SpaceX Super Heavy and Starship updates

[Xenon]

SpaceX Starship grounded indefinitely by FAA

https://www.militaryaerospace.com/commercial-aerospace/article/14292907/spacex-starship-grounded-indefinitely-by-faa

 

No real surprise there. No launches until they figure what happened. 

Edited April 27, 2023 by Xenon

[anthdci]

On 27/04/2023 at 17:45, Xenon said:

SpaceX Starship grounded indefinitely by FAA

https://www.militaryaerospace.com/commercial-aerospace/article/14292907/spacex-starship-grounded-indefinitely-by-faa

 

No real surprise there. No launches until they figure what happened. 

 

standard procedure isn't it? I doubt spacex would want to launch another one until they figured out the issues.

[FloatingFatMan]

On 27/04/2023 at 19:16, anthdci said:

 

standard procedure isn't it? I doubt spacex would want to launch another one until they figured out the issues.

Not that they can anyway... They don't have a launchpad that can take it any more...

[anthdci]

On 27/04/2023 at 23:30, FloatingFatMan said:

Not that they can anyway... They don't have a launchpad that can take it any more...

well exactly which is why it’s a none issue, they have plenty to work through first then the FAA will reissue.

[FloatingFatMan]

On 28/04/2023 at 08:51, anthdci said:

well exactly which is why it’s a none issue, they have plenty to work through first then the FAA will reissue.

Please note, I'm NOT criticizing the FAA grounding. It's SOP whenever a launch goes unexpectedly to ground until investigated.

[Skiver Veteran]

On 26/04/2023 at 14:50, Astra.Xtreme said:

Clearly you know nothing about engineering...  You can simulate anything you want, but you'll never know for sure until you actually try it.  Obviously they knew the risks involved, but decided to launch it anyway.  Now they know the results and boundaries and can re-engineer the pad as needed. 
That's actually a good thing...  Had they went a different route, they'd never know.  Should they have done a few more static fires?  Probably.

Clearly you think you know more about engineering than you do, Just look at Formula one last season when every team got to the Winter testing and every single car was bouncing way beyond anything any tests ever predicted and they all spent the next few weeks and months attempting to recover. Simulations work up until a point but nothing beats a real world test.

[bguy_1986]

On 27/04/2023 at 18:30, FloatingFatMan said:

Not that they can anyway... They don't have a launchpad that can take it any more...

They will have that pad rebuilt in no time.

[Astra.Xtreme]

On 28/04/2023 at 06:14, Skiver said:

Clearly you think you know more about engineering than you do, Just look at Formula one last season when every team got to the Winter testing and every single car was bouncing way beyond anything any tests ever predicted and they all spent the next few weeks and months attempting to recover. Simulations work up until a point but nothing beats a real world test.

Did you even read what I said, or did you reply to the wrong person?

[DocM]

On 26/04/2023 at 06:18, FloatingFatMan said:

So what you're saying is that 2023 rocket engineers with their super computers and complex simulations didn't know that their launch pad would get wrecked without protection, but 1950's rocket engineers with a slide rule and a pencil, did?

Okay...

 

1960s rocket scientists at NASA described how a flat pad works;

the rocket should be 2x the diameter of the engine cluster off the surface to allow a  stagnation layer to form. Starship is 9m, so 18m. The OLM is 25m off the ground. The region between the ground and engine cluster becomes a 360° "trench." 

• the problem was the Fondag  concrete at ground level failed, allowing high pressure gases to get under it. It broke up, then the plume dug a crater.

• fix for the base is a stronger slab and water cooled steel plate. These plates are used on SpaceX test stands.

• the chopstick arms work, so the DrawWorks mechanism works. 

• the DrawWorks housing took hits, but sheet metal is cheap.

• the damaged tanks were double walled with ~2m  between. No leaks. 

• the booster quick-disconnect had retracted into its dog house and was protected.

• the rest of the deluge system is on its way from KSC. Loaded on a barge yesterday.

• NASA and FAA were aware of the possibility of a failure at some point. First launches fail 50% of the time.

• the investigation procedure had been agreed to & described in a Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) update published before the launch. The Verge & similar headlines are FUD.

• work has already started on pad repairs & cleanup, the latter also described in the PEA update.

• NASA Administrator Nelson told Congress a return to flight should happen in a few months.

 

[DocM]

US Fish & Wildlife weighs in...

https://spacenews.com/fish-and-wildlife-service-documents-damage-from-starship-launch/

Quote

 

No debris was found on lands belonging to the refuge itself, but the agency said debris was spread out over 385 acres belonging to SpaceX and Boca Chica State Park. A fire covering 3.5 acres also started south of the pad on state park land, but the Fish and Wildlife Service didn’t state what caused the fire or how long it burned.

There was no evidence, though, that the launch and debris it created harmed wildlife. “At this time, no dead birds or wildlife have been found on refuge-owned or managed lands,” the agency said.

>

 

 

[DocM]

Musk had  Twitter Spaces event, pretty much an AMA. There should be another in a few weeks.

His statements were reported by Michael Sheetz of the Washington Post.

++++++++++

 

[DocM]

Stabilized video showing the flight termination system opening up the propellant tanks. There's a charge on the common dome between the tanks, and charges on the structural rings above and below the dome. I think we need bigger bombs.

 

 

[anthdci]

On 30/04/2023 at 19:08, DocM said:

Stabilized video showing the flight termination system opening up the propellant tanks. There's a charge on the common dome between the tanks, and charges on the structural rings above and below the dome. I think we need bigger bombs.

 

 

I think this is a massive learning point, they should press the button and it should be in a million pieces a couple of seconds later, not this slowly.

[DocM]

On 30/04/2023 at 15:13, anthdci said:

I think this is a massive learning point, they should press the button and it should be in a million pieces a couple of seconds later, not this slowly.

Like the autonomous flight safety system used at Cape Canaveral, Wallops, and Vandenberg there is no big red button to push. It's all automated, and separate from the rocket systems except for legacy launchers like Atlas V and Delta IV Heavy. Their replacements will be automated.

Falcon 9 was first in 2017, Falcon Heavy next, in the future Vulcan, New Glenn, etc.

[DocM]

Busy bees at the launch site

 

 

[bguy_1986]

Quote

SpaceX lost communications due to "some kind of energy event." And "some kind of explosion happened to knock out the heat shields of engines 17, 18, 19, or 20."

That piqued my interest, but it sounds like a little bit of a mis quote (according to random people on twitter).  They lost communication with only Engine 19

[Xenon]

 

[SALSN]

On 01/05/2023 at 21:27, Xenon said:

 

I seem to remember a very comprehensive environmental review, that was dragged out several months extra to go over all the feedback.

[DocM]

On 01/05/2023 at 16:19, SALSN said:

I seem to remember a very comprehensive environmental review, that was dragged out several months extra to go over all the feedback.

 

Yup, and there are a number of significant errors and omissions in their filing to the DC Circuit Court. Things like how many launches would be done a year, how many road closings, environmental mitigations SpaceX is already doing, etc.

History,

There are two kinds of environmental reviews which apply; a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and a Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA).

An EIS was done in 2013-2014 to approve a Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy launch site at Boca Chica,

https://www.faa.gov/space/environmental/nepa_docs/spacex_texas_eis

Quote

The FAA issued a Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Draft EIS in the Federal Register on April 19, 2013. Copies of the Draft EIS were sent to persons and agencies that requested a copy. The FAA held a public hearing on May 7, 2013 to obtain comments on the Draft EIS. The FAA issued an NOA of the Final EIS in the Federal Register on June 6, 2014.

 

Eventually, SpaceX decided to change the program from Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy to Starship. This change required a Programmitic Environmental Assessment (PEA), which was published June 13, 2022 with a FONSI (Finding Of No Significant Impact). It was updated with new test program info a few days before launch.

[Xenon]

On 01/05/2023 at 16:19, SALSN said:

I seem to remember a very comprehensive environmental review, that was dragged out several months extra to go over all the feedback.

I think it has to do with the Kaboom and the launchpad damage. 

[DocM]

On 01/05/2023 at 19:17, Xenon said:

I think it has to do with the Kaboom and the launchpad damage. 

 

An interesting comment on the pad explosion from Dr. Phil Metzger, Planetary Scientist U. Central Florida, co-founder of NASA KSC SwampWorks

++++++++++

 

 

 

Last Tweet expanded,

Quote

"I will add this: NASA had been involved in that project but pulled out when they learned PISCES planned to fire a thruster over the pad since NASA was concerned about the political optics of a failure if it occurred. Yet all the engineers involved thought the pad explosion was a tremendous success since we learned so much more about building lunar landing pads than we could have by a more careful approach."

 

[DocM]

Repairs are going fast

 

[Xenon]

On 02/05/2023 at 16:31, DocM said:

Repairs are going fast

 

I will say that when spacex wants something done. It gets done. But I still think they are too optimistic on their launch date projections. 

[DocM]

On 02/05/2023 at 17:04, Xenon said:

I will say that when spacex wants something done. It gets done. But I still think they are too optimistic on their launch date projections. 

 

Welcome to 'Elon Time', aspirational SpaceX/Tesla schedules set in part to motivate the troops. They play along, and things get done faster than their competitors. SpaceXers get an average of $169k/year, comprehensive health care, free meals at work, 15-20 personal days, stock options (regular monetization), etc.

[Skiver Veteran]

On 28/04/2023 at 13:52, Astra.Xtreme said:

Did you even read what I said, or did you reply to the wrong person?

Turns out I didn't read what you actually said, totally misinterpreted that as the other way around, apologies!