Author Topic: SpaceX: Falcon 9 Hotfire Updates (Read 92661 times)

FinalFrontier · « **Reply #120 on:** 03/09/2010 06:24 pm »

Quote from: ugordan on 03/09/2010 06:16 pm

Quote from: FinalFrontier on 03/09/2010 06:14 pm
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 · « **Reply #121 on:** 03/09/2010 06:26 pm »

Quote from: Avron on 03/09/2010 06:22 pm

Quote from: docmordrid on 03/09/2010 06:18 pm
Quote from: Norm Hartnett on 03/09/2010 06:16 pm
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 · « **Reply #122 on:** 03/09/2010 06:28 pm »

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 · « **Reply #123 on:** 03/09/2010 06:30 pm »

Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/09/2010 06:28 pm

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 · « **Reply #124 on:** 03/09/2010 06:30 pm »

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 · « **Reply #125 on:** 03/09/2010 06:31 pm »

Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/09/2010 06:28 pm

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 · « **Reply #126 on:** 03/09/2010 06:34 pm »

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

rkoenn · « **Reply #127 on:** 03/09/2010 06:35 pm »

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 · « **Reply #128 on:** 03/09/2010 06:37 pm »

Quote from: rkoenn on 03/09/2010 06:35 pm

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 · « **Reply #129 on:** 03/09/2010 06:37 pm »

Upper stage appears to have stopped venting.

dmc6960 · « **Reply #130 on:** 03/09/2010 06:38 pm »

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 · « **Reply #131 on:** 03/09/2010 06:40 pm »

Quote from: mmeijeri on 03/09/2010 06:37 pm

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 · « **Reply #132 on:** 03/09/2010 06:41 pm »

Quote from: mmeijeri on 03/09/2010 06:37 pm

Upper stage appears to have stopped venting.

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

mmeijeri · « **Reply #133 on:** 03/09/2010 06:42 pm »

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

rkoenn · « **Reply #134 on:** 03/09/2010 06:44 pm »

Quote from: mmeijeri on 03/09/2010 06:42 pm

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 · « **Reply #135 on:** 03/09/2010 06:56 pm »

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 · « **Reply #136 on:** 03/09/2010 07:07 pm »

Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/09/2010 06:56 pm

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 · « **Reply #137 on:** 03/09/2010 07:17 pm »

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.

Quote from: Ben the Space Brit on 03/09/2010 05:59 pm

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 · « **Reply #138 on:** 03/09/2010 07:20 pm »

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 · « **Reply #139 on:** 03/09/2010 07:36 pm »

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