Like they're a company full of Wozniaks, without a Jobs in sight.
Flight 1 L+7 update
FLIGHT 1 - L+7 UPDATEPRE- LAUNCH OPERATIONSOperations began around 5am local time while tracking a 30% weather POV due to a low deck of clouds creating triggered lightning risk. We delayed our TO slightly to wait for a gap in the weather. During propellant fill, a bulk carrier vessel transiting from Vancouver to Singapore approached the east boundary of our maritime exclusion area, threatening to violate the range. We pulled in our TO, accelerated propellant fill, and successfully cleared our launch commit criteria just before the range went red. We entered a flawless terminal count and ignited the engines.LIFTOFF + FLIGHTAll nine E2 Sea Level engines ignited and successfully bootstrapped to full thrust. After verifying liftoff criteria, RS1 commanded release of the hold down mechanisms on the GO launch stool. Liftoff occurred at 23:27:30 UTC. The quick-disconnect plate separated and the vehicle accelerated off the pad nominally. Tank pressure control and propellant utilization control were both effectively demonstrated in flight conditions. Thrust vector control was nominal, with near zero pitch or yaw control error, and a 2 degree roll immediately zeroed by the controller. RSI flew in this nominal condition for 10.87 seconds, reaching a max acceleration of 1.23 g's and altitude of 761 feet.ANOMALY + IMPACTAt T+10.87 seconds, Stage 1 suffered a complete loss of power. All valves on the stage de-energized. This caused a clean, simultaneous shutdown of all nine engines. Stage 2 continued to operate nominally, transmitting vehicle telemetry to the ground. R$1 ascended for another 2.63 seconds, briefly paused at apogee, and began accelerating downward toward the pad. The vehicle did not tumble, falling vertically for 8.81 seconds before impacting the ground roughly 60 feet east of the launch point. Approximately 95% of the vehicle total propellant mass was still on-board, creating an energetic explosion and overpressure wave that caused damage to nearby equipment and facilities. ABL equipment damaged in the explosion included fuel and water storage tanks, pad communications equipment, and our GSO launch mount and fluid container. Additionally, fire spread to our nearby fabric hangar, destroying it and much of the integration equipment stored therein. Debris scattered over a ¼ mile radius and was contained within the designated hazard area. In accordance with safety protocol, personnel were clear from the area and not at risk.RESPONSE + INVESTIGATIONAfter confirming the pad was in a safe state, ABL and Range personnel approached the pad and initiated our mishap investigation with oversight from the FAA. All vehicle debris is being cataloged and retained. We have formed an anomaly investigation team tasked with identifying root cause of the Stage 1 power loss. As of L+7, we have identified multiple fact patterns of interest. Notably, we saw off-nominal pressure spikes and rises in temperature in the Stage 1 aft cavity a few seconds after liftoff. Additionally, there is some visual evidence of fire or smoke near the vehicle QD and the engine bay after liftoff. Shortly before the power loss, a handful of sensors began dropping out sequentially. This evidence suggests that an unwanted fire spread to our avionics system, causing a system-wide failure. Should the source of the fire be indeterminate, the investigation will identify all undesirable conditions that may have caused, contributed to, or failed to mitigate the fire, as well as opportunities for increased resiliency. Each undesirable condition will be assessed for mitigation on Flight 2, Flight 3 and beyondFLIGHT 2All engines for RS1 SNO2 completed acceptance testing in 2022, and both stages are now fully assembled and ready for stage-level testing. GSO SNO2 is largely complete and commissioned. While the investigation continues, the pad will be repaired, after which GSO and RSI can deploy ahead of our next launch attempt. Pending the results of our anomaly investigation, we'll be prepared to share more on the expected timeline for these efforts.Suffice to say we are ready and motivated to step into Flight 2 with the same focus, efficiency, and speed that has defined the RS1 program to date.
...Should the source of the fire be indeterminate, the investigation will identify all undesirable conditions that may have caused, contributed to, or failed to mitigate the fire, as well as opportunities for increased resiliency....
At T+10.87 seconds, Stage 1 suffered a complete loss of power. All valves on the stage de-energized. This caused a clean, simultaneous shutdown of all nine engines. Stage 2 continued to operate nominally, transmitting vehicle telemetry to the ground. R$1 ascended for another 2.63 seconds, briefly paused at apogee, and began accelerating downward toward the pad. The vehicle did not tumble, falling vertically for 8.81 seconds before impacting the ground roughly 60 feet east of the launch point. Approximately 95% of the vehicle total propellant mass was still on-board, creating an energetic explosion and overpressure wave that caused damage to nearby equipment and facilities. [...] Notably, we saw off-nominal pressure spikes and rises in temperature in the Stage 1 aft cavity a few seconds after liftoff. Additionally, there is some visual evidence of fire or smoke near the vehicle QD and the engine bay after liftoff.
Well, that settles the prior FTS discussion, suggesting a major leak or engine ignition transient causing damage.
If the FTS was only wired onto the first stage, then it would be unable to be fired as the first stage lost power. But it's likely that RS1 only has a thrust-termination FTS, so it would be redundant.
Quote from: eeergo on 01/19/2023 09:20 amWell, that settles the prior FTS discussion, suggesting a major leak or engine ignition transient causing damage.Though it raises the question of why the FTS wasn't fired. It makes sense to have some inhibition in the early seconds — as long as the rocket is moving away from the pad, even if it's going off course you'd like it to get slightly farther from the pad before it goes boom. But once it's falling back towards you, better to disperse the propellants and diffuse the energy while it's still farther away, no?Hopefully this was just an unhandled case in the (Human? Automated?) decision tree, rather than a failure that included the FTS itself.
Quote from: 2megs on 01/19/2023 02:16 pmQuote from: eeergo on 01/19/2023 09:20 amWell, that settles the prior FTS discussion, suggesting a major leak or engine ignition transient causing damage.Though it raises the question of why the FTS wasn't fired. It makes sense to have some inhibition in the early seconds — as long as the rocket is moving away from the pad, even if it's going off course you'd like it to get slightly farther from the pad before it goes boom. But once it's falling back towards you, better to disperse the propellants and diffuse the energy while it's still farther away, no?Hopefully this was just an unhandled case in the (Human? Automated?) decision tree, rather than a failure that included the FTS itself.That assumes an active explosive FTS is present. If they are using thrust-termination FTS, then it would be impossible to fire it when the stage has already terminated thrust.
Sounds similar to Astra's sideways launch. Everything solid on the pad, but propellant gets loose after the T-0 umbilicals disconnect. Astra's avionics soldiered on more valiantly, but either way it's a bad day. Ground systems are tricky.
Quote from: edzieba on 01/19/2023 03:21 pmQuote from: 2megs on 01/19/2023 02:16 pmQuote from: eeergo on 01/19/2023 09:20 amWell, that settles the prior FTS discussion, suggesting a major leak or engine ignition transient causing damage.Though it raises the question of why the FTS wasn't fired. It makes sense to have some inhibition in the early seconds — as long as the rocket is moving away from the pad, even if it's going off course you'd like it to get slightly farther from the pad before it goes boom. But once it's falling back towards you, better to disperse the propellants and diffuse the energy while it's still farther away, no?Hopefully this was just an unhandled case in the (Human? Automated?) decision tree, rather than a failure that included the FTS itself.That assumes an active explosive FTS is present. If they are using thrust-termination FTS, then it would be impossible to fire it when the stage has already terminated thrust.Quote from: butters on 01/19/2023 03:25 pmSounds similar to Astra's sideways launch. Everything solid on the pad, but propellant gets loose after the T-0 umbilicals disconnect. Astra's avionics soldiered on more valiantly, but either way it's a bad day. Ground systems are tricky.The point of the FTS is to prevent the vehicle from leaving the range safety corridor. If the vehicle shuts down at 761 feet, it's not leaving the corridor regardless, so there is no requirement to fire the FTS. The ABL statement points out that the vehicle did not tumble on its brief flight. The Astra and Firefly flights also delayed firing the FTS for some time on what were clearly doomed flights, as the vehicles were still under control, and the IIP was within the corridor. (It also had the benefit of burning off propellant mass.)Also, of course, if a thrust-termination FTS fires after thrust already terminated from a failure, it would not have any effect.As to whether it causes less damage to blow an explosive FTS if the vehicle is at low altitude and heading towards the pad, that's debatable. A low airburst will have greater overpressure over a larger area than a ground burst. Also, it might have better propellant mixing and thus greater energy release.
The 88-foot rocket landed about 60 feet from the launch pad, and exploded with 95% of its fuel still on-board. According to Alaska’s Department of Environmental Conservation, 5,200 gallons of fuel were released in the crash. ABL did not agree to speak on tape for this story. But a spokesperson for the company said last week that the fuel was contained to an area near the launch site, and most of it likely burned off. Nearby beaches were not impacted by the spill, according to the company. Clean-up crews also scoured the area with metal detectors for any physical debris. Alaska Aerospace and ABL are currently working with DEC and the state’s Department of Natural Resources on a remediation plan for the area. According to documents submitted to DEC, an Anchorage-based firm, Restoration Science & Engineering, has been hired to sample the site’s soil and groundwater. Local construction company Brechan has also been hired to help with cleanup.
https://ablspacesystems.com/news/faa-closes-rs1-mishap-investigation/QuoteFAA Closes RS1 Mishap InvestigationABL 11.06.2023EL SEGUNDO, Calif., Nov. 6, 2023 – The Federal Aviation Administration notified ABL Space Systems it has closed the mishap investigation into the Flight 1 anomaly of the RS1 launch vehicle that occurred on Jan. 10, 2023.The mishap occurred 10.93 seconds after liftoff, when a fire in the aft cavity damaged key harnesses and triggered a complete loss of power. All engines shut down simultaneously as engine valves de-energized and terminated thrust, causing the vehicle to impact and detonate on the launch pad at the Pacific Spaceport Complex in Kodiak, Alaska. The source of the fire is attributed to an overly restrictive launch mount and flame deflector that created plume recirculation, overloading RS1’s base heat shield.ABL has identified 22 corrective actions to prevent future mishaps from repeating. Action items include redesign of the launch mount and flame deflector, hardened closeouts and harnesses, and additional risk mitigation activities. ABL must implement all corrective actions that impact public safety and receive concurrence from the FAA that all safety and other applicable regulatory requirements have been satisfied before resuming any launch activities.ABL led the mishap investigation with oversight from the FAA.
FAA Closes RS1 Mishap InvestigationABL 11.06.2023EL SEGUNDO, Calif., Nov. 6, 2023 – The Federal Aviation Administration notified ABL Space Systems it has closed the mishap investigation into the Flight 1 anomaly of the RS1 launch vehicle that occurred on Jan. 10, 2023.The mishap occurred 10.93 seconds after liftoff, when a fire in the aft cavity damaged key harnesses and triggered a complete loss of power. All engines shut down simultaneously as engine valves de-energized and terminated thrust, causing the vehicle to impact and detonate on the launch pad at the Pacific Spaceport Complex in Kodiak, Alaska. The source of the fire is attributed to an overly restrictive launch mount and flame deflector that created plume recirculation, overloading RS1’s base heat shield.ABL has identified 22 corrective actions to prevent future mishaps from repeating. Action items include redesign of the launch mount and flame deflector, hardened closeouts and harnesses, and additional risk mitigation activities. ABL must implement all corrective actions that impact public safety and receive concurrence from the FAA that all safety and other applicable regulatory requirements have been satisfied before resuming any launch activities.ABL led the mishap investigation with oversight from the FAA.
