-
#1040
by
Kabloona
on 18 Dec, 2015 17:54
-
-
#1041
by
cro-magnon gramps
on 18 Dec, 2015 18:12
-
Come on folks, just cause CB is away, we don't want to do a Denial of Moderator Service (aka drive the mods up the wall) lets keep it on topic...
meanwhile at the pad, haven't heard from Padrat for a long time... any news from our eyes and ears on the pad??
-
#1042
by
Chris Bergin
on 18 Dec, 2015 18:13
-
Chris is back. They've gotten close, apparently, but not static fired yet.
-
#1043
by
laika_fr
on 18 Dec, 2015 18:13
-
my bad wasn't using historical data for TX, so if Elon was referring to the 9/21 test
Waco-TX 9/21/2015
Avg humidity : 56% (max 80%)
min temp : 20°C
Patrick AFB yesterday
Humidity : 90-96%
temp 23-24 °C
-
#1044
by
Chris Bergin
on 18 Dec, 2015 18:26
-
So it looks like it'll play out one of two ways.
1) People in the area spot engine ignition (the exhaust) coming from the pad complex. If it was a good firing (remember, needs to be all nine engines and within parameters), ORBCOMM or SpaceX will likely tweet something due to the interest. Remember, engine ignition is one thing, good firing is another.
2) If not - and they can't get it done over the next few hours - I would assume Elon will take to Twitter.
-
#1045
by
Toastmastern
on 18 Dec, 2015 18:33
-
So it looks like it'll play out one of two ways.
1) People in the area spot engine ignition (the exhaust) coming from the pad complex. If it was a good firing (remember, needs to be all nine engines and within parameters), ORBCOMM or SpaceX will likely tweet something due to the interest. Remember, engine ignition is one thing, good firing is another.
2) If not - and they can't get it done over the next few hours - I would assume Elon will take to Twitter.
Don't get it has people been observing the *puff*?
-
#1046
by
brettreds2k
on 18 Dec, 2015 18:58
-
Why are they having so many issues with a static fire test? What was the reason to adjust LOX temps which seems to be what is delaying everything the past few days? I would think Elon just wants to get this one off without any issues so why mess with things for this flight?
-
#1047
by
docmordrid
on 18 Dec, 2015 19:01
-
Musk tweeted 5 minutes to static test
-
#1048
by
The Amazing Catstronaut
on 18 Dec, 2015 19:05
-
C'mon, let's do this!
-
#1049
by
abaddon
on 18 Dec, 2015 19:05
-
Why are they having so many issues with a static fire test? What was the reason to adjust LOX temps which seems to be what is delaying everything the past few days? I would think Elon just wants to get this one off without any issues so why mess with things for this flight?
The Falcon 9 1.1 FT is designed to work with subcooled LOX, so not using it is not an option.
-
#1050
by
Kabloona
on 18 Dec, 2015 19:07
-
Why are they having so many issues with a static fire test? What was the reason to adjust LOX temps which seems to be what is delaying everything the past few days? I would think Elon just wants to get this one off without any issues so why mess with things for this flight?
The Falcon 9 1.1 FT is designed to work with subcooled LOX, so not using it is not an option.
The reason for reducing the LOX and RP-1 temps is to increase their density so the rocket can carry more propellant for more performance.
More on that topic here:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39072.0
-
#1051
by
mtakala24
on 18 Dec, 2015 19:12
-
Why are they having so many issues with a static fire test? What was the reason to adjust LOX temps which seems to be what is delaying everything the past few days? I would think Elon just wants to get this one off without any issues so why mess with things for this flight?
Also, it was always the plan to get this new version (1.1 FT) flying from this mission onwards. The CRS-7 accident just happened to happen on the second to last flight of the previous version of the rocket. Only the Jason 3 -rocket is left, and it is launching from the west coast.
-
#1052
by
abaddon
on 18 Dec, 2015 19:12
-
Well, it is well after five minutes. We need* a short-lived poll as to what happened.
* No, we don't
-
#1053
by
Lee Jay
on 18 Dec, 2015 19:15
-
-
#1054
by
abaddon
on 18 Dec, 2015 19:18
-
I really don't get people who complain about SpaceX and transparency. Musk is often way more transparent than I would be in his position.
-
#1055
by
Semmel
on 18 Dec, 2015 19:19
-
What are the thresholds good for if they can be just adjusted like that?
Also, how can they test the throttle valve when the engine is not running?
@edit: Love it that Elon is tweeting things like that. Very much appreciated!
-
#1056
by
abaddon
on 18 Dec, 2015 19:23
-
What are the thresholds good for if they can be just adjusted like that?
They set conservative thresholds to be safe and then dial them back. I am not sure I understand it either, to be honest, but I remember the same things happening with F9 first flight (I think?) and definitely F9 1.1 first flight.
-
#1057
by
Jeff Lerner
on 18 Dec, 2015 19:24
-
Not meant as criticism but aren't thresholds tested prior to shipping to launch site ??
-
#1058
by
guckyfan
on 18 Dec, 2015 19:28
-
They did it before. First try with very narrow values, then adjust. They did the same with early 1.0 and I believe with early 1.1 too. Why exactly they chose that approach I don't know.
-
#1059
by
nadreck
on 18 Dec, 2015 19:28
-
I really don't get people who complain about SpaceX and transparency. Musk is often way more transparent than I would be in his position.
I don't get it, but I see it and related cognitive distortions all over the place. There is something about having to have an overriding opinion on people/companies/groups that are in the public eye that uses the notoriety of the target to leverage their own self-worth by proclaiming how the person/company/group should behave.
