51 replies to this topic

[GSBass]

Without responding directly to any of the critical comments, just think the obvious needs to be said… these are flight test, each pushes a little further, there will be successes and probably more failures as they continue to refine the design, it will become obvious when it’s ready but we have quite a few to go. The next big milestone will be land the booster back on the launchpad and catching it… would be rather shocked if that works on flight 5 but zero doubt they will nail it eventually, falcon 9 has not missed in quite a while.

[Rickycardo]

Very true. It seems as we (everyone aka the world aka the internet) have become so accustomed to exceeding success that a successful test flight becomes a failure. I have great hopes for Starship. As an engineer I would've loved to see the module pulled from the ocean and examined. They know what they're doing. That's why I work where I do and they are going into space.

[Serack]

Oh but they will.  They have to assess the damage to the flaps with the plasma burning through them.  They also need to assess the heat shield tiles to see how they held up.  The shielding for the flaps needs improvement to prevent a burn-through again.  Until the damage is assessed, the extent of the damage will be unknown.  Who knows, they could have been mere seconds from vehicle loss.

One Raptor was also dead from the start  That problem also needs assessed.  Even though 32 fired up and provided plenty of thrust, there is still a Gremlin that needs to be found.  Which could also be a Gremlin in hiding for the Starship Raptor engines.

With that said, I am ready for test flight #5!

I have no doubt that spacex and even nasa will be doing failure analysis.  What I am referring to is the event analysis NASA has been requiring that has to be wrapped up as part of approval for the next test.  The expressed hope is that with successful splashdowns, NASA can’t say, “you have to wait for our finished event analysis before your next test since the last one blew up.”

 

edit:  on third thought I think I’ve been referring to the FAA review approvals all this time

Edited by Serack, 07 June 2024 - 04:55 PM.

[GSBass]

As I stated some where above, Elon discussed the issue with the flaps before launch, saying something to the affect, we think they will make it but maybe not… he described it as a plasma river in that area so the decision was made to move the flaps to a different location on future starships. Sooo anyway it was not a surprise and they may have it fixed already… won’t know for sure til next reentry 

I have no doubt that spacex and even nasa will be doing failure analysis.  What I am referring to is the event analysis NASA has been requiring that has to be wrapped up as part of approval for the next test.  The expressed hope is that with successful splashdowns, NASA can’t say, “you have to wait for our finished event analysis before your next test since the last one blew up.”

 

edit:  on third thought I think I’ve been referring to the FAA review approvals all this time

[Skywatchr]

I have no doubt that spacex and even nasa will be doing failure analysis.  What I am referring to is the event analysis NASA has been requiring that has to be wrapped up as part of approval for the next test.  The expressed hope is that with successful splashdowns, NASA can’t say, “you have to wait for our finished event analysis before your next test since the last one blew up.”

 

edit:  on third thought I think I’ve been referring to the FAA review approvals all this time

There were exceptions to the FAA   approval for this flight.  As long as there were no catastrophic failures, they will not be holding up the next launch for "approval" since it was a designated "test launch".  There were no such failures and the intended mission goals were met this time.  There was nothing to warrant any investigations.

Let's just hope #5 is just as "uneventful".

[NinePlanets]

It is my understanding that the new flap configuration is coming with Ship 36, currently under construction, but I could have that wrong. Anyway, it has been in the works for a long time - like a year or more.

[Serack]

Let's just hope #5 is just as "uneventful".

If I understood the summaries I read of what Musk said this weekend, they intend to direct the booster to the tower on the next launch (next month?), but he gives it a 50/50 chance that the system will remain nominal and it will land there.  The other mode is that the system will detect issues and auto-destruct while on the way, but still over the Gulf.  

[cbowlsby]

I have really enjoyed following the efforts of the SpaceX team in building Starship via processes you usually only see in software development.

The resulting differences between the Starship and SLS programs could not be more dramatic.

Looking forward to the next test!

[GSBass]

It really is amazing, at some point when starship becomes fully operational and man rated, it will become very difficult to justify SLS, it’s a good rocket but the cost is so crazy high… the space lobby is in for a tough fight… my guess is by Artemis 4 they will be forced to reevaluate

I have really enjoyed following the efforts of the SpaceX team in building Starship via processes you usually only see in software development.

The resulting differences between the Starship and SLS programs could not be more dramatic.

Looking forward to the next test!

[NinePlanets]

I think we'll find that if/when Starship eats SLS's lunch, we will still be funding SLS simply because multi-source heavy lift is going to be a national priority. Notice that Dragon stomps all over Starliner and Orion and yet there they are.

[sickfish]

SLS, next launch is NET September 2025.

"Come on, while we're young".

[Skywatchr]

 

"Come on, while we're young".

[GSBass]

NASA is so risk averse these days it a wonder they get anything done, I thought a while back that the main reason they selected SpaceX for the lander was preemptive to keep them from going without them… meanwhile China marches on, they landed another robot for sample return on the far side the other day… they will be ready to land men there soon

SLS, next launch is NET September 2025.

"Come on, while we're young".

Edited by GSBass, 11 June 2024 - 08:57 AM.

[NinePlanets]

NASA is so risk averse these days it a wonder they get anything done, I thought a while back that the main reason they selected SpaceX for the lander was preemptive to keep them from going without them… 

HAHAHAHA!!!  I had that thought too! 

 

But it is true that there is a push by both NSF and DOD to diversify sourcing for space access and broaden the opportunities for start-ups and new players in the game. This is a good thing - to spur commercialization and development.

[GSBass]

I am all for diversifying, but at same time thinking it may be time to cut Boeing and ULA loose and let those companies figure out how to be nimble and competitive… currently it seems we are subsidizing to keep them afloat

HAHAHAHA!!!  I had that thought too! 

 

But it is true that there is a push by both NSF and DOD to diversify sourcing for space access and broaden the opportunities for start-ups and new players in the game. This is a good thing - to spur commercialization and development.

[NinePlanets]

I am all for diversifying, but at same time thinking it may be time to cut Boeing and ULA loose and let those companies figure out how to be nimble and competitive… currently it seems we are subsidizing to keep them afloat

I tend to agree. They need a fire lit under them.

[KiwiObserver]

it was a little funny hearing the incessant cheering and screaming even though nobody could see what was happening. My though was all these people must have access to a different camera because I don't see a thing. The crowd reaction is obviously planned ahead of time and everyone is told to cheer as loud as they can on certain cues. As reentry progressed, it just looked like melted chocolate was smeared all over the lens. 

 

It was the same while we watched it spin out of control and blow up on the first launch. I find this a little disturbing when watching these launches, it has a similar feeling to everyone cheering in an Apple store. They would have obviously put in a huge amount of work and be proud of what they've achieved but the non-stop fist-pumping and waving arms in the air and cheering gives the whole thing a bit of a strange feeling 

Edited by KiwiObserver, 11 June 2024 - 10:00 PM.

[Rickycardo]

There's a video on X showing the booster soft landing. I don't have an account but from the link at Space.com I was able to watch it.

https://www.space.co...y-landing-video

[BFaucett]

There's a video on X showing the booster soft landing. I don't have an account but from the link at Space.com I was able to watch it.

https://www.space.co...y-landing-video

 

 

Here's a post on X. Watch the video at the link below.

 

 

 

source: https://x.com/SpaceX...458854067118450

 

 

Cheers! Bob F. 

[NinePlanets]

It looks to me like there is a fire in the engine area that shouldn't be there.

But at least it made it that far! That's a win.

[Skywatchr]

It looks to me like there is a fire in the engine area that shouldn't be there.

But at least it made it that far! That's a win.

It appears something, possibly an engine, that had an "unscheduled disassembly".   When the engines first lit when above the clouds, you can see that "extra" orange flame. Then you see the hard engine gimbal as it came out the bottom of the clouds compensating somewhat for the loss of thrust. They were not using all the engines for the landing. Just a center section of them.

[NinePlanets]

I wonder if it had something to do with the outer ring engine that didn't light on takeoff? Or maybe one of the 13 that didn't light the second time? There looks to be an issue in Raptor Land again.

Edited by NinePlanets, 12 June 2024 - 06:40 PM.

[Skywatchr]

I wonder if it had something to do with the outer ring engine that didn't light on takeoff? Or maybe one of the 13 that didn't light the second time? There looks to be an issue in Raptor Land again.

Hard to say since the booster could have been spun around.  That one not firing may not be an engine issue at all, but possibly a fuel system problem. Something awry surely was allowing fuel to be ignited, and not coming out an engine nozzle under pressure.  They saw it and will probably report on it soon.  Perhaps Scott Manley will put out an update.

[GSBass]

Only the three gimbled raptors are used for the landing burn on the booster, the flames noted are likely due to a plumbing issue, unknown if the one engine they lost caused that but it is an issue when the valves don’t close properly… any leak will ignite when the three light back up. Generally it’s only a major issue if it continues to burn after landing but they have installed fire suppression systems at the pad

Hard to say since the booster could have been spun around.  That one not firing may not be an engine issue at all, but possibly a fuel system problem. Something awry surely was allowing fuel to be ignited, and not coming out an engine nozzle under pressure.  They saw it and will probably report on it soon.  Perhaps Scott Manley will put out an update.

[Skywatchr]

Kevin did a short video with a clip from Elon explaining a few things.

 

https://rumble.com/v...t-flight-4.html