Author Topic: Falcon 1 - Post Failure thread (Read 134916 times)

Propforce · « **Reply #80 on:** 03/25/2006 01:12 am »

Quote

DaveS - 24/3/2006 6:06 PM

I think that the Falcon's computer has been programmed to be overly sensitive and restrictive.

My other theory is that Falcon suffered what made the Delta IV Heavy partially fail on its first flight: aA LOX bubble fooling the ECO sensors and initiated an engine cut-off as it thought it was out of LOX.

WOW!! You gain all that insights from watching the SAME video as I did?

braddock · « **Reply #81 on:** 03/25/2006 01:14 am »

[Transcripted from my recording of the Press Call this afternoon, regarding use of Vandenberg for the next launch]

Q: "Just a question on vandenberg. Previously there has been talk that you may want to shift that second launch to Kwajalein. Has that now been resolved, are you definitely going to do the second launch from Vandenberg, or is there still some fuzzyness there? And secondly, about Vandenberg, there has been some talk about the Air Force concerns about using complex 3, have those concerns been resolved?

Gwynne Shotwell: "Well, I think the concerns that the 30th Space Wing have about us launching from 3 West will be resolved after we have a successful launch from Kwajalein. I had a detailed conversation with Colonel Weinstein about a month ago, and his intent is to allow Falcon 1 to launch from 3 West to a minimum until the end of its license for 3 west. After we launch from 3 West, we will be looking for an alternate site to host the Falcon 5 and 9, and once we have that alternative site we would transition from 3 west and use it for Falcon 1 launch as well.

"The discussion of moving TacSat-1 launch to Kwajalein came up probably because a lot of rumors, as opposed to substantive data, that 3 East was concerned about the particular launch. I think again that after a successful launch out of Kwaj that those concerns, that emotional response, will be decreased somewhat and we will lift TacSat off from 3 West."

[So, where will the next launch be from? Good question!]

Flightstar · « **Reply #82 on:** 03/25/2006 01:21 am »

I really can't see Vandenberg allowing launch 2 to be conducted on the Western Range until they've had a successful test flight.

R&R · « **Reply #83 on:** 03/25/2006 01:29 am »

Quote

Exci - 24/3/2006 8:11 PM

The thermal blanket wasn't around when that study was conducted

Don't get me wrong there's a lot that's not part of the Futron study. I tend to agree with what Nacnud submitted on page 4 that according to that study a blanket was likely a bad idea.

I think they have learned a hard lesson. I hope they can find the answers from this one.

R&R · « **Reply #84 on:** 03/25/2006 01:59 am »

Quote

DaveS - 25/3/2006 5:06 AM

The RSO is to determine if the vehicle is veering of out of control and if the vehicle is out of control, then activate the FTS.

Clearly the vehicle did not veer of course until after engine failure event.

Aerodynamic forces can really cause problems for control systems, excessive force on the nozzle is what drove Delta IV to put an extra skirt on one of their configurations. One could speculate that the lack of a thermal shield over the Falcon engine area above the nozzle allowed forces to prevent needed steering and the rocket went out of the flight path enough for the RSO to command the FTS.

Stowbridge · « **Reply #85 on:** 03/25/2006 02:15 am »

They'll come back from this. I'm glad everyone is working on that principle and they deserve our support.

Namechange User · « **Reply #86 on:** 03/25/2006 02:20 am »

Just watched the video for the first time but it looks live the nozzle failed and caused the Falc 1 to start tumbling.

James Lowe1 · « **Reply #87 on:** 03/25/2006 02:22 am »

Quote

Stowbridge - 24/3/2006 9:15 PM

They'll come back from this. I'm glad everyone is working on that principle and they deserve our support.

That is the only sentiment that is being expressed here, as it should be. I know I totally speak for Chris when I say that as a media site, we totally support SpaceX's mission and look forward to covering their successful attempt next time out.

James Lowe1 · « **Reply #88 on:** 03/25/2006 02:23 am »

Quote

OV-106 - 24/3/2006 9:20 PM

Just watched the video for the first time but it looks live the nozzle failed and caused the Falc 1 to start tumbling.

And a point to be made there. We're not going to speculate on the failure on the news articles until SpaceX have investigated. We have this forum for educated evaluations, but as far as the news articles, we're sticking with the basic outline for now.

gladiator1332 · « **Reply #89 on:** 03/25/2006 02:36 am »

All hell just breaks loose there around 33 secs into the video. What is the approx. velocity of the vehicle at that time? I'm just thinking it could be a combination of a weakened engine and what would happen if that blanket were to strike it?

zappafrank · « **Reply #90 on:** 03/25/2006 03:01 am »

I hope they aren't planning on using SLC-6 at Vandenberg, its cursed!

Are there any plans for SLC-6? All that retrofitting for the Shuttle, all that building for MOL, I'd not want to use it.

superstition and space launches

Damon Hill · « **Reply #91 on:** 03/25/2006 03:10 am »

Quote

zappafrank - 24/3/2006 10:01 PM

I hope they aren't planning on using SLC-6 at Vandenberg, its cursed!

Are there any plans for SLC-6? All that retrofitting for the Shuttle, all that building for MOL, I'd not want to use it.

superstition and space launches

It's been converted to launch Delta IV; there's a launch vehicle on the pad now, to be
launched RSN. Of course, Delta itself may not be around in a few years...

--Damon

zappafrank · « **Reply #92 on:** 03/25/2006 03:12 am »

I can only shudder to think of the Shuttle launching from there with spun carbon SRB's.

Had Challenger not happened, we would be talking about the Discovery accident.

gyro2020 · « **Reply #93 on:** 03/25/2006 03:14 am »

And there was me thinking I'd get home to read about the debut launch, and this happens. Wow

Looks like I've got some serious reading to do here.

(By the way, there's a lot of SLC-6 info in the historical section here, just search it and you'll see a number of specific threads that will be of interest.)

Jim · « **Reply #94 on:** 03/25/2006 05:21 am »

Quote

zappafrank - 24/3/2006 10:12 PMI can only shudder to think of the Shuttle launching from there with spun carbon SRB's.Had Challenger not happened, we would be talking about the Discovery accident.

Titan IV, Pegasus are graphite epoxy, no problems there

Jim · « **Reply #95 on:** 03/25/2006 05:22 am »

Quote

Damon Hill - 24/3/2006 10:10 PM
Quote
zappafrank - 24/3/2006 10:01 PMI hope they aren't planning on using SLC-6 at Vandenberg, its cursed!Are there any plans for SLC-6? All that retrofitting for the Shuttle, all that building for MOL, I'd not want to use it.superstition and space launches
It's been converted to launch Delta IV; there's a launch vehicle on the pad now, to belaunched RSN. Of course, Delta itself may not be around in a few years...--Damon

Says who

sammie · « **Reply #96 on:** 03/25/2006 10:03 am »

Does is sound really smug when I say that SpaceX should have kept their mouth shut about the greatest reliability ever until they have a succesfull launch.....

I do wish them the best for next try though, although I think we'd have to wait a year or so.

Crispy · « **Reply #97 on:** 03/25/2006 10:21 am »

I had my doubts about that blanket. "We're having unanticipated problem X, so we thought we'd just do untested procedure Y to fix it" - Hang on a minute, this is rocket science. It's, y'know, rocket science. Test, test, test again and then maybe maybe put it on flight hardware. In other words, I hope it was the blanket that caused the failure. If there's a deisng flaw in the actual rocket, then there's going to have to be some much more serious thinking. Fingers crossed for next time though, eh?

I wonder if they can get the satellite back?

*goes to find a spaceX email address to send a message of support*

UK Shuttle Clan · « **Reply #98 on:** 03/25/2006 10:30 am »

That's some failure. Will be interesting to read the investigation and see if it was the blanket that ended up catching the nozzel.

Spirit · « **Reply #99 on:** 03/25/2006 10:33 am »

I think that the blanket turned on the other side of the rocket, it tore apart but not at all and what was left of it continued fluttering and 1-2 secs later I saw the orange flame. I think the blanket hit the noozle or caught on fire before separation from the vehicle. Maybe the fire rised along the blanket and damaged the engine.
Of what I saw i think the vehicle rotated 90 degrees and then the video cut off.

Anybody know if there is an on-board safety system causing ECO if something caches on fire?

BTW where can I find the pricelists of the other launch vehicles owned by ILS, Sea Launch, Arianaspace...
Something like http://www.spacex.com/graphics/content_v2/Falcon%20Chart%202.gif