SpaceX Falcon 9 v1.1 - CASSIOPE - September, 2013 - GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD

[dglow]

Kerbal Space Program FTW! 

Is it bad that "I wonder how to build that in KSP?" was my first thought too?

I'd be very surprised if that wasn't done in STK, which is the primary mission design, analysis, and visualization software we use at COSGC.

The credits say they used both STK and KSP.

[Herb Schaltegger]

Kerbal Space Program FTW! 

Is it bad that "I wonder how to build that in KSP?" was my first thought too?

I'd be very surprised if that wasn't done in STK, which is the primary mission design, analysis, and visualization software we use at COSGC.

Well, sure. I've actually used STK myself years ago.

That being said, the thing itself looks very "Kerbal." KSP players will understand.

[Retired Downrange]

Roll out photo with fairing just posted on FB


http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153239285540131&set=a.10150303260090131.563831.353851465130&type=1&relevant_count=1&ref=nf


SpaceX
The next gen Falcon 9 rocket with satellite fairing rolls out to SpaceX's launch pad at Vandenberg Air Force Base.

[mlindner]

Roll out photo with fairing just posted on FB


http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153239285540131&set=a.10150303260090131.563831.353851465130&type=1&relevant_count=1&ref=nf


SpaceX
The next gen Falcon 9 rocket with satellite fairing rolls out to SpaceX's launch pad at Vandenberg Air Force Base.

That was already on Elon's twitter and in higher resolution. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BTyHRaVCIAAc8Zr.jpg:orig

[Froplume]

Kerbal Space Program FTW! 

Is it bad that "I wonder how to build that in KSP?" was my first thought too?

I'd be very surprised if that wasn't done in STK, which is the primary mission design, analysis, and visualization software we use at COSGC.

Well, sure. I've actually used STK myself years ago.

That being said, the thing itself looks very "Kerbal." KSP players will understand.

The rocket launch and fairing separation was done using Kerbal Space Program and a add-on by a user for the v1.1. All of the space video after that was done with STK using a model of the satellite that was ported from Solid Works.

[Joffan]

The rocket launch and fairing separation was done using Kerbal Space Program and a add-on by a user for the v1.1. All of the space video after that was done with STK using a model of the satellite that was ported from Solid Works.

Thanks Froplume, and welcome to the forum.

[averagespacejoe]

So I know MDA has posted their patch for CASSIOPE for quite some time but any word now that we are almost L-2 whether SpaceX has or will release its own mission patch.

[woods170]

Hmm....

Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk
Full thrust achieved on 2 sec static fire. Some anomalies to be investigated, so launch date tbd.

To be expected. This is a new vehicle.

[AnjaZoe]

I'm sorry, but Space-X did claim multiple times that they have tested way more than other space companies. If I test much much more (not my words!), I would not expect "anomalies" on a vehicle, that from its name is just an update to an existing one.

[Galactic Penguin SST]

Hmm....

Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk
Full thrust achieved on 2 sec static fire. Some anomalies to be investigated, so launch date tbd.

To be expected. This is a new vehicle.

Yeah, and since I was betting on early-mid October for this one, I might now have a larger chance of being right.  Happy to be wrong though!

[Rabidpanda]

I'm sorry, but Space-X did claim multiple times that they have tested way more than other space companies. If I test much much more (not my words!), I would not expect "anomalies" on a vehicle, that from its name is just an update to an existing one.

Except we all know that this is a completely new rocket and some small glitches are to be expected. And the whole point of testing so much is to find these anomalies, which it sounds like they did.

[AnjaZoe]

Yes, but you normally - according to gold old space industry fahsion -  test before the launch is just three days ahead with the payload already integrated 

[Rabidpanda]

Well they have tested the engines and stages individually, this is just the first time it's been tested all together on the brand new pad. And this whole launch is really just a test flight.

[woods170]

I'm sorry, but Space-X did claim multiple times that they have tested way more than other space companies. If I test much much more (not my words!), I would not expect "anomalies" on a vehicle, that from its name is just an update to an existing one.

Remember what happened on the first launch of Delta IV Heavy? Cavitation in propellant feedline causing a slightly early shutdown of the first stage.  That was an anomaly as well. On a vehicle that by it's name was just a bigger version of the already existing Delta IV. And it was on a vehicle that had been thoroughly tested. But still, that anomaly occurred.

Point is: in rocketry you can test all you like, but there will always be something that bites you in the *ss once you actually start launching. ULA, Arianespace, ILS, SpaceX.... They can all attest to that. Anomalies will always be there. This is not just typical for SpaceX, but for the rest of the industry as well.

[ChrisWilson68]

I'm sorry, but Space-X did claim multiple times that they have tested way more than other space companies. If I test much much more (not my words!), I would not expect "anomalies" on a vehicle, that from its name is just an update to an existing one.

That's a problem with your expectations, not with anything SpaceX did or said.  They said they did a lot of testing.  They didn't say that that meant we shouldn't expect anomalies in the hot fire test.

[Jarnis]

What if the anomalies are with the pad and not with the vehicle?

This is the first "test" of the pad, after all.

[Ben the Space Brit]

IIRC, the hot fire on the v.1.0 were up to ignition + 4 seconds, so for them to abort at 2 seconds was an early indication of 'anomalies'.  The only things that occur to me are thrust instabilities in one or more engines or a stress red-line warning on one of the hold-downs.

[docmordrid]

IIRC, the hot fire on the v.1.0 were up to ignition + 4 seconds, so for them to abort at 2 seconds was an early indication of 'anomalies'.  The only things that occur to me are thrust instabilities in one or more engines or a stress red-line warning on one of the hold-downs.

Or the 1D engines reached full, stable thrust in 2 seconds instead of the 1C's 4?

[Jim]

a stress red-line warning on one of the hold-downs.

That isn't a measured value.

[Joffan]

With the new pad and T/E, it's real progress to get the hotfire done, but it's also important to remember that the Falcon9 v1.1 has never yet flown. Despite all the computer modelling you could dream of, there's no substitute for the real rocket really going through MaxQ in the real atmosphere.

There will be tight stomachs and held breath at SpaceX on launch day (and here too of course) no matter how smoothly the preparation goes.