-
#1140
by
RDMM2081
on 17 Apr, 2023 19:46
-
well regardless of whether its actually broken or frozen shut, the fact is that it failed to operate when commanded which means theres a fault to it, hence a faulty valve.
No engineer in the world, especially an aerospace engineer, would describe a frozen valve as “faulty” absent a physical fault preventing actuation (a condition for which we have zero evidence).
What description would an aerospace engineer use to describe such a situation? I'm genuinely curious, and nothing is coming directly to my mind, but then again, I am not an aerospace engineer. Disabled? Inoperative? Malfunctioning? These all seem to have their own subtle connotation as well which I think rules them out just as well as 'faulty'.
-
#1141
by
DecoLV
on 17 Apr, 2023 19:54
-
I haven't seen the village this quiet in a while.
Ain't the same without you, Nomadd
-
#1142
by
Coastal Ron
on 17 Apr, 2023 20:05
-
well regardless of whether its actually broken or frozen shut, the fact is that it failed to operate when commanded which means theres a fault to it, hence a faulty valve.
No engineer in the world, especially an aerospace engineer, would describe a frozen valve as “faulty” absent a physical fault preventing actuation (a condition for which we have zero evidence).
What description would an aerospace engineer use to describe such a situation?
I'm not an engineer, but we have to remember that the valve is controlling the flow of something, so whatever that liquid or gas is could be affecting the actuation of the valve. For instance, if the line has contamination in it, or it froze up, then even if the valve opened the line may still be blocked.
I'm sure we'll hear what they found, and while there are design issues that you hope are caught during ground tests, sometimes there are operational issues that happen since you're doing something new. Personally I'm surprised that was the only issue with the vehicle...
-
#1143
by
whitelancer64
on 17 Apr, 2023 20:17
-
Also, what can we say about this flight being somewhat ignored? AFAIR the spaceX stream peaked at ~0.5 M viewers. The launch was scrubbed only at T- 9 minutes, well close to launch.
For reference Falcon Heavy test flight was watched by 2.3 M live (now youtube lists 33M because of the replays).
Counting the biggest "unofficial streams" we have 240k watching NSF and ~100k with Everyday Astronaut ( I am being triple counted here).
This is strange given the growth of the space community in this 5 years.
edit: this is about the web coverage, I am not contradicting what SpunkyEnigma said, I don't know about that.
The time may have had something to do with it - early on a Monday morning when a lot of people (especially on the west coast) are still asleep or just going to work.
Also, there were a ton of other live streams as well. Mainstream media like CNN, CNBC, and many other space-related youtubers had live streams.
-
#1144
by
mn
on 17 Apr, 2023 20:18
-
well regardless of whether its actually broken or frozen shut, the fact is that it failed to operate when commanded which means theres a fault to it, hence a faulty valve.
No engineer in the world, especially an aerospace engineer, would describe a frozen valve as “faulty” absent a physical fault preventing actuation (a condition for which we have zero evidence).
If it was designed and expected to work in a given operating environment and instead it froze it's fair to call it faulty/failed. (If on the other hand things got colder than intended, (or for more time than intended, etc) that would be different).
-
#1145
by
kevindbaker2863
on 17 Apr, 2023 20:27
-
I think thats part of the point. if the value, fluid, pipe.... was experiencing parameters out side of its intended operating parameters then it could be a combination of issues and not just the valve. remember that AMOS 5 was fixed with procedure changes!
-
#1146
by
Lijazos
on 17 Apr, 2023 20:33
-
Hey. I'm finding it hard to get accurate answers about this.
In this tweet, Zack Golden mentions that this many LN2/LOX/CH4 tankers are needed to replenish the Tank Farm after this kind of WDR.
https://twitter.com/CSI_Starbase/status/1647953241001345025Is it accurate in any way? One would think they wouldn't need as much CH4.
-
#1147
by
alugobi
on 17 Apr, 2023 20:42
-
I was delighted to see a MC Audio channel, but, as noted previously, I didn't hear anything from them.
Fix that, please, SX.
-
#1148
by
Herb Schaltegger
on 17 Apr, 2023 20:57
-
well regardless of whether its actually broken or frozen shut, the fact is that it failed to operate when commanded which means theres a fault to it, hence a faulty valve.
No engineer in the world, especially an aerospace engineer, would describe a frozen valve as “faulty” absent a physical fault preventing actuation (a condition for which we have zero evidence).
What description would an aerospace engineer use to describe such a situation? I'm genuinely curious, and nothing is coming directly to my mind, but then again, I am not an aerospace engineer. Disabled? Inoperative? Malfunctioning? These all seem to have their own subtle connotation as well which I think rules them out just as well as 'faulty'.
Typically it would be initially described simply as "failed." That's an functionality or operability statement regarding status alone, without distinction between a hardware failure, a design failure, a materials flaw, a manufacturing error or anything else. If and only if the unit is found to be physically broken or to suffer from an inherent design defect relevant to its suitability for the intended role in the system might someone reasonably consider using the term "faulty" but that term is imprecise, with no regard to the root cause of the failure.
That's why initially it's better simply to say the valve status is "failed," then proceed with a root cause analysis.
-
#1149
by
GmP
on 17 Apr, 2023 21:00
-
Hey. I'm finding it hard to get accurate answers about this.
In this tweet, Zack Golden mentions that this many LN2/LOX/CH4 tankers are needed to replenish the Tank Farm after this kind of WDR.
https://twitter.com/CSI_Starbase/status/1647953241001345025
Is it accurate in any way? One would think they wouldn't need as much CH4.
I have the same question. Where did the propellant go that was in the Starship and Booster tanks at the time of the scrub? Some (most I would expect) gets recycled into the tanks? Or not? My assumption is it would, so they only need to replenish what was lost due to venting, right?
Or did they really vent the whole content in Starship and Booster?
-
#1150
by
Chris Bergin
on 17 Apr, 2023 21:11
-
Slight trim. No politics please. Left or right, or middle. Just not a place for it here.
-
#1151
by
CMac
on 17 Apr, 2023 21:15
-
I feel an "orbital/suborbital" deja vue. Just substitute frozen/failed.
-
#1152
by
SpaceFinnOriginal
on 17 Apr, 2023 21:15
-
Window is 150 minutes long:
SpaceX is targeting as soon as Monday, April 17 for the first flight test of a fully integrated Starship and Super Heavy rocket from Starbase in Texas. The 150-minute test window will open at 7:00 a.m. CT.
Official SpaceX Mission patch:
Thank you for posting.
Question. What is this patch then?
-
#1153
by
cuddihy
on 17 Apr, 2023 21:30
-
Can someone just clarify -- does the vehicle on the pad use helium pressurization only on the ground for initial filling or is it on the vehicle overall?
-
#1154
by
joek
on 17 Apr, 2023 21:31
-
I feel an "orbital/suborbital" deja vue. Just substitute frozen/failed.
Awww... c'mon, you want to start another umpteen page debate over proper use of
deja vu?
-
#1155
by
CMac
on 17 Apr, 2023 21:41
-
I'm glad you brought this up...
-
#1156
by
WannaWalnetto
on 17 Apr, 2023 21:53
-
The wind shear info in Updates. There is a brand new high tech wind shear radar system at Starbase. It can give give high accuracy up to the "minute" detailed wind shear data. ….
I’ve looked a couple of times, but I can’t find anything more than a passing reference to wind shear. Maybe I’m looking in the wrong update thread (looking in topic=58568)?
-
#1157
by
WannaWalnetto
on 17 Apr, 2023 22:10
-
Don’t know if anybody else caught the early AM coverage from CNN today, but I think their writers need a crash course on launch terminology.
They reported that the “SpaceX Launch has been SCRAPPED” shortly after the launch was converted into a WDR. That gives a totally different picture of events in my mind.
-
#1158
by
Chris Bergin
on 17 Apr, 2023 22:30
-
Window is 150 minutes long:
SpaceX is targeting as soon as Monday, April 17 for the first flight test of a fully integrated Starship and Super Heavy rocket from Starbase in Texas. The 150-minute test window will open at 7:00 a.m. CT.
Official SpaceX Mission patch:
Thank you for posting.
Question. What is this patch then?
Our patch!
https://shop.nasaspaceflight.com/collections/starship-orbital-flight-test?utm_source=forumNSF Patch by the amazing Pauline.
-
#1159
by
alugobi
on 17 Apr, 2023 22:32
-
Imagine what they, and the others, will say if it launches and has a problem. One thing you can bet on, is that the headline will include "Elon Musk" and/or "billionaire".
That's what makes them money: making it about Musk.
