QUOTE (imipak @ Oct 21 2009, 02:55 PM) 
Full nine-engine test firing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&hl=...p;v=BYLtXhCcNWc
This is so cool. I am so excited for Elon and his team. Mostly I am excited for the future of commercial spaceflight.
Full Version: Falcon 9 Launch & Recovery Operations
This is so cool. I am so excited for Elon and his team. Mostly I am excited for the future of commercial spaceflight.
Hopefully not OT, but the second F9 flight is on the tentative launch schedule now.
No worries. The idea was to create a single thread to hold Falcon 9 discussion up until Launch #1. Around the time they start the countdown, it'll make sense to start a fresh thread and close this one, since (odds are) that thread will accumulate more posts in a couple of days than this one has in months and months.
Not too surprisingly, the launch is now NET February.
QUOTE
Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) has requested a Feb. 2 range date for the maiden flight of its Falcon 9 medium-lift rocket, according to a 90-day launch range forecast issued Oct. 28 by the U.S. Air Force’s 45th Space Wing.
New Update: http://spacex.com/updates.php
Second stage passed its last test and is being shipped to Florida by end of January. Launch should be one to three months later, so call it no sooner than March 1 and no later than May 1 -- assuming all goes well. I think Elon has previously said that this wide uncertainty reflects the fact that this is their first launch from KSC.
--Greg
Second stage passed its last test and is being shipped to Florida by end of January. Launch should be one to three months later, so call it no sooner than March 1 and no later than May 1 -- assuming all goes well. I think Elon has previously said that this wide uncertainty reflects the fact that this is their first launch from KSC.
--Greg
New Update: http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=30220
Nice looking rocket BTW, very "clean" d the Dragon looks much bigger than I thought. Edited: using Ugordan link (thanks) I suspect part of what I though was the Dragon could be it's fairing instead.
Trouble here is that we could fall into the Manned spacefligth side is we don't care enought but well, so far so good.
Less than 3 months to "see" the maiden flight of a new rocket, I can't wait to watch this.
Nice looking rocket BTW, very "clean" d the Dragon looks much bigger than I thought. Edited: using Ugordan link (thanks) I suspect part of what I though was the Dragon could be it's fairing instead.
Trouble here is that we could fall into the Manned spacefligth side is we don't care enought but well, so far so good.
Less than 3 months to "see" the maiden flight of a new rocket, I can't wait to watch this.
Higher resolution images are available at the Business Wire release.
Climber, the sloped thing at the top is the Dragon capsule (missing the nose cone), the cylindrical thing attached to its bottom is the unpressurized trunk section. Both will be pretty much inert, dummy units for the inaugural flight. Not a working Dragon capsule.
Climber, the sloped thing at the top is the Dragon capsule (missing the nose cone), the cylindrical thing attached to its bottom is the unpressurized trunk section. Both will be pretty much inert, dummy units for the inaugural flight. Not a working Dragon capsule.
QUOTE (climber @ Feb 12 2010, 03:35 AM)
Trouble here is that we could fall into the M****d s*********t side
We ought to be able to safely discuss everything else about the Falcon 9 -- everything we're actually interested in -- with little or no loss. We just can't talk about those kinds of applications for it.
I still maintain that the Falcon 9 is very exciting for UMSF because it promises to eventually make big changes to the cost equation for missions we care about deeply. If Elon finds other uses for it -- hey, that's great. I figure I'll read about them somewhere else.
--Greg (I'll admit I don't want to fly in it if I have to be unmanned first!) :-)
So is it me looking at something else, or does the vacuum engine on the second stage have an enormous nozzle? And is that a huge interstage?
Yes and yes. Trying to squeeze every bit of vacuum specific impulse that's practical.
Ever seen the nozzle for the upper stage of a Delta IV. Seriously - i've seen smaller central-London apartments.
*
OCO is a long term monitoring spacecraft (for which new funds have been earmarked). DragonLab is a short term on orbit and then landed vehicle - totally different requirements, orbits, etc etc
IIRC, an OCO 2 is specifically called out in the FY11 executive branch budget proposal, and if approved will be a high-fidelity refly of the baseline mission (as much as that's ever possible to do; things change). The Dragon system is obviously still very much in the testing phases; I haven't heard of anyone at all proposing hardline operational missions of any sort for it just yet.
Here's an image of the (uncoated ?) 2nd stage niobium nozzle extension. According to SpaceX, parts of it are only 1/3 mm thick, no wonder that hangar image shows what appear to be strengthening ribs. If this contraption works, it will make Merlin Vacuum the highest specific impulse kerosene engine ever made in the U.S.
Also, inside the interstage notice that silvery packaged stuff, it's speculated to be a parachute for the 1st stage recovery system. Seeing how F1 first stages always got cooked before parachute deploy, I wonder how this one will fare - assuming the flight goes through nominal staging.
Also, inside the interstage notice that silvery packaged stuff, it's speculated to be a parachute for the 1st stage recovery system. Seeing how F1 first stages always got cooked before parachute deploy, I wonder how this one will fare - assuming the flight goes through nominal staging.
Well, if they're lucky the (postulated) recovery system will work perfectly the first time. Engineering is iterative in nature, though, and prioritization is essential. I'll be deeply impressed if F9-1 delivers full performance & the Dragon flight qual model just barely reaches orbit on this first attempt, never mind the ancillary systems' performance.
They have undoubtedly learned some hard lessons with F1, but F9 is a much more complex vehicle, especially the first stage. It's not unrealistic to expect the first flight to fail, but if it got as far as F1 #2 went, it wouldn't be that bad IMO. As long as they gather enough data to make #2 work. There are many unknowns, though - how will the 9 engines work and how will the avionics be able to control them? Will there be pogo? Will the 2nd stage engine light in vacuum and zero G? Will the nozzle extension work?
As they say: stay tuned...
As they say: stay tuned...
We're clearly in violent agreement, G. 
Gonna cut considerable slack for them; the laws of physics never will, and we gotta show some love.
Gonna cut considerable slack for them; the laws of physics never will, and we gotta show some love.
QUOTE (ugordan @ Feb 13 2010, 09:20 AM)
Here's an image of the (uncoated ?) 2nd stage niobium nozzle extension.
That image set has some nice stuff in it, and here's to hoping the launch goes better than this pic that was featured in the above sidebar. Would this person be classified as an "enthusiast?"
*
Iin 2004 Musk told the US Senate he thought $500/pound (so roughly $1,000/kg) was achievable.
http://www.spacex.com/press.php?page=10
Looking at current Falcon 9 pricing http://www.spacex.com/falcon9.php one sees he's asking $44M to put 10,450 kg into LEO, which works out to a bit over $4,000 per kg.
--Greg
http://www.spacex.com/press.php?page=10
Looking at current Falcon 9 pricing http://www.spacex.com/falcon9.php one sees he's asking $44M to put 10,450 kg into LEO, which works out to a bit over $4,000 per kg.
--Greg
QUOTE (Adzel @ Feb 14 2010, 04:44 PM)
Does anyone know what the SpaceX organization is planning to charge?
I do. I found out by reading their website.
http://spacex.com/falcon9.php
No offense, but why WOULDN'T you do the same?
It's all reasonable. You gotta recoup development costs to stay solvent. Their business model is clearly predicated on demand, which based on historical trends is definitely there. If they can make a product that captures a large enough segment of global demand they win, otherwise they're toast.
In the global marketplace, it's all high-stakes poker. Hope they got a good hand; certainly they're incentivized (to use the current buzzword) to do so.
In the global marketplace, it's all high-stakes poker. Hope they got a good hand; certainly they're incentivized (to use the current buzzword) to do so.
Greg: Thank you for the information. I was just curious. IIRC the $1000/kg figure came up (about 25+) years ago in the early stages of the STS development.
djellison: No offence intended.
djellison: No offence intended.
It's on the pad now: http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/100220rollout/
Crop and slight enhancement of an image taken today by Mike Robel of NSF.com forums:
Click to view attachment
Crop and slight enhancement of an image taken today by Mike Robel of NSF.com forums:
Click to view attachment
Key info from the article is that the launch will be no sooner than March 22, and Elon, citing the uncertainties that accompany new-vehicle development, is saying "March to May" with perhaps most probability around late April.
They're doing a dress rehersal next week, though, where they'll fuel up the rocket and fire the engines for about four seconds.
--Greg
They're doing a dress rehersal next week, though, where they'll fuel up the rocket and fire the engines for about four seconds.
--Greg
QUOTE (Greg Hullender @ Feb 21 2010, 08:17 PM)
They're doing a dress rehersal next week, though, where they'll fuel up the rocket and fire the engines for about four seconds.
Based on previous timelines, I'm skeptical they'll manage to do a wet dress rehearsal and a static test by the end of the week. I'd be surprised if even the wet dress rehearsal happened during that timeframe.
A static firing is the last crucial test of the pad, rocket, the team and countdown sequence before the launch, and actual launch could happen as soon as a week after that. Elon saying he doesn't expect launch happening that soon suggests he also realizes there'll be many bugs to work out and things figured out before getting to that static firing.
EDIT: New images at spaceflightnow.com.
QUOTE (ugordan @ Feb 21 2010, 12:31 PM)
Based on previous timelines, I'm skeptical they'll manage to do a wet dress rehearsal and a static test by the end of the week. I'd be surprised if even the wet dress rehearsal happened during that timeframe. ...
Doing anything at Canaveral the first time is quite a culture shock. It can take days to complete even simple tasks. (Did you remember to include water bottles in the itemized tool list for technicians at the assembly site? Plan on three days to get the revised planning approved...and don't forget the safety data sheets for the bottles and the water.)
Full inline quote removed. - ADMIN
I sure hope Musk will be able to cut much of that nonsense out.
I sure hope Musk will be able to cut much of that nonsense out.
QUOTE (Littlebit @ Feb 21 2010, 04:30 PM)
Doing anything at Canaveral the first time is quite a culture shock. It can take days to complete even simple tasks. (Did you remember to include water bottles in the itemized tool list for technicians at the assembly site? Plan on three days to get the revised planning approved...and don't forget the safety data sheets for the bottles and the water.)
Huh? Not true. You are propagating a myth. Spacex is the only one that has to approved Spacex's planning and Spacex can work at its own speed. The range has little influence/effect on the day to day ops. The only ops that the range is interested in are the hazardous ones.
QUOTE (Jim from NSF.com @ Feb 22 2010, 12:48 PM)
Spacex is the only one that has to approved [sic] Spacex's planning and Spacex can work at its own speed.
I agree about Spacex. If any bunch of newcomers can handle themselves at a launch facility these guys and gals can. What an amazing group of people Elon has working for him!
Well, the wet dress rehersal did in fact happen on Friday afternoon, and SpaceX said it went very well.
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/...ress/index.html
The Static Fire test is planned for "the coming weeks.'
They repeated that launch will be "no earlier than" March 22, and that the launch window opens at 11AM every day. I don't think that means they could just launch any day without notice, though. :-)
--Greg
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/...ress/index.html
The Static Fire test is planned for "the coming weeks.'
They repeated that launch will be "no earlier than" March 22, and that the launch window opens at 11AM every day. I don't think that means they could just launch any day without notice, though. :-)
--Greg
More details on the countdown dress rehearsal: http://www.hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=18997
As I'm posting this, the vehicle is horizontal at the pad and technicians appear to be removing all cork from the 1st stage LOX tank as big segments of it peeled off after the wet dress rehearsal. The static fire probably won't happen before a new cork layer is applied, could also require de-mating the vehicle from the transporter/erector which all takes time. With this and the pending range safety approvals, I wouldn't put the chances of launching in March as very high.
As I'm posting this, the vehicle is horizontal at the pad and technicians appear to be removing all cork from the 1st stage LOX tank as big segments of it peeled off after the wet dress rehearsal. The static fire probably won't happen before a new cork layer is applied, could also require de-mating the vehicle from the transporter/erector which all takes time. With this and the pending range safety approvals, I wouldn't put the chances of launching in March as very high.
QUOTE (ugordan @ Feb 28 2010, 10:34 AM)
. . . I wouldn't put the chances of launching in March as very high.
My scheduling philosophy is "never say what year."
--Greg :-)
Firing test was rescheduled for Monday.
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/status.html
They're saying to expect an April launch -- more or less.
--Greg
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/status.html
They're saying to expect an April launch -- more or less.
--Greg
Make that Tuesday.
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/status.html
(For the test, not the launch!) :-)
--Greg
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/status.html
(For the test, not the launch!) :-)
--Greg
According to Spaceflight Now, the test-fire is scheduled for 1 PM EST, which is 10 AM PST (1800Z) today.
--Greg
--Greg
Thanks Greg. Almost missed it.
Abort post ignition, looked pretty scary. Scrub for the day. Hope no damage to the vehicle.
Here's some info taken from Spaceflight now. Executive Summary: They detected an anomoly in the Spin Start system and decided to take the rest of the day to study that, rather than immediately try again. The rocket never fired at all.
Since they got all the way to spin-start, one must assume the wash cycle ran without problems. :-)
--Greg
QUOTE
SpaceX has provided the following statement after today's static fire attempt:
"Today SpaceX performed our first Static Fire for the Falcon 9 launch vehicle. We counted down to T-2 seconds and aborted on Spin Start. Given that this was our first abort event on this pad, we decided to scrub for the day to get a good look at the rocket before trying again. Everything looks great at first glance."
"We completed pad preps on time and with good execution. The integrated countdown with the range included holdfire checks, S-band telemetry, C-band, and FTS simulated checks. We completed helium, liquid oxygen (LOX), and fuel loads to within tenths of a percent of T-zero conditions. Tanks pressed nominally and we passed all Terminal count, flight software, and ground software abort checks right down to T-2 seconds. We encountered a problem with the spin start system and aborted nominally."
"As part of the abort, we close the pre-valves to isolate the engines from the propellant tank and purge the residual propellants. The brief flames seen on the video are burn off of LOX and kerosene on the pad. The engines did not ignite and there was no engine fire."
"We detanked and safed the vehicle and launch pad. Preliminary review shows all other systems required to reach full ignition were within specification. All other pad systems worked nominally. Inspections will be complete tonight. Tomorrow will consist of data review and procedure updates. Commodities will be replenished tomorrow including TEA-TEB load, LOX and helium deliveries."
"We'll look to do the next static fire attempt in three or four days."
"Today SpaceX performed our first Static Fire for the Falcon 9 launch vehicle. We counted down to T-2 seconds and aborted on Spin Start. Given that this was our first abort event on this pad, we decided to scrub for the day to get a good look at the rocket before trying again. Everything looks great at first glance."
"We completed pad preps on time and with good execution. The integrated countdown with the range included holdfire checks, S-band telemetry, C-band, and FTS simulated checks. We completed helium, liquid oxygen (LOX), and fuel loads to within tenths of a percent of T-zero conditions. Tanks pressed nominally and we passed all Terminal count, flight software, and ground software abort checks right down to T-2 seconds. We encountered a problem with the spin start system and aborted nominally."
"As part of the abort, we close the pre-valves to isolate the engines from the propellant tank and purge the residual propellants. The brief flames seen on the video are burn off of LOX and kerosene on the pad. The engines did not ignite and there was no engine fire."
"We detanked and safed the vehicle and launch pad. Preliminary review shows all other systems required to reach full ignition were within specification. All other pad systems worked nominally. Inspections will be complete tonight. Tomorrow will consist of data review and procedure updates. Commodities will be replenished tomorrow including TEA-TEB load, LOX and helium deliveries."
"We'll look to do the next static fire attempt in three or four days."
Since they got all the way to spin-start, one must assume the wash cycle ran without problems. :-)
--Greg
QUOTE (Greg Hullender @ Mar 10 2010, 03:25 AM)
They detected an anomoly
Honest question: is anomoly a valid alternative spelling of anomaly? I've seen it spelled that way countless times, yet it doesn't appear to show up in (online) dictionaries.
Don't think so, G. Anomaly is the only correct spelling AFAIK.
Recorded video of the event: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_0KqS13weI
QUOTE (ugordan @ Mar 10 2010, 02:57 AM)
Honest question: is anomoly a valid alternative spelling of anomaly? I've seen it spelled that way countless times, yet it doesn't appear to show up in (online) dictionaries.
Just a typo -- mine, not SpaceX's or Spaceflight Now's. Even native speakers sometimes have trouble with the spelling associated with reduced vowels. It varies all over the map from one word to another, even though the sound is just "uh". In this case, though, "anomoly" actually looks wrong to me -- no clue why I typed it. Getting old perhaps. :-)
--Greg
Got it, thanks. I thought maybe it's one of those things like sulfur/sulphur, etc.
Yes, spelling in English is a constant joy for us all (even native speakers, as Greg stated)... 
Those sneaky SpaceX guys! After implying they might take several days before attempting another static firing, they set up to do one today (without telling anyone) but had to call it off because of weather.
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/status.html
Supposedly April 12 is the current planned launch date, but Elon says to think of this as "Beta Testing." Problems are expected to come from various causes, and we shouldn't get worked up over them.
He did say they figured out what caused the abort of the last test fire. "The problem was pretty simple: our autostart sequence didn't issue the command to the normally closed ground side isolation valve. We had tested everything on the vehicle side exhaustively in Texas, but didn't have this iso valve on our test stand there. Definitely a lesson learned to make sure that *everything* is the same between test stand and launch pad on the ground side, not just on the vehicle side."
They're hoping for better weather Saturday or Sunday for the next test.
--Greg
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/status.html
Supposedly April 12 is the current planned launch date, but Elon says to think of this as "Beta Testing." Problems are expected to come from various causes, and we shouldn't get worked up over them.
He did say they figured out what caused the abort of the last test fire. "The problem was pretty simple: our autostart sequence didn't issue the command to the normally closed ground side isolation valve. We had tested everything on the vehicle side exhaustively in Texas, but didn't have this iso valve on our test stand there. Definitely a lesson learned to make sure that *everything* is the same between test stand and launch pad on the ground side, not just on the vehicle side."
They're hoping for better weather Saturday or Sunday for the next test.
--Greg
We should be about one hour from the live fire at 12:30 EST (9:30 PST or 1730Z) and Spaceflight Now has a live video feed going.
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/status.html
Not as exciting as the real thing, but kind of cool anyway.
--Greg
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/status.html
Not as exciting as the real thing, but kind of cool anyway.
--Greg
Ignition happened on time at 12:30 PM local, waiting for official report on the burn. Looked better than the last time, and longer.
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
Successful.
QUOTE
Today, SpaceX successfully completed a test firing of the inaugural Falcon 9 launch vehicle at Space Launch Complex 40 located at Cape Canaveral. Following a nominal terminal countdown, the launch sequencer commanded ignition of all 9 Merlin first stage engines for a period of 3.5 seconds.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.