Author Topic: Falcon 1 - Post Failure thread (Read 134928 times)

Tap-Sa · « **Reply #180 on:** 03/26/2006 01:10 pm »

Quote

hyper_snyper - 26/3/2006 2:38 AM
I wonder if he meant the second stage or some portion of it with FalconSat-2 still inside.

There probably wouldn't be any machine shop left if the entire second stage would have crashed into it. A few tons of LOX/RP-1 would have torched it good.

braddock · « **Reply #181 on:** 03/26/2006 01:19 pm »

It somehow wouldn't surprise me at all if SpaceX took the damaged payload, sent it over to the Air Force academy to patch it up, and tried again with it on the house. They are going to have some delaying issues with their next TacSat-1 payload launch anyway; I have an article in the works.

Jim · « **Reply #182 on:** 03/26/2006 02:52 pm »

Quote

braddock - 26/3/2006 4:46 AMCan anyone tell me about the expected nature of the formal US Government anomaly investigation that SpaceX announced last night? Is it standard practice for a formal government investigation of any government-customer launch failure?

Gov't paid for the flight, they get to find out why they get there money's worth. But it depends on the contract for the launch service. All NASA and Air Force missions do it. HyperX did it. I don't know DARPA's policy.

Jim · « **Reply #183 on:** 03/26/2006 02:54 pm »

Quote

Super George - 25/3/2006 9:14 PM
Quote
lmike - 25/3/2006 9:02 PMActually from the onboard SpaceX video it does look like a rupture in plumbing (the flameout about 90 deg sideways) (if the nozzle didn't get burned through)
From the video, it's got the appearance of a rupture.

It could be an artifact of the engine shutdown sequence.

InfraNut · « **Reply #184 on:** 03/26/2006 03:47 pm »

I wonder how the crash looked from the pad crew's perspective, about 2.5 miles away? I would really love some pictures or video...

FYI: The 4 person "Read Team" pad crew retreats 10 minutes by boat to the nearby "Meck" island just before launch -- as this launch proved again, it is smart to put some distance between yourself and a launching rocket. (I guess there will be just 2 or 3 persons later when launches become "routine").

Congratulations SpaceX:

So much accomplishment already -- such a pity that a near-complete success looks so much like a disastrous failure -- but that is just the way this business is.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #185 on:** 03/26/2006 04:00 pm »

Quote

InfraNut - 26/3/2006 3:47 PM

I wonder how the crash looked from the pad crew's perspective, about 2.5 miles away? I would really love some pictures or video...

That video is on its way, I'm told. Will update if we get a specific time of publication.

Tap-Sa · « **Reply #186 on:** 03/26/2006 04:26 pm »

Quote

InfraNut - 26/3/2006 5:47 PM
such a pity that a near-complete success looks so much like a disastrous failure

At least in my books an actual launch attempt, even if it ends in failure, scores orders of magnitude higher than all the paper/powerpoint/CGI/gum flapping&mockups rocket concepts in the world put together. Hats off to SpaceX and better luck next time!

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #187 on:** 03/26/2006 06:33 pm »

Latest: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?id=4395

Just adding this image of when the engine let go, so as to be entered into the new article...

ericr · « **Reply #188 on:** 03/26/2006 08:35 pm »

Would someone please translate the phrase "when the engine let go" for those of us with little or no knowledge of the industry?

Tap-Sa · « **Reply #189 on:** 03/26/2006 10:00 pm »

I believe Chris refers to the exact moment when the Merlin engine appears to fail; sudden change in trajectory and the distinct bright flame. During normal operation all engine exhausts point 'downwards' ie. directly away from the flight camera, that's why you don't see much of it until the engine lets go. The fact that you do see a big flame shooting sideways denotes that something has gone very wrong. It is possible that the flame is part of nominal engine shutdown sequence, but even then the shutdown itself means failure occurred.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #190 on:** 03/26/2006 10:50 pm »

Quote

ericr - 26/3/2006 8:35 PM

Would someone please translate the phrase "when the engine let go" for those of us with little or no knowledge of the industry?

Sorry Eric...what Tap_Sa said

ericr · « **Reply #191 on:** 03/27/2006 02:22 am »

OK thanks, and it's cool to be with the inside crowd now! Now I know that "when the engine let go" means "when the engine let go"! LOL!

Sorry for trying to read more into it. At least I got a good laugh at myself!

mikejz · « **Reply #192 on:** 03/27/2006 04:42 am »

I wonder if the flame is a byproduct of the RP-1 fire and the engine shutdown----that the lack of thrust changed the airflow above the engine and caused the RP-1 fire to flare up.

James (Lockheed) · « **Reply #193 on:** 03/27/2006 05:20 am »

Quote

mikejz - 26/3/2006 10:42 PM

I wonder if the flame is a byproduct of the RP-1 fire and the engine shutdown----that the lack of thrust changed the airflow above the engine and caused the RP-1 fire to flare up.

Possible, although I believe it occured simply too fast for that to be the case. I think we're seeing a critical failure and then a shutdown.

Avron · « **Reply #194 on:** 03/27/2006 06:03 am »

Quote

James (Lockheed) - 27/3/2006 12:20 AM

Quote
mikejz - 26/3/2006 10:42 PM

I wonder if the flame is a byproduct of the RP-1 fire and the engine shutdown----that the lack of thrust changed the airflow above the engine and caused the RP-1 fire to flare up.

Possible, although I believe it occured simply too fast for that to be the case. I think we're seeing a critical failure and then a shutdown.

Looks like the vehice has stopped climbing, engine is shutting down, zero trust and its has rotated to a nose down attitude around the centre of gravity (launch phase is vertical), and all we are seeing is the airflow blowing the last flames of the engine in shutdown mode in the opposite direction to the vehicle rotation..

Avron · « **Reply #195 on:** 03/27/2006 06:05 am »

Quote

braddock - 26/3/2006 8:19 AM

It somehow wouldn't surprise me at all if SpaceX took the damaged payload, sent it over to the Air Force academy to patch it up, and tried again with it on the house. They are going to have some delaying issues with their next TacSat-1 payload launch anyway; I have an article in the works.

That would be superb.. payload for the next test launch..

UK Shuttle Clan · « **Reply #196 on:** 03/27/2006 08:29 am »

Quote

Avron - 27/3/2006 12:03 AM

Quote
James (Lockheed) - 27/3/2006 12:20 AM

Quote
mikejz - 26/3/2006 10:42 PM

I wonder if the flame is a byproduct of the RP-1 fire and the engine shutdown----that the lack of thrust changed the airflow above the engine and caused the RP-1 fire to flare up.

Possible, although I believe it occured simply too fast for that to be the case. I think we're seeing a critical failure and then a shutdown.

Looks like the vehice has stopped climbing, engine is shutting down, zero trust and its has rotated to a nose down attitude around the centre of gravity (launch phase is vertical), and all we are seeing is the airflow blowing the last flames of the engine in shutdown mode in the opposite direction to the vehicle rotation..

All that in the space of a few milliseconds? (if we are taking about the sudden change of the flame to a plume).

Kaitsu. · « **Reply #197 on:** 03/27/2006 04:42 pm »

Merlin was fired several times on the pad before the flight. Could the several shut downs of the engine have caused pressure hammering in some part of the korosene lines. In the beginning of the flight these parts ruptured and caused a leak. Only a small damage in some gasket would be enough to cause a leak and a fire.

Soviet moon rocket N1 was once restroyed because of such hammering after engine shut down.

But one mishap in the space business is nothing to be worried about. It's no disaster at all. If they foud only one single thing that have to be corrected, it fullfills the meaning of a test flight.

Davie OPF · « **Reply #198 on:** 03/27/2006 09:39 pm »

The next key stage will be when they reveal how much of the Falcon's first stage they have managed to recover. That will be key to the cause.

astrobrian · « **Reply #199 on:** 03/27/2006 10:50 pm »

Has there been any word on the recovery of the craft yet? From what I can tell as long as it survived the impact on the water without any explosion, it should be very much intact for determining the cause.