LIVE: SpaceX Falcon 1 Launch 5 (RazakSat) - July 13/14

[thomson]

Congratulations, SpaceX!

I've seen the webcast (replay actually, it was around 4am in Europe) and there seems to be kind of outburst at T+0:0:33. What is that?

Theoretical question: if RazakSAT was damaged during launch (e.g. due to excessive vibrations), will SpaceX get paid? During other commercial launches (by other companies, of course), was there a case when payload was delivered, but somehow damaged during delivery? How such case was dealt with?

Don't get me wrong. I wish SpaceX the very best. I just want to make sure that this indeed is a complete success, no a 99% almost-success It's almost to good to be true.

[ugordan]

I've seen the webcast (replay actually, it was around 4am in Europe) and there seems to be kind of outburst at T+0:0:33. What is that?

Vehicle punching through a cloud layer.

[wannamoonbase]

Congrats to SpaceX.  I hope this helps land more paying payloads.

I'm looking forward to the first Falcon 9 attempt.  They have learned lots on Falcon 1.  However, Falcon 9 is going to be a different animal.  Some similarities but no where near proven.

[Jim]

Pretty cool video...I'm of the opinion NASA needs to hang a few more cameras on their vehicles, including shuttle. 

Not always feasible on existing vehicles.

[Jim]

It didn't seem to wobble any more than on flight 4.  Does it really wobble more than other launch vehicles, or does SpaceX simply give us a better view of the wobbling than other launch providers?

Yes and no

[Ben the Space Brit]

Pretty cool video...I'm of the opinion NASA needs to hang a few more cameras on their vehicles, including shuttle. 

Not always feasible on existing vehicles.

I have to say that it was difficult to work out where the camera was and what it was showing on the LRO/LCROSS launch (the continual LOS didn't help).  Where is the camera on the Atlas-V-401?

Back on the subject, was it me or was the usual slick SpaceX PR machine absent for this launch? The webcast seems to have been squeezed out at the last moment and cut off very abruptly.  Has Elon reduced the marketing budget or is their usual Director of Marketing on vacation so he couldn't supervise the troops?

[Jim]

I have to say that it was difficult to work out where the camera was and what it was showing on the LRO/LCROSS launch (the continual LOS didn't help).  Where is the camera on the Atlas-V-401?

There were two, one aft facing and one forward facing

[ugordan]

It didn't seem to wobble any more than on flight 4.  Does it really wobble more than other launch vehicles, or does SpaceX simply give us a better view of the wobbling than other launch providers?

Yes and no

I'll expand on this with a question: how many other liquid upper stages of this small size have had onboard cameras (AND a high T/W so any movement of the nozzle translates into a significant torque) to clearly show their attitude stability instead of wiggles on telemetry graphs?

[Jim]

It didn't seem to wobble any more than on flight 4.  Does it really wobble more than other launch vehicles, or does SpaceX simply give us a better view of the wobbling than other launch providers?

Yes and no

I'll expand on this with a question: how many other liquid upper stages of this small size have had onboard cameras (AND a high T/W so any movement of the nozzle translates into a significant torque) to clearly show their attitude stability instead of wiggles on telemetry graphs?

T/W is not a consideration.  Movement is movement.

[mwfair]

and there is nothing hidden by wiggles on a graph.

[Ben the Space Brit]

@ Jim

Let's look at this from a slightly different perspective.  I don't think anyone doubts that Falcon-1 wiggles around during MECO, first stage jettison and second stage engine ignition and even noticably at SECO.  The important question is how important is this?

1) Has it or could it impact on the successful deployment of a payload?

2) Is it a safety hazard (either to the payload or to people down-range)?

3) As Falcon-9 is using Merlin engines too, could these motions 'scale up' to the larger launcher and be more violent?

[eeergo]

I have to say that it was difficult to work out where the camera was and what it was showing on the LRO/LCROSS launch (the continual LOS didn't help).  Where is the camera on the Atlas-V-401?

To expand a bit on this over what Jim has already answered, I'd say the downward-facing camera was at the top of the first stage "copper" cylinder, where it meets the white cone connecting the different diameters. The upward facing camera is a bit more problematic to locate, but IIRC the retrograde separation motors were quite low in the first stage, and they could be seen firing from the views this camera provided. So it was probably somewhere on the kerosene tank surface, perhaps housed in a feedline fairing?

BTW, I wasn't able to watch the launch yesterday live (way too late for us in Europe, even though it's summertime ), so I'd like to thank everyone who contributed for giving me the chance to relive the excitement. Great job, SpaceX, looking forward to the recoverable Falcon 1!

[pippin]

1) yes, as seen on F1-2
2) like any other loss of control. That's what range safety is for.
3) Of course they could. Or they could cancel each other out. We will see. I'd generally say the more mass you've got the more inertia you've got so any motions would really have to sync up to make things worse.

[madscientist197]

Theoretical question: if RazakSAT was damaged during launch (e.g. due to excessive vibrations), will SpaceX get paid? During other commercial launches (by other companies, of course), was there a case when payload was delivered, but somehow damaged during delivery? How such case was dealt with?

It would probably be covered by insurance. However, if the payload wasn't designed for known launch conditions (e.g. vibro-acoustics) then they might not get a payout.

[Ben the Space Brit]

1) yes, as seen on F1-2

I imagine the 'wiggle' was a lot worse on flight 2.  Has this problem been mitigated at all since then or has SpaceX just been a lot luckier?

[Jim]

@ Jim

Let's look at this from a slightly different perspective.  I don't think anyone doubts that Falcon-1 wiggles around during MECO, first stage jettison and second stage engine ignition and even noticably at SECO.  The important question is how important is this?

If it were a max payload mission, it have implications.  The performance is lost with this wiggles

[ugordan]

T/W is not a consideration.  Movement is movement.

Would an engine accelerating the stage at say 3 G produce the same torque (and so attitude rate per unit of guidance reaction time) as an engine producing 0.3 G, with all other things considered constant - moment arm, stage mass, deflection angle, etc.?

[ChrisC]

A great team deals with issues, a poor team stands around and watches helplessly as the s/c dies.  We might know if a few days or weeks some of those details...

Just an excerpt ... Great post jimvela, thanks!

[Nate_Trost]

As far as I can tell, the F1 second stage only seems to use the Kestrel for adjustment during second stage burns and not any secondary thrusters. Is this relatively unique and contributes to the apparent control response issues? How does the F1 second stage flight response compare to a LV with a solid upperstage motor?

[robertross]

Went back and read through many of the posts post launch.

Congrats SpaceX...great way to prove to the Augustine Commission, and the world in general that you are making progress and can get them into orbit.

And if those in charge read this, it's obvious a bit more PR on launch day would go a long way in helping your cause. Always lots of publicity on hardware and future plans, but your audience needs you all the way to orbit.

There were a bunch of folks here turning blue for news on separation, and I agree it was nail biting time.