Went down yesterday to a new spot I have for watching launches, but of course the launch was scrubbed. Going to try again tonight. That's the VAB in the background, we're much closer to it than it seems in the picture.


how do i get a url for a picture

This is the view from my spot with my 300mm lense.

Tugger wrote:

Of course it is off the topic but I wonder if the ULA will try to land a booster sometime. Their systems were never designed with that in mind so I doubt they can do it with their current launch vehicles.

It would be a major development project if they wanted to attempt it, but then again, that was also the case for the Falcon 9.

They have talked about their next rocket, Vulcan, being able to separate it's engines at burnout (something the original SM-65 Atlas also did) and be recovered in mid-air by helicopter. I don't know if that is confirmed.

JetBuddy wrote:

Their New Glenn rocket is scheduled to test launch before 2020. The New Shepard rocket has already done it many times, so they know the technology very well.

We'll see. ULA has been talking about 2019, but it's not clear how committed they are to it. Blue Origin has far more development to accomplish, however. New Shepard isn't even remotely in the same ballpark as New Glenn. They're taking a much bigger step than the evolution SpaceX took from the Falcon 1 to the Falcon 9, for example.

Another automatic abort at T-0:10 seconds. Another attempt is possible tomorrow.

Sad.

Currently, I'm reading Martin Caidin's "Spaceport U.S.A.". It's very verbose and you get easily drowned in a ton of details. It tells the story of Cap Canaveral in the 1950ies (Snark, Navaho, Matador, Atlas, early Titan tests), and even then on-board computers took over all commands some time before lift-off. And it describes how painstaking everything is - myriads of power lines, pipes and everything, how careful the fuel must be removed after a failed start...


David

Congrats on the dragon landing!

Happy Independence Day, my American friends. It seems like SpaceX is going to use the day to figure out what went wrong, and prepare for launch on the 5th or the 6th.

That's according to Elon Musk's Twitter:

We're going to spend the 4th doing a full review of rocket & pad systems. Launch no earlier than 5th/6th. Only one chance to get it right …

Thank you! SpaceX offering excellent general advice. Oh, that wasn't it? If I tweet it, it must become true.

New launch window will open today, Wednesday at 7:37 p.m. EDT

Tugg

Nice, clean, successful launch!
Still awaiting completion of the mission, satellite insertion, but it has started nicely.

Tugg

Very nice to see Intelsat 35E delivered to its GST orbit 625 km up and deployed - going 34'325 km/h. More money in the SpaceX kitty!

This will be interesting. Now that space x has launched three in space of two weeks. It means they have three separate launch crews working. Those crews will burn a lot of money if their left idle. So were at the point where space x will have to launch roughly 18 per year. Are suffer by having spare launch sitting around doing nothing.

This is the second SpaceX launch I've watched by video live stream. And I still find it so amazing that we actually have live video showing the running engines! IN SPACE!

David,

who is thinking on how to bribe SpaceX into launching Falcon Heavy on my next birthday

One of the stated advantages of systems like Stratolaunch was that they would easily be able to keep up with a rapid launch cadence. I think that SpaceX is proving that a well thought out process for traditional vertical launch systems can produce sufficient cadence for current and foreseeable future launch demand while keeping costs reasonable. Add to this that the New Zealand based light rocket will be able to keep up a rather rapid pace to handle the lighter satellites, and one wonders where the demand for Stratolaunch's capability will be? I can only imagine that Stratolaunch will have to provide a cost savings of significant amounts to make itself relevant, which makes the whole financial position of the project less and less viable.

Congratulations SpaceX for another successful delivery. Mission accomplished! Always so amazing to watch.

I have to post this description of the launch from Spaceflight Now:

the two-stage, 229-foot-tall (70-meter) launcher lit nine Merlin 1D main engines and rocketed away from pad 39A at the Florida spaceport at 7:38 p.m. EDT (2338 GMT) Wednesday.

The slender white booster pivoted 1.7 million pounds of thrust from its main engines to steer eastward from the Space Coast, powering through the speed of sound as the kerosene-fueled first stage climbed above the stratosphere.

The nine-engine first stage shut down less than three minutes after liftoff, and the booster dropped away with the help of pneumatic pushers for a destructive plunge into the Atlantic Ocean.

https://spaceflightnow.com/2017/07/06/s ... 9-mission/

There is just something both eloquent and over the top about it!

Tugg

SpaceX drops plans for powered Dragon landings:

SpaceX no longer plans to have the next version of its Dragon spacecraft be capable of powered landings, a move that has implications for the company’s long-term Mars plans.

SpaceX Chief Executive Elon Musk, speaking at the International Space Station Research and Development Conference here July 19, confirmed recent rumors that the version of the Dragon spacecraft under development for NASA’s commercial crew program will not have the ability to land on land using SuperDraco thrusters that will be incorporated into the spacecraft primarily as a launch abort system.

Full article
http://spacenews.com/spacex-drops-plans ... -landings/

sigh

filler
filler
filler

Well, I can't blame them for saving complexity.

David

Man-Rating a launch system has to be a very expensive and time-consuming process. The costs in time (delays) and money of certifying the Dragon's powered-landing system might outweigh the benefits compared to having it land in the ocean or on land like the Soviet capsules do.

I'm not sure Red Dragon is ruled out by this as suggested in the article. Red Dragon doesn't have to be reused. It just has to be in good enough shape for its payload to be deployed.

certifying the Dragon's powered-landing system ..

Isn't that prerequisite for a later mars landing and lift off ?
Most of the delay able/nix able nice to have features present later hard requirements, don't they?

Here's a video of Musk talking about the difficulties encountered with the development of Falcon Heavy as well, and it's eye popping.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tESpswQVXI

It would seem that after the euphoria of an initial streak of successes and breakthroughs, SpaceX is now facing a stiff bit of reality headwind...

He mentions all the technical challenges of essentially firing 3 first stages and 27 engines at the same time, and, as was already discussed and speculated earlier on this thread, the exponential technical challenges created by the additional mechanical stresses, vibration and harmonics, complex aerodynamic interference etc... and explains how they essentially went from "hey let's just strap 3 Falcon 9s together and make a big rocket" to "Oh... this is not going to be that simple".

The part I love most is his pessimism about the first launch. Musk always prefers to lower expectations when it comes to testing new hardware, but when talking about FH's first launch, he has half-jokingly cranked that right down to: - I'll be happy if it clears the launch pad without damaging it...
His expectations of it reaching orbit appear minimal.



Edifying.

The first Interplanetary Transport System iteration may end up a bit smaller than initially announced:

But he clearly doesn't want it to be too big; no one can ever accuse Musk of not having a vision, but it also needs to be feasible and achievable if he ever actually wants to get SpaceX to Mars. That's where this tweet comes in. The original SpaceX plan involved a massive rocket with 42 engines, with a 12-meter diameter, that would ferry ships of a 100 people or more to the red planet. Musk is now hinting that the rocket he is planning to use will have a 9-meter diameter. According to Ars Technica, this could leave the rocket with half the engines (21) and, therefore, half the mass.

Full article
https://www.engadget.com/2017/07/24/spa ... rs-rocket/
https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/07 ... rs-rocket/

Francoflier wrote:

"hey let's just strap 3 Falcon 9s together and make a big rocket" to "Oh... this is not going to be that simple".

Like almost everyone predicted.

For people who don't want to watch the video, here's the corresponding article:

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/07 ... ectations/

Saying:

Moreover, the tripling of the engines from nine to 27 creates a tripling of the vibrations and acoustics at play throughout the vehicle.

All of these elements, according to Mr. Musk, required a complete redesign of the central-core’s airframe.

“The amount of load you’re putting through that center core is crazy because you have two super powerful boosters also shoving that center core,” stated Mr. Musk.

“So [we broke] the qualification levels on so much of the hardware [that] we had to redesign the whole center-core airframe on the Falcon 9 because it’s going to take so much load.

“And then you’ve got the separation systems… and, yeah, it just ended up being way, way more difficult than we originally thought.”

Quite some redesign; they basically built a new rocket.

The part I love most is his pessimism about the first launch.

The same article claims there is no proper way to test the entire setup: eventually SpaceX will have to fire up the Falcon Heavy rocket and see what happens.

Going ahead with the launch of the first Falcon Heavy on the assumption that anything that doesn't result in the launch complex itself being damaged will result in useful lessons learned is just one of those things that presently can only happen at SpaceX. The engineers tasked with making it all happen successfully - sooner rather than later - certainly work in a very unique environment.

There's something I've asked myself ever since hearing Elon Musk's first comment on the design principle behind FHeavy - why not transmit the individual Falcons' lift to the payload by way of a truss at the top of the nosecones ?

SeJoWa wrote:

There's something I've asked myself ever since hearing Elon Musk's first comment on the design principle behind FHeavy - why not transmit the individual Falcons' lift to the payload by way of a truss at the top of the nosecones ?

Several reasons:

1. Its additional weight, which means more thrust just to lift the vehicle, which means a lower payload.
2. How would you handle the second stage? The side boosters are only first stage boosters, theres an entire Falcon 9-style stack in the centre with the second stage on top of it.
3. It wouldn't solve the issues with vibration and acoustics interacting across the first stage boosters.

SeJoWa wrote:

Going ahead with the launch of the first Falcon Heavy on the assumption that anything that doesn't result in the launch complex itself being damaged will result in useful lessons learned is just one of those things that presently can only happen at SpaceX. The engineers tasked with making it all happen successfully - sooner rather than later - certainly work in a very unique environment.

(Answering separately because ... reasons)

Not even SpaceX can afford to throw away a $200million vehicle on a test which doesn't have a high chance of success - this is Musk doing PR bluster and trying to downplay the Falcon Heavy program, so don't expect it to launch this year.

They won't launch the FH until they have a high confidence of success.

moo wrote:

SeJoWa wrote:

Going ahead with the launch of the first Falcon Heavy on the assumption that anything that doesn't result in the launch complex itself being damaged will result in useful lessons learned is just one of those things that presently can only happen at SpaceX. The engineers tasked with making it all happen successfully - sooner rather than later - certainly work in a very unique environment.

(Answering separately because ... reasons)

Not even SpaceX can afford to throw away a $200million vehicle on a test which doesn't have a high chance of success - this is Musk doing PR bluster and trying to downplay the Falcon Heavy program, so don't expect it to launch this year.

They won't launch the FH until they have a high confidence of success.

But they won't (well, they shouldn't) launch a payload with their first try. Of course they want success but some things will only become known during a real launch. And if you launch a "test" vehicle, it doesn't matter whether it blows up after ten seconds or burns up on reentry.

mxaxai wrote:

moo wrote:

SeJoWa wrote:

Going ahead with the launch of the first Falcon Heavy on the assumption that anything that doesn't result in the launch complex itself being damaged will result in useful lessons learned is just one of those things that presently can only happen at SpaceX. The engineers tasked with making it all happen successfully - sooner rather than later - certainly work in a very unique environment.

(Answering separately because ... reasons)

Not even SpaceX can afford to throw away a $200million vehicle on a test which doesn't have a high chance of success - this is Musk doing PR bluster and trying to downplay the Falcon Heavy program, so don't expect it to launch this year.

They won't launch the FH until they have a high confidence of success.

But they won't (well, they shouldn't) launch a payload with their first try. Of course they want success but some things will only become known during a real launch. And if you launch a "test" vehicle, it doesn't matter whether it blows up after ten seconds or burns up on reentry.

The point of any Falcon Heavy test would be to validate the platform, regardless of whether someone wants to risk a payload.

Validating the platform means lift off, correct thrust levels, acceptable vibration and acoustic levels which won't harm the mission or payload, successful separation of boosters and then successful separation of the core stage and the second stage.

The vehicle blowing up 10 seconds after launch does nothing to validate the platform.

Payload or not, they won't launch until they have a high confidence of success.

moo wrote:

Payload or not, they won't launch until they have a high confidence of success.

Welp, Nov 2017. Keeping ambitions, or at least expectations low for this launch, first launch might not even reach orbit, but they are probably talking about the second stage as the scrubbed the attempted landing of that stage for this flight. So, confident enough to launch, but not being too ambitious in one flight...

https://www.engadget.com/2017/07/28/spacex-falcon-heavy-maiden-flight-november/

Oroka wrote:

moo wrote:

Payload or not, they won't launch until they have a high confidence of success.

Welp, Nov 2017. Keeping ambitions, or at least expectations low for this launch, first launch might not even reach orbit, but they are probably talking about the second stage as the scrubbed the attempted landing of that stage for this flight. So, confident enough to launch, but not being too ambitious in one flight...

https://www.engadget.com/2017/07/28/spacex-falcon-heavy-maiden-flight-november/

Unfortunately, that article doesnt really add anything to the discussion - discount everything Musk says on this, that bird won't fly unless the engineers are significantly confident that the payload will make orbit, there is simply too much that needs to be validated for it not to be.

Even if the second stage fails to make orbit after successful booster and core staging events, that doesn't validate the design because it won't be a stock second stage, it will also be modified to handle the additional stresses on the airframe.

moo wrote:

- discount everything Musk says on this, that bird won't fly unless the engineers are significantly confident that the payload will make orbit, there is simply too much that needs to be validated for it not to be.

I think the key point is that even after all the validation checks, all the engineering discussion and evaluations, after all the simulations.... no one will actually KNOW until the big red button is pressed (or in today's world, the link is clicked on the screen).

I have family that was involved in the original Atlas launches and he describes the endless round of not launching, of even after everything looked good they would not press the button because it COULD fail. Once they pushed the button and committed the launch it could go wrong so delay and test was always the better option for the engineers involved.

I think the key thing Musk is pushing for is: Launch the damned thing! Be confident of course! You must test it of course, you need to check the numbers and confirm the simulations, but don't get locked into the "Hold and test and double check" pattern. This is not a cost plus contract, you don't get paid even if you don't launch, not launching is a failure in and of itself. This isn't an endlessly tax payer funded company. So at some point you must actually do it. You must: Go for Launch.

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

moo wrote:

- discount everything Musk says on this, that bird won't fly unless the engineers are significantly confident that the payload will make orbit, there is simply too much that needs to be validated for it not to be.

I think the key point is that even after all the validation checks, all the engineering discussion and evaluations, after all the simulations.... no one will actually KNOW until the big red button is pressed (or in today's world, the link is clicked on the screen).

I'm not disputing that. I'm just saying not to take Musk at face value here - not a single one of his engineers would launch with doubts like he is voicing.

Take the Falcon 9 as an example - it didn't have a full failure until its 19th flight, although it had a partial failure with a secondary payload on its fourth flight. SpaceX has shown it can be patient - it had no experience of flight with multiple engines on the first stage, the vehicle was significantly larger, the payloads significantly heavier and the vehicle was basically entirely new.

And they are now in the same boat with the Falcon Heavy - substantial redesigns, entirely new performance envelopes, entirely new risk areas.

If the engineers don't think it will make successful orbit, it won't fly. That doesn't mean it won't ever fly - the Falcon 9 flew, as did the Falcon 1 (but they lost the first 3 of those).

How does the dragon capsule bring people back to earth (from space station) now that it cannot use its thrusters and has no legs? Parachute?

Well... I can't see anything else than a parachute. Dragon is not a lifting body, so this leaves only one option, unless Elon wants to honnor the never-operationaly-used Gemini deltaplane?

parapente wrote:

How does the dragon capsule bring people back to earth (from space station) now that it cannot use its thrusters and has no legs? Parachute?

Indeed, parachute, as was planned all along. The legs and thrusters were only in place to soften the landing on ground, similar to what Soyuz capsules do.

Thx and I had a read myself.Parachutes it is.But what a mess.NASA appear to have 3 re-entry vehicles under development (overkill?) and now Spacex has absolutely no way of landing on Mars manned or unmanned.And neither do NASA.Is it not time for closer collaboration?

They both wanna go to Mars (the public aren't interested in anything else- and they -NASA -pay for it).NASA has a humongous rocket with no mission and spacex want to go there too.OK later Elon wants to colonise but that (frankly) is wayyyoff.
Right now they could put the first professional astronauts on Mars in a joint effort? Otherwise we will be waiting for ever.Time for some proper cooperation?

parapente wrote:

and now Spacex has absolutely no way of landing on Mars manned or unmanned.And neither do NASA.Is it not time for closer collaboration?

The key thing to realize is that the "parachute-mode" for the SpaceX crew capsule is so they can meet the human rated requirements for NASA. If they kept the original plan they would need to certify it fully and that will take time and money and why do that when time is a factor and they have another option? NASA is very picky about what they put their astronauts in.

As to Mars, as a private space venture SpaceX will not need to meet the same requirements. So they could use their desired systems if they are needed.

Tugg

parapente wrote:

Thx and I had a read myself.Parachutes it is.But what a mess.NASA appear to have 3 re-entry vehicles under development (overkill?) and now Spacex has absolutely no way of landing on Mars manned or unmanned.And neither do NASA.Is it not time for closer collaboration?

Dragon was never really meant to put people on Mars. All SpaceX wanted to do is landing Dragon on Mars to test some landing techniques and test out new technologies. Dragon was not able to take off from the planet anyway. The most practical Dragon usage for Mars was landing rovers and dropping supplies prior to the arrival of the colonizers. The Interplanetary Transport System is the rocket that should put people on the red planet.

Thx Karel.I guess the truth is that I was quite excited about the red dragon plan of putting a rocket inside the capsule So some Mars rock could be returned to Earth - a big first!But that will have to wait now.The timing was somewhat ambitious anyway.
But we have the 'heavy' to look forward to and the private round the moon trip (although I have my doubts about the timing of that too).

Whilst I have nothing against his dream of sending 100's of people to colonise Mars it's all a little pie in the sky IMHO.What for me is far more interesting is the first step.IE sending professional astronauts to Mars.This seems to be the NASA goal (they don't have another meaningful one) and they will soon have a rocket that makes this feasible.Just wish Musk would work with them on this important first step.But perhaps NASA doesn't like the idea of that sort of collaboration?

Next Falcon launch, the Dragon Resupply Mission CRS-12, is scheduled for today.
Launch window starts Monday, August 14 at 12:31 p.m. EDT, or 16:31 UTC from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at Kennedy Space Center.
The Falcon booster will return and be recovered.

This is the twelfth Commercial Resupply Services mission (CRS-12) and is the last of the original first SpaceX launch contract with NASA (the contract was extended and now stands at a total of 20). Apparently this mission is also known as the CREAM mission for the experiments being carried which make up a lot of the payload (in addition to the ISS supplies).

Livestream video link (goes live an hour before launch):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLxWsYx8dbo

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

Next Falcon launch, the Dragon Resupply Mission CRS-12, is scheduled for today.
Launch window starts Monday, August 14 at 12:31 p.m. EDT, or 16:31 UTC from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at Kennedy Space Center.
The Falcon booster will return and be recovered.

This is the twelfth Commercial Resupply Services mission (CRS-12) and is the last of the original first SpaceX launch contract with NASA (the contract was extended and now stands at a total of 20). Apparently this mission is also known as the CREAM mission for the experiments being carried which make up a lot of the payload (in addition to the ISS supplies).

Livestream video link (goes live an hour before launch):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLxWsYx8dbo

Tugg

Thanks for the link/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk_x5uZeyNQ

I found a different link on youtube. Not sure if it matters, but it is the one I am watching.(edit, it is a mirror. Tugger's is direct from Spacex).

Another success!

Nice landing!

Fun to watch the whole thing live like that from both angles. That is the great thing about on land landings, you don't loose the video feed.

Tugg

Successful mission again. Always so amazing to watch the Falcon 9 land.

And amazingly it is now routine, boring even for some.

It is truly amazing what SpaceX has done. As Musk might say: "Boring is beautiful".

Tugg

It's becoming a routine thing, which means lower insurance rates and a constant stream of cash in the kitty.

I'm still amazed and delighted, and the near picture-perfect landing of the first stage was very satisfying to watch in real time.

The Dragon is still en route and hasn't docked with the ISS just yet.

And here comes... Dragon captured and docked.

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/897809942706397184

Elon Musk today revealed the SpaceX spacesuit:


https://www.instagram.com/p/BYIPmEFAIIn/