Author Topic: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19  (Read 73815 times)

Offline Cretan126

  • Pointy end up? Check.
  • Member
  • Posts: 94
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #140 on: 12/20/2005 02:32 am »
Well, I think this confirms it:  liquids suck! :o The case for using solid rocket motors for reliable, responsive, high performance launch vehicles was made 40+ years ago in the development of ICBMs.  The only reason the early missiles were liquid (V2 through Titan) was because the technology to manufacture large solid rockets wasn't mature enough.  That hurdle was passed in the 60's.  The only problem is, now - through acquisition and merger - ATK has a virtual monopoly on solid rocket motors in the US.  And they are not what most people would consider a 'low cost supplier'.  

ut astrum per firmus!

Offline Terrible Twosome

  • Member
  • Member
  • Posts: 41
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #141 on: 12/20/2005 02:45 am »
I was going to say that solids are not what I'd call safe, but I think a lot of people like myself can't help but to think about Challenger. And cause nothing has gone wrong since, and they are going to be key for the VSE, I guess you have a good point!

Offline SRBseparama

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 273
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #142 on: 12/20/2005 04:11 am »
Damn. Quick question. Where is the LOX tank on the rocket on the 1st stage? Top or bottom?

Offline Sergi Manstov

  • NSF Russian Editor
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #143 on: 12/20/2005 04:16 am »
Unfortunate for SpaceX. That reads like a very serious problem if it's the tank out of shape. If they wish to fly at 100 per cent, they need a new certified tank, or complete repair of this tank, otherwise they would be a contradiction.

Offline Dobbins

  • Propellerhead
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 688
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #144 on: 12/20/2005 05:20 am »
Solids are too dirty. As long as the launch rates are low enough for the environment to absorb the pollution a solid rocket emits you can get away with using them, much like you could get away with no emission controls on automobiles before use of them became common. In the long term you are going to have to have something greener, LOX and LH2 or a hydrocarbon like RP or Methane.

John B. Dobbins

Offline braddock

  • NSF Private Space Flight Editor
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 991
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 8
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #145 on: 12/20/2005 10:33 am »
Imagine the horrified faces in control if the tank deformation was severe enough to be visible on the video...
I can't think how else they would have identified a "structural issue"...does anyone with more experience know if they would have seen other indications first?
Would they be likely to have strain sensors installed?

If they had seen vaccuum on a pressure sensor in the tank I would think they could have stopped the pumps in time?  Seems to me that current to the pump would be out of spec too as it started straining?  Are these things normally instrumented and monitored?

REMINDER: We'll be sending some reader submitted questions to SpaceX's VP of Development Ops to answer via e-mail.  Ask your questions at: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=1051&start=1

Offline Rocket Nut

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 280
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 1
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #146 on: 12/20/2005 10:55 am »
It's interesting to me that this happened just after Boeing had to postpone their Pluto mission because of a potentially faulty fuel tank.  The Pluto mission has a very serious time constraint.

Personally, I am going to find it interesting to see how the media treats each delay.  I hope the Falcon effort doesn't get get singled out by the press.  That could have a negative effect on future payloads and financial support.

After the push to merge the Atlas and Delta programs, we need an independent competitor.

Regards,

Larry

Offline UK Shuttle Clan

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 243
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #147 on: 12/20/2005 12:48 pm »
Leaks and valves. You need to be a plumber for this job ;)

Offline Mark Max Q

  • Going Supersonic
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1185
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 15
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #148 on: 12/20/2005 02:35 pm »
If it had split the tank, they'd really be having to look at starting over.

Offline Launch Fan

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1317
  • Liked: 59
  • Likes Given: 44
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #149 on: 12/20/2005 03:59 pm »
Quote
braddock - 20/12/2005  5:33 AM

Imagine the horrified faces in control if the tank deformation was severe enough to be visible on the video...
I can't think how else they would have identified a "structural issue"...does anyone with more experience know if they would have seen other indications first?
Would they be likely to have strain sensors installed?

If they had seen vaccuum on a pressure sensor in the tank I would think they could have stopped the pumps in time?  Seems to me that current to the pump would be out of spec too as it started straining?  Are these things normally instrumented and monitored?

REMINDER: We'll be sending some reader submitted questions to SpaceX's VP of Development Ops to answer via e-mail.  Ask your questions at: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=1051&start=1

Wow, they could see it mis-shaping on their monitors?? Could it have blown up if it had gone too far?

Offline braddock

  • NSF Private Space Flight Editor
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 991
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 8
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #150 on: 12/20/2005 04:30 pm »
Quote
Launch Fan - 20/12/2005  11:59 AM

Quote
braddock - 20/12/2005  5:33 AM

Imagine the horrified faces in control if the tank deformation was severe enough to be visible on the video...
I can't think how else they would have identified a "structural issue"...does anyone with more experience know if they would have seen other indications first?
Would they be likely to have strain sensors installed?


Wow, they could see it mis-shaping on their monitors?? Could it have blown up if it had gone too far?

No no, to be clear, I don't KNOW that they could see the deformation.  Note the "if" in there.  I was wondering if they could, or if they had other indications of the problem.  I was wondering if anyone more experienced could shed some light on how they could tell they had "structural issues".


Offline tommy

  • Member
  • Posts: 80
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #151 on: 12/20/2005 06:54 pm »
Well, I suppose all we can do now is to wait on what it looks like in the hanger. I wonder if we'll get a jump with the Q and A.

Offline lmike

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 860
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #152 on: 12/21/2005 09:38 am »
Great reportage.  Too bad they had a glitch, but it takes stamina and leadership from the flight director to abort a launch (there is a natural launch 'rush').  And it sounds like it was a sound decision here.  They *are* learning fast.  When in (such a large) doubt -- stop, investigate and fix.  Plenty of 'major' rockets sat on the pad fixing problems.  For years.  Plenty didn't... and blew up.  Experience accumulates, though.  We'll (and prospective investors) wait till January.  No biggie.  This just confirms to me that SpaceX are serious about what they are doing.

Offline Rocket Ronnie

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 176
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #153 on: 12/21/2005 11:53 am »
I think that's the important part of the scrubbing of a launch. They had a potentially disasterous situation where the rocket could have blown up on the pad, but they spotted it, aborted the countdown and now get a chance to go again next month.

Offline Cretan126

  • Pointy end up? Check.
  • Member
  • Posts: 94
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #154 on: 12/21/2005 05:13 pm »
Solid rocket motors seem to have an undeserved reputation for being unsafe.  There are definately hazards in the manufacturing processes - that's why they are built in remote locations.  However, once completed and handled properly (i.e. diligence about static electricity) they are much safer than liquids.  Remember that although the SRB o-ring was the root cause of the Challenger disaster, it was its proximity to the external (liquid propellant) tank that caused the big boom - the solids kept right on flying.  Also, note that the military overwhelmingly use solids when they are in close proximity to personnel (on planes, ships, and trucks).  

Liquids have their strengths, such as the ability to be throttled, stopped/started, etc., but I wouldn't put safety high on the list.

Offline publiusr

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1539
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 2
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #155 on: 12/21/2005 07:15 pm »
Musk would not have had the Lox problem. Rumor has it that Musk ignored a plea from MSFC's Sackheim to have better Lox infrastructure. I would have liked to have seen Musk build the big AJ-260 solid in Korea. It would have been a "widebody Stick" and the upper stage could be liquid--and look less like a German Hand Grenade. I understand Atlas V might have some tankage problems as well--at least in tests--according to Florida Today.

Offline braddock

  • NSF Private Space Flight Editor
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 991
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 8
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #156 on: 12/21/2005 10:44 pm »
Quote
publiusr - 21/12/2005  3:15 PM

Musk would not have had the Lox problem. Rumor has it that Musk ignored a plea from MSFC's Sackheim to have better Lox infrastructure. I would have liked to have seen Musk build the big AJ-260 solid in Korea. It would have been a "widebody Stick" and the upper stage could be liquid--and look less like a German Hand Grenade. I understand Atlas V might have some tankage problems as well--at least in tests--according to Florida Today.

What is the connection between the AJ-260, Korea, and SpaceX?  I can't find anything, although the AJ-260 program is fascinating.  I always wonder how many of the NASA program decisions are due to geo-politics.  We truck and fly the shuttle parts all over the country...that sure can't help the schedules or costs.  A monolithic AJ-260 program sounds fantastic, but it only wins a vote from the gentlemen from Florida.  :)

Offline Avron

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4930
  • Liked: 156
  • Likes Given: 160
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #157 on: 12/22/2005 03:35 am »
Quote
braddock - 20/12/2005  12:30 PM

Quote
Launch Fan - 20/12/2005  11:59 AM

Quote
braddock - 20/12/2005  5:33 AM

Imagine the horrified faces in control if the tank deformation was severe enough to be visible on the video...
I can't think how else they would have identified a "structural issue"...does anyone with more experience know if they would have seen other indications first?
Would they be likely to have strain sensors installed?


Wow, they could see it mis-shaping on their monitors?? Could it have blown up if it had gone too far?

No no, to be clear, I don't KNOW that they could see the deformation.  Note the "if" in there.  I was wondering if they could, or if they had other indications of the problem.  I was wondering if anyone more experienced could shed some light on how they could tell they had "structural issues".



I would guess that the pressure plot vs tank strain gauges said a lot... when viewed against fuel flow...

Offline Jamie Young

  • This custom rank is currently being decided on
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1327
  • Denver
  • Liked: 52
  • Likes Given: 151
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #158 on: 12/27/2005 05:51 pm »
Any new news on the new launch date, or the status of the tank?

Offline publiusr

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1539
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 2
RE: SCRUB: SpaceX Falcon 1, Launch Dec 19
« Reply #159 on: 12/29/2005 07:48 pm »
Quote
braddock - 21/12/2005  5:44 PM

Quote
publiusr - 21/12/2005  3:15 PM

Musk would not have had the Lox problem. Rumor has it that Musk ignored a plea from MSFC's Sackheim to have better Lox infrastructure. I would have liked to have seen Musk build the big AJ-260 solid in Korea. It would have been a "widebody Stick" and the upper stage could be liquid--and look less like a German Hand Grenade. I understand Atlas V might have some tankage problems as well--at least in tests--according to Florida Today.

What is the connection between the AJ-260, Korea, and SpaceX?  I can't find anything, although the AJ-260 program is fascinating.  I always wonder how many of the NASA program decisions are due to geo-politics.  We truck and fly the shuttle parts all over the country...that sure can't help the schedules or costs.  A monolithic AJ-260 program sounds fantastic, but it only wins a vote from the gentlemen from Florida.  :)

No connection--just an example of what I would have done had I Musk's money.

Tags:
 

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