It seems strange that swing arm repair would be enough to “indefinitely” delay the launch. I suspect this is the public story, but that there also are other (more serious) problems they are fixing at the same time that are the *real* long poles for the delay. But this is only my speculation.
Maybe they have long wait time for the legacy spare parts.
Quote from: Lars-J on 10/17/2020 07:54 amIt seems strange that swing arm repair would be enough to “indefinitely” delay the launch. I suspect this is the public story, but that there also are other (more serious) problems they are fixing at the same time that are the *real* long poles for the delay. But this is only my speculation.I won't go down the conspiracy theory route, but I'd guess ULA's major pitch of "reliable, on-time access to space" over The Competitor kind of got back at them and they want no more embarrassing aborts or holds with this launch.I guess the upshot of all of this is, if you really want "reliable, on-time access to space", then Fly Atlas (TM).
Space Force official: Launch scrubs are no reason to despairQuote from: SpacenewsA streak of United Launch Alliance and SpaceX launch scrubs has frustrated rocket company executives and space aficionados. But Space Force launch managers are not discouraged, and in fact see scrubs as proof that systems are working like they should, Col. Douglas Pentecost said Oct. 22.
A streak of United Launch Alliance and SpaceX launch scrubs has frustrated rocket company executives and space aficionados. But Space Force launch managers are not discouraged, and in fact see scrubs as proof that systems are working like they should, Col. Douglas Pentecost said Oct. 22.
A way to go yet:https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1321199132514652162QuoteStill working through the swing arm hydraulics. Drained 2000 gallons of oil, will be flushing for a few days, then replacing lots of servos.
Still working through the swing arm hydraulics. Drained 2000 gallons of oil, will be flushing for a few days, then replacing lots of servos.
So what was all that $$$ each year for launch assurance for?
That is the effect of poor maintenance practices and potentially a poor circuit design.It's bad enough to have to flush a live system (as opposed to a newly installed one), but to replace a number of servos?1) Obviously no pressure filtration for each servo (valve)2) Potentially no 'kidney loop' oil circulation system3) Likely no sampling regiment implemented to monitor for contamination (water, dirt, etc.).
Quote from: RyanC on 10/27/2020 10:37 pmSo what was all that $$$ each year for launch assurance for?It's become embarrassingly obvious that it was never spent on pad maintenance.
Note that they had a full year to fix this. The previous launch was last August. Given they are doing a full refresh now, that means they did not save any money, held up a launch, and aggrevated an important customer, all for nothing. Or worse than nothing - it surely costs *more* now since it has to be done in a hurry, and it's a hit to their reputation. What clearly happened is that they tried to save money by delaying or deferring maintenance on the hydraulic system. However a closer look, after they tried and failed to use it during the launch campaign, revealed systemic problems that needed to be fixed. There is certainly nothing wrong with saving money by deferring maintenance on a system that's working OK and unlikely to fail when you need it. We all (at least I do) make that judgement all the time, on a car, a house, or our health. But on something important, this requires a firm line of reasoning, and likely a detailed inspection, to make sure you are not asking for trouble. So either they skipped the detailed inspection, or the inspection failed to reveal serious existing problems. Either alternative looks unprofessional, something I've never seen from ULA before.
I doubt if somebody just said "Skip the maintenance since it's going away in a few years anyhow" It's more likely they just used a schedule meant for an active system, and not one that sat around unused for a year at a time. The whole thing probably should have been run through it's paces every two months just to keep things circulating.
FWIW, Tory himself claimed only a 30% staff reduction during his recent Space Show interview.
Quote“We never like to have a launch vehicle and a satellite sitting so long,” Bongiovi said. “But we need to make sure we launch when we’re ready,” he said. The priority is to “make sure this launch is successful.”
“We never like to have a launch vehicle and a satellite sitting so long,” Bongiovi said. “But we need to make sure we launch when we’re ready,” he said. The priority is to “make sure this launch is successful.”
Quote from: su27k on 11/20/2020 04:19 amQuote“We never like to have a launch vehicle and a satellite sitting so long,” Bongiovi said. “But we need to make sure we launch when we’re ready,” he said. The priority is to “make sure this launch is successful.”If CCAFS assigns the DIVH a building number, that's a concern.ISTR wry jokes about this sort of thing back in the Titan IV years.