That was on one of the BE4s?

That's NOT good. Sure FH can pretty much do what Vulcan can, but still.

It was a SRB which had the problem.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/united-launch-alliance-ula-vulcan-rocket-launched-second-test-flight/

nortex97 said:

---

Yeah that was apparently a pretty close call.

Vulcan during the "observation" seen during ULA's Cert-2 mission this morning. Watch how the rocket moves to adjust after the flash.

📸 - @NASASpaceflight
📺 - https://t.co/uzKGo20deK pic.twitter.com/5z3vXxDwhY

— D Wise (@dwisecinema) October 4, 2024

Kept running afterward, must have been something digested by a turbo pump getting fired through?

---

Apparently, it was the nozzle coming off.

double aught said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Yeah that was apparently a pretty close call.

Vulcan during the "observation" seen during ULA's Cert-2 mission this morning. Watch how the rocket moves to adjust after the flash.

📸 - @NASASpaceflight
📺 - https://t.co/uzKGo20deK pic.twitter.com/5z3vXxDwhY

— D Wise (@dwisecinema) October 4, 2024

Kept running afterward, must have been something digested by a turbo pump getting fired through?

---

Apparently, it was the nozzle coming off.

---

Was going to say it looked like molten metal or a chunk of something got chucked into the exhaust plume.

You think losing a nozzle it would lose some thrust… what kind of nozzle was it?

Better angle.


Looks like nozzle throat gets burned through and loses part of the expansion section, then the whole expansion section.

Here's another angle from this morning's flight of Vulcan Cert-2 and the anomalous behavior from SRB no. 1's nozzle section.

First 1:12 slowed to 60% speed.

📸 - @NASASpaceflight

📺 - https://t.co/GF6C1sCML1 pic.twitter.com/4TNuxJX4ca

— Max Evans (@_mgde_) October 4, 2024

bmks270 said:

---

Better angle.


Looks like nozzle throat gets burned through and loses part of the expansion section, then the whole expansion section.

---

That brings back a bad memory for those of us who are old enough to have watched Challenger's last launch.

Northrop Grumman is going to have some explaining to do.

The added complexity and risk of those smallish srb seek a little silly.

bmks270 said:

---

You think losing a nozzle it would lose some thrust… what kind of nozzle was it?

---

It did lose some thrust. The main stage had to burn an extra 30 seconds to get to the appropriate orbit.

Rapier108 said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

Better angle.


Looks like nozzle throat gets burned through and loses part of the expansion section, then the whole expansion section.

---

That brings back a bad memory for those of us who are old enough to have watched Challenger's last launch.

Northrop Grumman is going to have some explaining to do.

---

Yeah, it looked like the nozzle was blowing exhaust through to the outside of the vehicle. If the failure had occurred on the other side of the nozzle and the exhaust blowing in towards the vehicle it would have likely been castastrophic. They were very lucky on this one.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

double aught said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

You think losing a nozzle it would lose some thrust… what kind of nozzle was it?

---

It did lose some thrust. The main stage had to burn an extra 30 seconds to get to the appropriate orbit.

---

30 second is an eternity in rocket engines. That is a shocking amount of extra fuel to have been carrying

---

On these test flights, they may leave a lot of extra payload capacity.

It's not like they…have to worry about boost back or getting as light as possible for a recovery/landing. This is ULA, after all. No sea turtles or whales were harmed when the booster crashed and sank a little further out at sea than planned. A lot of delta v margin apparently in sending a relatively light satellite into a solar orbit.

15 minute burn for a raptor is pretty incredible;


October 12 NET possible now?

nortex97 said:

---

It's not like they…have to worry about boost back or getting as light as possible for a recovery/landing. This is ULA, after all. No sea turtles or whales were harmed when the booster crashed and sank a little further out at sea than planned. A lot of delta v margin apparently in sending a relatively light satellite into a solar orbit.

15 minute burn for a raptor is pretty incredible;


October 12 NET possible now?

---

Wait what?
There's a notice to Mariners Oct 12th Then the FAA clarifies that their original estimate for IFT-5 in November hasn't changed.

Then there's a notam released for Oct 13th - 19th, opening at 7am central each day:
NOTAM B0824/24 establishes a dangerous area for the launch of SpaceX Starship Flight-5. The designated airspace is divided into two distinct areas with specified coordinates. This restriction is in effect from October 13, 2024, to October 19, 2024, with specific active periods on each day. The vertical limits extend from the surface to unlimited altitude.

And another notam for re-entry, also on the 13th - 19th
Rocket launch will take place with hazardous operations for atmospheric re-entry and splashdown of SpaceX Starship Flight-5, Stage 2. The affected areas are from coordinates 2443S 07500E to 2702S 07500E. Time frame: From 2410131242 to 2410191505, with specific daily operational windows.

These times for reentry open at 7:42am central time each day.

I'm confused
Marcus says this could be an IFT-4 style mission, which SpaceX has automatic approval for. But still, it's strange that the notice for mariners is active the day before

Not new but still, it's really good

I like Marcus and that's why I post his videos as he's well informed/smart and gives good insight imho, but I highly doubt starship launches before Election Day. No idea otherwise as to the politics of agencies/notams etc.

This is an interesting take on another totalitarian governments Space program;

I think it would make some sense to launch an IFT-4 style mission if SpaceX has to wait on the FAA. There are other things to test other than the catch, like modifications being made for ship reentry.

I haven't had my phone for 3 days. Y'all slackin'. Lol

Pretty interesting info SpaceX is putting out.

Starship’s fifth flight test is preparing to launch as soon as October 13, pending regulatory approval → https://t.co/hibmw2lVv1 pic.twitter.com/Suw1kKLHiE

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) October 7, 2024

Falcon 9 launches the @ESA Hera mission to interplanetary transfer orbit from Florida pic.twitter.com/gCBrYXPuHr

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) October 7, 2024

View from Falcon 9's second stage during the Hera mission pic.twitter.com/a4Qrgg6Pp6

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) October 7, 2024

In my defense, I have a 2 month old and a 4 year old with head colds (plus me). Bringing updates to the thread is a bit low on my priority list…

Good video of the Lunar Dawn LTV and some things that went into designing it. They also address the pressurized vs. open rover comparison.

The problem is, the FAA has already publicly said nothing til late Nov. per the NSF update video, that could change if NASA approves the license (without FAA).

[url] [/url]

Yeah. I hope stacking and prepping is a fulcrum to help incentivize the expedient clearance of a launch license... But the government seems to step closer to totalitarianism every week. I wonder if there's some push and pull internally going on.

A updated issued statement by the FAA does no longer mention the late November target date. pic.twitter.com/nmE9wEhNj3

— Adrian Beil (@BCCarCounters) October 8, 2024

There was the thought that if they launched in October that it would be an IFT-4 style flight.

Nope. Not according to SpaceX

Quote:

---

The fifth flight test of Starship will aim to take another step towards full and rapid reusability. The primary objectives will be attempting the first ever return to launch site and catch of the Super Heavy booster and another Starship reentry and landing burn, aiming for an on-target splashdown of Starship in the Indian Ocean.

---

https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-flight-5

FTS install happening this am (4 hours ago!).

Adding boom sticks on Booster 12. pic.twitter.com/N8hEZRQ7zz

— Chris Bergin - NSF (@NASASpaceflight) October 9, 2024

Surely they aren't going to this trouble/risk just to prove a point about the FAA/EPA/fish and wildlife etc, right? They must have some word that approval is coming shortly, imho.

I think that somehow it's happening. Don't know how... but it does seem to be happening.

nortex97 said:

---

FTS install happening this am (4 hours ago!).

Adding boom sticks on Booster 12. pic.twitter.com/N8hEZRQ7zz

— Chris Bergin - NSF (@NASASpaceflight) October 9, 2024

Surely they aren't going to this trouble/risk just to prove a point about the FAA/EPA/fish and wildlife etc, right? They must have some word that approval is coming shortly, imho.

---

Yeah no way they're installing the explosives to prove a point.

I wonder if NASA is licensing them instead of waiting for the FAA.

Countdown To Launch Show as we potentially get to within days of Starship Flight 5:

Here on X and on YT:https://t.co/vRyIEAGCN8

— Chris Bergin - NSF (@NASASpaceflight) October 9, 2024

Is NASA able to grant launch licenses in Boca Chica? I thought there was discussion on that recently and that was only for manned launch vehicles?

https://dailygalaxy.com/2024/10/spacexs-starship-faa-license-sunday-launch/

Quote:

---

According to sources, the FAA has accelerated its review process, and SpaceX now believes that the flight "could launch as soon as October 13, pending regulatory approval." While SpaceX remains optimistic, it has acknowledged that the license could still be delayed if any unforeseen issues arise. The FAA itself remains cautious, stating only that "the FAA will make a licensing determination once SpaceX has met all licensing requirements."

---

Half a centimeter?

Updated with some comments from another committee meeting today by SpaceX's Bill Gerstenmaier, who said the previous Super Heavy landed in the ocean "with half a centimeter accuracy," giving confidence for the upcoming catch attempt. https://t.co/jzE2UvJv0O

— Jeff Foust (@jeff_foust) October 10, 2024

Interesting article from Berger on the history of the Europa Clipper mission.

https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/10/were-finally-going-to-the-solar-systems-most-intriguing-but-unexplored-frontier/

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) conducted a technical review of Starship’s water-cooled flame deflector, which uses potable (drinking) water and determined that its use does not pose risk to the environment, as we have detailed at great length here →… https://t.co/qKOPcuDBSX

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) October 10, 2024

Huge expense to use potable water compared to non-potable, but they get zero credit for that.