Elon Musk Updates Status of Satellite Launch, Falcon 9R Destruction
Elon Musk (Credit: SpaceX)
A message from SpaceX:
SpaceX has decided to postpone tomorrow’s flight of AsiaSat 6. We are not aware of any issue with Falcon 9, nor the interfaces with the Spacecraft, but have decided to review all potential failure modes and contingencies again. We expect to complete this process in one to two weeks.
The natural question is whether this is related to the test vehicle malfunction at our development facility in Texas last week. After a thorough review, we are confident that there is no direct link. Had the same blocked sensor port problem occurred with an operational Falcon 9, it would have been outvoted by several other sensors. That voting system was not present on the test vehicle.
What we do want to triple-check is whether even highly improbable corner case scenarios have the optimal fault detection and recovery logic. This has already been reviewed by SpaceX and multiple outside agencies, so the most likely outcome is no change. If any changes are made, we will provide as much detail as is allowed under US law.
— Elon Musk
23 responses to “Elon Musk Updates Status of Satellite Launch, Falcon 9R Destruction”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Better safe than sorry (really sorry)!
An air sensor port maybe. Mud daubers at work.
I vaguely remember an anecdote about mud daubers building nests in front of a pitot tube a crashing an airliner in the mid 90s. I think it was just a theory and never substantiated.
Strategic descision? Any problems with Falcon 9 now, before the announcment of CCtCap winners could upset the selection/announcment or spawn much debate afterwards. It’s really troubeling though that they at this stage STILL have the helium leak problems, that they are not 100% confident with the design, and are postponing launches by weeks. Nevertheless, I want SpaceX to succeed. They are the brightest shining star in the space industry right now.
But the Dragon is the only contender that is in operation already, in cargo version. And the Dragon is not Falcon. (And the debris did land vertically :-p)
As DragonV2 depends on Falcon 9 to go to space, a spectacular KABOOM right now would set them back quite a bit. Dragon V2 would be delayed, and the following investigation would cost time and resources. If this is factored in during selection of CCtCap winners it would not be very good for SpaceX. Anyway, I hope they fly soon.
It could fly on other launch vehicles too. I know of 6 other rockets with at least the same mass to LEO capacity which are operating today. But maybe you are right and they do consider the reliability of Falcon 9 and not only the Dragon itself. It is certainly bad timing for testing something to the limit right now.
Something I wonder is if the Orion could go around the Moon on a Falcon Heavy?
Nope. Orion + SM + fuel mass is about 29,000 kg, and Falcon Heavy is only capable of lofting 13,200 kg to TLI (Trans Lunar Injection).
Ares 1 to LEO was supposed to be 25,400 kg (56,000 lb)
Falcon Heavy to LEO is supposed to be 53,000 kg (117,000 lb)
I understand that LTI is a different monster all together but none the less…
Very interesting!
A very telling update to some of SpaceX’s posted performance values to GTO for the Falcon Heavy!
They spend quite a bit of time discussing the Heavy as well!
What I also found interesting was the level of people asking questions!
Boeing and Marshall Space Flight to name a few!
It’s a little over an hour long but definitely worth the watch!
http://www.youtube.com/watc…
Good decision. If a launch failure occurred because they didn’t perform due diligence, that could not only compromise commercial crew decisions but also set back their certification for DoD. On that last point, no doubt DoD took notice of the failure and will be asking some hard questions.
It’s a test vehicle being pushed hard. SpaceX is a private company. This incident has nothing to do with DOD and if they think it does then they need to stop acting in the oldspace manner and mind their own affairs. In any case, formal certification is underway and may include a review of this issue.
SpaceX will no doubt advise whoever they believe needs advice once they’ve understand the issue/s.
What if they hadn’t been undertaking this test program, what then?
Cheers
Oh, I suspect that both dod and NASA are looking into the cause.
It does not mean that it will hurt spacex. Even now, this delay is prudent.
From what I am reading here and there SpaceX has brought the manufacturing of the Helium system in house and this is causing some headaches… SpaceX is known for manufacturing most of their rocket in house which is one of the ways they can control cost and quality…
Although I don’t particularly care for yet another delay I do like how they are just putting the issues out there for consumption and working through them! Also, this latest information made available is a tad more technical in nature and is a lot more forthright and transparent!
Due dilegence and then some! SpaceX just needs to stay the course and keep launching successfully! All else will be built into their system of robustness through design, redesign, repeatability and reproducibility!
They are really maturing as a company. A couple years ago they probably wouldn’t have thought twice after concluding that the same failure wouldn’t occur on the production vehicle due to the absence of a certain system. Who remembers all the times the rocket aborted on the pad at T-zero, and they recycled the count and launched within two hours? Those were some exciting times! But now they have customers, they have to be more responsible. Good for them that they’re being so diligent.
Just the last launch, the countdown was aborted a few minutes before launch. They did some analysis, discussed the issue and successfully launched withing the same launch window.
And that was with a paying customers satellite on board 🙂
I wasn’t aware of that, as I haven’t been following their latest missions very closely, but I did some digging on wikipedia. Their latest flight, the OG2 mission, was scrubbed 4 times before finally launching. Perhaps on the final attempt they did a quick scrub and turnaround, they’re certainly still capable of working quickly, but compare that to Falcon 9 launch 1, or several of the Falcon 1 flights, when they didn’t scrub at all and simply recycled the count after the first attempt and then took off.
They’re definitely being more cautious, and I imagine it’s a combination of increased complexity of the rocket (someone else mentioned problems they’ve had since bringing some parts of the helium system in house), and also maturity. These are good things.
Not that I disagree with your general observation, but I just wanted to point out that OG2 wasn’t their latest flight. The latest was with AsiaSat 8. I watched that live and if I remember it correctly, they aborted the countdown under 5 minutes before launch and recycled within the ca. 2 hour launch window and launched successfully 🙂
Damn me and my hurry! I just saw the big green block on https://en.wikipedia.org/wi… and my eyes went straight up to mission 10. Thanks for pointing that out. It’s good to know that they haven’t completely lost their nerve 🙂
No worries 😉
Turns out, it was actually a last minute abort, here are some details:
http://www.spaceflight101.c…
I really would love to see a modified dragon v2 go up on these F9r. That way, if they lose the stage, then have the V2 separate and land SAFELY. That would help test and prove the system.
Chemical rocketry has it’s constraints, Nuclear dense non-radioactive energy will provide the energetics to overcome these.
SpaceWorks Engineering Advanced Concepts Group
Key customers and partners are NASA, Air Force Research Laboratory, DARPA, JPL, Pratt Whitney a United Technologies Company, ULA United Launch Alliance, Orbital, IHI AeroSpace, National Institute of Aerospace, UDRI University of Dayton Research Institute, UTC Universal Technology Corporation, and SI Satrec Initiative.
LENR Spaceplanes (see page 31)
http://www.sei.aero/eng/pap…
Advanced Propulsion System Concept Studies
Customer: NASA LaRC
Duration: 6 months
Date: 2009-2010
SpaceWorks conducted separate vehicle design studies evaluating the potential impact of two advanced propulsion system concepts under consideration by NASA Langley Research Center:
The first concept was an expendable multistage rocket vehicle which utilized an advanced Air-Augmented Rocket (AAR) engine. The effect of various rocket thrust augmentation ratios were identified the resulting vehicle design where compared against a traditional expendable rocket concept
The second concept leverage Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR), a new form of energy generation being studied at NASA LaRC, to determine how to utilize an LENR-based propulsion system for space access. For this activity, two LENR-based rocket engine propulsion performance models where developed jointly by SpaceWorks and LaRC personnel.
The Complete NARI 2014 Seedling Seminars (click people tab to view investigators)
The NASA Aeronautics Research Institute (NARI) presented a 6-day virtual technical seminar on February 19–21 and February 25–27, 2014 to showcase innovative concepts developed by NASA researchers, primarily featuring work from the Seedling Phase 2 (Round 1) and Seedling Phase 1 (Round 3) funds.
http://nari.arc.nasa.gov/si…
http://nari.arc.nasa.gov/si…
NASA Low Energy Nuclear Reaction Aircraft and Spaceplanes
http://nari.arc.nasa.gov/si…
Doug Wells: NASA Langley Research Center
http://nari.arc.nasa.gov/wells
Douglas Wells research interests include the study of aircraft design, aerodynamics, unconventional configurations, personal air vehicles, and Low Energy Nuclear Reactions. Currently, Wells is the technical monitor for the Boeing SUGAR Phase 2 Truss-Braced Wing Concept Studies and Exploration task. He performed technical assessments for the subsonic Fixed-Wing Project Phase 1 and Environmentally Responsible Aviation Project Phase 1 contractor’s advanced concepts.
Projects
Low Energy Nuclear Reaction Aircraft Phase I