The new platform effectively makes it ground level when it's raised. The various camera views show dudes walking around in that space as though they were on the floor.
Don't have to put all 13 up at once. The floor is lowered and raised in a few minutes. It's not that high; there are stairs. Whether on the ground or on the platform, it's the same space in the engine bay. And it's out of the weather. Lee's list is a good one, but not, in toto, a strong case for not installing engines at the site. Up on the high bay scaffolding, not doubt about it. But the OLM? Not so much in my estimation.
It's not only the 13 Raptors, the shielding arround the inner engines and at the outside of the 20 has to be mounted too!
Quote from: TergenFlerg on 08/12/2022 11:57 am"So in good old Elon fashion, SpaceX decided "best part is no part" and went for "no water deluge is the best water deluge" -- a decision that if I remember right was commented on by Musk on Twitter too along the lines of "might have been a mistake, we shall see.."I think that comment was regarding a flame diversion trench.You are right, I misremembered.That being said, I can't remember seeing any water deluge being used on the OLM ever. Only on pad A and B. The former landing pad had one of these remote controlled fire suppression cannons.Also for real water deluge you'd need a tall tower for some head pressure and volume. I don't see any such infrastructure anywhere near the Orbital pad.. Compare with the thickness of water pipes on Pad 39A or in Vandenberg SFB.
"So in good old Elon fashion, SpaceX decided "best part is no part" and went for "no water deluge is the best water deluge" -- a decision that if I remember right was commented on by Musk on Twitter too along the lines of "might have been a mistake, we shall see.."I think that comment was regarding a flame diversion trench.
... They're not using deluge simply because they're firing one engine in a stand that's designed for 33 engines
Quote from: [email protected] on 08/13/2022 12:04 am... They're not using deluge simply because they're firing one engine in a stand that's designed for 33 enginesBut have you ever seen *any* indication of a deluge test at the Orbital Launch Mount?One of the criticisms I recall of the FAA Programmatic Environmental Assessment was that it didn't cover a deluge system and its associate retention ponds, so that if SpaceX decides one is necessary they will have to go through a lengthy process with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to get it permitted.
Have they had a mariner notice like this before for static fires? In the past I was thinking they only did this notice for the test flights? Might this indicate a larger prop load or more engines than previous static fires?Austinhttps://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=56074.msg2395916#msg2395916
Did I miss a road closure announcement? Or is that not needed anymore for a quick run between the two sites? No road closures on Fridays (and the weekends)?
Quote from: kdhilliard on 08/13/2022 01:43 amQuote from: [email protected] on 08/13/2022 12:04 am... They're not using deluge simply because they're firing one engine in a stand that's designed for 33 enginesBut have you ever seen *any* indication of a deluge test at the Orbital Launch Mount?One of the criticisms I recall of the FAA Programmatic Environmental Assessment was that it didn't cover a deluge system and its associate retention ponds, so that if SpaceX decides one is necessary they will have to go through a lengthy process with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to get it permitted.Did you see the video linked upthread a bit?
I may have missed something...Is the recent static fire of the outer ring engine the first successful use of the OLM to initiate a raptor startup?Is there a similar test rig at McGregor for this?Would it be true that outer ring engines could not be static fired at the sub-orbital pads?