SpaceX and other space news updates

1,874,379 Views | 18910 Replies | Last: 1 day ago by Kenneth_2003
txags92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Anybody want to revisit their bets on whether Artemis or Starship launch next?

Instapundit Blog Archive THE NEW SPACE RACE: NASA has a new problem to fix before the next Artemis II countdown test.

THE NEW SPACE RACE: NASA has a new problem to fix before the next Artemis II countdown test.
Quote:

On Thursday, NASA's launch team tested the seals by partially filling the core stage with liquid hydrogen. This "confidence test" ended earlier than planned when the launch team encountered a new problem that reduced the flow of fuel into the rocket. In a statement released Friday night, NASA said workers will replace a filter suspected to be the cause of the reduced flow before proceeding into the next WDR.
The confidence test ended as the launch team transitioned to "fast fill" mode for liquid hydrogen, when pressures and flow rates put the finicky seals through the most stress. However, NASA said engineers achieved several key objectives of the confidence test.
Isaacman wrote Saturday that the test "provided a great deal of data, and we observed materially lower leak rates compared to prior observations during WDR-1."


Here's the core problem, and it isn't the hydrogen: NASA finally acknowledges the elephant in the room with the SLS rocket.
Quote:

During the news conference, I asked about this low flight rate and the challenge of managing a complex rocket that will never be more than anything but an experimental system. The answer from NASA's top civil servant, Amit Kshatriya, was eye-opening.
"You know, you're right, the flight ratethree years is a long time between the first and second," NASA's associate administrator said. "It is going to be experimental, because of going to the Moon in this configuration, with the energies we're dealing with. And every time we do it these are very bespoke components, they're in many cases made by incredible craftsmen. … It's the first time this particular machine has borne witness to cryogens, and how it breathes, and how it vents, and how it wants to leak is something we have to characterize. And so every time we do it, we're going to have to do that separately."
So there you have it. Every SLS rocket is a work of art, every launch campaign an adventure, every mission subject to excessive delays. It's definitely not ideal.


It's a hot mess that costs $4 billion per launch, not including substantial development costs.
Decay
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Everything about SLS is an advertisement for the SpaceX approach. Maybe that's Isaacman's ultimate plan
normaleagle05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ship 40 progress.


Only 2 more sections to go if cyberguru is accurate and I didn't miss a section.
fullback44
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
its almost silly to compare a NASA rocket program to a rocket program ran by Space X, one is a hugely over budgeted program operating in slow motion costing billions of tax dollars while the other runs at warp speed and builds rockets faster than Whataburger produces hamburgers..

I do give NASA credit for some of the programs exploring our planets, but that will soon be passed by as well I suppose.

We should all be happy that Elon is allowing us to see this while we are on earth, if it were up to countries and their own space programs we would probably never see what all is about to happen.

Thank you Mr Elon!
TexAgs91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
No, I don't care what CNN or Miss NOW said this time
Ad Lunam
Burdizzo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It is also a key component in waterboarding.
TexAgs91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Or DHMO-boarding
No, I don't care what CNN or Miss NOW said this time
Ad Lunam
txags92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Won't somebody please think of the children!?
OnlyForNow
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ag87H2O
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's SpaceX's new division - Fountainworks
OKCAg2002
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Lol.

Here's some video of the waterworks

nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
No indication the new pad's deluge test failed. Next would be rolling the booster there for a static fire, and seeing if they then decide to roll it back/change engines after that. Once that is done we'll have a better idea how long until launch (roughly). Upper stage static fire in Massey's as well is needed obviously.

The process to then get through a wet dress rehearsal might also take a bit longer this time, as so much of the GSE is now changed etc. From a purely 'wild guess' perspective I'd say week 3 in March for a launch would be the target, but I haven't read any educated folks guesses yet even really.
PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
nortex97 said:

No indication the new pad's deluge test failed. Next would be rolling the booster there for a static fire, and seeing if they then decide to roll it back/change engines after that. Once that is done we'll have a better idea how long until launch (roughly). Upper stage static fire in Massey's as well is needed obviously.

The process to then get through a wet dress rehearsal might also take a bit longer this time, as so much of the GSE is now changed etc. From a purely 'wild guess' perspective I'd say week 3 in March for a launch would be the target, but I haven't read any educated folks guesses yet even really.

I've been saying late March and that seems to track so far.

There is still some work left to do on the pad too.

Right now I think they're beginning to install the engines on the booster.
normaleagle05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's only a week behind Elon's 6 week timeline from late January, so maybe a tad aggressive, but in the ballpark.

hph6203
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TexAgs91 said:

Or DHMO-boarding
DHMO-board by the GTMO-board.
Ducks4brkfast
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I received an email today from someone at SpaceX telling me they're looking at doing a highway expansion project near Brownsville, with a goal of achieving the fastest highway construction timeline in history.

i wouldn't bet against them.
txags92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ducks4brkfast said:

I received an email today from someone at SpaceX telling me they're looking at doing a highway expansion project near Brownsville, with a goal of achieving the fastest highway construction timeline in history.

i wouldn't bet against them.

As long as they don't hire Williams Brothers, I won't.
jkag89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
normaleagle05 said:

That's only a week behind Elon's 6 week timeline from late January, so maybe a tad aggressive, but in the ballpark.



Six weeks!?!?!?
txags92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
jkag89 said:

normaleagle05 said:

That's only a week behind Elon's 6 week timeline from late January, so maybe a tad aggressive, but in the ballpark.



Six weeks!?!?!?

From January 25th. By Elon's estimate. So not before March 8th. But more likely the 2nd or 3rd week of March assuming assembly and testing goes to plan.
Ag_of_08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
NASA is a great exploration agency. They, since Apollo ended, have done a piss poor job of managing or supervising the building and launch of rockets( and arguably vehicles, given the 50/50 record the CC and the problems/inadequacies of Artemis) themselves.

double aught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
CC?
AtlAg05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Wet dress for Artemis II is still under way.

On a side note, NASA has a press conference set for 2PM ET on the investigation into Starliner.

That could be very interesting.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Starliner ruled a class A mishap. This thing is…done.


'…and too long, it was.' /Yoda
TriAg2010
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
double aught said:

CC?


Commercial Crew.

I need to go dig up my posts during the CFT debacle, because I recall my general attitude was roughy "the Starliner issues are manageable, but NASA is being extra risk adverse because they have the option to not take any risk and send the crew home on Dragon." It was more serious than I appreciated at the time.
Ag_of_08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
^^ what he said on cc= commercial crew.

I think it ended up being worse than even the more cynical amongst us thought.
Kenneth_2003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Can someone dig up the commentary, really impromptu interview, Butch gave to Eric Berger immediately after the crew press conference when they got home?

It's VERY insightful. Butch knew Eric is a competent and knowledgeable space geek journalist and really got into the details with it.

They were well outside mission rules to either approach the station AND to abort to reentry. The repeated faults/failures had them below the required degrees of freedom for stable flight. For safety of the station they technically should not have been allowed into the keep out sphere, but it was equally uncertain if they could achieve the requisite burn for deorbit and the proper attitude for safe re-entry!

Edit... Here it is in Ars Technica
https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/04/the-harrowing-story-of-what-flying-starliner-was-like-when-its-thrusters-failed/
Ag_of_08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Its one of the reasons I got irritated when the initial failures on the uncrewed flight happened, but people kept maintaining" oh but there was redundancy" " oh it had x number of backups working"... failure of the primary is still failure, and risking a crew on the idea "if we have enough backups one of then is bound to stay working" is... insane.
txags92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ag_of_08 said:

Its one of the reasons I got irritated when the initial failures on the uncrewed flight happened, but people kept maintaining" oh but there was redundancy" " oh it had x number of backups working"... failure of the primary is still failure, and risking a crew on the idea "if we have enough backups one of then is bound to stay working" is... insane.

Exactly. If the backups use the same mechanisms as the one that failed, and you don't know why the primary failed, you cannot trust the backup either.
double aught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Looks like the Artemis wet dress rehearsal went well yesterday.

Also, that Ars Technica interview is really interesting.
ABATTBQ11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's a real black eye for Boeing
lb3
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TriAg2010 said:

double aught said:

CC?


Commercial Crew.

I need to go dig up my posts during the CFT debacle, because I recall my general attitude was roughy "the Starliner issues are manageable, but NASA is being extra risk adverse because they have the option to not take any risk and send the crew home on Dragon." It was more serious than I appreciated at the time.
My position, not sure if I stated it here, was that if you wouldn't certify the vehicle for a manned launch due to the thruster issues, you couldn't certify it for a manned entry either.
TexAgs91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ABATTBQ11 said:

That's a real black eye for Boeing

Not just Boeing

Quote:

But as NASA, we managed the contract. We accepted the vehicle. We launched the crew. We made decisions from docking through post-mission actions. A considerable portion of the responsibility and accountability rests here.

No, I don't care what CNN or Miss NOW said this time
Ad Lunam
Kenneth_2003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The "safe haven" bit is interesting, and there are A LOT of things to consider here with a lot of variables. I know there are times they send crews back to their capsules just out of an abundance of caution such as a known piece of debris will travel too close to the station.

Years ago, I think toward the end of the first Dragon Crew I mission, I watched the hatch closeout and undocking. That closeout procedure took a LONG time to complete and then, as I recall during the first pressure hold, they had to open it back up and wipe it down again. The thought was a single hair or other small piece of FOD can prevent the seal.

If the ISS has been catastrophically damaged that fine detail of a test might not be possible. I realize I'm about to over-simplify, but if all intents they've got to get into a spacecraft, close the door and head for home. It's not the Russian space station in Armageddon breaking up and exploding, but I'm sure there's an urgency to it. If the station isn't holding absolute perfect pressure then that step-down hatch seal test won't work. It's that contingency that makes it important to be able to put your own capsule specific space suite on and plug into the capsule life support systems. If you depressurize then you've got a suit to keep you safe. Sure a Starliner passenger can jump in the cargo bay of the Dragon and most likely get home perfectly safe. You can ride down the road just fine in the bed of a pickup too, but you're safer in the cab with a seatbelt should something go wrong.

So regarding the "Safe Haven" what was riskier? Riding in the cargo space of a capsule that left in a big hurry (again I don't know all of those emergency/abridged procedures) or being properly suited and plugged into life support on a vehicle that might not orient itself correctly for deorbit?
ABATTBQ11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I would say definitely the former because deorbiting wing will probably result in a catastrophic loss and death, regardless of how well your suit matches the spacecraft.
ABATTBQ11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TexAgs91 said:

ABATTBQ11 said:

That's a real black eye for Boeing

Not just Boeing

Quote:

But as NASA, we managed the contract. We accepted the vehicle. We launched the crew. We made decisions from docking through post-mission actions. A considerable portion of the responsibility and accountability rests here.




Clearly NASA has lost control of Boeing
First Page
Page 540 of 541
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.