SpaceX Falcon 9 v1.1 - Dragon - CRS-5/SpX-5 -Jan. 10, 2015 - DISCUSSION

[deruch]

I don't understand why they waited so long to do the static fire.  They last launched in October, they've had hardware at the cape long enough to prep it right?  It feels like they waited till the last minute, and didn't leave themselves enough time to fix issues.

Well, the launch date slipped to the right.  With the statement saying SpaceX needed more time with the vehicle on the ground to more thoroughly ensure success (or some such bureaucratese).  To me that certainly read like they were working issues that prevented them from launching on time.  It's not too big a leap to assume that it also prevented them from attempting a static fire any further away from the new NET date.

[TomH]

So it's your position that there's an obvious reason it can't possibly happen, even though SpaceX is actively planning to do it?  Which do you think more likely -- everyone at SpaceX is so incompetent they can't see something obvious, or that you're reasoning is flawed?

Let me begin by thanking you for such a polite and cordial response. I believe it's one of the kindest things anyone has ever said to me.

I didn't say that it can't happen, just that I don't think that it will. Companies often talk about what their products are capable of doing, but couch the statements in terms of what they will do. It's like Stratolaunch, Orbital, and SNC talking about mini-DC being capable of the fastest point to point transportation in history. Well, that may be true if you're out to get in the Guinness Book of World Records, but with all the lead time and hundreds of millions of dollars in cost, I believe no one will ever actually use it to get from Point A to Point B for a business meeting nor for a SEAL assault.

As far as all this flyback talk, I do believe it's possible, but with the very limited number of hours that will be possible to put on a reusable stage, and given the cost of that stage, it does not make economic sense to fly it back when you can just tow it back. It makes more sense to save the available flight hours for an actual payload. Also, think of how complex it is to launch this rocket from its pad. Now, think about how much more complex it would be to load cyro prop out in the ocean and go through all the things involved in a countdown while your rocket is way out at sea and your launch team is hundreds of miles away. Think of the cost of the flight preparations. It just does not make sense from an economic standpoint nor a technical standpoint. Why do all that when a few sailors can secure it and tow it back to Port Canaveral?

I hope the remainder of your week will be more peaceful and your life less stressful than it seems to be at present.

[woods170]

I don't understand why they waited so long to do the static fire.  They last launched in October, they've had hardware at the cape long enough to prep it right?  It feels like they waited till the last minute, and didn't leave themselves enough time to fix issues.

What happened was a turbopump shredding itself on Antares last october. NASA subsequently delayed the SpaceX CRS-5 flight to change the cargo manifest. Certain items were re-scheduled to go up on CRS-5 as a direct result of the Antares failure.
Had that not happened the first attempt to launch CRS-5 possibly would have been in early december, giving much more time until the holidays to clear out any trouble.
Last time SpaceX scheduled a launch during the holidays they didn't exactly make themselves popular with some folks at the Cape. That's probably why they will change course this time and delay the launch until after the holidays.

What also happened is that the November clearing of their launchpad proved to be futile. The CCiCAP pad abort was planned for that period, but the vehicle wasn't ready for that timeframe. With neither a rocket, nor a payload ready to fill that gap it became a lost month. The latter situation is not unique to SpaceX though. Has happened to Arianespace as well.

A third factor is the planned barge landing. NASA is granting SpaceX a rather substantial amount of leeway in re-scheduling launches for factors other than immediately related to CRS-5. I don't need to remind you that SpaceX is planning to land the first stage of this particular launcher on a barge out in the Atlantic. At least one recent delay was attributed to this secondary goal.

[LastStarFighter]

I don't understand why they waited so long to do the static fire.  They last launched in October, they've had hardware at the cape long enough to prep it right?  It feels like they waited till the last minute, and didn't leave themselves enough time to fix issues.

Probably to busy prepping for the epic holiday party this past weekend 

Or perhaps they just want to static fire as close to launch as possible to show their confidence that they won't have issues? Could also be that they don't want to have to fly in folks from Cali any sooner then required. That saves money!

[MTom]

I don't understand why they waited so long to do the static fire.  They last launched in October, they've had hardware at the cape long enough to prep it right?  It feels like they waited till the last minute, and didn't leave themselves enough time to fix issues.

Probably to busy prepping for the epic holiday party this past weekend 

Or perhaps they just want to static fire as close to launch as possible to show their confidence that they won't have issues? Could also be that they don't want to have to fly in folks from Cali any sooner then required. That saves money!

This is not about "show" the confidence.

Although I could agree with woods170 about massive external influences IMHO placing the static fire very close to the launch date is a chosen behavior of SpaceX too.

Launching in some weeks time-frame is a capability.
A capability has to be developed and trained. For all of the participants has to be clear: they (all together) have this capability or not. Red or green.

If there are by-pass roads, they will be used. By-pass roads are dangerous: they hide the status "red" and convert it to status "yellow". It results: the capability seems to be "green" for most of the participants but in fact this is "red". We had a quick-fix for the problems, we could be satisfied.
Conclusion: Better to leave the opportunity for by-passing as low as possible.

[joshcryer]

IMO, flyback probably means more of a Grasshopper style maneuver, it's not like they'd fly it back from 125 km out, that'd be absurd. Bring the barge to within 5-10 km, fly it back to a pad, saves on having to have all sorts of crane equipment, a nice pier or dock, and whatnot.

Shame about the slippage, though, I'll refrain from speculating, but it feels like this happens every time SpaceX does something new and exotic. I hope we can return to that 20 day turnaround or whatever it was in the near future, and things just get nailed down. I have no clue about the operational aspects of these sorts of things (given how complex rockets inherently are), so maybe that is impossible or nearly so.

But it sure was awesome this past year when they were churning out flights for that brief period.

[MP99]

IMO, flyback probably means more of a Grasshopper style maneuver, it's not like they'd fly it back from 125 km out, that'd be absurd. Bring the barge to within 5-10 km, fly it back to a pad, saves on having to have all sorts of crane equipment, a nice pier or dock, and whatnot.

Shame about the slippage, though, I'll refrain from speculating, but it feels like this happens every time SpaceX does something new and exotic. I hope we can return to that 20 day turnaround or whatever it was in the near future, and things just get nailed down. I have no clue about the operational aspects of these sorts of things (given how complex rockets inherently are), so maybe that is impossible or nearly so.

But it sure was awesome this past year when they were churning out flights for that brief period.

I think that's a fair summary. There seem to be consistent delays when something new is involved.

I suspect this could extend to the next missions that include booster recovery.

Cheers, Martin

Sent from my GT-N5120 using Forum Fiend v1.2.14.

[Jim]

Shame about the slippage, though, I'll refrain from speculating, but it feels like this happens every time SpaceX does something new and exotic.

It has nothing to do with that

[TrevorMonty]

I would guess fresh food for Xmas dinner was scheduled for CRS5. Looks like ISS crew will be celebrating Xmas with dehyds.

[MattMason]

I don't understand why they waited so long to do the static fire.  They last launched in October, they've had hardware at the cape long enough to prep it right?  It feels like they waited till the last minute, and didn't leave themselves enough time to fix issues.

What happened was a turbopump shredding itself on Antares last october. NASA subsequently delayed the SpaceX CRS-5 flight to change the cargo manifest. Certain items were re-scheduled to go up on CRS-5 as a direct result of the Antares failure.
Had that not happened the first attempt to launch CRS-5 possibly would have been in early december, giving much more time until the holidays to clear out any trouble.
Last time SpaceX scheduled a launch during the holidays they didn't exactly make themselves popular with some folks at the Cape. That's probably why they will change course this time and delay the launch until after the holidays.

What also happened is that the November clearing of their launchpad proved to be futile. The CCiCAP pad abort was planned for that period, but the vehicle wasn't ready for that timeframe. With neither a rocket, nor a payload ready to fill that gap it became a lost month. The latter situation is not unique to SpaceX though. Has happened to Arianespace as well.

A third factor is the planned barge landing. NASA is granting SpaceX a rather substantial amount of leeway in re-scheduling launches for factors other than immediately related to CRS-5. I don't need to remind you that SpaceX is planning to land the first stage of this particular launcher on a barge out in the Atlantic. At least one recent delay was attributed to this secondary goal.

Agreed. Extra caution is needed. If Falcon could fly, it would fly. But minding your Ps and Qs is always a good thing, especially when you're the only U.S. cargo launcher.

And Chris B.'s latest report with an official response from the SpaceX spokesman confirms the reasoning for both delay and a post-Christmas launch:

“During this time, there are thermal and operational constraints that prohibit Dragon from being allowed to berth with the ISS.  This high beta period runs from 12/28/14-1/7/15.  Note that for a launch on 1/6, Dragon berths on 1/8.”

I also admit to a certain level of superstition. January has not been a lucky month in NASA's spaceflight history. It's best to add a heaping spoon of Thoroughness atop SpaceX's usual bowl of Care. A delay is preferable to the alternatives.

[b ramsey]

Well there goes the daylight launch out the window. The Jan 6 date is scheduled for 6:18 am ET instantaneous window, sunrise is at 7:16 am ET at the Cape. The launch will in the dark. The first stage landing will be in the dark most likely or slightly before sunrise so I don't know how good of video there will be for that. Night launches are kinda cool once or twice but they are mostly just a bright light that drowns everything else out, perhaps its better if your are there viewing with the naked eye. Kinda of a  bummer, I was really looking forward to viewing this launch and the first stage return.  Have to wait for a later launch for better video it looks like.

[Galactic Penguin SST]

Well there goes the daylight launch out the window. The Jan 6 date is scheduled for 6:18 am ET instantaneous window, sunrise is at 7:16 am ET at the Cape. The launch will in the dark. The first stage landing will be in the dark most likely or slightly before sunrise so I don't know how good of video there will be for that. Night launches are kinda cool once or twice but they are mostly just a bright light that drowns everything else out, perhaps its better if your are there viewing with the naked eye. Kinda of a  bummer, I was really looking forward to viewing this launch and the first stage return.  Have to wait for a later launch for better video it looks like.

I wonder if floodlights will be installed on the ship - that might actually make the barge easier to see from above, as well as seeing the rocket stage slamming on the surface.... 

[Ben the Space Brit]

Well there goes the daylight launch out the window. The Jan 6 date is scheduled for 6:18 am ET instantaneous window, sunrise is at 7:16 am ET at the Cape. The launch will in the dark. The first stage landing will be in the dark most likely or slightly before sunrise so I don't know how good of video there will be for that. Night launches are kinda cool once or twice but they are mostly just a bright light that drowns everything else out, perhaps its better if your are there viewing with the naked eye. Kinda of a  bummer, I was really looking forward to viewing this launch and the first stage return.  Have to wait for a later launch for better video it looks like.

This is purely an aesthetic thing but I love pre-dawn launches. The vehicle flying into the sunrise makes for spectacular views from the rocket-cam.

Additionally, I wonder if this would make visual tracking of the approaching core easier, at least during periods when it is actively thrusting. Beyond that, battery-powered LEDs on the landing legs that activate at landing +30 seconds are pretty much the only thing required.

[Garrett]

Shame about the slippage, though, I'll refrain from speculating, but it feels like this happens every time SpaceX does something new and exotic.

I think that's a fair summary. There seem to be consistent delays when something new is involved.

I think that would only make sense if the "something new" was related to the launching phase. But here the "something new" is with the landing phase, which appears to me to be quite independent. If the grid fins or the landing legs, for example, weren't ready, I cannot see how that would impact the launch date. SpaceX would presumable just remove them or inhibit them. Launching on time is a higher priority at the moment than reuse. That may change in the future, but they're not at that stage yet.

Besides, I cannot see how a problem related to the landing phase hardware/software would result in what seems to have been an aborted hot fire.

[Prober]

I would guess fresh food for Xmas dinner was scheduled for CRS5. Looks like ISS crew will be celebrating Xmas with dehyds.

yep, had that thought

sad that SpaceX can't get past 2 dragon launches a year.   The classic line of excuses of "space being hard" etc. just don't seem to cut it anymore.

[Lar]

sad that SpaceX can't get past 2 dragon launches a year.   The classic line of excuses of "space being hard" etc. just don't seem to cut it anymore.

And here I was worried that you weren't going to come in and critique SpaceX's launch tempo...

[rsnellenberger]

Well there goes the daylight launch out the window. The Jan 6 date is scheduled for 6:18 am ET instantaneous window, sunrise is at 7:16 am ET at the Cape. The launch will in the dark. The first stage landing will be in the dark most likely or slightly before sunrise so I don't know how good of video there will be for that. Night launches are kinda cool once or twice but they are mostly just a bright light that drowns everything else out, perhaps its better if your are there viewing with the naked eye. Kinda of a  bummer, I was really looking forward to viewing this launch and the first stage return.  Have to wait for a later launch for better video it looks like.

I wonder if floodlights will be installed on the ship - that might actually make the barge easier to see from above, as well as seeing the rocket stage slamming on the surface.... 

I suppose they *could* attach a large, downward-pointing floodlight to the base of the stage to illuminate the landing platform. 

[Prober]

sad that SpaceX can't get past 2 dragon launches a year.   The classic line of excuses of "space being hard" etc. just don't seem to cut it anymore.

And here I was worried that you weren't going to come in and critique SpaceX's launch tempo...

lol, I'm being guarded for the holiday season or you would get my real critique 

[Lar]

sad that SpaceX can't get past 2 dragon launches a year.   The classic line of excuses of "space being hard" etc. just don't seem to cut it anymore.

And here I was worried that you weren't going to come in and critique SpaceX's launch tempo...

lol, I'm being guarded for the holiday season or you would get my real critique 

lol, so am I or you would have gotten my real critique of your critique

[Kaputnik]

Well there goes the daylight launch out the window. The Jan 6 date is scheduled for 6:18 am ET instantaneous window, sunrise is at 7:16 am ET at the Cape. The launch will in the dark. The first stage landing will be in the dark most likely or slightly before sunrise so I don't know how good of video there will be for that. Night launches are kinda cool once or twice but they are mostly just a bright light that drowns everything else out, perhaps its better if your are there viewing with the naked eye. Kinda of a  bummer, I was really looking forward to viewing this launch and the first stage return.  Have to wait for a later launch for better video it looks like.

I wonder if floodlights will be installed on the ship - that might actually make the barge easier to see from above, as well as seeing the rocket stage slamming on the surface.... 

I suppose they *could* attach a large, downward-pointing floodlight to the base of the stage to illuminate the landing platform. 

I think they already did that. It's powered by kerosene and is quite bright.