SpaceX: Falcon 9 Hotfire Updates

[ugordan]

Keep an eye on http://kscwmserv1.ksc.nasa.gov/ae%20video%20channel%201 it's beentargeted at SLC-40 (thanks to whoever it was).

[psloss]

FWIW, in the Shuttle/Station briefing, Kirk Shireman said the hot fire would be at 12 pm Central...

[DaveS]

FWIW, in the Shuttle/Station briefing, Kirk Shireman said the hot fire would be at 12 pm Central...

Which is 1 pm EST.

[HammerD]

FWIW, in the Shuttle/Station briefing, Kirk Shireman said the hot fire would be at 12 pm Central...

Which is 1 pm EST.

Nice! If the test is successful when is the earliest they could launch?

Seems like it's taking ages for them to get this off the ground...

[Avron]

Something just vented or fired

[TrueBlueWitt]

Are there any potential weather constraints for a Hot Fire? 

Looks dark on the video.. what's the weather like at the Cape?

[docmordrid]

FWIW, in the Shuttle/Station briefing, Kirk Shireman said the hot fire would be at 12 pm Central...

Which is 1 pm EST.

Which goes with SpaceFlight Now's update -

1522 GMT (10:22 a.m. EST)
Safety officials are establishing road blocks around Complex 40 as fueling is about to begin for the Falcon 9's static fire, which remains scheduled for around 1 p.m. EST.

[StuffOfInterest]

Are there any potential weather constraints for a Hot Fire? 

Looks dark on the video.. what's the weather like at the Cape?

I think the darkness is just a light saturation issue on that one particular camera.  It has been getting darker as the morning progresses.  If you view the still image captures here, it looks like a bright and sunny (although slightly hazy) day at the pad.

[ugordan]

Looks like an overcast sky, but there shouldn't be rain until tonight IIRC.

[TrueBlueWitt]

When should tanking start? 

Will we be able to tell?  Venting/Ice?

[Ben the Space Brit]

When should tanking start? 

Will we be able to tell?  Venting/Ice?

I imagine that, when the LOX is loaded, the vehicle will start 'breathing' boiled-off GOX much in the same way the Delta-IV (or is it the Atlas-V? ) does.

[PahTo]

Keep an eye on http://kscwmserv1.ksc.nasa.gov/ae%20video%20channel%201 it's beentargeted at SLC-40 (thanks to whoever it was).

Thanks for posting this link, ugordan!

[Robson68]

Is it definitely scheduled for 1pm EST (6PM GMT)?

[usn_skwerl]

Is it definitely scheduled for 1pm EST (6PM GMT)?

So far, yep. But if something does change, you'll find out on this thread.

[StuffOfInterest]

I just noticed water droplets on a couple of the KSC webcams.  Hopefully a lite shower is not considered an issue for fueling the rocket.

[ugordan]

If I didn't know better, I'd say the 2nd stage is now venting GOX. There are hints of change in the static webcam images.

[jabe]

spaceflightnow says fueling has begun....

[docmordrid]

SFN is reporting the time has been moved to 1:30 PM

[ugordan]

1st stage now venting as well.

[Norm Hartnett]

Anyone know when the last time a totally new rocket of this size was test fired at the Cape?

[stockman]

1st stage now venting as well.

good eyes... certainly hard to see on the long range shot...

[dmc6960]

Anyone know when the last time a totally new rocket of this size was test fired at the Cape?

Lookup Atlas V and Delta IV.

-Jim

[ugordan]

certainly hard to see on the long range shot...

While they were setting up this shot and setting camera parameters, there was a digital 2x zoom tried out, this looks like max. optical zoom. The 2x zoom wouldn't provide actual new details in the camera, but would help with this downsized web stream.

[Jim]

Anyone know when the last time a totally new rocket of this size was test fired at the Cape?

Lookup Atlas V and Delta IV.

Not Atlas V

[ugordan]

Spaceflightnow now has a live stream of the closer-in camera: http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/status.html

[stockman]

much more noticable now

[ugordan]

While they were setting up this shot and setting camera parameters, there was a digital 2x zoom tried out, this looks like max. optical zoom. The 2x zoom wouldn't provide actual new details in the camera, but would help with this downsized web stream.

Looks like someone might be reading this thread

[stockman]

While they were setting up this shot and setting camera parameters, there was a digital 2x zoom tried out, this looks like max. optical zoom. The 2x zoom wouldn't provide actual new details in the camera, but would help with this downsized web stream.

Looks like someone might be reading this thread

lol.. yea,, a bit better on this feed...

sadly the best closeup is the KSC webcams -

[zeke01]

While they were setting up this shot and setting camera parameters, there was a digital 2x zoom tried out, this looks like max. optical zoom. The 2x zoom wouldn't provide actual new details in the camera, but would help with this downsized web stream.

Looks like someone might be reading this thread

Yeah.  Can you brighten up a little more, too?  You had it pretty good there, but dimmed it back down...

zeke

[PahTo]

Any updates on time for fire, or is 13:30EST still the target?

[ugordan]

Anyone able to record the SFN feed?

[rdale]

A few sprinkles were on radar earlier - but looking dry now. Don't freak if you look at radar - there are a LOT of forest fires across FL and the smoke is showing up.

Any updates on time for fire, or is 13:30EST still the target?

When there is an update someone here knows of, it'll be posted here.

[ugordan]

A note that if the venting suddenly stops, that happens about 40 or so seconds before T-0 to pressurize the tanks so it would be an early sign the count is below 1 minute and ignition is near.

[stockman]

A note that if the venting suddenly stops, that happens about 40 or so seconds before T-0 to pressurize the tanks so it would be an early sign the count is below 1 minute and ignition is near.

Thank you... thats a good point...

so far still venting.. About 9 minutes to go if the test is still on for 1:30

[HammerD]

Is there any audio on the spaceflightnow video stream? It would be nice to have some commentary and/or hear the engine firing sounds...

[StuffOfInterest]

The KSC stream is starting to have stall and rebuffer problems for me now.  Too many people coming in, I guess.  Can't get the SpaceflightNow stream from my office.

[braddock]

Is there any audio on the spaceflightnow video stream? It would be nice to have some commentary and/or hear the engine firing sounds...

I think this IS the commentary...

[stockman]

[ugordan]

The KSC stream is starting to have stall and rebuffer problems for me now. 

Me too. Pity as that's the one I'm able to record.

[bad_astra]

its been stalling for me off and on, but it does come right back up. Plume is still visible

[FinalFrontier]

Almost 3500 viewers on the NSF forum at the moment... probably bogging things down a bit as well.

That's the SFN stream.

What time is the hotfire expected to take place? Have been busy the past few days.

[jimvela]

no ignition at the scheduled time

[HammerD]

no ignition at the scheduled time

Why what happened?? 

[Halidon]

Have yet to see venting stop

[jimvela]

no ignition at the scheduled time

Why what happened?? 

That's why you test- to shake out the systems.

[DavisSTS]

The KSC stream is starting to have stall and rebuffer problems for me now.  Too many people coming in, I guess.  Can't get the SpaceflightNow stream from my office.

No one will soon. SFN's parent company here in the UK is going bust.

[usn_skwerl]

It's rocket science. 

[JMS]

The venting never stopped indicating final seq...apparently a hold of somekind.

[Lars_J]

Water pumped into flame trench???

[FinalFrontier]

no ignition at the scheduled time

Appears to be in a hold. Watch to see if vapor dissappears as this would be a sign of a scrub (detanking).

[Lars_J]

Looks like water and/or white smoke in the flame trench... Purging gases?

[ugordan]

Water pumped into flame trench???

Looks like pad deluge was also active, but the venting never stopped.

[Cog_in_the_machine]

no ignition at the scheduled time

Appears to be in a hold. Watch to see if vapor dissappears as this would be a sign of a scrub (detanking).

No. Vapor stopping means it's about 1 minute until ignition.

[stockman]

Looks like water and/or white smoke in the flame trench... Purging gases?

for reference the white smoke being referenced is circled in red...

[zerm]

Water pumped into flame trench???

Looks like pad deluge was also active, but the venting never stopped.

Looked more like some sort of cryo dump.

[Lars_J]

Venting stopped, close now!

[Lars_J]

Ignition!

[Verio Fryar]

Ignition!!!

[Lars_J]

Hmmm very short.... Venting has resumed.

[Lee Jay]

There was just a short puff of flames from the base of the rocket.

[StuffOfInterest]

D***.  Didn't see a thing on the KSC live stream.

[braddock]

Did they set something on fire?

[PahTo]

Wow, now THAT was an attempt, and did y'all notice the fire burning up the side of the booster after shotdown??

[Lars_J]

It certainly seemed less than 3 seconds... But perhaps not.

[ugordan]

This didn't look good, the 1st stage vented immediately at ignition, looked like an abort.

[PahTo]

er, shUtdown...

[HarryM]

Yeah, that didn't look right.

[stockman]

getting quite smokey now...

Crap - I thought this was more of the venting.. Missed the test completely!!  damn...

[Herb Schaltegger]

That did not appear to be a full 3.5 second test, but the video streams aren't very detailed; it also appeared as if the venting started again before the flames died away.

[Mark S]

Yeah, saw that flame, certainly not 3.5 seconds worth of ignition unless they have some way of hiding the smoke.

[HammerD]

Yeah, that didn't look right.

It looked like 1/2 a second...but I did see fire!

[Harold KSC]

SFN don't know what's going on either. "A flash of fire and smoke was just observed at the base of the Falcon 9 rocket, possibly indicating ignition"

[Herb Schaltegger]

And there is definite scorching around the base of the vehicle nearest to the SFN webcam.

[Robson68]

was that it?

[PahTo]

This didn't look good, the 1st stage vented immediately at ignition, looked like an abort.

Concur--I believe an abort.  Too bad no audio.  Hopefully the SpaceX folks learned from this, and the next one (and the first flight) work to plan!  Rocket science indeed...

[braddock]

Yes, there seems to be a vertical scorch mark on the base, about where I saw a lick of flame.  I don't see it in the earlier posted frames, but the quality is pretty bad to say for sure.

[ugordan]

Definitely not a full 3.5 s burn, that would blow the flame trench exit clean out.

[Mike_1179]

If you remember the Falcon 1 launches, the RP-1 was too cold due to the common bulkhead with the LOX tank inside the first stage.  This cold RP-1 hit performance slightly and they aborted just after ignition.  They were able to pump out the RP-1 and then re-tank with the now slightly warmer fuel.  After that, the Falcon 1 launched. 

I know it has a common bulkhead for RP-1 and LOX, could something similar happen here?

[Mark S]

Well, at least it didn't blow up on the pad.  Something was clearly amiss though.

[marshallsplace]

Yes, there seems to be a vertical scorch mark on the base, about where I saw a lick of flame.  I don't see it in the earlier posted frames, but the quality is pretty bad to say for sure.

[kraisee]

Looks like water and/or white smoke in the flame trench... Purging gases?

for reference the white smoke being referenced is circled in red...

If you look closely at the clear pictures now, you'll see there is a big tube there -- this side of the propellant tank (actually quite a way away from it, but the camera angle doesn't show that).

That big tube is one of the main exhaust channels designed to take flame & smoke away from the Pad safely at launch.   Seeing smoke from there is to be fully expected in such a test.

In fact, I would have expected to see a lot more.

Ross.

[NYC777]

If the rocket is still venting are they going to try another hot fire attempt?

[Oberon_Command]

Is it possible that this was a planned abort, maybe to test the abort systems? If I were launching a rocket, I would want to know that I could abort the whole thing if something went wrong prior to liftoff.

[stockman]

heres a before and after - you can see the scorching being talked about

[kraisee]

Security aircraft and helicopters seem to be heading back to Patrick now, which tells me this test is over for today.
Ross.

[ugordan]

Never mind the scorch marks, Delta IV chars like a barbecue, as long as there was no damage done to the vehicle. What struck me was that immediately at abort the stage vented, but the 2nd stage appeared to hold flight pressurization for quite some time. And that black smoke from the base of the rocket...

[Robson68]

Maybe why they left that shoddy paint job

Yes, there seems to be a vertical scorch mark on the base, about where I saw a lick of flame.  I don't see it in the earlier posted frames, but the quality is pretty bad to say for sure.

[FinalFrontier]

er, shUtdown...

"There was no confirmation that the engines fired for the expected 3.5 seconds."
Computer aborted ignition sequence. Why is the question............I see more delays.....

[Norm Hartnett]

heres a before and after - you can see the scorching being talked about

Nice bit of work there stockman, thanks.

Now we wait for the press conference/news release.

[Ben the Space Brit]

"There was no confirmation that the engines fired for the expected 3.5 seconds."

Computer aborted ignition sequence. Why is the question............I see more delays.....

There could be a thousand and one reasons. 

Technical question: Is it possible to detect combustion instability these days? I know that it can cause an engine to blow up so it is a good reason for a hard stop.

Another would be abnormal vibration in the turbo impellers (loose turbine blades).

[kraisee]

I am of the opinion that today's test has at least confirmed one excellent fact:   That their abort systems are working and that their vehicle isn't likely to blow up on the pad due to difficulties during the ignition sequence.

That your abort systems work exactly as they are supposed to, is very valuable piece of knowledge to have under your belt early in such a program.

They will learn why this happened, go fix it, and try again soon enough.

Ross.

[ugordan]

There are 3 areas where F9 vents GOX, the one in the middle of the interstage, is that connected to MVac? If so, would it still be venting if this is a wrap for today?

EDIT: 3, not two areas...

[bad_astra]

Any data they get that doesn't destroy the vehicle is good data. It's why you test.

[Robson68]

what happens now, do they empty and reset?

Will it be a few days for a re-test?

[Andy USA]

Now we wait for the press conference/news release.

Press conference? They didn't even webcast the so-called testfire!

[Ben the Space Brit]

There are 2 areas where F9 vents GOX, the one in the middle of the interstage, is that connected to MVac? If so, would it still be venting if this is a wrap for today?

I would imagine that the vents would remain open so long as there is LOX in the tanks, just for safety reasons.  They don't want GOX pooling in the tanks and staying there after de-tanking.  With this in mind, the venting will continue until the tank is empty.

[ugordan]

There are 2 areas where F9 vents GOX, the one in the middle of the interstage, is that connected to MVac? If so, would it still be venting if this is a wrap for today?

I would imagine that the vents would remain open so long as there is LOX in the tanks, just for safety reasons.  They don't want GOX pooling in the tanks and staying there after de-tanking.  With this in mind, the venting will continue until the tank is empty.

I edited my post above to correct the number of vents I'm seeing, it's 3. In addition to the two stage vents, there's an additional small one both in F1 and F9.

[mmeijeri]

Any opinions on the scorch marks? Are they really scorch marks, or just soot or maybe charred cork? Recent opinion seemed to be that the cork had been stripped off before the test.

[kevin-rf]

Did SpaceX do similar short duration hotfire tests in Texas, and do we have video of these tests to compare to?

I am not convince it was a "total" failure. The proof will be in a SpaceX press release if it was a success, or lack of one if it was less than 100%.

Also remember they managed to quick turn the Falcon 1 on a pad abort, launching in the same window. If this was an abortive hotfire, maybe they will try again.

[FinalFrontier]

Hmm....sounds like it may have just been that the abort critera in the computer were a little strict. Perhaps a minor piece of data triggered the abort.

[Ben the Space Brit]

Any opinions on the scorch marks? Are they really scorch marks, or just soot or maybe charred cork? Recent opinion seemed to be that the cork had been stripped off before the test.

I don't know, of course, but my guess that it is soot from the flame as the gas generators discharged.  There is possibly some thermal damage to the surface of the TPS but nothing more than that.

[Norm Hartnett]

Now we wait for the press conference/news release.

Press conference? They didn't even webcast the so-called testfire!

Well it didn't blow up so they have something positive to say. We will see.

[psloss]

Anybody got a short video clip of the terminal sequence they can post?

[ugordan]

The shutdown on Merlins causes a lot of soot and black smoke. What I'm wondering about is how come the pad deluge wasn't working then, it looks as though it was activated too early. The fire on the engine fairing looked scary.

[HarryM]

Did SpaceX do similar short duration hotfire tests in Texas, and do we have video of these tests to compare to?

I am not convince it was a "total" failure. The proof will be in a SpaceX press release if it was a success, or lack of one if it was less than 100%.

Also remember they managed to quick turn the Falcon 1 on a pad abort, launching in the same window. If this was an abortive hotfire, maybe they will try again.

[dmc6960]

Here is a slightly choppy video of test.  May be smoother than some people saw on the live stream though. (The KSC stream that is).

[Norm Hartnett]

Is it possible to guess whether they are contemplating a second attempt based on the current venting? I believe they have the range until 3:00PM

[psloss]

Here is a slightly choppy video of test.  May be smoother than some people saw on the live stream though. (The KSC stream that is).

Thanks.

[ugordan]

The smoke was generated by gas generator fuel burning off (since this ignites before other parts of the engine). It was black becasue it was fuel (rp1) rich. The main jet (combustion chamber) did not ignite.

Can you please stop making these statements as a matter-of-fact when you have no supporting evidence.

[JMS]

SFN calling scrub.

[bad_astra]

The smoke was generated by gas generator fuel burning off (since this ignites before other parts of the engine). It was black becasue it was fuel (rp1) rich. The main jet (combustion chamber) did not ignite.

Can you please stop making these statements as a matter-of-fact when you have no supporting evidence.

There was never main ignition. It looks pretty obvious.

[FinalFrontier]

Is it possible to guess whether they are contemplating a second attempt based on the current venting? I believe they have the range until 3:00PM

If it was a minor issue then yes. If it was a bad sensor, as minor as that is, then no as the sensor must be replaced. If it was more serious, such as a turbopump drive failure or start failure, then no. Regardless, unless they can attempt again today or in the next week and a half this will result in a good sized slip in the launch date. Probably end of April. Not sure if the first COTS flight will occur this year.

[ugordan]

There was never main ignition. It looks pretty obvious.

Define "main ignition" and on what do you base that statement? It certainly didn't achieve significant thrust, but to say the chambers never ignited is lacking in evidence. What set that fireball on fire then? As per Tim Buzza, the combustion chamber is the first to light.

[ugordan]

There was no ignition.

That doesn't constitute as proof.

[Norm Hartnett]

Is it possible to guess whether they are contemplating a second attempt based on the current venting? I believe they have the range until 3:00PM

If it was a minor issue then yes. If it was a bad sensor, as minor as that is, then no as the sensor must be replaced. If it was more serious, such as a turbopump drive failure or start failure, then no. Regardless, unless they can attempt again today or in the next week and a half this will result in a good sized slip in the launch date. Probably end of April. Not sure if the first COTS flight will occur this year.

How long will we see continued venting if this attempt is a scrub?

[FinalFrontier]

The shutdown on Merlins causes a lot of soot and black smoke. What I'm wondering about is how come the pad deluge wasn't working then, it looks as though it was activated too early. The fire on the engine fairing looked scary.

Damage? Just from the scorching? I think they may have to roll it back to the hangar.

[ugordan]

How long will we see continued venting if this attempt is a scrub?

Until LOX is detanked.

[docmordrid]

How long will we see continued venting if this attempt is a scrub?

As long as the anti-commercial guys hands hold out I guess  (j/k)

[Norm Hartnett]

How long will we see continued venting if this attempt is a scrub?

Until LOX is detanked.

Time frame?

[Avron]

How long will we see continued venting if this attempt is a scrub?

As long as the anti-commercial guys hands hold out I guess  (j/k)

LOL...

[FinalFrontier]

There was no ignition.

That doesn't constitute as proof.

My apologies. You are correct its chamber first then gas gen for turbine drive. So then it would have been the "low pressure" chamber light that occured but pressurization beyond that was never achieved. Hence, I guess, the flames licking up the side of the vehicle.

[Norm Hartnett]

How long will we see continued venting if this attempt is a scrub?

As long as the anti-commercial guys hands hold out I guess  (j/k)

LOL...

LOL, indeed. I am getting slow in my old age, I completely missed that one.

(btw to answer my own question, the Delta IV was first flown in 2002, not all that long ago.)

[Robotbeat]

After watching the replay someone was so kind to post, the time from the puff of white smoke until after the fire stops is about 3.5 seconds. It may not have been anything other than what they planned.

[Lee Jay]

After watching the replay someone was so kind to post, the time from the puff of white smoke until after the fire stops is about 3.5 seconds. It may not have been anything other than what they planned.

That could have been from T-3 to t+0.5 (abort).  I will have a hard time believing 9 engines got to full thrust during that test.

[ugordan]

That video appears to run faster than it happened in real time. There was no full thrust, the flame trench exit was never flushed with exhaust. It was an abort some time after ignition sequence start.

[kevin-rf]

After watching the replay someone was so kind to post, the time from the puff of white smoke until after the fire stops is about 3.5 seconds. It may not have been anything other than what they planned.

I agree, the posted McGregor video is for much longer than 3.5 seconds and at night. So it would look completely different.

[mmeijeri]

Heheh, so we'll be waiting for a puff of white smoke and an announcement of Falconem habemus!

[rkoenn]

Some reports are that ignition was aborted just as the engines started to ignite.  From what I saw real time that sounds reasonable but we will just have to wait and see what Elon has to say.  It was also reported that there was a bang at the moment of ignition.  Elon is great giving out info when he is successful but takes his time and obfuscates when he isn't.  It will be interesting to hear what he has to say.  I wish him well in this endeavor and have a great deal of respect for his accomplishments but don't care much for his ego or his blatant salesmanship tactics.

[FinalFrontier]

Some reports are that ignition was aborted just as the engines started to ignite.  From what I saw real time that sounds reasonable but we will just have to wait and see what Elon has to say.  It was also reported that there was a bang at the moment of ignition.  Elon is great giving out info when he is successful but takes his time and obfuscates when he isn't.  It will be interesting to hear what he has to say.  I wish him well in this endeavor and have a great deal of respect for his accomplishments but don't care much for his ego or his blatant salesmanship tactics.

SFN just said this:
"Spectators report they heard a loud bang at the time of ignition, but no other prolonged sounds of the engine burning. Visual indications at ignition included a flash of orange light, a cloud of steam and black smoke, and a brief fire at the base of the rocket, which appeared consistent with behavior after an engine cutoff. "

[mmeijeri]

Upper stage appears to have stopped venting.

[dmc6960]

After comparing my posted video of the test with its source, it does seem to be very slightly faster than realtime, perhaps 1.1x speed.  Not much.

[rkoenn]

Upper stage appears to have stopped venting.

My current video feed show it still venting.  I don't know how quickly they can empty the tanks and venting will probably continue for some time after LOX drain from residuals in the tank.

[stockman]

Upper stage appears to have stopped venting.

yea... looks like it is winding down... Seems like only one stream venting now

[mmeijeri]

Earlier there were three puffs of smoke coming from the vents, now there's just one.

[rkoenn]

Earlier there were three puffs of smoke coming from the vents, now there's just one.

Sorry, you are correct.  I was only paying attention to the first stage which will take the longest to vent.

[Robotbeat]

Since we're doing unwarranted speculation, I figured I might give it a try: Was it a hard start? Is that puff of white smoke unignited propellant that is later ignited and leading to the fireball and the "loud bang"?

BTW, there was a puff of black smoke coming out of the flame trench during (EDIT: or immediately after) the ignition attempt.

[Jeff Lerner]

Since we're doing unwarranted speculation....., I

..continuing on this unwarrented speculation theme....wasn't this first stage completely tested in their test cellsa awhile ago ...given that it all seemed to work and was considerd a flight article, what are the sort of issues that would be encountered in a hot fire test of an already flight qualified stage that would have resulted in what appears to be an unsuccesful ignition of those very same engines ??

[Antares]

TEA-TEB does make a nice bang.
RS-27 spins up in a couple of seconds.  Small engines don't take much time to spin up.

They don't want GOX pooling in the tanks and staying there after de-tanking.

  The tanks are essentially full of GOX moments after exposure to LOX as they are quenched.  After detanking, when the fill and drain valve is closed, the tanks are purged with N2.  This is how all LVs work, though H2 tanks may be purged with helium instead of N2 depending on how close the next attempt is.

[ugordan]

Does anyone know what the 3rd vent location is on the F9, the one I asked about before? It's still venting along with the 1st stage tank. Isn't it supposed to be finished detanking by now?

Also, how big of an TEA-TEB bang are we talking about? Hearing a bang at a distance is not something you'd want with this, could it be observers intepreting the initial thrust buildup (there was some smoke coming out the flame trench) before cutoff as a bang instead? Or did something really blow down there. 

[Firehawk153]

Is it safe to say that if it was something too serious they would have moved the erector back around the vehicle?

[Swatch]

Also, how big of an TEA-TEB bang are we talking about? Hearing a bang at a distance is not something you'd want with this, could it be observers intepreting the initial thrust buildup (there was some smoke coming out the flame trench) before cutoff as a bang instead? Or did something really blow down there. 

Haha, it is, afterall, a rocket engine.     Rumor has it that they can be loud sometimes.   

[mr. mark]

On the spaceflightnow.com website they have a picture of the test fire or abort? Question why would the first stage still be venting if the first stage was firing? This seems strange, especially after I noticed that venting had stopped prior to ignition?

[stockman]

looks like all venting has stopped now...

[ugordan]

On the spaceflightnow.com website they have a picture of the test fire or abort? Question why would the first stage still be venting if the first stage was firing?

Image is immediately after cutoff so the vehicle presumably started safing itself automatically. The fireball could have conceivably started rising after cutoff. Or not. Hard to figure out the timeline with no countdown clock. There does appear to have been some chamber combustion ramp-up as the ice started being shaken off the stage. Not sure if turbopump spinup alone would have done that.

[just-nick]

On the spaceflightnow.com website they have a picture of the test fire or abort? Question why would the first stage still be venting if the first stage was firing? This seems strange, especially after I noticed that venting had stopped prior to ignition?

I noticed that too -- and I admit I was only half watching and was caught by surprise, but it looked like the venting was going on concurrent with the ignition.  Which is atypical -- most LV's close vents a few seconds before ignition to let pressures build up.  But SpaceX isn't always typical...

But perhaps Valve A failed to respond to the command of Computer B and that caused Computer C to interrupt the ignition of Engines D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L?

[ugordan]

it looked like the venting was going on concurrent with the ignition.

According to my memory there was no venting prior to that and the sudden venting was the immediate sign to me ignition was off-nominal. Remember the fireball would take some short amount of time after thrust termination to rise up - before that it would have been sucked with the exhaust into the flame trench. It cannot be assumed the fireball appearance is the moment of ignition.

[Lars_J]

Yeah the venting stopped 20-30 seconds before (attempted) ignition - but the vents opened just as the abort was made. That picture is 1-2 seconds after the abort, before the flames disappeared.

[just-nick]

Yeah the venting stopped 20-30 seconds before (attempted) ignition - but the vents opened just as the abort was made. That picture is 1-2 seconds after the abort, before the flames disappeared.

Alright, I'll blame my confusion and distraction on some co-worker coming over to my desk and expecting me to have a conversation about work related stuff right at the moment of ignition.  The nerve...

[ugordan]

Heh, I just noticed something on the ELV Countdown Portal page: http://countdown.ksc.nasa.gov/elv/

There's a small text saying "Is this any better?" that wasn't there before. Probably a result of our constant yacking about the camera pointing, quality and resolution.

Thanks again for that camera work, whoever it was 

[elnino99]

Isn't it ironic that an internet pioneer can't post any sort of status update on this test, even after three hours? What happened to the Twitter revolution?

[wannamoonbase]

Well at least flames are some sign of life.

They'll learn and get back to it.

It's amazing how hard it really is to launch things into space.  That's why it's so expensive.  A plot of the changes in per launch cost projections vs 'learning opportunities' like today's would be most interesting.

[Avron]

Isn't it ironic that an internet pioneer can't post any sort of status update on this test, even after three hours? What happened to the Twitter revolution?

Old revolution!!... new one is out of this world..!!!

Love the small text on the countdown page.. many thanks to the nasa person behind the zoom in attempt.. great work, no  notice and so much red tape..

Yes, it was better...

[Serafeim]

where is the video from the testfire?
I hope someone upload it somewhere.on spacex site maybe?

[Avron]

where is the video from the testfire?
I hope someone upload it somewhere.on spacex site maybe?

Look back a few posts

[neilh]

Isn't it ironic that an internet pioneer can't post any sort of status update on this test, even after three hours? What happened to the Twitter revolution?

Have they even had a chance to make an inspection of the engine yet?

[elnino99]

It's amazing how hard it really is to launch things into space.  That's why it's so expensive.

True, and perhaps why some in this business shouldn't pretend that they can accomplish amazing things at substantially lower costs!

[Ronsmytheiii]

I will say one thing, she could be heard from the visitor's complex

[astrobrian]

Isn't it ironic that an internet pioneer can't post any sort of status update on this test, even after three hours? What happened to the Twitter revolution?

My bet is twitter is the last thing on their minds at the moment, just a hunch though 

[elnino99]

It is my sincere hope that SpaceX is successful, and it is certainly no surprise that the Falcon 9 team has encountered technical problems with a new nine-engine booster. However, a steady flow of reliable information about the status of this program - which is now being funded by taxpayers - is imperative to maintain good public relations. There is no excuse for the silence today from the SpaceX operation.

[ugordan]

I will say one thing, she could be heard from the visitor's complex

Was it really a bang or a short rumble?

[ugordan]

It is my sincere hope that SpaceX is successful, and it is certainly no surprise that the Falcon 9 team has encountered technical problems with a new nine-engine booster. However, a steady flow of reliable information about the status of this program - which is now being funded by taxpayers - is imperative to maintain good public relations. There is no excuse for the silence today from the SpaceX operation.

Do you hold Orbital to the same standards? How many tests, issues and failures they show you, live ? It takes SpaceX more than this to issue a release on a success, let alone a setback.

[Avron]

All in all .. my congrats to SpaceX on their first testfire of the Newest North American space vehicle at the Cape.. .. lets all be happy this is happening here and on some distant soil ..

Looking forward to the 9 engine test run at 3.5 secs... maybe that will wake up a few...

[Sen]

It is my sincere hope that SpaceX is successful, and it is certainly no surprise that the Falcon 9 team has encountered technical problems with a new nine-engine booster. However, a steady flow of reliable information about the status of this program - which is now being funded by taxpayers - is imperative to maintain good public relations. There is no excuse for the silence today from the SpaceX operation.

Really? Its been what three hours? I imagine they are pouring through the data trying to figure out exactly what went wrong and why. The rocket is still on the pad so we arent even to the take a look in the hangar phase yet. What do you want, an imediate press release and an apology for not having it ready to go before they actually tested. How dare they have an issue during testing, and double how dare they not satisify your arbetrary standards. 

[ugordan]

Absolutely - especially since both propose replacing the existing manned spaceflight procurement regime with their untested programs!

Then don't you find it interesting they weren't exactly forthcoming either when it was leaked AJ-26 engine had test problems a few months ago. Someone might say we are entitled to know that. Are we really?

Neither company is 100% financed by NASA so it's not responsible for releasing every bit of information us outsiders would like to know. I would wager there was no such contract point in either their COTS or CRS papers.

[Coolhand77]

Just noticed a fire and gray smoke coming up near the base of the rocket (5:10 pm Eastern). I'd noticed it this morning prior to the test also and thought it was maybe a controlled burn to clear some brush before the test.

I now think it was the loading of the TEA-TEB this morning and this is just dumping the remaining TEA-TEB from the engines.

[elnino99]

It is my sincere hope that SpaceX is successful, and it is certainly no surprise that the Falcon 9 team has encountered technical problems with a new nine-engine booster. However, a steady flow of reliable information about the status of this program - which is now being funded by taxpayers - is imperative to maintain good public relations. There is no excuse for the silence today from the SpaceX operation.

Really? Its been what three hours? I imagine they are pouring through the data trying to figure out exactly what went wrong and why. The rocket is still on the pad so we arent even to the take a look in the hangar phase yet. What do you want, an imediate press release and an apology for not having it ready to go before they actually tested. How dare they have an issue during testing, and double how dare they not satisify your arbetrary standards. 

I didn't demand or expect a detailed explanation. But the company is using a public launch site for an announced test, and certainly has had the time to issue a short statement stating the basic facts! This behavior is BAD PR that will not help them win friends or influence decisionmakers.

[Ronsmytheiii]

I will say one thing, she could be heard from the visitor's complex

Was it really a bang or a short rumble?

Too long to be a bang but too short to be a rumble, more like a long yell.

[mr. mark]

Funny, I thought this was a science based website not a political one. Well, hopefully Spacex will learn from this test as they did from Falcon 1. Kind of funny these same complainers were not complaining when Falcon 1 went through it's initial round of testing. Spacex is current working to fulfill the cargo end of it's contract with NASA, not a manned spaceflight program. There is only a budget proposal, not a budget for NASA based commercial manned spaceflight yet. There is no need to argue over the politics of this.   

[ugordan]

Strongback moving in now.

[Chris Bergin]

I wouldn't expect much PR on this, as they only have one person (nice lady too) as their media relations dept. NASA has about 100 PAOers, and a lot of them either have their hands tied or come across as useless.

They probably thought there wouldn't be much interest in the static fire (and I'm shocked this is nearly a 20,000 viewed thread when only SFN could cover it due to having a camera there), thus the lack of a webcast (which is dirt cheap/free to set up), along with hardly any media notification via the usual route. But the alternative option of armwaving about it, and then having a problem, wouldn't of been clever for a commercial company.

I'd cut them some slack, as the test will be how approachable they'll be on a regular basis in the future, such as ahead of the launch.

----

The shuttle's still more interesting though

[neilh]

Absolutely - especially since both propose replacing the existing manned spaceflight procurement regime with their untested programs!

Then don't you find it interesting they weren't exactly forthcoming either when it was leaked AJ-26 engine had test problems a few months ago. Someone might say we are entitled to know that. Are we really?

Neither company is 100% financed by NASA so it's not responsible for releasing every bit of information us outsiders would like to know. I would wager there was no such contract point in either their COTS or CRS papers.

One could also mention about how long it took for NASA to come forward with full details about its failures with the Orion parachute test and the various problems on the Ares I-X, despite having public relations teams a couple orders of magnitude larger than SpaceX's

[stockman]

Strongback moving in now.

[Chris Bergin]

Moved the last seven posts into the SpaceX Discussion thread, as they weren't about the test fire.

However, given they've not sucessfully carried that out yet, we'll leave this thread open for the next attempt.

[Sen]

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6284FT20100309

     Funny, reading that article one could have the impression the test was smooth and successful. It didnt seem that way watching it...

[Robotbeat]

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6284FT20100309

     Funny, reading that article one could have the impression the test was smooth and successful. It didnt seem that way watching it...

I don't know. The article used words like "the test was supposed to last 3.5 seconds", etc. It doesn't say anything that isn't true. I guess, it also doesn't have anyone's specific spin, so that might be something to complain about .

[Sen]

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6284FT20100309

     Funny, reading that article one could have the impression the test was smooth and successful. It didnt seem that way watching it...

I don't know. The article used words like "the test was supposed to last 3.5 seconds", etc. It doesn't say anything that isn't true. I guess, it also doesn't have anyone's specific spin, so that might be something to complain about .

hehe. It was like information cotton candy. could have been written last week.

[SpacexULA]

I didn't demand or expect a detailed explanation. But the company is using a public launch site for an announced test, and certainly has had the time to issue a short statement stating the basic facts! This behavior is BAD PR that will not help them win friends or influence decisionmakers.

Official company news does not come on your twitter time scale.  They likely don't know what happened yet with 100% assurance, when they do, and if they decide to share it they will.

YOU are not the customer, NASA is.  It would be fully within the right of SpaceX to only give updates to NASA, and then let them distribute the information (AKA you would find out weeks later).

There is precedent, neither NASA nor SpaceX always announce COTS milestone payments.

[telomerase99]

The article in Reuters seems to state that the maiden flight is a sole project of SpaceX. I was under the impression that an unnamed government (dod) customer was financing this launch...?

[Orbiter]

SpaceX released statement

"Today SpaceX performed our first Static Fire for the Falcon 9 launch vehicle. We counted down to T-2 seconds and aborted on Spin Start. Given that this was our first abort event on this pad, we decided to scrub for the day to get a good look at the rocket before trying again. Everything looks great at first glance." 

"We completed pad preps on time and with good execution. The integrated countdown with the range included holdfire checks, S-band telemetry, C-band, and FTS simulated checks. We completed helium, liquid oxygen (LOX), and fuel loads to within tenths of a percent of T-zero conditions. Tanks pressed nominally and we passed all Terminal count, flight software, and ground software abort checks right down to T-2 seconds. We encountered a problem with the spin start system and aborted nominally." 

"As part of the abort, we close the pre-valves to isolate the engines from the propellant tank and purge the residual propellants. The brief flames seen on the video are burn off of LOX and kerosene on the pad. The engines did not ignite and there was no engine fire." 

"We detanked and safed the vehicle and launch pad. Preliminary review shows all other systems required to reach full ignition were within specification.  All other pad systems worked nominally. Inspections will be complete tonight.  Tomorrow will consist of data review and procedure updates. Commodities will be replenished tomorrow including TEA-TEB load, LOX and helium deliveries." 

"We'll look to do the next static fire attempt in three or four days."

Seems like they got cold-feet, which with all that's riding on this launch including the future of American Human space flight that's very understandable, I would have done the same thing. But sooner or later, as said with Al Shepard 'Lets light this candle'

Orbiter

[robertross]

Seems like they got cold-feet, which with all that's riding on this launch including the future of American Human space flight that's very understandable, I would have done the same thing.

Orbiter

Nah...I'm glad everything worked on the abort. First sign of a good system AFAIK. I wish them all the best in the next attempt.

But it proves a point that there is a learning curve here that MUST be taken into account for all new systems. And like shuttle, you have to always keep on top of them: it's part of the business or it will bite you.

So we need to be mindful to hope for the best, expect the worst, and cut them some slack.

[mr. mark]

It's great to see that they are doing this in a careful manner and that the abort systems as well as the vehicle system were working. Hope to see them fix the problem and get a second crack at this in a few days.

[stockman]

well I have to say that was a reasonably timely update from SpaceX... thank you in case anyone is reading this...

Now one question if I may -

"We counted down to T-2 seconds and aborted on Spin Start"

this may be obvious to others but I am not an in depth techie type- what is the Spin Start they refer to exactly? Just trying to understand what part of the system caused the abort...


Thank you in advance for any descriptive input....

[00rs250]

Seems this was a logical step in proving that the vehicle can safely shut itself down if there was an issue.  Is there anyway that the Air Force would have asked them to do this by chance as part of their pending safety approval?  Even if we find out that it was caused by a mechanical issue or human intervention?

[robertross]

well I have to say that was a reasonably timely update from SpaceX... thank you in case anyone is reading this...

Now one question if I may -

"We counted down to T-2 seconds and aborted on Spin Start"

this may be obvious to others but I am not an in depth techie type- what is the Spin Start they refer to exactly? Just trying to understand what part of the system caused the abort...

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=19228.msg557620#msg557620

[docmordrid]

So, a problem with the helium pressure/flow to the turbopumps?  Doesn't sound too drastic.

[WHAP]

TEA-TEB does make a nice bang.
RS-27 spins up in a couple of seconds.  Small engines don't take much time to spin up.

They don't want GOX pooling in the tanks and staying there after de-tanking.

  The tanks are essentially full of GOX moments after exposure to LOX as they are quenched.  After detanking, when the fill and drain valve is closed, the tanks are purged with N2.  This is how all LVs work, though H2 tanks may be purged with helium instead of N2 depending on how close the next attempt is.

The statement about LOX tanks being purged with N2 after detanking is not true for at least one of the EELV's.  Nor does that same LV ever use N2 to purge LH2 tank(s) at the launch site, regardless of the length of time between attempts.

[kkattula]

We encountered a problem with the spin start system and aborted nominally.

At a guess, one or more turbo pumps didn't reach sufficent RPM when spun up by pressurised helium. Could be the helium didn't flow properly in the pad layout, (I think it's from GSE not on-board).  Or there was a stuck valve, etc.

I expect SpaceX will let us know when they do. Contrary to some opinions, I think they've been pretty good at explaining issues like these.

[stockman]

""We'll look to do the next static fire attempt in three or four days."


This is the most encouraging piece of the small release tonight by SpaceX... Lets hope the data review doesn't reveal anything more serious... 3 or 4 days is not too long to wait for another attempt...


btw - Thanks Robertross for the pointer on the Spin Start Question I had... I get it now..

[Robotbeat]

That's a much larger, more detailed press release than I expected. Thanks, SpaceX!

[corrodedNut]

SFN has a larger article up now, with new photos:

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/100309hotfire/

Carl: It's a press release, see full release and full res images here:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=20799.0)

[Jim]

  Is there anyway that the Air Force would have asked them to do this by chance as part of their pending safety approval?

No way.  There is no requirement to demonstrate this

[just-nick]

SFN has a larger article up now, with new photos:

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/100309hotfire/

Thanks...

Notice the little spurt of green flame coming from one of the nozzles in the 2nd photo?  As I recall from some books on the SR-71 (which used TEB as an ignition source), the ignition flame was a characteristic green.

Pretty.

  --Nick

[Comga]

SFN has a larger article up now, with new photos:

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/100309hotfire/

Thanks...

Notice the little spurt of green flame coming from one of the nozzles in the 2nd photo?  As I recall from some books on the SR-71 (which used TEB as an ignition source), the ignition flame was a characteristic green.

Pretty.

  --Nick

The caption says: "SpaceX released this view of the base of the Falcon 9 rocket moments before the planned ignition. The green color under the rocket is from the TEA-TEB ignition source. Credit: SpaceX".  Your memory seems to be correct.