Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD (1)  (Read 1541179 times)

Offline CorvusCorax

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1860
  • Germany
  • Liked: 4010
  • Likes Given: 2738
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #380 on: 09/01/2016 04:48 pm »
Maybe it should be noted that unlike the general public which is relying on rumors and large distance post-event closeups of shaky video, ...

SpaceX will have high res video stream recordings of pad camera from multiple angles, likely including thermal infrared as well as optical - as well as high res telemetry data from both pad equipment and vehicle until the initial explosion and likely well past (usually it takes a few milliseconds, sometimes seconds from the original event till full scale disassembly that stops telemetry)

Considering pad systems like fire suppression obviously kept working they'd likely have had pad equipment data well afterwards too, maybe still do.

If the part at fault was an actuator like a valve, its even possible that the sensors on this very part indicated the malfunction to operators and board computers even before the actual RUD (but too late to do anything about it)

Based on that, I think a claim by somepone at SpaceX - direct or indirect - that pad equipment were at fault - even at such an early time - would be completely credible.

They would most likely be able to tell by now (with high likelyhood) which part caused the RUD and the event chain that lead from part failure to RUD (just like they were able to tell 2nd stage oxygen tank overpressure right after CRS-7)

Finding the root cause might take longer, for that they might have to find debris of said component - be it ground or vehicle side. it's likely to be among the most affected by the fire/explosion.

But I have no doubts they already know what to look for.

Offline Chris Bergin

Dumb question but what is COPV?

http://bfy.tw/7Us0

Whoa, that freaked me out! :)

COPVs were a fun subject during Shuttle:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/?s=COPV

---

Not that there is any information this was an issue today of course.

We're all waiting for Elon to say something, like he did after CRS-7. That will likely be the first official info we get to know.
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline Wolfram66

Photos of the pad seem to show the strong back not retracted.  Can anyone tell if it looks like the cradle arms were opened?  If so, that bounds the time of the incident pretty well.

i think its possible the arms we're closed bc it looks like they were bent/pulled downward. not a for sure thing though.

or possibly the rods that connect the top section of the TEL to the rest of it deformed from the heat?

It is very possible that the TEL was deformed by the heat of the fire. Having worked on offshore drilling rigs, i have seen the aftermath of blowouts and fires. The effects of fire on the 3/4 inch thick steel of the derrick is amazing. bent and twisted like taffy. :o :-\

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Flames-engulf-Mexico-oil-platform-in-Gulf-6173928.php
« Last Edit: 09/01/2016 04:57 pm by Wolfram66 »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #383 on: 09/01/2016 04:53 pm »
including thermal infrared


Not used on RP-1 vehicles

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8566
  • Liked: 3603
  • Likes Given: 327
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #384 on: 09/01/2016 04:56 pm »
I'm stating outright that the root cause here is the ISS and Orbital.  It seems Murphy doesn't want all the cargo resuppliers operational at the same time.

That has to be it.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #385 on: 09/01/2016 04:58 pm »
..

SpaceX will have high res video stream recordings of pad camera from multiple angles,


Don't know that

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2587
  • Likes Given: 2895
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #386 on: 09/01/2016 04:59 pm »
Well, at least we know it wasn't the rocket engines.  This took place before firing.  I've heard there were multiple explosions? 

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8566
  • Likes Given: 1356
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #387 on: 09/01/2016 05:02 pm »
Well, at least we know it wasn't the rocket engines.  This took place before firing.  I've heard there were multiple explosions? 
One big explosion, followed by a big fire and a series of secondary explosions.  Typical of a fire where multiple pressure vessels are present.

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 09/01/2016 05:05 pm by edkyle99 »

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #388 on: 09/01/2016 05:03 pm »
No, this is not correct, the supposed ex-employee source on reddit denies that. They state:

I'm not exactly allowed to reveal sources. It'll still be months before things settle down, but it was definitely a pad issue.

Look it may be baloney, we can't say anything for sure, that's why it's a rumour.

Part of me hopes that it's something that is easy to fix. But if it's easy to fix, people will ask "why wasn't it detected?". The COPV would be bad news as it could imply that SpaceX is unable to fix that issue.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10351
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2431
  • Likes Given: 13606
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #389 on: 09/01/2016 05:04 pm »
If this is a pad failure then procedures are a likely culprit. Inadequate inspections, checks, etc?

If the root cause is traced to a procedural issue, that would goes a long way toward showing why rapid launch cadence is difficult to achieve. So many things have to happen in such rapid succession and in exactly the right order and with exactly the right timing, or else *BOOM*. The answer for why ULA can't launch faster than they do is not just that "old aerospace" is inefficient.
I see you are new. Welcome to the site.

Keep in mind that "fast launch cadence" in rocket terms is nothing like the fast cadence of say an F1 pit crew, or an ER team with a patient. It's usually more a question of having something to launch, IE payloads in the pipeline on a regular basis.

It's a weak data point but the DC-X team were ready to re-launch 8 hrs after a previous launch. It was simply the range crew that wanted to go home that delayed it to the following day. While a smaller vehicle (and non orbital) it could be (and often is) argued that LH2 is a much less forgiving fuel to handle than RP1.

AFAIK the usual concern with ELV companies is slow cadence, like the time between launches of SLS for example, where there is a real risk several staff will die or retire between one launch and the next. Nothing keeps a team sharp than the chance to regularly practice their skills in a live environment.
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10348
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 729
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #390 on: 09/01/2016 05:07 pm »
Well, at least we know it wasn't the rocket engines.  This took place before firing.  I've heard there were multiple explosions? 
One big explosion, followed by a big fire and a series of secondary explosions.  Typical of a fire where multiple pressure vessels are present.

 - Ed Kyle


Yes, best pics I've just found so far...
http://www.wesh.com/news/explosion-reported-at-cape-canaveral/41467356
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant..." --Isoroku Yamamoto

Offline rsdavis9

Given that booster passed in McGregor.
Then transported to ksc.
Nothing happened to booster during transit.
Then the gse is the only variable.

P.s. also 2nd stage.
With ELV best efficiency was the paradigm. The new paradigm is reusable, good enough, and commonality of design.
Same engines. Design once. Same vehicle. Design once. Reusable. Build once.

Offline OnWithTheShow

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 349
  • Philadelphia, PA
  • Liked: 153
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #392 on: 09/01/2016 05:08 pm »
Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk  29s30 seconds ago
Loss of Falcon vehicle today during propellant fill operation. Originated around upper stage oxygen tank. Cause still unknown. More soon.

Offline Kosmos2001

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 191
  • CAT
  • Liked: 66
  • Likes Given: 172
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #393 on: 09/01/2016 05:09 pm »
Originated around upper stage oxygen tank.

Hmm...

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8520
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3543
  • Likes Given: 759
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #394 on: 09/01/2016 05:10 pm »
Given that booster passed in McGregor.
Then transported to ksc.
Nothing happened to booster during transit.
Then the gse is the only variable.

"Given that this lightbulb worked the last time I turned on the lights, it must work this time as well"

See the problem in that kind of reasoning?

Offline Joaosg

LV related cause :( This means all flights grounded and no immediate cause found. Was hopping for a pad fault that couldn't happen at Vanderberg.

Offline yatpay

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 129
  • Greenbelt, MD
  • Liked: 201
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #396 on: 09/01/2016 05:12 pm »
LV related cause :( This means all flights grounded and no immediate cause found. Was hopping for a pad fault that couldn't happen at Vanderberg.

No one said it was LV related. Elon just said "around upper stage oxygen tank". Could still be GSE.
========
I make a bi-weekly NASA human spaceflight history podcast called The Space Above Us. Covering every flight from Freedom 7 to STS-135 in order. Check it out on iTunes, Google Play, or at http://thespaceabove.us

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10351
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2431
  • Likes Given: 13606
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #397 on: 09/01/2016 05:12 pm »
Part of me hopes that it's something that is easy to fix. But if it's easy to fix, people will ask "why wasn't it detected?".
True.
Quote
The COPV would be bad news as it could imply that SpaceX is unable to fix that issue.
Just to be clear IIRC it was not the COPV in the LOX tank but the struts holding them that failed and (eventually) caused the COPV's to fail.

Historically COPV's have been pretty reliable components. They have (relatively) generous safety margins for space structures. They should be minimized not because of the danger but the paperwork  they generate to show they've been tested and inspected. IIRC the ones on the SSME's last the life of each orbiter without replacement, roughly 30 flights each.
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline cebri

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 245
  • Spain
  • Liked: 291
  • Likes Given: 181
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #398 on: 09/01/2016 05:13 pm »
Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk  29s30 seconds ago
Loss of Falcon vehicle today during propellant fill operation. Originated around upper stage oxygen tank. Cause still unknown. More soon.

Well if there is a problem with the rocket... 2 major failures in 14 months... is going to be grounded for a while.
"It's kind of amazing that a window of opportunity is open for life to beyond Earth, and we don't know how long this window is gonna be open" Elon Musk
"If you want to see an endangered species, get up and look in the mirror." John Young

Offline JDTractorGuy

  • Member
  • Posts: 86
  • Hello there.
  • Liked: 104
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD
« Reply #399 on: 09/01/2016 05:15 pm »
Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk  29s30 seconds ago
Loss of Falcon vehicle today during propellant fill operation. Originated around upper stage oxygen tank. Cause still unknown. More soon.

Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but what could cause an explosion around that tank?

Tags:
 

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