Author Topic: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION  (Read 460176 times)

Online Eer

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 627
  • Liked: 470
  • Likes Given: 915
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1160 on: 01/16/2024 01:44 pm »
Did I miss the explanation why the booster had the RUD?

I don't believe he (Elon) mentioned it in his remarks ...
From "The Rhetoric of Interstellar Flight", by Paul Gilster, March 10, 2011: Well build a future in space one dogged step at a time, and when asked how long humanity will struggle before reaching the stars, well respond, As long as it takes.

Online wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5428
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 3118
  • Likes Given: 3878
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1161 on: 01/16/2024 02:11 pm »
Did I miss the explanation why the booster had the RUD?

I don't believe he (Elon) mentioned it in his remarks ...

You noticed that too.

The information on the ship's problem is interesting but seems incomplete and not a word about the booster.  Hopefully it was just a problem with the sequence and timing. 

Still seemed conveniently left out of the conversation.
Wildly optimistic prediction, Superheavy recovery on IFT-4 or IFT-5 (Welp a little early on IFT-4, but still have a shot at 5)

Offline litton4

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 601
  • Liked: 398
  • Likes Given: 149
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1162 on: 01/16/2024 03:13 pm »
Is there any news about possibly getting footage of IFT-2 from the WB-57?

I'm sure there was one there for the flight?
Dave Condliffe

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14179
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14059
  • Likes Given: 1392
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1163 on: 01/17/2024 05:12 am »


Did I miss the explanation why the booster had the RUD?

I don't believe he (Elon) mentioned it in his remarks ...

You noticed that too.

The information on the ship's problem is interesting but seems incomplete and not a word about the booster.  Hopefully it was just a problem with the sequence and timing. 

Still seemed conveniently left out of the conversation.

Conspiracy much?

The booster was pretty obvious, the way the engines were sputtering after the very aggressive flip over.

The ship was a complete mystery. Was.

"conveniently left out" my a$$.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline frogamazog

  • Member
  • Posts: 80
  • Durham, NC
  • Liked: 129
  • Likes Given: 277
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1164 on: 01/17/2024 12:51 pm »

The booster was pretty obvious, the way the engines were sputtering after the very aggressive flip over.


I'm not sure that I would call it "obvious", and I would love to have more details from those with a world of extra telemetry. I think that the booster failure is a lot less interesting regardless. The booster succeeded in its primary mission, and failed its secondary. The ship failed its primary mission.

And before folks rip into me, yes I understand that reuse is really also a 'primary' mission for the starship system, given its aspirations, but its important to remember that as soon as they can get that beast to orbit and and back out of orbit, regardless of the fate of the components, then the system can start paying for itself with Starlink launches. I think Elon and SpaceX are just implicitly coming from a place where the booster failure wasn't that important.

Online steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2218
  • Liked: 2808
  • Likes Given: 967
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1165 on: 01/17/2024 11:02 pm »
I think Elon and SpaceX are just implicitly coming from a place where the booster failure wasn't that important.
This makes a lot of sense. They are the only organisation in the world with experience of developing a reusable orbital booster like this, and may well have learned that a lot of it is simply trying things to see if they work. If that's the case then they'll just be expecting to lose a lot of SuperHeavy boosters while they figure it out.

Online edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6144
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9393
  • Likes Given: 39
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1166 on: 01/18/2024 02:44 pm »
To double back to the 'LOX dump caused a fire' topic again: S28 has acquired some new LOX dump ports that pick up directly from the aft dome and dump straight into the engine bay. I wonder if those will be reworked prior to IFT-3, or left in place in favour of schedule and an alternative mitigation measure used (e.g. dumping during coast, performing multiple opposing burns to use up prop with minimal velocity change, minimising excess LOX load in the first place, etc).

Offline ppb

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 188
  • San Francisco Bay Area
  • Liked: 202
  • Likes Given: 159
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1167 on: 01/18/2024 03:10 pm »
Since we don't know what actually burned or exploded, or how the vent figured in to that, it's premature to conclude that venting is to be avoided going forward.

Elon specifically mentioned that the vented oxygen caused a fire and then an explosion. That's how the vent figured into that.

And taking the booster as an example regarding leaks, it's reasonable to infer a massive cloud of oxidizer would eventually combust with something.
I'm a bit confused (as usual). How can there be a "cloud"? This all occurred in a near vacuum, so the vented molecules should have been ballistic or nearly so. I would think that fire and explosion implies a closed space, but why would they vent into a closed space?

Not only that, but a high acceleration as well.  My take is that the venting didn't point outwards, and the ignition source was very close to the vent point.  Possibly right on the rim of the vent port?

Agree that the ignition source must have been close to the vent. Given the near vacuum external environment, that  plume would have quickly dispersed and could not have collected in any entrained low pressure pockets because air pressure is extremely low everywhere around the rocket.

Online InterestedEngineer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2332
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 1816
  • Likes Given: 2957
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1168 on: 02/08/2024 05:09 pm »
So why did they cut the staging out of the WB-57 video?

https://twitter.com/nasaspaceflight/status/1755636732005872066

Offline alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1542
  • Liked: 1601
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1169 on: 02/08/2024 06:38 pm »
Some of those views show missing tiles quite well.

Offline ChrisC

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2222
  • Liked: 1566
  • Likes Given: 1753
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1170 on: 02/09/2024 02:58 am »
So why did they cut the staging out of the WB-57 video?

Yeah, WTF?  Pesky ITAR again?  I got all good and ready to scrutinize the staging and then poof.
PSA #1: EST does NOT mean "Eastern Time".  Use "Eastern" or "ET" instead, all year round, and avoid this common error.  Google "EST vs EDT".
PSA #2: It's and its: know the difference and quietly impress grammar pedants.  Google "angry flower its" .  *** See profile for two more NSF forum tips. ***

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8148
  • Liked: 6808
  • Likes Given: 2965
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1171 on: 02/09/2024 11:24 am »
So why did they cut the staging out of the WB-57 video?

Yeah, WTF?  Pesky ITAR again?  I got all good and ready to scrutinize the staging and then poof.

In this case it's more likely that that SpaceX considers data about hot staging on Starship proprietary, so NASA won't release it - either due to contractual obligations or simple goodwill.

Offline eriblo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1385
  • Sweden
  • Liked: 1684
  • Likes Given: 271
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1172 on: 02/09/2024 12:16 pm »
So why did they cut the staging out of the WB-57 video?

Yeah, WTF?  Pesky ITAR again?  I got all good and ready to scrutinize the staging and then poof.

In this case it's more likely that that SpaceX considers data about hot staging on Starship proprietary, so NASA won't release it - either due to contractual obligations or simple goodwill.
https://twitter.com/therealsheep5/status/1755649409264521250

Offline Kspbutitscursed

I have been speculating about S25's RUD i belive that there was an explosion in the skirt of the Ship that could have obliterated ships engine skirt, due to the loss of thrust the FTS activated and delt with the rest of the ship i think thats an explanation and i'd like to hear your thoughts about this.
I attempt to fly in ksp
WEN OFT-4                 #Wen Booster 12/13 engines installation

Offline Vettedrmr

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1503
  • Hot Springs, AR
  • Liked: 2078
  • Likes Given: 3199
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1174 on: 02/26/2024 12:09 am »
I have been speculating about S25's RUD i belive that there was an explosion in the skirt of the Ship that could have obliterated ships engine skirt, due to the loss of thrust the FTS activated and delt with the rest of the ship i think thats an explanation and i'd like to hear your thoughts about this.

So you don't believe Elon's explanation.
Aviation/space enthusiast, retired control system SW engineer, doesn't know anything!

Offline Kspbutitscursed

I have been speculating about S25's RUD i belive that there was an explosion in the skirt of the Ship that could have obliterated ships engine skirt, due to the loss of thrust the FTS activated and delt with the rest of the ship i think thats an explanation and i'd like to hear your thoughts about this.

So you don't believe Elon's explanation.
I do, i should have elaborated that agree with elons explanation i am speculating what hapened with the ship after the Lox dump.
Maybe there was a fire in the skirt because Elon said that there was an explosion
There was a explosion in the spacex stream
A few seconds before the video shows the explosion the telemetry based diagram showed all 6 engines shutdown clearly something significant happened, the ships speed began decreasing then it stopped signaling FTS and loss of vehicle
thats why i said an explosion in the engne skirt


well i was partially correct, There was several explosions in the engine skirt before the engines were shutdown
« Last Edit: 03/03/2024 09:25 pm by Kspbutitscursed »
I attempt to fly in ksp
WEN OFT-4                 #Wen Booster 12/13 engines installation

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48460
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 82188
  • Likes Given: 37086
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1176 on: 03/02/2024 11:56 am »

Offline ChrisC

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2222
  • Liked: 1566
  • Likes Given: 1753
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1177 on: 03/08/2024 03:41 am »
https://twitter.com/jdeshetler/status/1765817741703806993

Hey, uhhhh, that pitch/yaw wobble that starts at 0m27s into that video* -- I don't think we've ever talked about that before.  Wind shear?  It looks like it was executing the roll program at that point, so maybe a control algorithm problem?  Or both.   (*the video embedded in the tweet above, not the Youtube link)
« Last Edit: 03/08/2024 03:43 am by ChrisC »
PSA #1: EST does NOT mean "Eastern Time".  Use "Eastern" or "ET" instead, all year round, and avoid this common error.  Google "EST vs EDT".
PSA #2: It's and its: know the difference and quietly impress grammar pedants.  Google "angry flower its" .  *** See profile for two more NSF forum tips. ***

Online edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6144
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9393
  • Likes Given: 39
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1178 on: 03/08/2024 09:31 am »
https://twitter.com/jdeshetler/status/1765817741703806993

Hey, uhhhh, that pitch/yaw wobble that starts at 0m27s into that video* -- I don't think we've ever talked about that before.  Wind shear?  It looks like it was executing the roll program at that point, so maybe a control algorithm problem?  Or both.   (*the video embedded in the tweet above, not the Youtube link)
Note the timebase at the bottom (from from 2x to 12x speed). That just looks like regular steering during the roll programme. You can probably pick any other rocket launch with a long duration ground track, and if you speed it up you will also see a 'wobble' as it steers.

Offline Vettedrmr

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1503
  • Hot Springs, AR
  • Liked: 2078
  • Likes Given: 3199
Re: SpaceX Starship IFT-2 : Starbase TX : 18 Nov 2023 DISCUSSION
« Reply #1179 on: 03/08/2024 12:39 pm »
Hey, uhhhh, that pitch/yaw wobble that starts at 0m27s into that video*

It's a video artifact.  No other video shows it.
Aviation/space enthusiast, retired control system SW engineer, doesn't know anything!

Tags: Pictures 
 

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