I'm most worried about the flame trench at the test stand. It's a one off item, it took a long time to fabricate and install, it was subjected to heat long after all of its water evaporated, probably took some serious impacts. Can they do six engine ship tests without it?
We don't know what kind of "long lead hardware" SpaceX has ordered for Other Launch Pads under contruction. They can always reroute it to Massey.
Quote from: crandles57 on 06/24/2025 03:26 pmQuote from: envy887 on 06/24/2025 12:54 pm4 months seems rather conservative for repairs at Massey's. It took SpaceX only 2 months after blowing up SN4 to static fire SN5, and less than 3 months after IFT-1 to repair the cratered pad and install and test the water deluge system. I'd expect Massey's to be ready by mid-August, and flight hardware readiness to be the gating factor to a static fire. Finding and fixing the issue with Ship 36 will probably take longer than that IMO.I certainly hope you are right and 4 months is fairly extreme long estimate of the time. I suggested that time in the context to trying to show whether you might want to start work on converting Pad A to V3 now. So a fairly bad outturn even if not quite a worse case time involved. Said it before, but our observation data is on the assembly time, we don't know the acquisition lead times. Piping gantries vaporisers etc no problem quickly available. Tanks not quite as easy but they will have spares, orders, re-task, borrow, beg or pay to jump queues and get adequate tanks somehow. It is the control room that worries me. If they can assemble from generic parts it may not be a problem. If they have to order from a supplier who only builds to order and is either in middle of large order or has long waiting list then we have to hope there is another adequate one already on order for a different location that can be re-tasked? Assuming it can be all be fixed and working in a couple of months might be the erroneous mis-estimation but I am hoping that is correct and my worst case fears are overdone.The difference between Pad-A repair and the Static Fire repair is that one was a major infrastructure change-out, and a new water deluge system, with just the major commodities lines reconnected. The Static Fire pad is the opposite; the infrastructure seems to be okay, but all the commodities need to be replaced, and that includes a lot of O2 lines that blew their connections from blowback. The vast amount of re-piping, connections, welding, ordering of all these parts, new data and control bunkers, and new or re-test tanks will take time. Although it may be the same time, the work effort is entirely different.
Quote from: envy887 on 06/24/2025 12:54 pm4 months seems rather conservative for repairs at Massey's. It took SpaceX only 2 months after blowing up SN4 to static fire SN5, and less than 3 months after IFT-1 to repair the cratered pad and install and test the water deluge system. I'd expect Massey's to be ready by mid-August, and flight hardware readiness to be the gating factor to a static fire. Finding and fixing the issue with Ship 36 will probably take longer than that IMO.I certainly hope you are right and 4 months is fairly extreme long estimate of the time. I suggested that time in the context to trying to show whether you might want to start work on converting Pad A to V3 now. So a fairly bad outturn even if not quite a worse case time involved. Said it before, but our observation data is on the assembly time, we don't know the acquisition lead times. Piping gantries vaporisers etc no problem quickly available. Tanks not quite as easy but they will have spares, orders, re-task, borrow, beg or pay to jump queues and get adequate tanks somehow. It is the control room that worries me. If they can assemble from generic parts it may not be a problem. If they have to order from a supplier who only builds to order and is either in middle of large order or has long waiting list then we have to hope there is another adequate one already on order for a different location that can be re-tasked? Assuming it can be all be fixed and working in a couple of months might be the erroneous mis-estimation but I am hoping that is correct and my worst case fears are overdone.
4 months seems rather conservative for repairs at Massey's. It took SpaceX only 2 months after blowing up SN4 to static fire SN5, and less than 3 months after IFT-1 to repair the cratered pad and install and test the water deluge system. I'd expect Massey's to be ready by mid-August, and flight hardware readiness to be the gating factor to a static fire. Finding and fixing the issue with Ship 36 will probably take longer than that IMO.
Quote from: catdlr on 06/24/2025 03:35 pmQuote from: crandles57 on 06/24/2025 03:26 pmQuote from: envy887 on 06/24/2025 12:54 pm4 months seems rather conservative for repairs at Massey's. It took SpaceX only 2 months after blowing up SN4 to static fire SN5, and less than 3 months after IFT-1 to repair the cratered pad and install and test the water deluge system. I'd expect Massey's to be ready by mid-August, and flight hardware readiness to be the gating factor to a static fire. Finding and fixing the issue with Ship 36 will probably take longer than that IMO.I certainly hope you are right and 4 months is fairly extreme long estimate of the time. I suggested that time in the context to trying to show whether you might want to start work on converting Pad A to V3 now. So a fairly bad outturn even if not quite a worse case time involved. Said it before, but our observation data is on the assembly time, we don't know the acquisition lead times. Piping gantries vaporisers etc no problem quickly available. Tanks not quite as easy but they will have spares, orders, re-task, borrow, beg or pay to jump queues and get adequate tanks somehow. It is the control room that worries me. If they can assemble from generic parts it may not be a problem. If they have to order from a supplier who only builds to order and is either in middle of large order or has long waiting list then we have to hope there is another adequate one already on order for a different location that can be re-tasked? Assuming it can be all be fixed and working in a couple of months might be the erroneous mis-estimation but I am hoping that is correct and my worst case fears are overdone.The difference between Pad-A repair and the Static Fire repair is that one was a major infrastructure change-out, and a new water deluge system, with just the major commodities lines reconnected. The Static Fire pad is the opposite; the infrastructure seems to be okay, but all the commodities need to be replaced, and that includes a lot of O2 lines that blew their connections from blowback. The vast amount of re-piping, connections, welding, ordering of all these parts, new data and control bunkers, and new or re-test tanks will take time. Although it may be the same time, the work effort is entirely different. And the burning foam insulation under the outer lining on the non vacuum jacketed lines resulted in residual hotspots.
Quote from: matthewkantar on 06/24/2025 03:54 pmI'm most worried about the flame trench at the test stand. It's a one off item, it took a long time to fabricate and install, it was subjected to heat long after all of its water evaporated, probably took some serious impacts. Can they do six engine ship tests without it?The condition of that is unknown to us, and we must wait for aerial pictures. Please remember that the blast occurred at the top of the ship, while the secondary and much larger fuel feed explosion took place off to the side, where the commodity pipes led to the test stand. As the ship fell over and onto its side, it burst open, spilling out the fuel. The water deluge was ready to start, but the tanks lost their footing, and one of the water lines burst open, releasing its contents. Some of it did reach the trench well. Crews were seen pumping water out yesterday. I can't provide more information than that, and we all just need to stay alert for updates on what is being worked on and repaired. We may receive some status in L2, but it has not been provided.
Quote from: catdlr on 06/24/2025 04:06 pmQuote from: matthewkantar on 06/24/2025 03:54 pmI'm most worried about the flame trench at the test stand. It's a one off item, it took a long time to fabricate and install, it was subjected to heat long after all of its water evaporated, probably took some serious impacts. Can they do six engine ship tests without it?The condition of that is unknown to us, and we must wait for aerial pictures. Please remember that the blast occurred at the top of the ship, while the secondary and much larger fuel feed explosion took place off to the side, where the commodity pipes led to the test stand. As the ship fell over and onto its side, it burst open, spilling out the fuel. The water deluge was ready to start, but the tanks lost their footing, and one of the water lines burst open, releasing its contents. Some of it did reach the trench well. Crews were seen pumping water out yesterday. I can't provide more information than that, and we all just need to stay alert for updates on what is being worked on and repaired. We may receive some status in L2, but it has not been provided.Public aerial video and pictures so far show little to minimal visible damage to the internal concrete structure and exposed steel and the energetic event ripped some of the hold down clamps off of the stand as S36 ripped itself free during unzipping as the aft skirt and bulkhead lost structural integrity. Most of the trench debris is everything liberated from the aft skirt. Since it wasn't an equal disintegration some hardware was blown downwards while the rest went up and out from the sides when the hold downs failed to retain.
My apologies to the moderators; I usually do not intentionally post a LaParde video. But this is important, A crane accident has just occurred at Massey. Two cranes are working; keep your eye on the one on the right, which is visible just at the end of this video.https://twitter.com/CSI_Starbase/status/1937577895137800693
This is the crane that collapsed as seen yesterday, cleaning up debris at Massey's:
Quote from: rsdavis9 on 06/24/2025 03:09 pmIs there someway they could do a quick and dirty static fire pad at masseys and continue the proper build with flame trench and other stuff?So do they have more than one mobile static fire stand that they use at massey's? I see they transported down the road with the stand with legs.Can they make an area at masseys where it could be static fired without flame trench?They still need all the fluids. LN2, LO2, LCH4, H2O.This is the kicker:"They still need all the fluids. LN2, LO2, LCH4, H2O."Regardless of the capabilities of elevating the ship, however, the commodities cannot merely consist of a collection of hoses connected to trucks parked nearby. The crab stand (i.e., the ship SF transporter) would be the optimal equipment; nonetheless, due to its substantial weight, it risks damaging the flat cement surface. The static fire pad is designed to support the weight of the test stand, those four legs, the ship, and the fuel. We have to wait for them to repair the site.
Is there someway they could do a quick and dirty static fire pad at masseys and continue the proper build with flame trench and other stuff?So do they have more than one mobile static fire stand that they use at massey's? I see they transported down the road with the stand with legs.Can they make an area at masseys where it could be static fired without flame trench?They still need all the fluids. LN2, LO2, LCH4, H2O.
Quote from: catdlr on 06/24/2025 03:18 pmQuote from: rsdavis9 on 06/24/2025 03:09 pmIs there someway they could do a quick and dirty static fire pad at masseys and continue the proper build with flame trench and other stuff?So do they have more than one mobile static fire stand that they use at massey's? I see they transported down the road with the stand with legs.Can they make an area at masseys where it could be static fired without flame trench?They still need all the fluids. LN2, LO2, LCH4, H2O.This is the kicker:"They still need all the fluids. LN2, LO2, LCH4, H2O."Regardless of the capabilities of elevating the ship, however, the commodities cannot merely consist of a collection of hoses connected to trucks parked nearby. The crab stand (i.e., the ship SF transporter) would be the optimal equipment; nonetheless, due to its substantial weight, it risks damaging the flat cement surface. The static fire pad is designed to support the weight of the test stand, those four legs, the ship, and the fuel. We have to wait for them to repair the site.Alternate option: chop the legs off of the ship static fire stand, and turn it into an 'adapter' that mounts onto the pad 1 OLM. Snake some temporary commodity lines to it (e.g. from an adapter plate on the booster QD), lift the ship onto the stand with the chopsticks (using a separate transport stand rather than rolling on the static fire stand), and fire using the 'showerhead' flame diverter. This is assuming either the pad 1 tank farm retains the ability to plumb LN2 to the prop feed lines, as it has done in the past (back when booster testing occurred entirely on the OLM with no stand at Massey's) or such a mod could be re-implemented more quickly than rebuilding Massey's.
Quote from: catdlr on 06/24/2025 08:40 pmMy apologies to the moderators; I usually do not intentionally post a LaParde video. But this is important, A crane accident has just occurred at Massey. Two cranes are working; keep your eye on the one on the right, which is visible just at the end of this video.https://twitter.com/CSI_Starbase/status/1937577895137800693Yeah... I just got a note over this, just minutes ago. Mobile crane toppled over. Emergency services were called in. And that's one more item to clean up at Massey's...
Quote from: woods170 on 06/24/2025 09:11 pmQuote from: catdlr on 06/24/2025 08:40 pmMy apologies to the moderators; I usually do not intentionally post a LaParde video. But this is important, A crane accident has just occurred at Massey. Two cranes are working; keep your eye on the one on the right, which is visible just at the end of this video.https://twitter.com/CSI_Starbase/status/1937577895137800693Yeah... I just got a note over this, just minutes ago. Mobile crane toppled over. Emergency services were called in. And that's one more item to clean up at Massey's... I hope everyone is okay. Regardless, a short stand down to review how procedures allowed for this to happen would probably be a good idea.
[...] chop the legs off of the ship static fire stand, and turn it into an 'adapter' that mounts onto the pad 1 OLM.
Quote from: edzieba on 06/25/2025 03:17 pm[...] chop the legs off of the ship static fire stand, and turn it into an 'adapter' that mounts onto the pad 1 OLM.From your lips to Elon's ears.
Quote from: sdsds on 06/26/2025 03:03 amQuote from: edzieba on 06/25/2025 03:17 pm[...] chop the legs off of the ship static fire stand, and turn it into an 'adapter' that mounts onto the pad 1 OLM.From your lips to Elon's ears."The walls have ears."
