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

[edkyle99]

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 

They did.  The vehicle had a wet dress rehearsal on August 28. 

Hot fire tests on the pad are not standard procedure for mature launch vehicles.  It used to be standard, back in the very early days, for Atlas and Titan and Thor, etc..  Most of those tests also only took place a few days before launch, and problems cropped up frequently.  Occasionally, a rocket would actually explode or otherwise be destroyed during a hot fire test.

Remember that Antares also endured an extended round of WDR and hot fire test scrubs.

 - Ed Kyle

[Antares]

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.

You realize how many things are monitored and can go out of limits with a rocket, right?  I'm not sure on what basis you can make narrow it down to those two things.

[Antares]

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.

I think Anja has an excellent point.  SpaceX is responsible for ratcheting up irrational expectations in the fan community, and now SpaceX is showing that it has the same teething problems everyone else has.  I've been making this point for years.  Irrational exuberance begets irrational depression when things don't go exactly perfect.  SpaceX should be proud for going so far so fast as a team that has recently come together.  As far as achieving orbit reliably on time, SpaceX is no better than anyone else on the planet, despite an ethos claiming to be.

[Lars_J]

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.

I think Anja has an excellent point.  SpaceX is responsible for ratcheting up irrational expectations in the fan community, and now SpaceX is showing that it has the same teething problems everyone else has.

  Really? It sounds more like you think SpaceX is responsible for not launching a massive public education campaign about A) the realities of testing vs rubber on the ground (the thing hasn't even left the pad yet, so clearly the testing is not over) and B) history of issues with first launches of new types.

SpaceX is increasing the public interest in spaceflight.  (not massively, but still - Chris should be able to verify that with forum traffic)  Isn't that a good thing? Something that we all spaceflight enthusiasts have been wanting? But when it happens, we get complaints like yours that they simply aren't managing the P.R. as well as you think they should. But with increased attention you always get some good and bad, it comes with the territory.

I've been making this point for years.

And with increasing frequency recently. 

[king1999]

I think Anja has an excellent point.

I don't think Anja is a good representative of SpaceX fans. Not a reasonable space fan would ever equate "a lot more tests" to "no anomalies".

[Chris Bergin]

Remember to keep an eye on the update thread. Things moving pretty fast and we're in for an intense weekend.

[kirghizstan]

Remember to keep an eye on the update thread. Things moving pretty fast and we're in for an intense weekend.

is the target still sunday or are the tea leaves saying something different?

[WHAP]

I've been making this point for years.

And with increasing frequency recently. 

Adding the winky doesn't hide the fact that this is an unnecessary statement.  Antares' recent posts (last couple of months) don't seem to be increasing with respect to statements about SpaceX's teething problems. 

[Chris Bergin]

Remember to keep an eye on the update thread. Things moving pretty fast and we're in for an intense weekend.

is the target still sunday or are the tea leaves saying something different?

Still Sunday!

Seems awfully tight, and it'll be at the mercy of how the second hot fire goes.

[Orbiter]

Cutting it close if they're going to hotfire again tomorrow, then have the LRR, then launch Sunday.

[Mader Levap]

STILL Sunday?
This is... hardcore...

[Lars_J]

STILL Sunday?
This is... hardcore...

Remember the first F9 launch? An abort and then launch within a few hours. They can move fast.

[kirghizstan]

a SECOND hotfire?!?

just to make sure the kinks were worked out from the first?

good thing these engines are capable of many reuses

[Antares]

Isn't that a good thing?

Not when it backfires and loses people who would otherwise have been kept by slow build-up with accurate expectations.  Many of us who are enthusiasts already know what to expect.  There are many even in the industry, especially in the payload community, who believe the SpaceX spin.  I think let-downs or shortfalls end up losing more people than reasonable build-up fails to attract.  Out of being fooled once, they ignore subsequent achievements.

[LegendCJS]

Isn't that a good thing?

Not when it backfires and loses people who would otherwise have been kept by slow build-up with accurate expectations.  Many of us who are enthusiasts already know what to expect.  There are many even in the industry, especially in the payload community, who believe the SpaceX spin.  I think let-downs or shortfalls end up losing more people than reasonable build-up fails to attract.  Out of being fooled once, they ignore subsequent achievements.

Nobody with the responsibility to decide how to spend space launch size amounts of money is letting amazing peopleism, hype, or enthusiasm influence their decisions.  Forum posters, however, are another story.

[Targeteer]

From Facebook

30th Space Wing (Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif.)
The SpaceX launch date, which was tentatively scheduled for Sunday, is now to be determined. For more information about SpaceX, please email [email protected]

[mr. mark]

Wake me up when we have a launch date. I may have to spend more time on the Antares/Cygnus D launch thread.

[Lurker Steve]

STILL Sunday?
This is... hardcore...

Remember the first F9 launch? An abort and then launch within a few hours. They can move fast.

Of course, Orbital made sure the crew was well rested before the maiden launch, so they gave them a long weekend. It appears that SpaceX management has a different style. Push, Push, Push.

[Lars_J]

STILL Sunday?
This is... hardcore...

Remember the first F9 launch? An abort and then launch within a few hours. They can move fast.

Of course, Orbital made sure the crew was well rested before the maiden launch, so they gave them a long weekend. It appears that SpaceX management has a different style. Push, Push, Push.

[mlindner]

STILL Sunday?
This is... hardcore...

Remember the first F9 launch? An abort and then launch within a few hours. They can move fast.

Of course, Orbital made sure the crew was well rested before the maiden launch, so they gave them a long weekend. It appears that SpaceX management has a different style. Push, Push, Push.

Old folks need more rest time.