-
#80
by
GewoonLukas_
on 19 May, 2023 13:20
-
"Currently evaluating, core is healthy"
-
#81
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 19 May, 2023 13:21
-
-
#82
by
GewoonLukas_
on 19 May, 2023 13:21
-
Clock has recycled to T-15 minutes (Standard procedure)
-
#83
by
GewoonLukas_
on 19 May, 2023 13:24
-
Scrubbing for the day, vehicle and payload are healthy.
Back-up opportunity tomorrow at 6:15 a.m. PT (13:15 UTC)
-
#84
by
GewoonLukas_
on 19 May, 2023 13:30
-
-
#85
by
zubenelgenubi
on 19 May, 2023 13:43
-
Scrubbing for the day, vehicle and payload are healthy.
Back-up opportunity tomorrow at 6:15 a.m. PT (13:15 UTC)
SpaceX is targeting Friday, May 19 at 6:19 a.m. PT (13:19 UTC) for launch of the Iridium OneWeb mission to a low-Earth orbit from Space Launch Complex 4 East (SLC-4E) at Vandenberg Space Force Base in California. A backup launch opportunity is available on Saturday, May 20 at 6:15 a.m. PT (13:15 UTC).
<snip>
-
#86
by
litton4
on 19 May, 2023 16:23
-
We're seeing quite a few last minute aborts with SpaceX lately.
Any info on why?
-
#87
by
mn
on 19 May, 2023 16:40
-
Logical guess as to what the cause of the abort was:
Maybe a certain parameter exceeded the redline limit right at startup. Not sure if the computers going into startup inadvertently triggered something.
If I read your post and didn't know any better I would think F9 going to startup was something new.
It does this literally on EVERY LAUNCH, to say this caused the abort is ...
-
#88
by
litton4
on 19 May, 2023 16:41
-
We're seeing quite a few last minute aborts with SpaceX lately.
Any info on why?
No official info, but my post above states my opinion of the cause of a last-minute abort.
I was wondering more in general - there have been 3? last minute aborts lately.
I don't see any correlation with booster age, for example, as starlink boosters tend to be older, iirc, and they've been fine?
Maybe they tighten the operational parameters for customer flights....
-
#89
by
ZachS09
on 19 May, 2023 16:49
-
Logical guess as to what the cause of the abort was:
Maybe a certain parameter exceeded the redline limit right at startup. Not sure if the computers going into startup inadvertently triggered something.
If I read your post and didn't know any better I would think F9 going to startup was something new.
It does this literally on EVERY LAUNCH, to say this caused the abort is ...
It was just a blind guess ‘cause I really have no idea.
I deleted the post as it was pointless all along. So sorry.
-
#90
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 19 May, 2023 20:23
-
-
#91
by
John Santos
on 19 May, 2023 20:53
-
Logical guess as to what the cause of the abort was:
Maybe a certain parameter exceeded the redline limit right at startup. Not sure if the computers going into startup inadvertently triggered something.
If I read your post and didn't know any better I would think F9 going to startup was something new.
It does this literally on EVERY LAUNCH, to say this caused the abort is ...
It was just a blind guess ‘cause I really have no idea.
I deleted the post as it was pointless all along. So sorry.
Unless SpaceX or one of their customers decides to tell us, we will probably never know. If it someday becomes relevant to an accident or other investigation and becomes public information, or Elon casually mentions it in a random Tweet, or someone with inside access to SpaceX writes a definitive history of the Falcon rocket family, it will be announced. Otherwise it will be ignored by everyone except a few obsessive rocket fans. Is that a good thing? Probably not. But it is most likely all the information we will ever get.
-
#92
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 19 May, 2023 21:06
-
Tomorrow’s webcast
-
#93
by
mn
on 19 May, 2023 21:17
-
Logical guess as to what the cause of the abort was:
Maybe a certain parameter exceeded the redline limit right at startup. Not sure if the computers going into startup inadvertently triggered something.
If I read your post and didn't know any better I would think F9 going to startup was something new.
It does this literally on EVERY LAUNCH, to say this caused the abort is ...
It was just a blind guess ‘cause I really have no idea.
I deleted the post as it was pointless all along. So sorry.
Unless SpaceX or one of their customers decides to tell us, we will probably never know. If it someday becomes relevant to an accident or other investigation and becomes public information, or Elon casually mentions it in a random Tweet, or someone with inside access to SpaceX writes a definitive history of the Falcon rocket family, it will be announced. Otherwise it will be ignored by everyone except a few obsessive rocket fans. Is that a good thing? Probably not. But it is most likely all the information we will ever get.
Actually I think they often mention the cause on the webcast of the next attempt.
-
#94
by
VLN
on 19 May, 2023 21:55
-
192019Z MAY 23
NAVAREA XII 309/23(18,21).
EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC.
CALIFORNIA
CANCEL NAVAREA XII 283/23 AND THIS MSG.
NAVAREA XII 283/23 was the original NGA launch hazard warning associated with this Iridium/OneWeb launch. Canceling it now seems to leave no warnings in effect along the launch track for the announced launch attempt tomorrow.
Anyone have an interpretation of this, especially if no replacement warning is issued?
-
#95
by
zubenelgenubi
on 19 May, 2023 22:20
-
Cross-post; 2nd launch attempt:
https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=iridium-oneweb
SpaceX is targeting Saturday, May 20 at 6:16 a.m. PT (13:16 UTC) for launch of the Iridium OneWeb mission to a low-Earth orbit from Space Launch Complex 4 East (SLC-4E) at Vandenberg Space Force Base in California.
The Falcon 9 first stage booster supporting this mission previously launched Sentinel-6 Michael Freilich, DART, Transporter-7, and seven Starlink missions. After stage separation, the first stage will land on the Of Course I Still Love You droneship, which will be stationed in the Pacific Ocean.
-
#96
by
Ken the Bin
on 19 May, 2023 22:36
-
192019Z MAY 23
NAVAREA XII 309/23(18,21).
EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC.
CALIFORNIA
CANCEL NAVAREA XII 283/23 AND THIS MSG.
NAVAREA XII 283/23 was the original NGA launch hazard warning associated with this Iridium/OneWeb launch. Canceling it now seems to leave no warnings in effect along the launch track for the announced launch attempt tomorrow.
Anyone have an interpretation of this, especially if no replacement warning is issued?
I was just looking at that cancellation notice. My only interpretation is the same as yours ... WTF???
-
#97
by
VLN
on 20 May, 2023 03:12
-
Canceling it now seems to leave no warnings in effect along the launch track for the announced launch attempt tomorrow.
Anyone have an interpretation of this, especially if no replacement warning is issued?
I was just looking at that cancellation notice. My only interpretation is the same as yours ... WTF???
There's a chance that you and I don't know something relevant.
There's a chance they'll notice it and replace the warning in time.
There's a chance that no vessels will stray into the not-zone at launch time.
Aaaand there's a chance that they'll scrub because of an incursion that could have been avoided.
The suspense will give us a little extra excitement as we watch tomorrow...
-
#98
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 20 May, 2023 12:38
-
-
#99
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 20 May, 2023 12:42
-
Launch autosequence has started