGee »
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline gbl

  • Member
  • Posts: 23
  • US
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 25
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #84 on: 10/13/2023 09:32 pm »
Question for Jim (from Novice here):
AIUI, SpaceX is collecting a lot of telemetry data on each launch that needs to be analyzed. Do you think an automated process will be able to perform such analyses in the near future such that it could satisfy NASA's data review? With Falcon 9's increased launch cadence, perhaps 3 times a week by next year, manual data reviews seem hard to accomplish so rapidly (every 2-3 days). 
« Last Edit: 10/13/2023 09:33 pm by gbl »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39286
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25283
  • Likes Given: 12125
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #85 on: 10/13/2023 10:02 pm »
Question for Jim (from Novice here):
AIUI, SpaceX is collecting a lot of telemetry data on each launch that needs to be analyzed. Do you think an automated process will be able to perform such analyses in the near future such that it could satisfy NASA's data review? With Falcon 9's increased launch cadence, perhaps 3 times a week by next year, manual data reviews seem hard to accomplish so rapidly (every 2-3 days).
Spacex DOES have such an automated system in place. They have for years. An old timer from NASA told me about it, said it was far more advanced than what NASA had at the time. But NASA has to do their own analysis, and because it applies to any kind of launch vehicle and because NASA doesn’t launch nearly as often, it’s not really feasible to be so automated.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8454
  • Roanoke, TX
  • Liked: 2379
  • Likes Given: 2077
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #86 on: 10/14/2023 12:02 am »
AMOS-7 was lost because a process change (LHe load sequencing and load speed) uncovered a new failure mode (solid LOX formation within CoPV weave) in the upper stage.

I thought AMOS-7 was lost during a test, not a launch.  There were exploring a faster LOX load sequence.  It wasn't the LOX load sequence they had been using in previous launches or that they planned to use in the AMOS-7 launch.  It was a new data point.

I'm imaging a graph with one axis being fill time and another axis being perhaps pressure and yet another being temperature.  This was just a combination of conditions that they hadn't tried before.

Quote
That was not the first launch to use that process change, and there were opportunities to review past load sequences and pick up fibre break noise from the accelerometer telemetry just as it was picked up for AMOS-7.

If I understand you, you're saying that after the AMOS-7 accident, they discovered that they could detect "fibre break noise" in the right circumstances.  But I'm guessing that they were not looking to detect any such thing before the accident.

I don't think they should be blamed for not looking for "fibre break noise" in earlier LOX loadings.  I suspect it's only because of the accident that we know that this is something to look for.

I didn’t know there was an AMOS 7. How come Spacecom didn’t make that satellite as a backup for AMOS 6, but rather mount it on Falcon 9 only for it to be lost in the test failure?

AMOS-7 was originally launched as AsiaSat 8 on a F9 v 1.1 on on 5 August 2014 - In 2017 the sat was leased to Spacecom and renamed AMOS-7, The sat is in orbit and operational.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AsiaSat_8

Obviously the post meant the ill-fated AMOS-6

I said that as a joke so as to not sound rude while pointing out the minor error.
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5720
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4489
  • Likes Given: 1873
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #87 on: 10/14/2023 12:17 am »
"Fool me once: shame on you. Fool me twice: shame on me."

If this situation was a surprise to SpaceX, then they learned a lesson. Going forward, they need to factor the opportunity costs of the foregone launches into the price of any launch that has this constraint. NASA can choose to either relax the constraint or pay the premium.

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14341
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14205
  • Likes Given: 1398
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #88 on: 10/14/2023 04:37 am »
"Fool me once: shame on you. Fool me twice: shame on me."

If this situation was a surprise to SpaceX, then they learned a lesson. Going forward, they need to factor the opportunity costs of the foregone launches into the price of any launch that has this constraint. NASA can choose to either relax the constraint or pay the premium.
I doubt it was a surprise...  but yeah, they should, I like the idea.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Online Rebel44

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 572
  • Liked: 554
  • Likes Given: 2055
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #89 on: 10/15/2023 03:24 pm »

That's an explanation for the content of this thread, I'm looking for an explanation of what information there is in flight n-1 that informs risk decisions about flight n, but that isn't available from flight n-2, n-3, n-4....

A new failure
And if you postpone the Starlink flight to after Psyche - how does that help?



3) But another possibility is that the Starlink Falcon 9 has a defect not present in the Psyche Falcon Heavy.  In this case, the anomaly investigation might push the Psyche launch out beyond the end of its launch period only to find the Psyche launch vehicle is clean.  We’d incur a 15-month slip and tens of millions in extra expense for nothing.


Prevents from have to go before Congress, when Psyche buys it and there was problem in the previous launch but the data wasn't reviewed.

It also would affect insurance rates on commercial mission.

IMO, there is a fault in this argument.

Scenario: Let's say that the upper stage for the Psyche and Starlink 6-22 shared a common fault which only would be discovered after the hypothetical failure of the Psyche launch - I am pretty sure that it would also result in everyone being dragged into Congressional hearings - with one of the questions at that point being why was the launch of Starlink 6-22 delayed when it would have provided at least data about any serious issue(s).

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4881
  • Liked: 2792
  • Likes Given: 1099
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #90 on: 10/15/2023 03:54 pm »
IMO, there is a fault in this argument.
...

Not sure there is a fault in the argument, just not well articulated. Alternate scenario: Psyche and planned SpaceX launches (e.g., Starlink 6-22) shared differences from prior launches. NASA wants to ensure those differences do not impact Psyche. So they look for the latest data on which to evaluate the difference and potential impact to Psyche. Seems reasonable. Jim might have provided a clue there ...
the launch vehicles are not static.  These are not the same design as a year ago.  Every upperstage is new.

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #91 on: 10/15/2023 05:52 pm »
IMO, there is a fault in this argument.
...

Not sure there is a fault in the argument, just not well articulated. Alternate scenario: Psyche and planned SpaceX launches (e.g., Starlink 6-22) shared differences from prior launches. NASA wants to ensure those differences do not impact Psyche. So they look for the latest data on which to evaluate the difference and potential impact to Psyche. Seems reasonable. Jim might have provided a clue there ...
the launch vehicles are not static.  These are not the same design as a year ago.  Every upperstage is new.
But that would be a reason to delay Psyche until after the other launch from which they would gain more data. It can't be a reason to delay the other launch until after Psyche.

Offline mkent

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 120
  • Aerospace Engineer
  • Liked: 115
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #92 on: 10/15/2023 08:19 pm »
In the good old days, the delay was no big deal…

There was a one-day delay to the 113th flight for a constellation with over 4,000 operational satellites.  It’s still no big deal.

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #93 on: 10/15/2023 08:30 pm »
In the good old days, the delay was no big deal…

There was a one-day delay to the 113th flight for a constellation with over 4,000 operational satellites.  It’s still no big deal.

Nobody thinks it's a big deal. (Ok if this ends up being the difference between making it to 100 this year some people will make it a big deal...)

We are just debating whether delaying the launch is logically correct. (Because we like to debate lots of things that make almost no difference in the big picture)

Offline alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1589
  • Liked: 1628
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #94 on: 10/15/2023 08:38 pm »
The next launch can't come soon enough.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #95 on: 10/16/2023 02:51 pm »

We are just debating whether delaying the launch is logically correct. (Because we like to debate lots of things that make almost no difference in the big picture)

If it make no difference and allows people to cover their asses, then it is logically correct.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #96 on: 10/16/2023 02:53 pm »
with one of the questions at that point being why was the launch of Starlink 6-22 delayed when it would have provided at least data about any serious issue(s).

Not a given.
« Last Edit: 10/16/2023 02:53 pm by Jim »

Offline LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3432
  • Liked: 6206
  • Likes Given: 870
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #97 on: 10/16/2023 04:54 pm »
We are just debating whether delaying the launch is logically correct. (Because we like to debate lots of things that make almost no difference in the big picture)
If it make no difference and allows people to cover their asses, then it is logically correct.
Except delaying the Starlink launch doesn't even accomplish this.  Assume Psyche fails, and the Starlink launch could have foretold this  -  the situation where ass-covering is needed.   Then NASA managers will get hauled before Congress, and asked why they delayed the launch of Starlink beyond Psyche, thus ruling out the possibility of even a blatant error (like a second stage failure) being found.

Online eriblo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1414
  • Sweden
  • Liked: 1704
  • Likes Given: 278
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #98 on: 10/16/2023 05:01 pm »
Reading the whole thread in one go some posters have touched on it but to summarize:

Three relevant cases when there is not enough time to fully review launch N-1 before launch N which has a specific launch window:

A) N-1 and N have a common failure mode which is found without full review.

B) N-1 has a failure mode which is found without full review but N does not. However, confirming that will make N miss the window.

C) N-1 and N have a common failure mode that would only have been found after a full review and which causes the loss of N.

While A and B are important for the mission, C is only important for the political fallout.


If the probability of A is lower than that of (B or C)1 it makes logical sense to delay N-1 after N. This is not at all unreasonable for a mature but slowly evolving launch system.


1After considering the cost of delaying to the next window and the political "cost" of C.
« Last Edit: 10/16/2023 05:12 pm by eriblo »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #99 on: 10/16/2023 05:07 pm »
We are just debating whether delaying the launch is logically correct. (Because we like to debate lots of things that make almost no difference in the big picture)
If it make no difference

and allows people to cover their asses, then it is logically correct.
Except delaying the Starlink launch doesn't even accomplish this.  Assume Psyche fails, and the Starlink launch could have foretold this  -  the situation where ass-covering is needed.   Then NASA managers will get hauled before Congress, and asked why they delayed the launch of Starlink beyond Psyche, thus ruling out the possibility of even a blatant error (like a second stage failure) being found.

Wrong.  The premise is that the previous launch can’t be reviewed without delaying Psyche.  There is no way to review the previous.

Offline LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3432
  • Liked: 6206
  • Likes Given: 870
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #100 on: 10/16/2023 05:17 pm »
We are just debating whether delaying the launch is logically correct. (Because we like to debate lots of things that make almost no difference in the big picture)
If it make no difference

and allows people to cover their asses, then it is logically correct.
Except delaying the Starlink launch doesn't even accomplish this.  Assume Psyche fails, and the Starlink launch could have foretold this  -  the situation where ass-covering is needed.   Then NASA managers will get hauled before Congress, and asked why they delayed the launch of Starlink beyond Psyche, thus ruling out the possibility of even a blatant error (like a second stage failure) being found.
Wrong.  The premise is that the previous launch can’t be reviewed without delaying Psyche.  There is no way to review the previous.
Wrong.  There are errors that can be reviewed in time, such as a second stage failure.

Offline whitelancer64

We are just debating whether delaying the launch is logically correct. (Because we like to debate lots of things that make almost no difference in the big picture)
If it make no difference and allows people to cover their asses, then it is logically correct.
Except delaying the Starlink launch doesn't even accomplish this.  Assume Psyche fails, and the Starlink launch could have foretold this  -  the situation where ass-covering is needed.   Then NASA managers will get hauled before Congress, and asked why they delayed the launch of Starlink beyond Psyche, thus ruling out the possibility of even a blatant error (like a second stage failure) being found.

NASA didn't decide to delay the Starlink launch, SpaceX did.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #102 on: 10/16/2023 06:34 pm »
We are just debating whether delaying the launch is logically correct. (Because we like to debate lots of things that make almost no difference in the big picture)
If it make no difference

and allows people to cover their asses, then it is logically correct.
Except delaying the Starlink launch doesn't even accomplish this.  Assume Psyche fails, and the Starlink launch could have foretold this  -  the situation where ass-covering is needed.   Then NASA managers will get hauled before Congress, and asked why they delayed the launch of Starlink beyond Psyche, thus ruling out the possibility of even a blatant error (like a second stage failure) being found.
Wrong.  The premise is that the previous launch can’t be reviewed without delaying Psyche.  There is no way to review the previous.
Wrong.  There are errors that can be reviewed in time, such as a second stage failure.

wrong. That is not the type of issue that a data review is for.  That is an accident/failure investigation and all launches are stopped.

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14341
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14205
  • Likes Given: 1398
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #103 on: 10/17/2023 05:00 am »
How is this getting so complicated.

Psyche's timing is fixed.
Starlink can launch either a day before or be delayed and launch after. That's the obly decision to make.

If it launches before, there's no time for a data review.
If it lahnches after, there's no data at all.
Some (major) failures don't require a data review to become apparent.

Therefore:
Delaying the launch of Starlink deprives Psyche of some data, in the relatively rare case of a major fault with Starlink.

So for the sake of some ass covering, a little bit of risk was added to the Psyche mission.

On the bright side, risk to the Starlink mission was reduced by the same small amount.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3432
  • Liked: 6206
  • Likes Given: 870
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #104 on: 10/17/2023 01:10 pm »
How is this getting so complicated.

Psyche's timing is fixed.
Starlink can launch either a day before or be delayed and launch after. That's the obly decision to make.

If it launches before, there's no time for a data review.
If it lahnches after, there's no data at all.
Some (major) failures don't require a data review to become apparent.

Therefore:
Delaying the launch of Starlink deprives Psyche of some data, in the relatively rare case of a major fault with Starlink.

So for the sake of some ass covering, a little bit of risk was added to the Psyche mission.

On the bright side, risk to the Starlink mission was reduced by the same small amount.

Agreed.  NASA's end goal is not to do a data review of all previous launches.  NASA's end goal is is increase the likelihood of success on future launches.  Data review is a means to this end, as are accident reviews and stand-downs due to previous launch failures.    Data reviews are for subtle bugs and stand-down for major problems.  Both are there to increase the likelihood of success on later flights.

Incidentally, I think the approach used covered some asses and uncovered others.  If Psyche failed, and it could have been foretold by Starlink, then there will be recriminations.  Middle managers can say "NASA has this longstanding rule, which historically has made excellent sense.  Modern developments have made this rule slightly counterproductive.  But modifying this rule, or obtaining a waiver, is time-consuming and difficult, and deemed not worth the effort for what we thought was a small gain."  But the managers that set the rules will be asked why the rules were not adapted to modern flight rates, even though everyone could see them coming for years. 



Offline DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5720
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4489
  • Likes Given: 1873
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #105 on: 10/17/2023 01:45 pm »
Incidentally, I think the approach used covered some asses and uncovered others.  If Psyche failed, and it could have been foretold by Starlink, then there will be recriminations.  Middle managers can say "NASA has this longstanding rule, which historically has made excellent sense.  Modern developments have made this rule slightly counterproductive.  But modifying this rule, or obtaining a waiver, is time-consuming and difficult, and deemed not worth the effort for what we thought was a small gain."  But the managers that set the rules will be asked why the rules were not adapted to modern flight rates, even though everyone could see them coming for years.
The rule has not changed because there is no incentive within NASA to change it. Those folks are busy, and until this year the rule had no real negative effect. SpaceX needs to add an additional fee to the launch of any mission that includes this rule. The charge will cover the opportunity costs of the potential lost launch slots. This will give NASA an incentive to evaluate the cost  of the rule versus the benefit.The fee should increase automatically as launch cadence goes up.

Offline abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3092
  • Liked: 3968
  • Likes Given: 5402
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #106 on: 10/17/2023 03:11 pm »
Those folks are busy, and until this year the rule had no real negative effect.
Still had no real negative effect.  The amount of crying over a Starlink flight being held until after Psyche launched is absurd.  Launches get held all the time, SpaceX has delayed Starlink launches when a crewed launch is about to go up for example.  Psyche had priority because of its limited launch window.  Starlinks can fly whenever.

Offline DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5720
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4489
  • Likes Given: 1873
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #107 on: 10/17/2023 03:32 pm »
Those folks are busy, and until this year the rule had no real negative effect.
Still had no real negative effect.  The amount of crying over a Starlink flight being held until after Psyche launched is absurd.  Launches get held all the time, SpaceX has delayed Starlink launches when a crewed launch is about to go up for example.  Psyche had priority because of its limited launch window.  Starlinks can fly whenever.
As I understand the rule, the no-launch window affects all F9 launches at all sites. The launch cadence is still accelerating, and will reach 130/yr by the end of 2024 by the most conservative projection. Even if we have not saturated the launch slots quite yet, we are getting close, and delays go up sharply as the system nears saturation. In most systems I know of (e.g., packet switching delays, or your daily commuting route), a system at 50% utilization has no allocation problems (delay) and a system that nears 100% has very serious problems.  Theoretically the "problem" curve is a hyperbola asymptotic to infinity at 100% utilization. The "knee" of the curve depends on the details.

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #108 on: 10/17/2023 03:38 pm »
Those folks are busy, and until this year the rule had no real negative effect.
Still had no real negative effect.  The amount of crying over a Starlink flight being held until after Psyche launched is absurd.  Launches get held all the time, SpaceX has delayed Starlink launches when a crewed launch is about to go up for example.  Psyche had priority because of its limited launch window.  Starlinks can fly whenever.

The discussion is was never about the slight delay of 6-22.

The discussion is about the 'absurdity' (to use your language) of the 'logic' claiming that the delay is good for the Psyche mission.

When a decision is made and a reason is given and people realize that the reason is illogical it drives them crazy, so we get a thread. (The impact of the decision is completely secondary to the discussion)

Edit: On 2nd thought I removed last paragraph.
« Last Edit: 10/17/2023 03:45 pm by mn »

Offline LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3432
  • Liked: 6206
  • Likes Given: 870
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #109 on: 10/17/2023 03:47 pm »
Those folks are busy, and until this year the rule had no real negative effect.
Still had no real negative effect.  The amount of crying over a Starlink flight being held until after Psyche launched is absurd.  Launches get held all the time, SpaceX has delayed Starlink launches when a crewed launch is about to go up for example.  Psyche had priority because of its limited launch window.  Starlinks can fly whenever.
I don't think the crying is for the Starlink delay.  The crying is for Psyche, a billion dollar, one of a kind, exceedingly hard to replace mission,  taking an unnecessary risk.  And NASA, for pursuing a course that actively mandates taking that risk.  Fortunately it worked, but we may not be so lucky going forward. 

Offline RedLineTrain

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2534
  • Liked: 2460
  • Likes Given: 10389
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #110 on: 10/17/2023 03:53 pm »
Those folks are busy, and until this year the rule had no real negative effect.
Still had no real negative effect.  The amount of crying over a Starlink flight being held until after Psyche launched is absurd.  Launches get held all the time, SpaceX has delayed Starlink launches when a crewed launch is about to go up for example.  Psyche had priority because of its limited launch window.  Starlinks can fly whenever.
I don't think the crying is for the Starlink delay.  The crying is for Psyche, a billion dollar, one of a kind, exceedingly hard to replace mission,  taking an unnecessary risk.  And NASA, for pursuing a course that actively mandates taking that risk.  Fortunately it worked, but we may not be so lucky going forward.

I think the larger question begged is whether LSP is earning its keep.  Why does NASA need to review data when SpaceX has already done so, on a rocket that has been exceedingly well characterized?  The value of a re-review sure seems to be diminishing quickly.
« Last Edit: 10/17/2023 04:10 pm by RedLineTrain »

Offline JayWee

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1006
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 1905
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #111 on: 10/17/2023 04:59 pm »
Btw, does "review of previous flight" include the previous flight of the reused boosters?

Offline Barley

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1049
  • Liked: 715
  • Likes Given: 390
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #112 on: 10/17/2023 06:15 pm »
the launch vehicles are not static.  These are not the same design as a year ago.  Every upperstage is new.
The solution to this is version control.  You should not assume that chronological order of the launch implies version number of the hardware.

For example if Psyche is using upper stage serial number 1002 you can launch serial numbers 1001 and 1003 and use those as your baseline.  (Assuming 1001-1003 are identically configured, if they are not rearrange things so they are.)

Similarly for boosters and launch pad procedures.

Offline abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3092
  • Liked: 3968
  • Likes Given: 5402
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #113 on: 10/17/2023 06:40 pm »
The crying is for Psyche, a billion dollar, one of a kind, exceedingly hard to replace mission,  taking an unnecessary risk. 
Funny.  But ridiculous.

I'm out.  Everyone else, have fun.

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #114 on: 10/17/2023 08:45 pm »
the launch vehicles are not static.  These are not the same design as a year ago.  Every upperstage is new.
The solution to this is version control.  You should not assume that chronological order of the launch implies version number of the hardware.

For example if Psyche is using upper stage serial number 1002 you can launch serial numbers 1001 and 1003 and use those as your baseline.  (Assuming 1001-1003 are identically configured, if they are not rearrange things so they are.)

Similarly for boosters and launch pad procedures.
Coming up with a solution isn't the issue, tbh; recognising that there's a problem is.

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #115 on: 10/17/2023 11:27 pm »
The crying is for Psyche, a billion dollar, one of a kind, exceedingly hard to replace mission,  taking an unnecessary risk. 
Funny.  But ridiculous.

I'm out.  Everyone else, have fun.

Instead of leaving, why don't you try to explain...

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #116 on: 10/18/2023 12:06 pm »

I think the larger question begged is whether LSP is earning its keep.  Why does NASA need to review data when SpaceX has already done so, on a rocket that has been exceedingly well characterized?  The value of a re-review sure seems to be diminishing quickly.

how do you know that SpaceX already has?  It isn't for "characterization"

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #117 on: 10/18/2023 12:11 pm »
the launch vehicles are not static.  These are not the same design as a year ago.  Every upperstage is new.
The solution to this is version control.  You should not assume that chronological order of the launch implies version number of the hardware.

For example if Psyche is using upper stage serial number 1002 you can launch serial numbers 1001 and 1003 and use those as your baseline.  (Assuming 1001-1003 are identically configured, if they are not rearrange things so they are.)

Similarly for boosters and launch pad procedures.

They still aren't identical

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39286
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25283
  • Likes Given: 12125
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #118 on: 10/18/2023 02:19 pm »
[Edit to add context from Psyche mission thread - SpaceX originally delayed the F9 Starlink 6-22 launch because there would not have been enough time for NASA to analyse the launch data prior to the following FH Psyche launch]

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.
Yeah, it’s not rational because delaying the Starlink 6-22 launch provides zero improvement to launch risk (in fact it increases it) but it does solve schedule risk due to procedures not always lining up 1:1 to the most Pareto-optimal risk analysis. And it just delayed for a few days so who cares, problem solved.

Alright let’s put this to bed. Thread closed, problem solved LOL
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Barley

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1049
  • Liked: 715
  • Likes Given: 390
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #119 on: 10/18/2023 03:16 pm »
the launch vehicles are not static.  These are not the same design as a year ago.  Every upperstage is new.
The solution to this is version control.  You should not assume that chronological order of the launch implies version number of the hardware.

For example if Psyche is using upper stage serial number 1002 you can launch serial numbers 1001 and 1003 and use those as your baseline.  (Assuming 1001-1003 are identically configured, if they are not rearrange things so they are.)

Similarly for boosters and launch pad procedures.

They still aren't identical

The chronological predecessor is also not identical.

Offline Barley

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1049
  • Liked: 715
  • Likes Given: 390
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #120 on: 10/18/2023 03:28 pm »
the launch vehicles are not static.  These are not the same design as a year ago.  Every upperstage is new.
The solution to this is version control.  You should not assume that chronological order of the launch implies version number of the hardware.

For example if Psyche is using upper stage serial number 1002 you can launch serial numbers 1001 and 1003 and use those as your baseline.  (Assuming 1001-1003 are identically configured, if they are not rearrange things so they are.)

Similarly for boosters and launch pad procedures.
Coming up with a solution isn't the issue, tbh; recognising that there's a problem is.
The people supporting the delay of 6-22 have recognized the problem and come up with a non-solution.  So clearly recognizing the problem is not the hard part.

I am in complete agreement with following procedures as written and not making ad-hoc changes.  Changes should be made in regular order.  I have some sympathy for the argument that the cost of following the procedure is low enough that making a change is not yet warranted.  I have no brief for the argument that everything is for the best in the best of all possible worlds and no change should ever be made.

This episode has disclosed a bug.  It should be tracked until it is fixed.

Offline RedLineTrain

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2534
  • Liked: 2460
  • Likes Given: 10389
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #121 on: 10/18/2023 04:07 pm »

I think the larger question begged is whether LSP is earning its keep.  Why does NASA need to review data when SpaceX has already done so, on a rocket that has been exceedingly well characterized?  The value of a re-review sure seems to be diminishing quickly.

how do you know that SpaceX already has?  It isn't for "characterization"

No, I don't know that SpaceX already has.  But why wouldn't they, at least in some automated fashion?  They want to provide a good and reliable service.  More money is riding on the launch for SpaceX than it is for NASA.

Offline alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1589
  • Liked: 1628
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #122 on: 10/18/2023 04:19 pm »
It's not about money for NASA.

Offline DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5720
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4489
  • Likes Given: 1873
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #123 on: 10/18/2023 05:02 pm »
It's not about money for NASA.
That's because NASA is not a for-profit company. SpaceX is. If this rule has a probability of costing SpaceX money, then SpaceX should add that prpbably cost into the price of the launch. If NASA chooses to pay this premium, then SpaceX does not lose money. If NASA chooses to change the rules on order to  save the premium, then SpaceX does not lose money.

Offline RedLineTrain

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2534
  • Liked: 2460
  • Likes Given: 10389
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #124 on: 10/18/2023 05:35 pm »
It's not about money for NASA.

On the contrary, these data reviews are because NASA self-insures.

Offline alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1589
  • Liked: 1628
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #125 on: 10/18/2023 06:24 pm »
So, it either is or it isn't.  I don't care.  My point is that, from appearances, SX and NASA have different priorities.  Make money and get to Mars vs. don't screw the pooch again.

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #126 on: 10/18/2023 06:31 pm »
So, it either is or it isn't.  I don't care.  My point is that, from appearances, SX and NASA have different priorities.  Make money and get to Mars vs. don't screw the pooch again.
I don't think anyone would be arguing over "don't screw the pooch again".  The concern is around whether the priority has become "make sure your backside is covered when the pooch gets screwed again".

Offline dondar

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 299
  • Likes Given: 263
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #127 on: 10/19/2023 03:09 pm »
what a bizarre thread.
NASA reviews involve SpaceX engineers. SpaceX doesn't have Falcon engineers dedicated to NASA.  NASA and Air Force flights demand more preparation and more time from SpaceX engineers than any other flights. Hence the "dead zone" before any NASA/Air Force flight.
This time/availability of SpaceX engineering force is contracted by NASA/Air Force.
The BS about "data" is BS.

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #128 on: 10/19/2023 05:05 pm »
what a bizarre thread.
NASA reviews involve SpaceX engineers. SpaceX doesn't have Falcon engineers dedicated to NASA.  NASA and Air Force flights demand more preparation and more time from SpaceX engineers than any other flights. Hence the "dead zone" before any NASA/Air Force flight.
This time/availability of SpaceX engineering force is contracted by NASA/Air Force.
The BS about "data" is BS.
It's only bizarre if you haven't read it properly ;-)

Offline dondar

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 299
  • Likes Given: 263
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #129 on: 10/23/2023 08:21 pm »
what a bizarre thread.
NASA reviews involve SpaceX engineers. SpaceX doesn't have Falcon engineers dedicated to NASA.  NASA and Air Force flights demand more preparation and more time from SpaceX engineers than any other flights. Hence the "dead zone" before any NASA/Air Force flight.
This time/availability of SpaceX engineering force is contracted by NASA/Air Force.
The BS about "data" is BS.
It's only bizarre if you haven't read it properly ;-)
The only practical reason for NASA review delay (i.e. extra work) is some out of family event during (one of) previous Falcon launch, which SpaceX team has to process and to wrap some "satisfactory story" for NASA review committee.
Check it out this news about identical episode but from different era (pre Starship/superheavy push).
https://spacenews.com/falcon-9-investigation-ongoing-as-spacex-continues-starlink-launches/
See the difference? the difference is the number of available engineers currently busy with Falcon hardware.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #130 on: 10/23/2023 09:16 pm »

The only practical reason for NASA review delay (i.e. extra work) is some out of family event during (one of) previous Falcon launch, which SpaceX team has to process and to wrap some "satisfactory story" for NASA review committee.

No, NASA does the data review.

Offline LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3432
  • Liked: 6206
  • Likes Given: 870
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #131 on: 10/24/2023 09:02 pm »
It would be interesting to know what these reviews uncover.  In theory another set of eyes on the data can uncover things the developers may have missed.

One could imagine that the initial few reviews of a new rocket type would be the most valuable.  NASA of course has experience with a wide variety of rockets that have collectively developed many different issues over the years.  These issues could easily be potential problems the manufacturer has not yet thought of or encountered.

But once a rocket has launched many times, and the manufacturer has addressed the potential problems found in prior NASA reviews, it would seem the chance of a NASA review catching something the manufacturer missed would be slight.

Offline matthewkantar

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2118
  • Liked: 2562
  • Likes Given: 2253
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #132 on: 10/24/2023 11:59 pm »
The reviewers get to keep their jobs, a prime goal in government.

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6325
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9662
  • Likes Given: 41
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #133 on: 10/25/2023 09:40 am »
But once a rocket has launched many times, and the manufacturer has addressed the potential problems found in prior NASA reviews, it would seem the chance of a NASA review catching something the manufacturer missed would be slight.
That assumes the vehicle and its operations are static, which is not the case with Falcon 9.

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #134 on: 10/25/2023 11:07 am »
It would be interesting to know what these reviews uncover.  In theory another set of eyes on the data can uncover things the developers may have missed.

One could imagine that the initial few reviews of a new rocket type would be the most valuable.  NASA of course has experience with a wide variety of rockets that have collectively developed many different issues over the years.  These issues could easily be potential problems the manufacturer has not yet thought of or encountered.

But once a rocket has launched many times, and the manufacturer has addressed the potential problems found in prior NASA reviews, it would seem the chance of a NASA review catching something the manufacturer missed would be slight.
I'm not sure it matters how slight the risk is - the owner of the risk (in this case NASA) is going to want to assess any new data themselves. Or at least, review any assessment by the launch provider. Even if just to see that there isn't any significant new data. I would if I were them.

But that's not really what this thread is about.

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12131
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18310
  • Likes Given: 12298
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #135 on: 10/25/2023 11:42 am »
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.

It has nothing to do with the amount of data.  NASA wants the data of the last mission before theirs.

Delaying that "last mission before theirs" has happened before, in which case NASA does not get the data of the last planned mission before theirs, but of the last actually flown mission before theirs. Which are two different things. This entire discussion going on in this thread revolves around the fallacy of believing that you might miss an issue that crops up conveniently "only" in the last planned mission before an important NASA mission:

https://www.space.com/spacex-delays-starlink-launch-crew-5-astronaut-mission

The fact that NASA has now allowed two Starlink missions, which were originally scheduled to fly BEFORE important NASA missions, to be delayed until AFTER those important NASA missions, goes to show that NASA is fine with using older data to scrutinize for potential issues. If NASA believed in the fallacy mentioned above, they would not have allowed SpaceX to postpone those two Starlink missions beyond the NASA missions.
« Last Edit: 10/29/2023 06:08 pm by woods170 »

Offline LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3432
  • Liked: 6206
  • Likes Given: 870
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #136 on: 10/25/2023 12:20 pm »
But once a rocket has launched many times, and the manufacturer has addressed the potential problems found in prior NASA reviews, it would seem the chance of a NASA review catching something the manufacturer missed would be slight.
I'm not sure it matters how slight the risk is - the owner of the risk (in this case NASA) is going to want to assess any new data themselves. Or at least, review any assessment by the launch provider. Even if just to see that there isn't any significant new data. I would if I were them.
I agree.  But at some point it, the best way to improve safety (at least for a given employee count) would likely be to work on improvements to known small risks, as opposed to redundantly scouring the data for newly developing risks.  After all, the manufacturer already has high incentives to spot problems that may be developing.

However, we are far from this point.  The FAA, for example, carefully looks at the data from the first N flights, then lets the manufacturer and user handle the data review after that.  However N is huge - "Altogether, Boeing’s fleet of 787 test planes has logged more than 4,800 hours in more than 1,700 flights."  Furthermore, these tests are designed to explore the corners of the flight envelope, whereas rockets always attempt to launch in the most favorable conditions they can find.

So I don't think NASA will give up reviews any time soon.  At most they will do what folks here have suggested - only doing a quick pass review of previous flights that are too close in time to do a full review.

Offline RedLineTrain

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2534
  • Liked: 2460
  • Likes Given: 10389
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #137 on: 10/25/2023 03:52 pm »
It would be interesting to know what these reviews uncover.  In theory another set of eyes on the data can uncover things the developers may have missed.

One could imagine that the initial few reviews of a new rocket type would be the most valuable.  NASA of course has experience with a wide variety of rockets that have collectively developed many different issues over the years.  These issues could easily be potential problems the manufacturer has not yet thought of or encountered.

But once a rocket has launched many times, and the manufacturer has addressed the potential problems found in prior NASA reviews, it would seem the chance of a NASA review catching something the manufacturer missed would be slight.
I'm not sure it matters how slight the risk is - the owner of the risk (in this case NASA) is going to want to assess any new data themselves. Or at least, review any assessment by the launch provider. Even if just to see that there isn't any significant new data. I would if I were them.

But that's not really what this thread is about.

I think that it's really what this thread is about.

1.  SpaceX also owns the risk here and it was arguably higher than NASA's on this flight.
2.  I doubt that the insurers reviewed the data for Viasat's recent Falcon Heavy launch.
3.  I doubt that a NASA data review at this point increases the chance of success or NASA's understanding of the chance of success.  Maybe a couple of years ago it did.
« Last Edit: 10/25/2023 03:59 pm by RedLineTrain »

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14341
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14205
  • Likes Given: 1398
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #138 on: 10/25/2023 04:23 pm »
But once a rocket has launched many times, and the manufacturer has addressed the potential problems found in prior NASA reviews, it would seem the chance of a NASA review catching something the manufacturer missed would be slight.
That assumes the vehicle and its operations are static, which is not the case with Falcon 9.
That doesn't change the fact that delaying the "less important" launch till after the high value launch only reduces the amount of data the high value launch has to work with.

This is purely and entirely a CYA exercise.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #139 on: 10/25/2023 06:09 pm »
It would be interesting to know what these reviews uncover.  In theory another set of eyes on the data can uncover things the developers may have missed.

One could imagine that the initial few reviews of a new rocket type would be the most valuable.  NASA of course has experience with a wide variety of rockets that have collectively developed many different issues over the years.  These issues could easily be potential problems the manufacturer has not yet thought of or encountered.

But once a rocket has launched many times, and the manufacturer has addressed the potential problems found in prior NASA reviews, it would seem the chance of a NASA review catching something the manufacturer missed would be slight.
I'm not sure it matters how slight the risk is - the owner of the risk (in this case NASA) is going to want to assess any new data themselves. Or at least, review any assessment by the launch provider. Even if just to see that there isn't any significant new data. I would if I were them.

But that's not really what this thread is about.

I think that it's really what this thread is about.

1.  SpaceX also owns the risk here and it was arguably higher than NASA's on this flight.
2.  I doubt that the insurers reviewed the data for Viasat's recent Falcon Heavy launch.
3.  I doubt that a NASA data review at this point increases the chance of success or NASA's understanding of the chance of success.  Maybe a couple of years ago it did.
The thread is about delaying a Starlink launch until after a NASA launch so that you can say the data is not available, rather than not having the time to review it. You don't use the data either way.

It is not about whether it is worth reviewing it if it is available and you have the time.

Offline LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3432
  • Liked: 6206
  • Likes Given: 870
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #140 on: 10/26/2023 02:57 am »
The thread is about delaying a Starlink launch until after a NASA launch so that you can say the data is not available, rather than not having the time to review it. You don't use the data either way.

It is not about whether it is worth reviewing it if it is available and you have the time.
You don't use the DETAILED review either way.  But you have plenty of time to review perhaps the most important piece of information - did the rocket place the payload into the intended orbit.

A successful flight is one of the three main requirements for certification.  One of the others, having a "Post Flight Operations/Anomaly Resolution Process" should be knowable in advance.  Only the third element, "NASA Flight Margin Verification" might not be able to complete in time.

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #141 on: 10/26/2023 07:19 am »
The thread is about delaying a Starlink launch until after a NASA launch so that you can say the data is not available, rather than not having the time to review it. You don't use the data either way.

It is not about whether it is worth reviewing it if it is available and you have the time.
You don't use the DETAILED review either way.  But you have plenty of time to review perhaps the most important piece of information - did the rocket place the payload into the intended orbit.

A successful flight is one of the three main requirements for certification.  One of the others, having a "Post Flight Operations/Anomaly Resolution Process" should be knowable in advance.  Only the third element, "NASA Flight Margin Verification" might not be able to complete in time.
I do agree with you, but now you've added an extra decision point, and so an extra beaurocratic process wrapped around that decision point.

My point is that you are no worse off if it launches and you completely ignore it than if you postpone it (from a flight risk perspective). From a career-progression perspective I suspect there's a significant difference.

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #142 on: 10/26/2023 04:06 pm »
......
This entire discussion going on in this thread revolves around the fallacy of believing that you might miss an issue that crops up conveniently "only" in the last planned mission before an important NASA mission:
...

I think you have it backwards.

The question of this thread is whether you believe in the fallacy that delaying planned launch n-1 somehow benefits launch n

Edit: removed most of the quote and left only the relevant section I'm responding to.
« Last Edit: 10/26/2023 04:07 pm by mn »

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12131
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18310
  • Likes Given: 12298
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #143 on: 10/27/2023 09:52 am »
......
This entire discussion going on in this thread revolves around the fallacy of believing that you might miss an issue that crops up conveniently "only" in the last planned mission before an important NASA mission:
...

I think you have it backwards.

The question of this thread is whether you believe in the fallacy that delaying planned launch n-1 somehow benefits launch n

Edit: removed most of the quote and left only the relevant section I'm responding to.

Emphasis mine.

NASA clearly believes in that so-called "fallacy". They have now allowed SpaceX to delay planned "launch n-1", to let "launch n" go first, at least three times (Crew-5, Crew-6 and Psyche).
From the viewpoint of NASA "launch n" clearly benefits from delaying planned "launch n-1". Specifically because it allows "launch n" to fly on schedule, instead of running the risk of being delayed while waiting for planned "launch n-1" to actually launch.

There's your "somehow benefits".

Not everything revolves around decreasing risk thru data review/data analysis.

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12131
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18310
  • Likes Given: 12298
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #144 on: 10/27/2023 10:01 am »
But once a rocket has launched many times, and the manufacturer has addressed the potential problems found in prior NASA reviews, it would seem the chance of a NASA review catching something the manufacturer missed would be slight.
That assumes the vehicle and its operations are static, which is not the case with Falcon 9.
That doesn't change the fact that delaying the "less important" launch till after the high value launch only reduces the amount of data the high value launch has to work with.

This is purely and entirely a CYA exercise.

Emphasis mine.

Which is not a bad thing, for two reasons:

- Although there is large commonality between Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy, using single-stick Falcon 9 flight data to directly assess the risk of a 3-core FH launch is  questionable. NASA is much more likely to assess Falcon Heavy launch risk by looking at Falcon Heavy flight data.
- But, in the IMO unlikely case that NASA actually uses single-stick Falcon 9 flight data to assess FH launch risk, there is the fact that NASA already is in possession of a literal mountain of Falcon 9 flight data (courtesy of its very high flight rate). One launch less won't make a significant difference to the knowledge that NASA has in hand already.
« Last Edit: 10/27/2023 10:02 am by woods170 »

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #145 on: 10/27/2023 10:54 am »
......
This entire discussion going on in this thread revolves around the fallacy of believing that you might miss an issue that crops up conveniently "only" in the last planned mission before an important NASA mission:
...

I think you have it backwards.

The question of this thread is whether you believe in the fallacy that delaying planned launch n-1 somehow benefits launch n

Edit: removed most of the quote and left only the relevant section I'm responding to.

Emphasis mine.

NASA clearly believes in that so-called "fallacy". They have now allowed SpaceX to delay planned "launch n-1", to let "launch n" go first, at least three times (Crew-5, Crew-6 and Psyche).
From the viewpoint of NASA "launch n" clearly benefits from delaying planned "launch n-1". Specifically because it allows "launch n" to fly on schedule, instead of running the risk of being delayed while waiting for planned "launch n-1" to actually launch.

There's your "somehow benefits".

Not everything revolves around decreasing risk thru data review/data analysis.

Whoa you've now completely changed the subject.

It was said that the launch was delayed because if it launches they would be required to review the data and there would not be sufficient time to review, and therefore it is better to delay launch n-1. That is what was claimed and that is what we are discussing. (Whether or not this is true is irrelevant to our discussion, we are just discussing the logic behind such a decision)

THAT is what we're discussing. Only that and nothing else.
« Last Edit: 10/27/2023 11:30 am by mn »

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #146 on: 10/27/2023 12:28 pm »
It was said that the launch was delayed because if it launches they would be required to review the data and there would not be sufficient time to review, and therefore it is better to delay launch n-1. That is what was claimed and that is what we are discussing. (Whether or not this is true is irrelevant to our discussion, we are just discussing the logic behind such a decision)
If its not true then the rest of the discussion is pretty pointless. Is there doubt about whether it is?

Offline LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3432
  • Liked: 6206
  • Likes Given: 870
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #147 on: 10/27/2023 12:37 pm »
NASA clearly believes in that so-called "fallacy". They have now allowed SpaceX to delay planned "launch n-1", to let "launch n" go first, at least three times (Crew-5, Crew-6 and Psyche).
From the viewpoint of NASA "launch n" clearly benefits from delaying planned "launch n-1". Specifically because it allows "launch n" to fly on schedule, instead of running the risk of being delayed while waiting for planned "launch n-1" to actually launch.

There's your "somehow benefits".

Not everything revolves around decreasing risk thru data review/data analysis.
This makes sense, but only if the rockets are launching from the same pad.  Then if launch N-1 gets delayed for any reason (technical problems, weather, etc) it eats into the margins of the more important launch N.  Even worse, if it damages the pad,  launch N might miss the window entirely.  In this case, and in this case only (IMO) delaying launch N-1 makes sense.

But if they are launching from separate pads, this seems like a case of "go fever" combined with CYA.  Imagine a crew launch sitting on the pad at the Cape.  A day earlier, there is a Starlink launch at Vandenburg, and that Falcon-9 blows up in flight.  The crew launch would surely be delayed, and rightly so.   But if the launch succeeds, NASA will be faced with a PR problem.  If they keep to the crew launch schedule, they will be accused of "go fever", waiving their own flight rules to keep the schedule.  If, god forbid, the crew launch fails, they will be accused of not looking at all available evidence.  Both of these PR problems are avoided by delaying launch N-1, at the risk of not detecting a possible error.

This problem is entirely of NASA's own making.  They have a set of rules that made perfect sense in the days of infrequent launches from non-redundant pads.  With technical advances, they are now making counter-productive decisions based on not violating their own rules.  The correct solution, I believe, is to change their rules to adapt to modern flight rates.


Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14341
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14205
  • Likes Given: 1398
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #148 on: 10/27/2023 01:18 pm »
But once a rocket has launched many times, and the manufacturer has addressed the potential problems found in prior NASA reviews, it would seem the chance of a NASA review catching something the manufacturer missed would be slight.
That assumes the vehicle and its operations are static, which is not the case with Falcon 9.
That doesn't change the fact that delaying the "less important" launch till after the high value launch only reduces the amount of data the high value launch has to work with.

This is purely and entirely a CYA exercise.

Emphasis mine.

Which is not a bad thing, for two reasons:

- Although there is large commonality between Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy, using single-stick Falcon 9 flight data to directly assess the risk of a 3-core FH launch is  questionable. NASA is much more likely to assess Falcon Heavy launch risk by looking at Falcon Heavy flight data.
- But, in the IMO unlikely case that NASA actually uses single-stick Falcon 9 flight data to assess FH launch risk, there is the fact that NASA already is in possession of a literal mountain of Falcon 9 flight data (courtesy of its very high flight rate). One launch less won't make a significant difference to the knowledge that NASA has in hand already.
They can always choose to not look...  or in other words, if they're not using the data, why dalay the F9 launch?

This makes no sense.

And to your basic point:

If a Merlin fails, do you really think they'll ignore it since it's mounted to a different vehicle?

The side cores are practically the same, the center core is almost the same, the second stage also.

Basically all failure modes of F9 are present in an FH.  (Plus a bunch of new ones)

The more odd rationales I hear, the more it's obvious that this is, and always was, CYA.  (Not the data analysis, the delay of flight N-1)
« Last Edit: 10/27/2023 03:32 pm by meekGee »
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #149 on: 10/27/2023 02:30 pm »
It was said that the launch was delayed because if it launches they would be required to review the data and there would not be sufficient time to review, and therefore it is better to delay launch n-1. That is what was claimed and that is what we are discussing. (Whether or not this is true is irrelevant to our discussion, we are just discussing the logic behind such a decision)
If its not true then the rest of the discussion is pretty pointless. Is there doubt about whether it is?

Someone either in this thread or some other thread claimed that it was a SpaceX decision to delay and not NASA, sorry can't find that post right now.

But if it's not true then it's just a hypothetical discussion, we've had plenty of those around here.

Edit to add: Here is the source of the delay and reason given. Whatever this other poster posted somewhere that I can't find is apparently not correct.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=50260.msg2530831#msg2530831
« Last Edit: 10/27/2023 02:36 pm by mn »

Offline dondar

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 299
  • Likes Given: 263
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #150 on: 10/27/2023 04:12 pm »

The only practical reason for NASA review delay (i.e. extra work) is some out of family event during (one of) previous Falcon launch, which SpaceX team has to process and to wrap some "satisfactory story" for NASA review committee.

No, NASA does the data review.
lol, they review reports prepared by SpaceX. Both sides said a number of times the that review is two side process and is a learning experience for both sides. Both sides. They did already more than 10 such reviews (close to 15?) . One has to be specially challenged to claim that they don't have  a clear idea about time, processes and that there can be something "special", The only possible reason for the delay is obvious and I already mentioned it. The only possible reason for delay for Starlink flights is also obvious and I already mentioned it. NASA has no say about other SpaceX flights.  The only external action can come from Air Force, who could indeed ground Falcon 9 if it would be deemed unsaved to launch.
This story about "latest flight" requirement can be easily disproved and I already mentioned the evidence.

dude. why? You write rather normal posts about NASA etc. every time SpaceX pops you go bananas. Why?

Offline dondar

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 299
  • Likes Given: 263
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #151 on: 10/27/2023 04:17 pm »
......
This entire discussion going on in this thread revolves around the fallacy of believing that you might miss an issue that crops up conveniently "only" in the last planned mission before an important NASA mission:
...

I think you have it backwards.

The question of this thread is whether you believe in the fallacy that delaying planned launch n-1 somehow benefits launch n

Edit: removed most of the quote and left only the relevant section I'm responding to.

Emphasis mine.

NASA clearly believes in that so-called "fallacy". They have now allowed SpaceX to delay planned "launch n-1", to let "launch n" go first, at least three times (Crew-5, Crew-6 and Psyche).
From the viewpoint of NASA "launch n" clearly benefits from delaying planned "launch n-1". Specifically because it allows "launch n" to fly on schedule, instead of running the risk of being delayed while waiting for planned "launch n-1" to actually launch.

There's your "somehow benefits".

Not everything revolves around decreasing risk thru data review/data analysis.
what is the size of Falcon 9 group in SpaceX? 10% of the initial size? 20%?
they are squeezed by NASA reviews  up and don't have spare eyes for the rest. You see typical "test" crunch. The mere idea about NASA controlling SpaceX flights in general is beyond bizarre. They can ask, but why?

Offline DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5720
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4489
  • Likes Given: 1873
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #152 on: 10/27/2023 04:36 pm »
Without debating the merits of a review, can we all agree that the following statement is true?
   IF (NASA mandates a review of any F9/FH mission prior to the NASA mission
         AND reviews take a known potential maximum time window
        )
     THEN
        SpaceX cannot schedule any F9/FH missions in that time window prior to the scheduled NASA mission.

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1075
  • United States
  • Liked: 934
  • Likes Given: 346
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #153 on: 10/27/2023 04:48 pm »
Without debating the merits of a review, can we all agree that the following statement is true?
   IF (NASA mandates a review of any F9/FH mission prior to the NASA mission
         AND reviews take a known potential maximum time window
        )
     THEN
        SpaceX cannot schedule any F9/FH missions in that time window prior to the scheduled NASA mission.

Obviously that is true.

But just to nitpick "known potential maximum time window" includes the possibility of an anomaly requiring an x month review process, so SpaceX cannot schedule anything within x months of that NASA mission ;)

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #154 on: 10/27/2023 06:38 pm »
lol, they review reports prepared by SpaceX. .....

wrong.  NASA does independent data reviews of all launches of vehicles it has under contract


NASA has no say about other SpaceX flights. 

That's what you think.  NASA has ways to apply leverage.

Quote from: dondar link=topic=59679.msg2535266#msg2535266 date=1698423170)

dude. why? You write rather normal posts about NASA etc. every time SpaceX pops you go bananas. Why?

To counter unsubstantiated posts like the ones you make
« Last Edit: 10/27/2023 06:42 pm by Jim »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37649
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21729
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #155 on: 10/27/2023 06:43 pm »
what is the size of Falcon 9 group in SpaceX? 10% of the initial size? 20%?
they are squeezed by NASA reviews  up and don't have spare eyes for the rest. You see typical "test" crunch. The mere idea about NASA controlling SpaceX flights in general is beyond bizarre. They can ask, but why?

This is so wrong.  NASA postflight data reviews have no impact on SpaceX manpower.
« Last Edit: 10/27/2023 06:44 pm by Jim »

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12131
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18310
  • Likes Given: 12298
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #156 on: 10/29/2023 06:11 pm »
It was said that the launch was delayed because if it launches they would be required to review the data and there would not be sufficient time to review, and therefore it is better to delay launch n-1. That is what was claimed and that is what we are discussing. (Whether or not this is true is irrelevant to our discussion, we are just discussing the logic behind such a decision)
If its not true then the rest of the discussion is pretty pointless. Is there doubt about whether it is?

Someone either in this thread or some other thread claimed that it was a SpaceX decision to delay and not NASA, sorry can't find that post right now.

But if it's not true then it's just a hypothetical discussion, we've had plenty of those around here.

Edit to add: Here is the source of the delay and reason given. Whatever this other poster posted somewhere that I can't find is apparently not correct.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=50260.msg2530831#msg2530831

Delaying Starlink missions in favour of NASA missions has so far always been SpaceX decisions. At least one time such decision was made by SpaceX after a request from NASA. Not an order, but a request.
« Last Edit: 10/29/2023 06:15 pm by woods170 »

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #157 on: 10/29/2023 10:20 pm »
It was said that the launch was delayed because if it launches they would be required to review the data and there would not be sufficient time to review, and therefore it is better to delay launch n-1. That is what was claimed and that is what we are discussing. (Whether or not this is true is irrelevant to our discussion, we are just discussing the logic behind such a decision)
If its not true then the rest of the discussion is pretty pointless. Is there doubt about whether it is?

Someone either in this thread or some other thread claimed that it was a SpaceX decision to delay and not NASA, sorry can't find that post right now.

But if it's not true then it's just a hypothetical discussion, we've had plenty of those around here.

Edit to add: Here is the source of the delay and reason given. Whatever this other poster posted somewhere that I can't find is apparently not correct.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=50260.msg2530831#msg2530831

Delaying Starlink missions in favour of NASA missions has so far always been SpaceX decisions. At least one time such decision was made by SpaceX after a request from NASA. Not an order, but a request.

Quote
Also data review of previous F9 launches by LSP must be complete before proceeding with Psyche launch. This includes Starlink 7-4.  Also, LSP asked for the Starlink 6-22 launch delay after weather scrub on October 9, until after Psyche, due to the same post launch analysis reason.
Yep, assuming LSP = "Launch Service Provider", it seems like a SpaceX decision.  But if LSP asks for delay because otherwise they can't comply with a rule, that doesn't mean the rule is a sensible one.

Regardless, the premise of this thread doesn't change depending on who makes specific decisions, just on what those decisions are.

Offline RedLineTrain

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2534
  • Liked: 2460
  • Likes Given: 10389
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #158 on: 10/30/2023 05:38 pm »
Yep, assuming LSP = "Launch Service Provider", it seems like a SpaceX decision.

LSP = NASA's Launch Services Program.

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Liked: 2821
  • Likes Given: 975
Re: Discussion of NASA data review delaying SpaceX launches
« Reply #159 on: 10/30/2023 07:51 pm »
Yep, assuming LSP = "Launch Service Provider", it seems like a SpaceX decision.

LSP = NASA's Launch Services Program.
Hmmm.... so it was NASA that requested the delays then?

Too much conflicting information here, but maybe I'm just misunderstanding it all.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0