SpaceX Tuesday...
Discussion
Even if they collect only a couple of fairings a year, the ship & crew hire will pay for itself. Hopefully they'll get it nailed soon, just like they have the rocket landings. They can fish them out of the drink & bring them back anyway.
It's actually an automated system, with a guidance computer controlling each boat on an intercept course with their target fairing.
The two boats should be back in Port Canaveral on Wednesday morning. The booster, landing ship & tug will take a lot longer.
UPDATE: Both faring halves are back in port now and look to be intact.
It's actually an automated system, with a guidance computer controlling each boat on an intercept course with their target fairing.
The two boats should be back in Port Canaveral on Wednesday morning. The booster, landing ship & tug will take a lot longer.
UPDATE: Both faring halves are back in port now and look to be intact.
Edited by Beati Dogu on Wednesday 18th December 16:08
The Falcon 9 is back in port and has been lifted off for transport to the refurb hangar already. The 21st December marks 4 years since they landed the first Falcon 9.
Meanwhile, the date for the in flight abort test has been put back slightly. It'll be no earlier than Saturday, 11th Jan now. (This change was made before today's launch issue, but NASA gave no reason).
After launch, they're going to shut down all 9 Merlin engines while at Max Q. The Crew Dragon capsule is supposed to instantly detect this and initiate an automatic abort sequence.
The Falcon 9 rocket will be suddenly exposed to the elements and almost certainly be torn apart. If not, it'll likely be detonated by the Autonomous Flight Termination System (AFTS).
The Falcon 9 booster they're going to use (B1046) has flown 3 times already. It will not have any legs or grid fins attached and the new upper stage will have a mass simulator instead of the usual Merlin engine. They will fully fuel the rocket as per a normal launch, so it should be quite a firework show.
Provided the capsule passes this test, there's no reason they can't continue to a manned test flight early next year as well.
Meanwhile, the date for the in flight abort test has been put back slightly. It'll be no earlier than Saturday, 11th Jan now. (This change was made before today's launch issue, but NASA gave no reason).
After launch, they're going to shut down all 9 Merlin engines while at Max Q. The Crew Dragon capsule is supposed to instantly detect this and initiate an automatic abort sequence.
The Falcon 9 rocket will be suddenly exposed to the elements and almost certainly be torn apart. If not, it'll likely be detonated by the Autonomous Flight Termination System (AFTS).
The Falcon 9 booster they're going to use (B1046) has flown 3 times already. It will not have any legs or grid fins attached and the new upper stage will have a mass simulator instead of the usual Merlin engine. They will fully fuel the rocket as per a normal launch, so it should be quite a firework show.
Provided the capsule passes this test, there's no reason they can't continue to a manned test flight early next year as well.
Beati Dogu said:
The Falcon 9 is back in port and has been lifted off for transport to the refurb hangar already. The 21st December marks 4 years since they landed the first Falcon 9.
Meanwhile, the date for the in flight abort test has been put back slightly. It'll be no earlier than Saturday, 11th Jan now. (This change was made before today's launch issue, but NASA gave no reason).
After launch, they're going to shut down all 9 Merlin engines while at Max Q. The Crew Dragon capsule is supposed to instantly detect this and initiate an automatic abort sequence.
The Falcon 9 rocket will be suddenly exposed to the elements and almost certainly be torn apart. If not, it'll likely be detonated by the Autonomous Flight Termination System (AFTS).
The Falcon 9 booster they're going to use (B1046) has flown 3 times already. It will not have any legs or grid fins attached and the new upper stage will have a mass simulator instead of the usual Merlin engine. They will fully fuel the rocket as per a normal launch, so it should be quite a firework show.
Provided the capsule passes this test, there's no reason they can't continue to a manned test flight early next year as well.
Interesting and amazing levels of detail as always Beati, thank you.Meanwhile, the date for the in flight abort test has been put back slightly. It'll be no earlier than Saturday, 11th Jan now. (This change was made before today's launch issue, but NASA gave no reason).
After launch, they're going to shut down all 9 Merlin engines while at Max Q. The Crew Dragon capsule is supposed to instantly detect this and initiate an automatic abort sequence.
The Falcon 9 rocket will be suddenly exposed to the elements and almost certainly be torn apart. If not, it'll likely be detonated by the Autonomous Flight Termination System (AFTS).
The Falcon 9 booster they're going to use (B1046) has flown 3 times already. It will not have any legs or grid fins attached and the new upper stage will have a mass simulator instead of the usual Merlin engine. They will fully fuel the rocket as per a normal launch, so it should be quite a firework show.
Provided the capsule passes this test, there's no reason they can't continue to a manned test flight early next year as well.
How long was the gap between them clearing the Crew Dragon for the IFA test and the (current) planned date? I'm wondering if "early next year" is over optimistic for putting people in it. It feels like late next year is more probable. Especially if Boeing are going to have a delay to sort out Starliner.
Thanks, Dragon & Starliner are parallel NASA programmes, but there's no reason why problems with one should cause delays with the other.
So we could see SpaceX Demo Mission 2 (DM-2) - a manned mission to the ISS - as early as February 2020. Provided NASA is happy with the abort test, the parachute system certification and the remediation work SpaceX has done after blowing up a Dragon capsule back in April.
SpaceX will use a new rocket and a new capsule each time for manned flight. That doesn't mean to say that they can't reuse them later on for other things of course. They could convert the capsules for ISS cargo missions fairly easily.
So we could see SpaceX Demo Mission 2 (DM-2) - a manned mission to the ISS - as early as February 2020. Provided NASA is happy with the abort test, the parachute system certification and the remediation work SpaceX has done after blowing up a Dragon capsule back in April.
SpaceX will use a new rocket and a new capsule each time for manned flight. That doesn't mean to say that they can't reuse them later on for other things of course. They could convert the capsules for ISS cargo missions fairly easily.
Beati Dogu said:
The Falcon 9 is back in port and has been lifted off for transport to the refurb hangar already. The 21st December marks 4 years since they landed the first Falcon 9.
Meanwhile, the date for the in flight abort test has been put back slightly. It'll be no earlier than Saturday, 11th Jan now. (This change was made before today's launch issue, but NASA gave no reason).
After launch, they're going to shut down all 9 Merlin engines while at Max Q. The Crew Dragon capsule is supposed to instantly detect this and initiate an automatic abort sequence.
The Falcon 9 rocket will be suddenly exposed to the elements and almost certainly be torn apart. If not, it'll likely be detonated by the Autonomous Flight Termination System (AFTS).
The Falcon 9 booster they're going to use (B1046) has flown 3 times already. It will not have any legs or grid fins attached and the new upper stage will have a mass simulator instead of the usual Merlin engine. They will fully fuel the rocket as per a normal launch, so it should be quite a firework show.
Provided the capsule passes this test, there's no reason they can't continue to a manned test flight early next year as well.
Same as above, thanks for the information and level of detail. Much appreciated, I've sent this to a friend of mine in Orlando who's son is Rocket mad, they go to as many launches as possible. Hopefully this one will be an amazing experience for them when it goes.Meanwhile, the date for the in flight abort test has been put back slightly. It'll be no earlier than Saturday, 11th Jan now. (This change was made before today's launch issue, but NASA gave no reason).
After launch, they're going to shut down all 9 Merlin engines while at Max Q. The Crew Dragon capsule is supposed to instantly detect this and initiate an automatic abort sequence.
The Falcon 9 rocket will be suddenly exposed to the elements and almost certainly be torn apart. If not, it'll likely be detonated by the Autonomous Flight Termination System (AFTS).
The Falcon 9 booster they're going to use (B1046) has flown 3 times already. It will not have any legs or grid fins attached and the new upper stage will have a mass simulator instead of the usual Merlin engine. They will fully fuel the rocket as per a normal launch, so it should be quite a firework show.
Provided the capsule passes this test, there's no reason they can't continue to a manned test flight early next year as well.
Well that's cool, thanks a lot. They should definitely be able to see the rocket separate and break apart from near the coast. It reaches Max-Q only about 1 minute 15 seconds after lift off. Should be quite a firework show.
It's taking off from Pad 39A by the way, the former Apollo pad. If it's open, Playalinda Beach would be a good spot, as it's fairly close (~4 miles), to the north of the pad, but since they're local they'll probably know that. E.g.:
It's taking off from Pad 39A by the way, the former Apollo pad. If it's open, Playalinda Beach would be a good spot, as it's fairly close (~4 miles), to the north of the pad, but since they're local they'll probably know that. E.g.:
RobDickinson said:
just the in flight abort in Jan I think?
That was scheduled before they had completed the 10 parachute tests, so I'm a little bit confused on whether NASA ASAP will still want lots of reviews of the parachute testing after the IFA. If this is the end of the parachute testing then either incredibly good planning running the workstreams in parallel or they were allowed to do the IFA prior to the ten tests being completed.
The in flight abort test will count as a parachute test too.
Clearly parachute science is every bit as difficult as rocket surgery. Even packing them properly takes great skill and care. Apparently, only 3 individuals were qualified to pack the parachutes for Apollo. Their names were Norma Cretal, Buzz Corey and Jimmy Calunga and they alone packed the parachutes for all the Apollo missions. So vital were they considered, that they were banned from travelling in the same vehicle together.
Even then there's always that X factor. One of Apollo 15's three main parachutes failed to open properly, but the built in safety margin meant the capsule landed safely in the Pacific on two of them - Only about 3 mph faster than intended.
Source (with several other interesting Apollo-related facts):
https://www.history.com/news/moon-landing-technolo...
Apollo 15's landing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-Vd75Ptg9I
No wonder SpaceX designed the Dragon 2 for propulsive landings. However, NASA said no, even for returning cargo missions. I wonder if it can still do it if all else fails. It doesn't have legs, but it doesn't need them in an emergency.
Clearly parachute science is every bit as difficult as rocket surgery. Even packing them properly takes great skill and care. Apparently, only 3 individuals were qualified to pack the parachutes for Apollo. Their names were Norma Cretal, Buzz Corey and Jimmy Calunga and they alone packed the parachutes for all the Apollo missions. So vital were they considered, that they were banned from travelling in the same vehicle together.
Even then there's always that X factor. One of Apollo 15's three main parachutes failed to open properly, but the built in safety margin meant the capsule landed safely in the Pacific on two of them - Only about 3 mph faster than intended.
Source (with several other interesting Apollo-related facts):
https://www.history.com/news/moon-landing-technolo...
Apollo 15's landing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-Vd75Ptg9I
No wonder SpaceX designed the Dragon 2 for propulsive landings. However, NASA said no, even for returning cargo missions. I wonder if it can still do it if all else fails. It doesn't have legs, but it doesn't need them in an emergency.
Beati Dogu said:
The in flight abort test will count as a parachute test too.
Clearly parachute science is every bit as difficult as rocket surgery. Even packing them properly takes great skill and care. Apparently, only 3 individuals were qualified to pack the parachutes for Apollo. Their names were Norma Cretal, Buzz Corey and Jimmy Calunga and they alone packed the parachutes for all the Apollo missions. So vital were they considered, that they were banned from travelling in the same vehicle together.
Even then there's always that X factor. One of Apollo 15's three main parachutes failed to open properly, but the built in safety margin meant the capsule landed safely in the Pacific on two of them - Only about 3 mph faster than intended.
Source (with several other interesting Apollo-related facts):
https://www.history.com/news/moon-landing-technolo...
Apollo 15's landing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-Vd75Ptg9I
No wonder SpaceX designed the Dragon 2 for propulsive landings. However, NASA said no, even for returning cargo missions. I wonder if it can still do it if all else fails. It doesn't have legs, but it doesn't need them in an emergency.
That’s really interesting Beati and I never knew that about the Apollo parachute packers so thanks Clearly parachute science is every bit as difficult as rocket surgery. Even packing them properly takes great skill and care. Apparently, only 3 individuals were qualified to pack the parachutes for Apollo. Their names were Norma Cretal, Buzz Corey and Jimmy Calunga and they alone packed the parachutes for all the Apollo missions. So vital were they considered, that they were banned from travelling in the same vehicle together.
Even then there's always that X factor. One of Apollo 15's three main parachutes failed to open properly, but the built in safety margin meant the capsule landed safely in the Pacific on two of them - Only about 3 mph faster than intended.
Source (with several other interesting Apollo-related facts):
https://www.history.com/news/moon-landing-technolo...
Apollo 15's landing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-Vd75Ptg9I
No wonder SpaceX designed the Dragon 2 for propulsive landings. However, NASA said no, even for returning cargo missions. I wonder if it can still do it if all else fails. It doesn't have legs, but it doesn't need them in an emergency.
Before the abort test, SpaceX have their Starlink-2 mission on Sat 4th Jan, 3.23 am UK time (3rd Jan 10.23 pm local), with another batch of 60 satellites.
This is from Pad 40, Florida, with a landing 390 miles (628 km) downrange.
Hopefully they'll be able catch the two payload fairing halves his time
This is from Pad 40, Florida, with a landing 390 miles (628 km) downrange.
Hopefully they'll be able catch the two payload fairing halves his time
Beati Dogu said:
Apollo 15's landing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-Vd75Ptg9I
What must it feel like to finally splash down after that whole mission? Did they know one chute hadn't deployed?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-Vd75Ptg9I
And likely then go on to say 'Please Miss can I have another go?'
I often think MotoGP riders and F1 drivers are a different breed to the rest of us, but those lads that went to the moon were something beyond that.
Thanks for the post!
ETA.
Right lads who packed number 3 chute? 
Yes, they're certainly a special type of people.
They were warned by the recovery ship, USS Okinawa, just before splashing down: "you have a streamed chute, standby for a hard impact, over".
"Roger" was the reply.
You can hear it on that Youtube video at 0:40.
USS Okinawa also recovered the unmanned Apollo 6, back in 1968,
They were warned by the recovery ship, USS Okinawa, just before splashing down: "you have a streamed chute, standby for a hard impact, over".
"Roger" was the reply.
You can hear it on that Youtube video at 0:40.
USS Okinawa also recovered the unmanned Apollo 6, back in 1968,
JustALooseScrew said:
ETA.
Right lads who packed number 3 chute?
Nothing to do with the packers. Right lads who packed number 3 chute? If you watch any Apollo splashdown, you will see what looks like smoke drifting from the capsule as it descends under the parachutes. This was the venting of remaining propellants from the small attitude control thrusters that surrounded the Command Module. These propellants were quite toxic and acidic and it was considered safer to try and vent as much of the remaining fuel as possible before splashdown as otherwise there was the very real chance that the recovery frogmen or even the astronauts themselves could be affected by fumes when being picked up from the sea.
It seems that some of the parachute lines were actually burned through by the venting propellants causing that chute not to deploy properly.
If you look at Soyuz spacecraft coming down on their parachutes you will see a similar technique in place.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff