Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD (2)  (Read 512537 times)

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5627
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 4878
  • Likes Given: 1368
From ASAP media call today:

Quote
Frost: Looks like direct cause of Falcon mishap essentially found, but are loose ends, NASA not completely comfortable, more work to do.

https://twitter.com/flatoday_jdean/status/834852531033534465

Online docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4615
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 1744
  • Likes Given: 1
Is it safe to assume the "loose ends" are the COPV and other upgrades SpaceX has already mentioned? Just seems were addressing the past again, as with the GAO document.
DM

Online cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2848
  • Liked: 1970
  • Likes Given: 664
It was mentioned in one of the various CRS-10 press conferences that NASA was excited about doing some fundamental research on composites submerged in LOX in cooperation with SpaceX.

Offline pargoo

  • Lifelong space fan
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 663
  • Australia
    • Buran - wait, the Russians had a Space Shuttle?
  • Liked: 65
  • Likes Given: 1
     Before this thread fades into obscurity, we saw a close-up of the fairing but was a whole-vehicle on-the-pad hi-res ever released...not by SpaceX, of course :/

Offline njb

  • Member
  • Posts: 8
  • Melbourne, Australia
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 8
Was a Spacex mission patch ever released for Amos-6.
They have released one for every other mission

Offline mme

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1186
  • Santa Barbara, CA, USA, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way Galaxy, Virgo Supercluster
  • Liked: 1424
  • Likes Given: 3844
Was a Spacex mission patch ever released for Amos-6.
They have released one for every other mission
SpaceX doesn't sell a CRS-7 patch, I don't not expect them to sell an AMOS-6 patch.
« Last Edit: 02/24/2017 05:30 AM by mme »
Space is not Highlander.  There can, and will, be more than one.

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5627
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 4878
  • Likes Given: 1368
Not sure what to make of this:

Quote
Amos-6 loss on @SpaceX rocket sent satellite-autonomy message to Israeli govt, @ILAerospaceIAI CEO Weiss [email protected]

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/877428816599298048

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7901
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 3872
  • Likes Given: 1179
Not sure what to make of this:

Quote
Amos-6 loss on @SpaceX rocket sent satellite-autonomy message to Israeli govt, @ILAerospaceIAI CEO Weiss [email protected]

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/877428816599298048
My guess: Israel wants to be able to launch it's own satellites with it's own launcher. Right now they are dependent on others to launch their stuff, because that "stuff" is too infrequent in nature.

To give you an idea: a similar situation is what got Europe the highly succesful line of Ariane launchers.
« Last Edit: 06/21/2017 08:31 AM by woods170 »

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5627
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 4878
  • Likes Given: 1368

Online AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5794
  • Liked: 3642
  • Likes Given: 5057
Write-up doesn't mention any launch capability, only in-house satellite fab.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5301
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 587
Thanks. Here's a write-up explaining it:

https://www.spaceintelreport.com/iai-amos-6-failure-sent-message-israeli-government-satellite-autonomy/

According to the headline, "Amos-6 failure sent [a] message to [the] Israeli government on satellite autonomy."  You might think that since Amos-6 was lost because of a launch-vehicle failure, this statement means that Israel should develop its own comsat launch vehicle.  But what the write-up actually seems to say is that the government is considering ensuring that Amos-6's builder, IAI, gets enough orders to stay in business.  Apparently that means at least one comsat every four years, and that in turn means twisting the arm of Spacecom, the Israeli satellite operator that ordered Amos-6, to buy more satellites from IAI and fewer from other manufacturers.

In a sense, then, I don't understand in what way the loss of Amos-6 was a wake-up call.  Presumably the loss simply guaranteed another comsat order for, likely to IAI.  So why would this be the trigger that starts to make Israel think it needs to support IAI more?

Offline deruch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1997
  • California
  • Liked: 1547
  • Likes Given: 2789
Thanks. Here's a write-up explaining it:

https://www.spaceintelreport.com/iai-amos-6-failure-sent-message-israeli-government-satellite-autonomy/

According to the headline, "Amos-6 failure sent [a] message to [the] Israeli government on satellite autonomy."  You might think that since Amos-6 was lost because of a launch-vehicle failure, this statement means that Israel should develop its own comsat launch vehicle.  But what the write-up actually seems to say is that the government is considering ensuring that Amos-6's builder, IAI, gets enough orders to stay in business.  Apparently that means at least one comsat every four years, and that in turn means twisting the arm of Spacecom, the Israeli satellite operator that ordered Amos-6, to buy more satellites from IAI and fewer from other manufacturers.

In a sense, then, I don't understand in what way the loss of Amos-6 was a wake-up call.  Presumably the loss simply guaranteed another comsat order for, likely to IAI.  So why would this be the trigger that starts to make Israel think it needs to support IAI more?
IAI is a wholly state-run enterprise and not a private business.  They can't go out of business.
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8051
  • N. California
  • Liked: 4297
  • Likes Given: 859
As a once-native:

"IAI uses Amos 6 Incident to argue that they should get funding to build a bigger booster"

This is how military contractors do, state-run or not...
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline jpo234

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 855
  • Liked: 659
  • Likes Given: 98
https://mobile.twitter.com/rocketjoy/status/903714513043693568
Quote
One year ago today, we lost the Amos-6 vehicle. This is a somber, very important reminder to always focus on reliability as #1 priority. 
« Last Edit: 09/02/2017 12:25 PM by jpo234 »
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5627
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 4878
  • Likes Given: 1368
Quote
Synchronized video, audio, infrasound and seismic of the 2016/09/01 Falcon9 rocket explosion. This was the centrepiece of my AGU talk yesterday.

https://twitter.com/volcanoglenn/status/941610530082557957

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5627
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 4878
  • Likes Given: 1368
Quote
Synchronized video, audio, infrasound and seismic of the 2016/09/01 Falcon9 rocket explosion. This was the centrepiece of my AGU talk yesterday.

https://twitter.com/volcanoglenn/status/941610530082557957

Here’s a BBC article explaining why volcanologists are studying rockets (including the AMOS6 static fire):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-42362334

Hopefully the article is readable from outside the UK.

Edit to add: here’s the abstract of the paper presented this week that uses the data in the previous post

Quote
S44A-02: Infrasound and seismic analysis of the SpaceX Falcon9 explosion sequence of 1-September-2016 (Invited)
Thursday, 14 December 2017  16:15 - 16:30 New Orleans Ernest N. Morial Convention Center - 222

During a static launch test on 1-Sep-2016 at Kennedy Space Center, a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket exploded causing loss of the rocket and the payload, and extensively damaging the launch complex. The sequence was captured by a 3-element infrasound array and a broadband 3-component seismometer at the Astronaut Beach House, just 0.87 miles (1.4 km) from the launch pad.
Manual picking identified 153 impulsive airwave signals over a 26-minute interval and these were compared to video recordings of the sequence. The explosion onset consisted of a moderate signal on both seismic and infrasound (52 Pa) instruments. This corresponds to the rupture of the second-stage fuel tank. We found no signals before this, so we do not believe that there was an external cause. The primary fuel tank ruptured 4 seconds later and was the strongest event by far, producing an infrasound signal that exceeded 1400 Pa (~2000 Pa in reduced pressure). The seismic signal consists mainly of air-coupled Rayleigh waves with frequencies of 5-23 Hz.

The infrasound events occurred in four clusters. The first cluster included the onset and main events and 46 smaller events. This was followed by several minutes without infrasound signals during which a 3.5 minute continuous seismic vibration occurred. Cluster 2 consisted of 4 events ranging from 117-256 Pa. Cluster 3 comprised 96 events of 7-78 Pa. Cluster 4 consisted of 5 events with overpressures of 23-63 Pa. Gaps of several minutes without infrasound and seismic signals occurred between clusters 2 and 3, and 3 and 4. In terms of energy, the main event dominated; in terms of numbers, cluster 3 had the most infrasound events.

The seismic and infrasound data are complementary to video recordings of the explosion, and provide additional characterization that may be useful to interpret the sequence of events. Because of the proximity of our array to this rocket explosion, our dataset may be unique.

Plain Language Summary
On September 1st, 2016, a SpaceX rocket exploded on the launchpad. There is video of the explosion sequence on Youtube. First the secondary fuel tank exploded. Then the primary fuel tank. Then the payload was destroyed. A fire burned on the launchpad for several tens of minutes.
When this happened, we had equipment normally used for recording "seismic waves" from earthquakes and low-frequency sound ("infrasound") waves just 0.87 miles from this launchpad. From the data recorded, we have been able to identify 153 events that have sudden starts. But none of these occur before the secondary fuel tank is seen to explode on the Youtube video. So this suggests the tank ruptured from the inside, rather than being caused by something from the outside.
We have been able to determine the direction the infrasound waves came from for most of the 153 events, and they all come from the direction of the launchpad.
The explosion of the primary fuel tank produced the largest low-frequency sound signal. This is not surprising, as it contains most of the fuel for launching a rocket.

Authors
Glenn Thompson
University of South Florida Tampa
Stephen R McNutt
University of South Florida Tampa
Robert G Brown
NASA Kennedy Space Center
Jochen Braunmiller
University of South Florida Tampa
« Last Edit: 12/16/2017 08:51 PM by FutureSpaceTourist »

Offline deruch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1997
  • California
  • Liked: 1547
  • Likes Given: 2789
There was a more general paper that was presented, too.
https://agu.confex.com/agu/fm17/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/277389

Quote
S44A-01: Infrasound and Seismic Recordings of Rocket Launches from Kennedy Space Center, 2016-2017

We installed a temporary 3-station seismic-infrasound network at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in February 2016 to test sensor calibrations and train students in field deployment and data acquisitions techniques. Each station featured a single broadband 3-component seismometer and a 3-element infrasound array. In May 2016 the network was scaled back to a single station due to other projects competing for equipment.

To date 8 rocket launches have been recorded by the infrasound array, as well as 2 static tests, 1 aborted launch and 1 rocket explosion (see next abstract). Of the rocket launches recorded 4 were SpaceX Falcon-9, 2 were ULA Atlas-5 and 2 were ULA Delta-IV.

A question we attempt to answer is whether the rocket engine type and launch trajectory can be estimated with appropriate travel-time, amplitude-ratio and spectral techniques. For example, there is a clear Doppler shift in seismic and infrasound spectrograms from all launches, with lower frequencies occurring later in the recorded signal as the rocket accelerates away from the array. Another question of interest is whether there are relationships between jet noise frequency, thrust and/or nozzle velocity. Infrasound data may help answer these questions.

We are now in the process of deploying a permanent seismic and infrasound array at the Astronaut Beach House. 10 more rocket launches are schedule before AGU. NASA is also conducting a series of 33 sonic booms over KSC beginning on Aug 21st. Launches and other events at KSC have provided rich sources of signals that are useful to characterize and gain insight into physical processes and wave generation from man-made sources.

Plain Language Summary
As part of our normal research, we put instruments close to volcanoes to measure earthquakes and low-frequency sound waves. To test that these instruments work and are properly calibrated, we take them to Kennedy Space Center (KSC), because rocket launches produce some similar signals to volcanoes. In February 2016 we installed instruments at 3 different sites at KSC. In May 2016 we scaled this back to just one site.

We have recorded 8 rocket launches so far, and 4 other events where the rocket stayed on the ground. The most interesting event we have recorded so far is the explosion of the SpaceX rocket on September 1st, 2016. This is the topic of another AGU presentation.

In addition to testing and calibrating our instruments, we will analyze the data we have recorded to see if each rocket type produces a characteristic signal (we have recorded 3 different rocket types so far). We will also estimate the path of each rocket as it climbs away from the launchpad.

We are now deploying some instruments permanently at KSC, so that we can continue to compile data from more rocket launches. We hope to record up to 10 more rocket launches before AGU.

Authors
Stephen R McNutt
     University of South Florida Tampa
Glenn Thompson
     University of South Florida Tampa
Robert G Brown
     NASA Kennedy Space Center
Jochen Braunmiller
     University of South Florida Tampa
Alexandra Kathryn Farrell
     University of South Florida Tampa
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

I don't think I've ever seen the actual patch for this mission until now.

https://twitter.com/ticklestuffyo/status/959272033023533063

 
« Last Edit: 02/02/2018 10:22 AM by tvg98 »

Offline DanseMacabre

I don't think I've ever seen the actual patch for this mission until now.

https://twitter.com/ticklestuffyo/status/959272033023533063

Edit: Not the actual patch but it should be close to the real one as it was reconstructed from reports from employees.

That is the actual patch design, not a reconstructed design. The physical patch was made from the actual design by a fan, however.

I don't think I've ever seen the actual patch for this mission until now.

https://twitter.com/ticklestuffyo/status/959272033023533063

Edit: Not the actual patch but it should be close to the real one as it was reconstructed from reports from employees.

That is the actual patch design, not a reconstructed design. The physical patch was made from the actual design by a fan, however.

Ok then. I'll fix my original comment, and thank you for the correction.

Tags: