-
#1060
by
Poole Amateur
on 18 Dec, 2015 19:33
-
-
#1061
by
Craftyatom
on 18 Dec, 2015 19:35
-
Not meant as criticism but aren't thresholds tested prior to shipping to launch site ??
IIRC, the static firing at the cape is the first time they're tested while stacked, because otherwise they would be stacked, tested, and then de-stacked at McGregor, causing big delays. You can imagine how the engine sitting on top of a stage full of deep-cryo propellants would perform differently than a stage out in the Texas heat - yes, it's got cryo stuff on top of it as well in both cases, but there's a marked difference.
Also, I've seen more than a few comments on "why wasn't this caught during testing?" Part of that answer is that not all problems will surface during the first test. Hell, 18 F9s flew perfectly fine, and that's pretty much the most extensive test you can do, and there was
still a subsequent failure. If something can go wrong, it will go wrong, but nobody knows when, and so it's unreasonable to expect everything to be caught during testing, IMO.
-
#1062
by
The Amazing Catstronaut
on 18 Dec, 2015 20:02
-
They certainly seem determined to get it done today - they havn't decided to abandon the static fire for today yet.
-
#1063
by
abaddon
on 18 Dec, 2015 20:07
-
They certainly seem determined to get it done today - they havn't decided to abandon the static fire for today yet.
Not getting it in today presumably means a slip. Do they have anything open beyond Sunday?
-
#1064
by
nadreck
on 18 Dec, 2015 20:09
-
They certainly seem determined to get it done today - they havn't decided to abandon the static fire for today yet.
They just want to see the full palette of shades of blue I can turn while I hold my breath
On a more serious note - if this is just clearing a bunch of issues that cropped up because of the delays induced by the initial problems of sub-cooled LOX then they will try again tomorrow - however if there is some fundamental issue with the sub-cooling that did not show up at McGregor then maybe they will be taking a longer break.
-
#1065
by
Toastmastern
on 18 Dec, 2015 20:11
-
They certainly seem determined to get it done today - they havn't decided to abandon the static fire for today yet.
Not getting it in today presumably means a slip. Do they have anything open beyond Sunday?
Rumors are saying tuesday aswell
-
#1066
by
Michael.Kalenty
on 18 Dec, 2015 20:15
-
My guess is that they want to work as through as many problems as possible, as soon as possible. They have the Jason-3 mission scheduled for Jan 17th, and the further they delay OG2, the less time they'll have to review data, fix issues, etc. before they have to start delaying other launches that already have a set date... which just ends up being a scheduling headache.
-
#1067
by
Toastmastern
on 18 Dec, 2015 20:18
-
-
#1068
by
MarekCyzio
on 18 Dec, 2015 20:27
-
I heard some very faint low frequency rumble. I am about 30 miles south. Not sure if this was a test.
-
#1069
by
Craftyatom
on 18 Dec, 2015 20:29
-
I heard some very faint low frequency rumble. I am about 30 miles south. Not sure if this was a test.
Another possibility is that the F9 has just been brought down by an earthquake.
Don't celebrate yet, everybody.
-
#1070
by
francesco nicoli
on 18 Dec, 2015 20:31
-
"two minutes from Static Fire" (Musk on twitter)
-
#1071
by
mtakala24
on 18 Dec, 2015 20:33
-
-
#1072
by
MarekCyzio
on 18 Dec, 2015 20:36
-
It was C-17
-
#1073
by
The Amazing Catstronaut
on 18 Dec, 2015 20:38
-
I blame all the people having negative spiritual experiences about this launch. You've Voodooed it before we even got the static fire over with! Shame on you for letting your occult powers interfere with rocket science.
-
#1074
by
brettreds2k
on 18 Dec, 2015 20:39
-
It has been well over 2 minutes since Elon tweeted "2 Minutes till static fire" so..... whats the update? lol
-
#1075
by
rcoppola
on 18 Dec, 2015 20:41
-
I blame all the people having negative spiritual experiences about this launch. You've Voodooed it before we even got the static fire over with! Shame on you for letting your occult powers interfere with rocket science.
Well, I just got out of the theatre where I watched another Falcon light up the sky...and it was...a.m.a.z.i.n.g. The Force is strong with this Falcon....it will happen.
-
#1076
by
cro-magnon gramps
on 18 Dec, 2015 20:45
-
I blame all the people having negative spiritual experiences about this launch. You've Voodooed it before we even got the static fire over with! Shame on you for letting your occult powers interfere with rocket science.
Well, I just got out of the theatre where I watched another Falcon light up the sky...and it was...a.m.a.z.i.n.g. The Force is strong with this Falcon....it will happen.
I would like it to happen now, tonight, but I am not going to get bent out of shape if it doesn't.. IT will happen sometime soon... go Elon, Go SpaceX, go Falcon 9 FT
-
#1077
by
nadreck
on 18 Dec, 2015 21:01
-
Elon Musk @elonmusk 27s27 seconds ago
Aborted on ignition timing due to slow ground side valve. Adjusting ignition sequence by 0.6 secs for next attempt.
Anyone know if this is saying that either a LOX or pressurant feed line valve for the first or 2nd stage that was supposed to shut off before ignition failed to? Or is this something that does not connect to the vehicle.
-
#1078
by
kevinof
on 18 Dec, 2015 21:01
-
New tweet from Elon Musk
Aborted on ignition timing due to slow ground side valve. Adjusting ignition sequence by 0.6 secs for next attempt.
-
#1079
by
Chris Bergin
on 18 Dec, 2015 21:02
-
Elon Musk @elonmusk 27s27 seconds ago
Aborted on ignition timing due to slow ground side valve. Adjusting ignition sequence by 0.6 secs for next attempt.
Sounds like the rocket is behaving, but the GSE let them down on that attempt.
Willing to entertain thoughts
Don't celebrate yet, everybody.
