Author Topic: LIVE: SpaceX Falcon 9/Dragon CRS-2 (SpX-2) LAUNCH and FD-1 UPDATES (Read 278954 times)

Star One · « **Reply #480 on:** 03/01/2013 07:33 pm »

Elon -fairly rapid series of burns to get to ISS.

Lar · « **Reply #481 on:** 03/01/2013 07:33 pm »

Quote from: meekGee on 03/01/2013 07:31 pm

Quote from: Lar on 03/01/2013 07:29 pm
E super worst case... we can deorbit with just one quad working... not easy but it's doable

Now had he said "it'd be like a one-armed rower" than we'd know what he'd been reading over the last hour...

I just love his use of "super" ... super worst case, falcon was super perfect. etc

Bill hennigan of LA times ... can dock with only 2 pods??? (think not) and E, how concerned are you with this issue

E - not too concerned, this is the 4th mission, have not seen this before, it was an anomaly, a glitch, not a serious design issue, esp if we come back on line

Suff: we require 3 of 4 operational (as said before)

simonbp · « **Reply #482 on:** 03/01/2013 07:33 pm »

Quote from: Star One on 03/01/2013 07:31 pm

Quote from: meekGee on 03/01/2013 07:30 pm
yeah, interesting. no solar on crewed dragon. straight from the horse's mouth.

Is this to save mass that they would go this route, didn't catch all his answer on this.

Didn't say, but if the battery is internal, it could be part of keeping Dragon as reusable as possible.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #483 on:** 03/01/2013 07:33 pm »

I like how they deployed solar arrays partly to mitigate Dragon's attitude rotation "like a skater extending arms during a spin"

Kabloona · « **Reply #484 on:** 03/01/2013 07:34 pm »

Quote from: AJA on 03/01/2013 07:32 pm

1. Does anyone have an image of these valves?

2. Are they going to fire the thrusters associated with that tank? From what Elon said, they're planning on doing so. If the impediment was some solid contaminant, and now it's in the ox tank, might it get lodged in the oxidiser feed line to the Draco combustion chamber?

No, because the prop tanks have diaphragms that separate presurant gas (He) from the props.

Ben the Space Brit · « **Reply #485 on:** 03/01/2013 07:34 pm »

Quote from: reubenb on 03/01/2013 07:30 pm

Solar arrays would be on longer duration missions, but not on ISS missions.

We'll see if that innovation survives this incident.

Star One · « **Reply #486 on:** 03/01/2013 07:34 pm »

Elon - not a major concern, probably just an anomaly.

Galactic Penguin SST · « **Reply #487 on:** 03/01/2013 07:34 pm »

Musk: decided to deploy the solar panels before the thrusters came back online because the temperature on the solar panel actuators were dropping rapidly.

Star One · « **Reply #488 on:** 03/01/2013 07:36 pm »

Know soon if 2 & 3 are good, they probably are.

Possible frozen oxidizer in the line, warmed up & began to flow.

russianhalo117 · « **Reply #489 on:** 03/01/2013 07:37 pm »

Quote from: AJA on 03/01/2013 07:32 pm

1. Does anyone have an image of these valves?

2. Are they going to fire the thrusters associated with that tank? From what Elon said, they're planning on doing so. If the impediment was some solid contaminant, and now it's in the ox tank, might it get lodged in the oxidiser feed line to the Draco combustion chamber?

It is in the Helium tanks, Form my POV/understanding the line was vented and then blown with additional helium. So It sounded like it was blown overboard when the valves were cycled. May be incorrect.

Lar · « **Reply #490 on:** 03/01/2013 07:37 pm »

E - might rotate the craft but not needed? maybe some frozen ox but we doubt it... temps in the oxy tanks are 70F

Q: any chance for Sat docking (he means berthing

)
Suff: probably not, Sunday is more likely. More time to evaluate things in that case

Q: are these common tanks or separate, and now long to fire things and be happy

E; 4 sets of tanks.... all fuel fine, only 1 of 4 oxy at right pressure, either a blockage or a stuck check valves between the He pressure tank and the 3 oxy tanks

E: we will know pretty soon if they are operating as they should... 1 has 5 thrusters and 4 has 4, all are working as expected now... then we will do pod 3 and then pod 2. We expect things to be normal if we've correctly resolved the pressure issue

An hour or 2??? E: yes, I think so

Star One · « **Reply #491 on:** 03/01/2013 07:38 pm »

Sunday most likely for docking rather than Saturday.

RDoc · « **Reply #492 on:** 03/01/2013 07:38 pm »

Any thoughts on what would cause 3 out of 4 to fail? That sounds like a systematic error.

wronkiew · « **Reply #493 on:** 03/01/2013 07:39 pm »

Musk: Possibly a bit of frozen oxidizer in the system. Not the most likely possibility.

Star One · « **Reply #494 on:** 03/01/2013 07:40 pm »

4 fuel tanks, 4 oxidizer tanks, 3 of 4 oxidizer tanks were at wrong pressure. Blockage appears to have alleviated.

wronkiew · « **Reply #495 on:** 03/01/2013 07:40 pm »

Musk: Four sets of tanks, 8 tanks in total. All fuel tanks are operating nominally, only one oxidizer tank at the right pressure. Possibly stuck valves or blockage going from the helium pressure tank to the oxidizer tank.

sdsds · « **Reply #496 on:** 03/01/2013 07:41 pm »

Musk: Pod 1 has 5 thrusters; pod 4 has 4.

meekGee · « **Reply #497 on:** 03/01/2013 07:41 pm »

wait - the He sure as hell didn't freeze.
If the oxidizer froze, how did this prevent the tank from pressurizing?
I can see how it prevented oxidizer from reaching downstream towards the thruste... Maybe the pressure sensor is downstream from the tank? this makes little sense.

Lar · « **Reply #498 on:** 03/01/2013 07:42 pm »

WHat maneuvers, and how long in current orbit?

E we first have to raise perigee or we might reenter within a day or two... once we do that we have time to plan what to do next

THAT'S A WRAP

Star One · « **Reply #499 on:** 03/01/2013 07:42 pm »

End of teleconference.