Great article Chris, really rooting for SpaceX on this one.Regarding the April 2014 abort, what are they going to do to the Falcon 9 once they abort, are they going to carry on to orbit with a secondary payload, or are they going to have the RSO destruct the vehicle?
Quote from: guckyfan on 01/10/2013 05:23 pmThanks for the article.About rupture of the fuel dome. Is there newly released evidence for that happening? It was speculated as one possible reason for the engine failure but there were others like rupture of a fuel line.OT, but my guess is that the rate of pressure fall is indicative - too large perhaps to what can be attributed to a fuel line.
Thanks for the article.About rupture of the fuel dome. Is there newly released evidence for that happening? It was speculated as one possible reason for the engine failure but there were others like rupture of a fuel line.
We used to launch astronauts on ICBMs. Just sayin'.EDIT:Actually, we still do. The R7 family started as an ICBM.
Quote from: Orbiter on 01/10/2013 08:05 pmGreat article Chris, really rooting for SpaceX on this one.Regarding the April 2014 abort, what are they going to do to the Falcon 9 once they abort, are they going to carry on to orbit with a secondary payload, or are they going to have the RSO destruct the vehicle?They'll fly it back to the pad, of course.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 01/10/2013 07:59 pmWe used to launch astronauts on ICBMs. Just sayin'.EDIT:Actually, we still do. The R7 family started as an ICBM.Yeah, though really, a modern Soyuz launcher has about as much to do with the original R-7 as an Atlas V has to do with an Atlas D.Still though, the Titan IIs that Gemini used were only minimally modified from the ones in the silo with h-bombs.
Quote from: Orbiter on 01/10/2013 08:05 pmGreat article Chris, really rooting for SpaceX on this one.Regarding the April 2014 abort, what are they going to do to the Falcon 9 once they abort, are they going to carry on to orbit with a secondary payload, or are they going to have the RSO destruct the vehicle?I doubt that any payload atop the second stage nestled inside the trunk barrel would survive a transonic abort because of the dynamic pressure. Air would rush into the trunk barrel after the capsule separates and almost certainly destroy any satellite residing there.As for first stage RTLS, the transonic abort would occur at a significantly lower altitude than upper stage separation on the nominal flight trajectory. I doubt that the first stage structure would survive the flip to retrograde at that altitude. They need to get the first stage up and out of the sensible atmosphere to do the boost-back maneuver. And they can't just keep burning the stage because they need to demonstrate first stage shutdown as part of the abort demonstration.I see no obvious alternative to a pure abort demo with no secondary payload and no stage recovery.
Instead of shutting down all Merlins could they just throttle the centre engine to minimum while the Dragon clears the core and then recover the 1st stage. I expect it will involve a bit of persuading NASA that it won't affect the certification of the Dragon LAS.
Can F9 launch on half a tank?
Regarding the April 2014 abort, what are they going to do to the Falcon 9 once they abort, are they going to carry on to orbit with a secondary payload, or are they going to have the RSO destruct the vehicle?
As the 1st stage wouldn't be reaching its intended altitude and speed, would the 1st stage have to launch half empty as it wouldn't have enough time to expend the fuel through the centre engine in time?Can F9 launch on half a tank?
Nice article Chris. Thanks for keeping us in the loop.One question - What do you mean when you write the Dragon is 'partially crew-rated' ? Components may be "crew-rated", but the vehicle either is or isn't.I'm just a systems / ops person, and easily confused. Help me out here.