SpaceX F9 : Bangabandhu-1 : KSC 39A : May 11, 2018 : Discussion

[soltasto]

Took quite long if it really is B1046... However explains the delay

[Johnnyhinbos]

I wonder if they took it "into the shop" after the static fire at McGregor to do any post-static fire analysis on the octoweb, etc.

[Jakusb]

I wonder if they took it "into the shop" after the static fire at McGreggor to do any post-static fire analysis on the octoweb, etc.

I guess NASA has something to do with the delay. It seems they have done some very extensive post test fire checks and inspection at McGregor.
Likely all for certification purposes...
Block-5 is to be human rated, so better safe then sorry...

Side note:
Very curious how quickly 1047 will be processed at McGregor. Hopefully and likely much faster, though still longer then pre-block-5 cores...

[wannamoonbase]

All Hail Block 5!

Great to hear it finally made it to the cape. 

It's a start to a flow, 46 in the barn, 47 in Texas.  By the time this flys maybe 48 could be out of Hawthorne.

Looking forward to seeing the Block 5 performance flying.

[abaddon]

I wonder if they took it "into the shop" after the static fire at McGreggor to do any post-static fire analysis on the octoweb, etc.

I guess NASA has something to do with the delay. It seems they have done some very extensive post test fire checks and inspection at McGregor.

Is the bolded speculation, or is there information to indicate this?

[vaporcobra]

I wonder if they took it "into the shop" after the static fire at McGreggor to do any post-static fire analysis on the octoweb, etc.

I guess NASA has something to do with the delay. It seems they have done some very extensive post test fire checks and inspection at McGregor.

Is the bolded speculation, or is there information to indicate this?

The sheer amount of time 1046 spent both vertical and otherwise at McGregor is enough to suggest that it was a uniquely thorough test regime. 

[deruch]

I wonder if they took it "into the shop" after the static fire at McGreggor to do any post-static fire analysis on the octoweb, etc.

I guess NASA has something to do with the delay. It seems they have done some very extensive post test fire checks and inspection at McGregor.

Is the bolded speculation, or is there information to indicate this?

The sheer amount of time 1046 spent both vertical and otherwise at McGregor is enough to suggest that it was a uniquely thorough test regime.

Or possibly just that as it was the first run through of a new variant of the vehicle, so it took them longer than for the well shaken down models.  Each time SpaceX has introduced large-ish changes they've had an uptick in scrubs and delays as they smooth the newly found rough edges of their processes for a new vehicle which behaves a bit differently.  Slightly tweaking countdown timings and minutely altering acceptable rates and parameter margins, etc.

[Jakusb]

I wonder if they took it "into the shop" after the static fire at McGreggor to do any post-static fire analysis on the octoweb, etc.

I guess NASA has something to do with the delay. It seems they have done some very extensive post test fire checks and inspection at McGregor.

Is the bolded speculation, or is there information to indicate this?

Speculation, but based on talks with someone in the know, beginning of February. He made it clear that NASA is heavily involved in everything around this specific core. All procedures are now much more elaborate to adhere to NASA standards. This requires serious adjusting, including creating brand new tooling to do all the additional required inspections.

[Johnnyhinbos]

Not surprising considering the audit report from NASA’s OIG on commercial crew.

[dnavas]

Speculation, but based on talks with someone in the know, beginning of February. He made it clear that NASA is heavily involved in everything around this specific core. All procedures are now much more elaborate to adhere to NASA standards. This requires serious adjusting, including creating brand new tooling to do all the additional required inspections.

Do you know if this specific to crack mitigation and the blisk, or is it more wide-ranging than that?

[cppetrie]

Speculation, but based on talks with someone in the know, beginning of February. He made it clear that NASA is heavily involved in everything around this specific core. All procedures are now much more elaborate to adhere to NASA standards. This requires serious adjusting, including creating brand new tooling to do all the additional required inspections.

Do you know if this specific to crack mitigation and the blisk, or is it more wide-ranging than that?

Crack testing could be checked on the engines separate from the booster. The whole booster being involved suggests COPV and integrated system checks.

[Jakusb]

Speculation, but based on talks with someone in the know, beginning of February. He made it clear that NASA is heavily involved in everything around this specific core. All procedures are now much more elaborate to adhere to NASA standards. This requires serious adjusting, including creating brand new tooling to do all the additional required inspections.

Do you know if this specific to crack mitigation and the blisk, or is it more wide-ranging than that?

No idea. The talk was not very specific, but main takeaways were that NASA involvement increased procedures drastically, including testing and inspection. And that inspection is hard in some places on an fully integrated booster. For that they required new tooling build. Not a problem, but takes time to figure out and get them build. Some requiring several iterations, with tooling going back and forth between McGregor and Hawthorne for adjustments.

I am sure they do it in such a way that it becomes much more easy for later boosters.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

During the TESS pre-launch press conference, on now, Hans Koenigsmann was asked about Block 5 testing at McGregor. He said that testing went well and completed quicker than for previous block upgrades.

[Grendal]

A launch time has been posted for May 4th: 2000-2225 GMT (4:00-6:25 p.m. EDT)

[fans0902]

wait for a  update thred

[fans0902]

Ha, just：

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=45522.0

[Ben the Space Brit]

A launch time has been posted for May 4th: 2000-2225 GMT (4:00-6:25 p.m. EDT)

The juvenile in me can't help but think of this as 'The Star Wars launch date'. Sorry about that!

[Semmel]

A launch time has been posted for May 4th: 2000-2225 GMT (4:00-6:25 p.m. EDT)

Thanks, thats fantastic news This launch is arguably more important than FH (arguably because I think it is but most might not agree). I am on a business trip that day but should be home by that time.

[Star One]

A launch time has been posted for May 4th: 2000-2225 GMT (4:00-6:25 p.m. EDT)

Thanks, thats fantastic news This launch is arguably more important than FH (arguably because I think it is but most might not agree). I am on a business trip that day but should be home by that time.

FH is more relevant to their longer term future with if nothing else the management of such a large number of engines more directly important to the BFR.

[wannamoonbase]

A launch time has been posted for May 4th: 2000-2225 GMT (4:00-6:25 p.m. EDT)

Thanks, thats fantastic news This launch is arguably more important than FH (arguably because I think it is but most might not agree). I am on a business trip that day but should be home by that time.

It's more important in that the Block 5 F9 is going to be doing something like 90% of their launches.

But it's all the same technology, so I think it's splitting hairs.

Hard to be the raw awesomeness and excitement of the FH.