Author Topic: SpaceX: Falcon 9 Hotfire Attempt 2 Updates (Read 138679 times)

mtakala24 · « **Reply #140 on:** 03/13/2010 04:31 pm »

the amount of smoke/exhaust and then the black smoke (fuel-rich shutdown?) looked about right to me.

stockman · « **Reply #141 on:** 03/13/2010 04:31 pm »

best catches from the webcams...

PahTo · « **Reply #142 on:** 03/13/2010 04:32 pm »

Yeah, from this far away it sure looked like a good test...that is, successful.

DanielW · « **Reply #143 on:** 03/13/2010 04:32 pm »

Gah!! bad picture. Nice that something happened.

mrhuggy · « **Reply #144 on:** 03/13/2010 04:32 pm »

Looked like a good burn.

stockman · « **Reply #145 on:** 03/13/2010 04:33 pm »

update from SFN - 12:30

"IGNITION. The Falcon 9 rocket's nine Merlin engines have fired for a brief test at Complex 40. "

butters · « **Reply #146 on:** 03/13/2010 04:33 pm »

Substantially more exhaust than the previous attempt, which is a promising indication.

Bubbinski · « **Reply #147 on:** 03/13/2010 04:33 pm »

Too bad there was no sound or commentary....but yeah it appears the engines ignited, there were white smoke clouds to the right of the rocket, looked like an engine firing to my (untrained) eyes.

rdale · « **Reply #148 on:** 03/13/2010 04:33 pm »

Quote from: mrhuggy on 03/13/2010 04:32 pm

Looked like a good burn.

Just curious what you saw that made it a "good" burn versus otherwise?

Robotbeat · « **Reply #149 on:** 03/13/2010 04:34 pm »

Quote from: Bubbinski on 03/13/2010 04:33 pm

Too bad there was no sound or commentary....but yeah it appears the engines ignited, there were white smoke clouds to the right of the rocket, looked like an engine firing to my (untrained) eyes.

Why do they need commentary? You have commentary right here!

stockman · « **Reply #150 on:** 03/13/2010 04:35 pm »

Now back to venting normally - and the sun comes out

Halidon · « **Reply #151 on:** 03/13/2010 04:35 pm »

Gah, really disappointed that SFN couldn't go with the closer camera. Sure, live commentary for a hotfire test is a bit much to ask for, but a camera closer than Miami surely is not.

stockman · « **Reply #152 on:** 03/13/2010 04:35 pm »

update from SFN: 12:33

"Visual indications are the Merlin engines ignited during today's static fire attempt. The engines were supposed to burn for 3.5 seconds"

Ben the Space Brit · « **Reply #153 on:** 03/13/2010 04:36 pm »

On the SFN feed, there was definately two distinct events - an initial blast of smoke followed ~1 second later by a low plume of smoke. I'm no expert but that seemed to me to be an ignition event followed by the effects of the engine burn in the flame trench.

The questions that will need to be answered:

1) Did they get the full 3.5 seconds?

2) Did everything work properly?

3) Are they now go to proceed for the launch preparations?

That aside... Woah! That webcam was moving like it was an earthquake! What was the sustained surface wind-speed at SLC-40 today?

daver · « **Reply #154 on:** 03/13/2010 04:36 pm »

Quote from: stockman on 03/13/2010 04:35 pm

Now back to venting normally - and the sun comes out

Where are you getting your pictures from? The one I'm watching is on SFN and is a lot farther away.

Bubbinski · « **Reply #155 on:** 03/13/2010 04:37 pm »

Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/13/2010 04:34 pm

Quote from: Bubbinski on 03/13/2010 04:33 pm
Too bad there was no sound or commentary....but yeah it appears the engines ignited, there were white smoke clouds to the right of the rocket, looked like an engine firing to my (untrained) eyes.
Why do they need commentary? You have commentary right here!

Good point! But I had it on full screen, hoping they'd switch to another camera. Oh well. Hopefully the camera work will be a lot better on the actual launch attempt.

stockman · « **Reply #156 on:** 03/13/2010 04:38 pm »

Quote from: daver on 03/13/2010 04:36 pm

Quote from: stockman on 03/13/2010 04:35 pm
Now back to venting normally - and the sun comes out

Where are you getting your pictures from? The one I'm watching is on SFN and is a lot farther away.

KSC webcams... not video - refresh every 60 seconds

http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/countdown/video/

TrueBlueWitt · « **Reply #157 on:** 03/13/2010 04:39 pm »

Quote from: rdale on 03/13/2010 04:33 pm

Quote from: mrhuggy on 03/13/2010 04:32 pm
Looked like a good burn.

Just curious what you saw that made it a "good" burn versus otherwise?

I think a "good" burn would be any ignition of the rocket engines.. at least compared to the failed attempt earlier this week.

billh · « **Reply #158 on:** 03/13/2010 04:39 pm »

I'm just sure that SFN would have used the closer camera if they could. So my guess is that someone (probably SpaceX) wants to restrict the flow of information. Not that I blame them, but it is frustrating for geeks like us who would sit around on Saturday watching a video feed of a test procedure.

DaveS · « **Reply #159 on:** 03/13/2010 04:40 pm »

Quote from: Ben the Space Brit on 03/13/2010 04:36 pm

That aside... Woah! That webcam was moving like it was an earthquake! What was the sustained surface wind-speed at SLC-40 today?

You'd be suprised that learn that camera is a bit further away than SLC-40. I believe it's a camera at 39A. And while it looked like it was shaking alot, it really wasn't, not more than a few inches.

The reason why is that camera is really zoomed in tight on something very far away which leads to the visual anomaly of high winds shaking the camera.