Launch News SpaceX Falcon 9 F3 COTS2+ Updates

[NovaSilisko]

Just got this from the SpaceX newsletter:

May 19, 2012

Today’s COTS 2 Demonstration launch was aborted half a second before liftoff when the flight computer detected slightly high pressure in the engine 5 combustion chamber. We have discovered root cause and repairs are underway.

During rigorous inspections of the engine, SpaceX engineers discovered a faulty check valve on the Merlin engine. We are now in the process of replacing the failed valve. Those repairs should be complete tonight. We will continue to review data on Sunday. If things look good, we will be ready to attempt to launch on Tuesday, May 22nd at 3:44 AM Eastern.

Looks like it wasn't just a sensor glitch.

 

[garyw]

It is 7 months in which NASA requested SpaceX to literally certify that even the color for the SpaceX logo does not catch fire while docked to the ISS. Hardly SpaceX fault of the development, it is maximal just the difference between "another test of a capsule" and "Let us merge a few test objectives into a single mission to give a signal to the political decision makers".

True but it's also SpaceX who are stepping up the timetable. Don't forget that the Russians weren't keen on combining two flights and if it wasn't for NASA and Musk pushing things you'd be seeing this ISS resupply flight in 18 months from now.

 

[Codz]

True but it's also SpaceX who are stepping up the timetable. Don't forget that the Russians weren't keen on combining two flights and if it wasn't for NASA and Musk pushing things you'd be seeing this ISS resupply flight in 18 months from now.

Which is still a possibility if they keep delaying.:lol:

 

[orb]

SPACE.com: SpaceX Replaces Faulty Rocket Valve for Space Station Flight:

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. — SpaceX engineers have replaced a faulty engine valve on a private rocket carrying the first commercial space capsule bound for the International Space Station following the last-second abort during an attempted liftoff Saturday (May 19).

The valve replacement came after SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket, which will loft the firm's unmanned Dragon capsule toward the station, aborted its launch attempt a half-second before liftoff from a pad here at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. Technicians investigating the glitch discovered a faulty check valve was to blame for the high engine pressure that forced the booster's engines to unexpectedly shut down.

SpaceX engineers replaced the balky valve late Saturday, and are now inspecting the Falcon 9 rocket in preparation for a possible second launch attempt early Tuesday (May 22).

"We will continue to review data on Sunday," company officials said in a statement Saturday evening. "If things look good, we will be ready to attempt to launch on Tuesday, May 22nd at 3:44 AM Eastern."

{...}

 

[ADSWNJ]

Darn faulty check valves ... they should just install the good ones, eh?

 

[Codz]

Criticism aside, hopefully the launch goes well on Tuesday.

 

[orb]

Darn faulty check valves ... they should just install the good ones, eh?

The valve was good on the static fire test. It was only faulty on the launch abort "test".

 

[N_Molson]

It suggests that the static test somehow damaged it ?

 

[T.Neo]

Space Shuttle launch scrub, internet reaction:

Darn. I hope I'll be able to watch the launch on the rescheduled date!

Falcon 9 launch scrub, internet reaction:

SpaceX is a bunch of incompetant noobs! 7 months and now a scrub? Elon Musk's pie in the sky ideas are even more absurd after this failure.

:dry:

 

[orb]

Falcon 9 launch scrub, internet reaction:

Well, there are of course exceptions, like this one. :lol:

 

[mojoey]

Damn your negativity orb

 

[C3PO]

It suggests that the static test somehow damaged it ?

I wonder if static fire tests are such a good idea. Especially if you're not planning to launch within a short time. Leaving enough time for corrosion to do it's work can lead to all sorts of trouble. I know the LM ascent engine almost tore itself up when running, and the actual flight hardware could never be tested.

PS: What exactly are the symptoms of Go-fever? :lol:

 

[mojoey]

I wonder if static fire tests are such a good idea. Especially if you're not planning to launch within a short time. Leaving enough time for corrosion to do it's work can lead to all sorts of trouble. I know the LM ascent engine almost tore itself up when running, and the actual flight hardware could never be tested.

PS: What exactly are the symptoms of Go-fever? :lol:

 

[Codz]

Elon Musk's pie in the sky ideas are even more absurd after this failure.

Are you telling me that the CEO of a completely new company with a grand total of 4 succesful flights isn't stretching reality when he talks about launches to Mars and the Moon within 10 years with his barely tested hardware?

 

[mojoey]

Are you telling me that the CEO of a completely new company with a grand total of 4 succesful flights isn't stretching reality when he talks about launches to Mars and the Moon within 10 years with his barely tested hardware?

*cough*JFK*cough*

 

[Codz]

*cough*JFK*cough*

JFK had the resources of the entire US government and the top scientists and engineers in the aerospace field. We also had the motivation to beat the Soviets because of a percieved nuclear threat. Don't compare a US president with some CEO.

 

[mojoey]

...and Mr. Musk has a metic butt-ton of money, and a beehive of uber smart people. I'd like to see you do the same.

 

[MattBaker]

*cough*JFK*cough*

As long as we don't have to kill Elon Musk, so everyone wants to finish his legacy...

 

[Codz]

His legacy of what? A run-of-the-mill launch vehicle and statements that could be considered pure commercial rhetoric?

---------- Post added at 04:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:23 PM ----------

...and Mr. Musk has a metic butt-ton of money, and a beehive of uber smart people. I'd like to see you do the same.

Let's not forget that he relies almost entirely on government funds.

 

[N_Molson]

Let's not forget that he relies almost entirely on government funds.

:hesaid:

In the current state of things, SpaceX is hardly more than a NASA sub-agency. It has currently no way to make profits. It will take a lot of manned flights to the ISS for the company to actually pay back the quite enormous investments.

*cough*JFK*cough*

Hey, stop with the nonsense. JFK is probably turning over in its tomb knowing that he is compared to Musk.

...and Mr. Musk has a metic butt-ton of money, and a beehive of uber smart people. I'd like to see you do the same.

I'd like to have a "metric butt-ton of money" to start with... :dry: