SpaceX Falcon 9 : TESS : April 18, 2018 : Discussion

[eeergo]

My point wasn't so much the delay, but that more or less for a second time in a row, certification wasn't complete until after the vehicle in question was already out of production in favor of a not yet certifued successor.

This has nothing to do with NASA vs. SpaceX in particular, its rather a common symptom seen in fields with fast innovation cycles.

In my last job, we build wireless sensors, which we needed to put through a certification process due to radio emissions. We had it more than once that by the time we finally had a device iteration certified, one of the chips used in the design was already marked "obsolete" by the manufacturer, Especially in the field of telco microelectronics, some components meanwhile have a generation life of under 1 year. From the time a chip becones available for the general public for prototyping.until end of production is sometimes less than 6 months.

Thats might be OK for smartphone manufacturers who are used to it, but not enough to complete cert tests and paperwork for a small startup, and ramp up production.

A balance must exist between rigorous certification processes to verify mission assurance and enhancements to the systems to increase mission assurance and delivered capabilities, I would argue. It doesn't make sense to take a year to certify something if the object in question is manufactured in a day -- but it doesn't make sense either to make minute incremental steps every week and roll them out for consumption if those need to be certified up to high standards.

Block 4 *second stages* started flying in August, about 8.5 months ago to this day. Certification was expected in September 2017 according to the GAO assessment (originally, but at which point was that?) -- that obviously left about a month to certify a new, non-flight-proven major system that only flew twice more in the considered period. Note the extra month also accounts for the time SpaceX used to correct something that wasn't up to standards, on their side, in order to satisfy requirements.

I don't have the post history at hand now, but I remember a lot of speculation was floating around, for a few months, about when SpaceX would roll out the Block 4 S2, while they kept shooting up Block 3 S2s. What if the certification process wasn't the problem?

[ZachS09]

Actually, Block 4 upper stages began flying in May 2017 and were stacked atop several Block 3 booster rockets. The Block 4 booster rockets began flying in August 2017.

[eeergo]

Actually, Block 4 upper stages began flying in May 2017 and were stacked atop several Block 3 booster rockets. The Block 4 booster rockets began flying in August 2017.

You're right about that, there were two flights of Block 4 second stages on Block 3 first stages in May. S1 and 2 should be independent of one another (assumption) so the missions for NROL-76 and I5-F4 could in principle be counted towards B4S2 certification. That adds 3 months to my post above, and makes a total of five B4S2 flown before being certified for high-profile NASA missions.

This means the certification process was initially envisioned to take 4 months (more realistic than the single month estimated above, clearly), but ended up lasting 5, due to certification delays *and* corrective action implementation.

Still, the substance remains - I don't find why this small launch slip should be frowned upon, or why it's being assumed it was solely due to the certification bureaucracy dragging on needlessly.

[seruriermarshal]

First pic of a fairing return (from TESS launch 3 weeks ago).

[pospa]

First pic of a fairing return (from TESS launch 3 weeks ago).

What is the source of your info this picture is from TESS mission?

[tleski]

First pic of a fairing return (from TESS launch 3 weeks ago).

What is the source of your info this picture is from TESS mission?

The source is Elon's instagram.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BiQ5qXnA_OM/
Posted on May 2nd. This photo was discussed extensively in the fairing recovery thread.

[nacnud]

First pic of a fairing return (from TESS launch 3 weeks ago).

What is the source of your info this picture is from TESS mission?

Elon Musks instagram

https://www.instagram.com/p/BiQ5qXnA_OM/?hl=en&taken-by=elonmusk

[tleski]

[...]

Let's not go all fanboi into a SpaceX vs NASA discussion again. The reason reviews weren't done faster isn't stated, and I would guess having mission assurance oversight in order to prevent mishaps is something desirable, not the contrary. It doesn't matter if it was the last Block 4, the review on S2 COPVs (which caused two LOMs so far) wasn't mature on time.

Official investigation report concluded that CRS-7 LOM was caused by a strut failure not a COPV issue. Do we have any new information pointing to COPV? But I guess this is off topic for this thread.

[pospa]

First pic of a fairing return (from TESS launch 3 weeks ago).

What is the source of your info this picture is from TESS mission?

Elon Musks instagram

Sorry, but he is not being specific about from which mission this picture is.
Btw, we know this picture since it was posted, discussed here: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37727.msg1816687#msg1816687

[abaddon]

Official investigation report concluded that CRS-7 LOM was caused by a strut failure not a COPV issue. Do we have any new information pointing to COPV? But I guess this is off topic for this thread.

A strut bolting the COPV to the tank wall.  One could reasonably consider that a part of the COPV system (and the design that puts them inside the LOX tank), even though it isn't part of the COPV proper.

Yes, this is all off-topic, so best to move on.

[dnavas]

Sorry, but he is not being specific about from which mission this picture is.

space.com attributes it to TESS: https://www.space.com/40509-spacex-payload-fairing-parafoil-photo.html

[Raul]

Sorry, but he is not being specific about from which mission this picture is.

space.com attributes it to TESS: https://www.space.com/40509-spacex-payload-fairing-parafoil-photo.html

Last week, I also considered during which mission could be taken this photo. And regardless of space.com article, I would have the same opinion, that this fairing is really from TESS mission. Not only because it's a recent mission...

1, Successful fairing landing attempt at least in the water was possible in these missions: TESS (2.0.), Iridium-5, Paz (2.0.), Iridium-4 (unconfirmed), Intelsat-35e (unconfirmed), BulgariaSat-1 (unconfirmed), Inmarsat-5 F4,  NROL-76

2, From all of these missions, only two missions launched at such a time, that fairing could reach the sun approximately 0.5° above the horizon at sunset (TESS) or sunrise (Paz) -  by the way, both missions with fairing 2.0.

3, Although it is almost impossible to recognize the sunrise or sunset in the photo taken over the sea. Both these missions launched under relatively different climatic conditions, that should affect the appearance of this photo for example by the amount of water vapor present in the air - absolute humidity affected by temperature: TESS 24°C, PAZ 2°C. More saturated, more orange and red, harsher colors of photo remind me much more of sunset at higher temperature, than sunrise at freezing temperatures at the end of February on the West Coast - points to the TESS mission, before fairing soft water landing in the ocean near Go Pursuit.

[pospa]

Thanks Raul, your analysis seems to be reasonable and more trustworthy then other sources.
So I agree with you its most probably from TESS mission. 

[Yeknom-Ecaps]

Here are some videos of the fairings in port - with both fairing on OCISLY - and in the video you can see the TESS logo. One fairing had the parasail is in great shape .... the other not so much.



In this video the non-parasail fairing is still under the tarp as seen in the first video

[Yeknom-Ecaps]

Is there a list of all the post launch events somewhere? Perigee maneuvers, instrument checkouts, etc.

Periodically some appear on the NASA TESS page but many do not.

[CorvusCorax]

That is some really awesome launch footage there, especially at t=561

-- toasty transporter erector :-)

The F9 gets off the pad real quick, but wow - during those few seconds the ablative paint at the pad base seems to gets some heavy workout