FAILURE: SpaceX Falcon I Launch III - August 2

[Seattle Dave]

Some rolling back and forth on first stage.

FAILED!!

Wow, very sad news. Now we wait for the delay to flight 4.

[Chris Bergin]

Ok, we're working on the video. Will be on our video section (free, but need to be logged in) asap.

[EE Scott]

It does seem that they need to try again as quickly as prudently possible, this time with a simple demosat that would confirm correct orbit insertion.  If there is a wait as long as last time until next launch, well I just don't see that as possible.

More test flights, please.

[Dalon]

Hearing loss during sep. 

We must have been viewing on a 30 second delay.

[Ronsmytheiii]

It does seem that they need to try again as quickly as prudently possible, this time with a simple demosat that would confirm correct orbit insertion.  If there is a wait as long as last time until next launch, well I just don't see that as possible.

More test flights, please.

No they need to be conservative and figure out the problem, not shoot rockets off like fireworks.

[Chris Bergin]

Hearing loss during sep. 

We must have been viewing on a 30 second delay.

Now this is where we all need to be careful. Where are you hearing this?

[Oberon_Command]

Hearing loss during sep. 

That's just a telemetry loss, correct? So it DID get to staging?

[JonSBerndt]

...
They need to fail and fail and fail until they fix this thing. No more .gov payloads... No more student projects... No more anything. They need to build and launch build and launch. That is how the best aircraft engines ever made were built to last.. They were run and run and run until they fell apart...

I read this somewhere recently and thought it was relevant enough to save:

"It's amazing how NASA took charge of itself in those days. We had pure, raw leadership, incredibly talented and capable people, and by November, ten months later, we were launching our first all-up Saturn V, a very gutsy move by George [E.] Mueller to conduct what was called "the all-up testing," and this was every time you fly you're going to test everything. You're going to test all three stages of the booster. You're going to test the spacecraft. You're going to test inside the spacecraft, the guidance and navigation controls. There is no test that will not be a complete entity.
The obvious advantage of this was, if you're successful, you're buying yourself time on the schedule. If you see a bunch of problems, you've got time to fix them, but if you're unsuccessful, you've got a whole bunch of space hardware that's reduced to junk. So it's a go-for-broke kind of approach that he kicked off that really paid off and, I think, was the real key in getting to the Moon."

I hope they have a lot of good telemetry.

They'll get it right eventually.

JB

[bodge]

Hearing loss during sep. 

We must have been viewing on a 30 second delay.

Now this is where we all need to be careful. Where are you hearing this?

If you rewatch the video you'll notice that the crowd in the background begins to cheer roughly 30 seconds prior to the video cutout. Immediately after the background noise goes silent and the video presses on til the cut out. This seems to support the delay if you assume the crowd noise cut-out corresponds to the 'oh no!' that was actually occurring as we watched the final 30 seconds of flight.

Not proof, but just some supporting evidence that the anomaly may have occurred right around the next major event the crowd was cheering for (MECO / sep)

[EE Scott]

It does seem that they need to try again as quickly as prudently possible, this time with a simple demosat that would confirm correct orbit insertion.  If there is a wait as long as last time until next launch, well I just don't see that as possible.

More test flights, please.

No they need to be conservative and figure out the problem, not shoot rockets off like fireworks.

Viable and credible programs need to work off of real-world data that can only come from launch, fix, launch, fix, etc.... until real reliability comes.  Look at all the rockets that were blown up in the 50s and 60s -- that's just part of the journey.  No more paying customers' sats until they verify their design.

[jimvela]

Yeah, I want the announcers to sit there and think of something to say, that is their job.

Then you are wrong.  Knowing why the vehicle was lost is going to take a WHOLE lot of review.  There's telemetry from before and after launch, a physical inspection of the launch pad, reviews of closeout photos and documentation, procedures, tons of things.

Some knucklhead on the internet wondering aloud what might've gone wrong is one thing (e.g. ME).  The commentators talking out their backsides without all the facts is another.

The best thing the commentators could possibly do is to say that it appears to have been a serious launch anomaly, that they will provide more detail when it is known, and then sign off.  If they'd heard for certain that the vehicle was destroyed, then add that.

Pretty much anything beyond that at the moment of loss will only work against them and their company.

[Dalon]

Hearing loss during sep. 

We must have been viewing on a 30 second delay.

Now this is where we all need to be careful. Where are you hearing this?

A source of totally unknown reliability.

Take it with the largest possible grain of salt.

[Chris Bergin]

Hearing loss during sep. 

We must have been viewing on a 30 second delay.

Now this is where we all need to be careful. Where are you hearing this?

If you rewatch the video you'll notice that the crowd in the background begins to cheer roughly 30 seconds prior to the video cutout. Immediately after the background noise goes silent and the video presses on til the cut out. This seems to support the delay if you assume the crowd noise cut-out corresponds to the 'oh no!' that was actually occurring as we watched the final 30 seconds of flight.

Not proof, but just some supporting evidence that the anomaly may have occurred right around the next major event the crowd was cheering for (MECO / sep)

Understood, but let's worth on information, rather than assumption (which isn't a bad thing - just needs to be tagged as such - rather than "I hear that" - which suggests a source etc.

[Zachstar]

http://kwajrockets.blogspot.com/2008/08/rocket-is-lost.html

Rocket is lost.........

[Jim]

Just about everyone but Nasa do less than SpaceX did.

Not everyone, Not ULA (Atlas and Delta), not OSC, not Ariancespace.  Only Spacex and Sealaunch

[Dalon]

Just about everyone but Nasa do less than SpaceX did.

Not everyone, Not ULA (Atlas and Delta), not OSC, not Ariancespace.  Only Spacex and Sealaunch

I've seen the Russians cut video, I've seen ESA cut as well.

[EE Scott]

Sorry for the basic/stupid question, but does SpaceX use active explosive devices on their LVs or do they just let it run out of fuel and crash.

[jimvela]

Sorry for the basic/stupid question, but does SpaceX use active explosive devices on their LVs or do they just let it run out of fuel and crash.

Thrust termination on F1.  In other words, shut down and fall to your doom.  No explosive termination systems in the F1.

[EE Scott]

Sorry for the basic/stupid question, but does SpaceX use active explosive devices on their LVs or do they just let it run out of fuel and crash.

Thrust termination on F1.  In other words, shut down and fall to your doom.  No explosive termination systems in the F1.

Thanks for clarifying that for me.

[JonSBerndt]

Thinking about it some more ... any kind of oscillation would be bad at sep. I wonder if they took out the stage 2 nozzle this time? Pointless speculation, I know. Time will tell.

JB