Author Topic: LIVE: SpaceX Falcon 9 v1.1 - CASSIOPE - Sept. 29 - LAUNCH UPDATES (Read 316110 times)

Lars_J · « **Reply #380 on:** 10/01/2013 03:48 pm »

Quote from: JimO on 10/01/2013 01:43 pm

May I raise the point that the videos from South Africa and Mauritius show a symmetric expanding cloud, what might be expected from a stable dispenser. This is markedly unlike the spiral clouds painted by
tumbling stages. Is that a clue that no energetic event disturbed the orientation of the second stage?

That sounds reasonable, but I'm no expert.

JimO · « **Reply #381 on:** 10/01/2013 03:53 pm »

Quote from: kevin-rf on 10/01/2013 01:49 pm

Jim, I thought the spiral patterns where due to a stage firing while tumbling...

There are several ways to make space spirals:

1. Tumbling thrusting rockets, e.g. a Chinese 'UFO' where the plume actually reverses rotation sense halfway through...

2. Spinning solid-fuel stages doing 'momentum dumping' on less-than-max-range test flights, usually by opening and then closing two opposite-facing thrust chamber ports, e.g., Norway spiral, Dec 2009.

3. ICBM MIRV bus spin-up post shutdown -- usually a 3 to 5 second burst of laterally-mounted thrusters, seen on several recent KY to Sary Shagan ICBM flights.

4. Post-insertion fuel dump with stage slow tumble, eg some deep-space Cemtaur purges, and Falcon-9 over east Australia, June 2010, and the 'great east coast UFO' of 1986 [Japanese H-2 stage], etc.

I'm sure there are other ways....

Lars_J · « **Reply #382 on:** 10/01/2013 05:36 pm »

A tweet from James Dean, reporter at Florida Today: https://twitter.com/flatoday_jdean/status/385079753922736128

Quote

James Dean
‏@flatoday_jdean
SpaceX statement re. speculation about F9 upper stage anomaly: "our data confirms there was no rupture of any kind on the second stage."

edkyle99 · « **Reply #383 on:** 10/01/2013 05:43 pm »

Quote from: kevin-rf on 10/01/2013 12:25 pm

Quote from: fatjohn1408 on 10/01/2013 12:05 pm
How do you do this actually? Is there a quick and dirty calculation that can be performed?

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/realdata/sightings/SSapplications/Post/JavaSSOP/SSOP_Help/tle_def.html

btw. Space-Track TLE's are not supposed to be posted. Though, posting the catalog number and what Ed posted are fair game.

This didn't come from Space-Track. It came from the DANDE web site! It is presented as an "in house TLE".

- Ed Kyle

gospacex · « **Reply #384 on:** 10/01/2013 05:51 pm »

Are there any videos of retro burn?

Lars_J · « **Reply #385 on:** 10/01/2013 06:14 pm »

Quote from: gospacex on 10/01/2013 05:51 pm

Are there any videos of retro burn?

Not yet, but if you look at this video, you can see what appears to be the 1st stage thrusters turning it around. (at 4:40)

mlindner · « **Reply #386 on:** 10/01/2013 06:15 pm »

Quote from: kevin-rf on 10/01/2013 12:25 pm

Quote from: fatjohn1408 on 10/01/2013 12:05 pm
How do you do this actually? Is there a quick and dirty calculation that can be performed?

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/realdata/sightings/SSapplications/Post/JavaSSOP/SSOP_Help/tle_def.html

btw. Space-Track TLE's are not supposed to be posted. Though, posting the catalog number and what Ed posted are fair game.

Non-functional because the government is shut down lol... Looks like they took all of NASA.gov down. Didn't know a website running depended on people actually being there, unless they shut off power.

justineet · « **Reply #387 on:** 10/01/2013 06:50 pm »

Quote from: edkyle99 on 10/01/2013 05:43 pm

Quote from: kevin-rf on 10/01/2013 12:25 pm
Quote from: fatjohn1408 on 10/01/2013 12:05 pm
How do you do this actually? Is there a quick and dirty calculation that can be performed?

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/realdata/sightings/SSapplications/Post/JavaSSOP/SSOP_Help/tle_def.html

btw. Space-Track TLE's are not supposed to be posted. Though, posting the catalog number and what Ed posted are fair game.
This didn't come from Space-Track. It came from the DANDE web site! It is presented as an "in house TLE".

- Ed Kyle

The speculation is unlikely because the upper stage was photographed over South Africa venting off unused fuel about an hour after launch.....https://twitter.com/RavenXV/status/384668909007155200/photo/1

mr. mark · « **Reply #388 on:** 10/01/2013 07:03 pm »

http://www.space.com/23023-spacex-falcon-9-from-vandenberg-afb-near-perfect-video.html

US Airforce personel commentary on the launch.

input~2 · « **Reply #389 on:** 10/01/2013 07:23 pm »

"No Upper-stage Explosion after Falcon 9 v1.1 Launch, SpaceX Says"
http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/37498no-upper-stage-explosion-after-falcon-9-v11-launch-spacex-says

king1999 · « **Reply #390 on:** 10/01/2013 07:23 pm »

Quote from: mr. mark on 10/01/2013 07:03 pm

http://www.space.com/23023-spacex-falcon-9-from-vandenberg-afb-near-perfect-video.html

US Airforce personel commentary on the launch.

What did they mean there was no countdown?
They didn't watch the webcast?
Weird the launch caught the reporters by surprise.

Lars_J · « **Reply #391 on:** 10/01/2013 07:31 pm »

Quote from: input~2 on 10/01/2013 07:23 pm

"No Upper-stage Explosion after Falcon 9 v1.1 Launch, SpaceX Says"
http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/37498no-upper-stage-explosion-after-falcon-9-v11-launch-spacex-says

The SpaceX quote from that article: (thanks!)

Quote

"Following separation of the satellites to their correct orbit, the Falcon 9 second stage underwent a controlled venting of propellants (fuel and pressure were released from the tank) and the stage was successfully safed. During this process, it is possible insulation came off the fuel dome on the second stage and is the source of what some observers incorrectly interpreted as a rupture in the second stage. This material would be in several pieces and be reflective in the Space Track radar. It is also possible the debris came from the student satellite separation mechanisms onboard.

SpaceX will continue to review to help identify the source of the extra debris, but our data confirms there was no rupture of any kind on the second stage."

ugordan · « **Reply #392 on:** 10/01/2013 07:32 pm »

There's a related article to this video and it says the PA system at the site was apparently carrying the engineering net and not the countdown net so that's why they didn't hear a countdown. Don't know where they got the idea the launch was supposed to go off at 09:21, though.

Lars_J · « **Reply #393 on:** 10/01/2013 07:41 pm »

Quote from: ugordan on 10/01/2013 07:32 pm

There's a related article to this video and it says the PA system at the site was apparently carrying the engineering net and not the countdown net so that's why they didn't hear a countdown. Don't know where they got the idea the launch was supposed to go off at 09:21, though.

Here is the article: http://www.space.com/23009-spacex-falcon-9-rocket-launch-test-first-person.html

laika_fr · « **Reply #394 on:** 10/01/2013 08:06 pm »

looks like a velocity burn if you ask me

Lars_J · « **Reply #395 on:** 10/01/2013 08:07 pm »

It is hard to tell where you captured that from - but it looks like the 2nd stage ignition.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #396 on:** 10/01/2013 08:22 pm »

Recording and transcript of the post launch presser now in L2.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=31448.msg1104571#msg1104571 (L2 Link)

We're going to create some articles out of it.

laika_fr · « **Reply #397 on:** 10/01/2013 08:34 pm »

Lars, from the above video, zoom 250%, if the halo means m-vac ignition, this comes after.

mlindner · « **Reply #398 on:** 10/02/2013 05:08 am »

Quote from: mr. mark on 10/01/2013 07:03 pm

http://www.space.com/23023-spacex-falcon-9-from-vandenberg-afb-near-perfect-video.html

US Airforce personel commentary on the launch.

If only Space.com would get with the modern era and use HD video with reasonable bitrate.

InfraNut2 · « **Reply #399 on:** 10/03/2013 06:40 am »

The new NSF article on the next F9 v.1.1 flight quoted Elon as saying:

Quote

“We essentially saw the engine initiate ignition, get up to about 400 psi and then it encountered a condition that it didn’t like. It may have been due to an extended spin start, maybe, but this is speculative. So it initiated an abort of the restart. But we have all of the data.

“Before deciding what the issue was, I think we want a bit more time to read the data, before coming to a conclusion,”

Please take any technical discussion of this to the discussion thread.

EDIT: fixed discussion thread link.