SpaceX

Humanity's bold journey into the cosmos, pushing boundaries, uncovering mysteries, and expanding our understanding of the universe, paving the way for new discoveries and inspiring generations.

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
heisan
Seven Thousand
Seven Thousand
Posts: 7614
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:45 pm
Closest Airfield: Rhino Park
Location: Pretoria
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 1002 times

Re: SpaceX

Unread post by heisan »

Launch license issued:

https://www.faa.gov/media/69476

Now just a question of weather.
These users thanked the author heisan for the post (total 2):
Patrick ALChalkie
Justin Schoeman

ZU-FSR (Raven)
User avatar
Chalkie
Too Tousand
Too Tousand
Posts: 2939
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 9:19 am
Closest Airfield: Tranquility
Location: Tranquility
Has thanked: 857 times
Been thanked: 1823 times

Re: SpaceX

Unread post by Chalkie »

Now to see which livestream is best... Everyday Astronaut goes live 12:00B.

Where do I find livestream on X? Search for Spacex IFT 3 in X, results in lots of chatter, no link to livestream.
User avatar
bladerunner
Power off stall
Posts: 336
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 4:14 pm
Has thanked: 58 times
Been thanked: 50 times

Re: SpaceX

Unread post by bladerunner »

Chalkie wrote: Thu Mar 14, 2024 8:29 am Where do I find livestream on X? Search for Spacex IFT 3 in X, results in lots of chatter, no link to livestream.
https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission ... p-flight-3

Looks like it will start @ 13:30 SA time.
These users thanked the author bladerunner for the post:
Chalkie
User avatar
heisan
Seven Thousand
Seven Thousand
Posts: 7614
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:45 pm
Closest Airfield: Rhino Park
Location: Pretoria
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 1002 times

Re: SpaceX

Unread post by heisan »

Ice Ice Baby :D

Propellant loading! Seems to be on schedule for 15h25 launch.
Justin Schoeman

ZU-FSR (Raven)
User avatar
heisan
Seven Thousand
Seven Thousand
Posts: 7614
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:45 pm
Closest Airfield: Rhino Park
Location: Pretoria
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 1002 times

Re: SpaceX

Unread post by heisan »

Justin Schoeman

ZU-FSR (Raven)
User avatar
stojan
Reaching altitude
Posts: 235
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2007 1:51 pm
Closest Airfield: FALA and Eagles Creek
Location: Fourways, Gauteng
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: SpaceX

Unread post by stojan »

WOW that was too awesome for words....and is still going 8) Is there a way to track where it is currently? On a map/globe?
CPL ME/IR
Fournier RF4D
User avatar
Chalkie
Too Tousand
Too Tousand
Posts: 2939
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 9:19 am
Closest Airfield: Tranquility
Location: Tranquility
Has thanked: 857 times
Been thanked: 1823 times

Re: SpaceX

Unread post by Chalkie »

All in all an awesome demonstration of massive improvements, leaps and strides ahead of IFT2. 13 engines for booster boost-back burn then three lit up but only 1 continued to run during the slow down / landing phase...

Unfortunately SS seems to have failed on re entry, I wonder if the cargo bay door that did not close properly, if it compromised the structural integrity? (It seems to pop out of the tracks at T +30:18 )

SpaceX said they lost 2 different communication systems at the same time which they seem to think indicates loss of the vehicle.

Looking at the booster, landing phase videos. Imagine a 9m diameter butt end of the rocket descending, exhaust pipes first and going trans sonic in the slowdown. The shock waves must be enormous, hence the rapid movement of the grid fins... I guess we will have to wait for Zak of CSI Starbase to do a deep dive into that one.
These users thanked the author Chalkie for the post:
Patrick AL
User avatar
Chalkie
Too Tousand
Too Tousand
Posts: 2939
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 9:19 am
Closest Airfield: Tranquility
Location: Tranquility
Has thanked: 857 times
Been thanked: 1823 times

Re: SpaceX

Unread post by Chalkie »

Report from Scott Manley, seems the SS also entered the atmosphere tail first and not belly first...

These users thanked the author Chalkie for the post (total 2):
Patrick ALmarius scheepers
User avatar
heisan
Seven Thousand
Seven Thousand
Posts: 7614
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:45 pm
Closest Airfield: Rhino Park
Location: Pretoria
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 1002 times

Re: SpaceX

Unread post by heisan »

Yup. Was a really impressive launch. Primary objectives achieved, and most secondary objectives achieved.

But, there are still major issues. My guess is that the grid fins were sticking (look at the way they start jerking), and they lost control of the booster. Rapid rotation probably created too much fuel slosh for the engines to relight (any gas bubble in the fuel line, and a raptor pretty much goes boom).

For the ship, it clearly had no RCS authority for the last half of the flight. My guess would be that they got some liquid fuel in the RCS system, which froze (see the ice flying off the first time the front flap moves).
Justin Schoeman

ZU-FSR (Raven)
User avatar
heisan
Seven Thousand
Seven Thousand
Posts: 7614
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:45 pm
Closest Airfield: Rhino Park
Location: Pretoria
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 1002 times

Re: SpaceX

Unread post by heisan »

On a side not, it looks like, as-is, if they used starship as a non-reusable launch vehicle, they could put 3x the payload of SLS into orbit for 1/20 the cost...
These users thanked the author heisan for the post:
Chalkie
Justin Schoeman

ZU-FSR (Raven)
User avatar
Chalkie
Too Tousand
Too Tousand
Posts: 2939
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 9:19 am
Closest Airfield: Tranquility
Location: Tranquility
Has thanked: 857 times
Been thanked: 1823 times

Re: SpaceX

Unread post by Chalkie »

heisan wrote: Fri Mar 15, 2024 12:48 pm On a side not, it looks like, as-is, if they used starship as a non-reusable launch vehicle, they could put 3x the payload of SLS into orbit for 1/20 the cost...
... and do away with all the time, trouble and expense of fitting 40 000 TPS Tiles

Makes you think, doesn't it...
User avatar
heisan
Seven Thousand
Seven Thousand
Posts: 7614
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:45 pm
Closest Airfield: Rhino Park
Location: Pretoria
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 1002 times

Re: SpaceX

Unread post by heisan »

Chalkie wrote: Fri Mar 15, 2024 1:38 pm
heisan wrote: Fri Mar 15, 2024 12:48 pm On a side not, it looks like, as-is, if they used starship as a non-reusable launch vehicle, they could put 3x the payload of SLS into orbit for 1/20 the cost...
... and do away with all the time, trouble and expense of fitting 40 000 TPS Tiles

Makes you think, doesn't it...
Yep - but SpaceX's ultimate aim requires far cheaper than 1/20 the cost. Fully reusable, starship should have about 3x the payload of SLS, but 1/2000 the cost.
Justin Schoeman

ZU-FSR (Raven)
User avatar
Chalkie
Too Tousand
Too Tousand
Posts: 2939
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 9:19 am
Closest Airfield: Tranquility
Location: Tranquility
Has thanked: 857 times
Been thanked: 1823 times

Re: SpaceX

Unread post by Chalkie »

heisan wrote: Fri Mar 15, 2024 12:45 pm Yup. Was a really impressive launch. Primary objectives achieved, and most secondary objectives achieved.

But, there are still major issues. My guess is that the grid fins were sticking (look at the way they start jerking), and they lost control of the booster. Rapid rotation probably created too much fuel slosh for the engines to relight (any gas bubble in the fuel line, and a raptor pretty much goes boom).

For the ship, it clearly had no RCS authority for the last half of the flight. My guess would be that they got some liquid fuel in the RCS system, which froze (see the ice flying off the first time the front flap moves).
I doubt the grid fins were sticking, they use Tesla electric motors and are capable of moving fast, software can be tweaked to slow down movement, but I think it was the Mach shockwaves judging by how the grid fins vibrated. The trouble starts as they decelerate below 2000km/h and they lose control at about 1000km/h.

One of the early interviews of Everyday Astronaut, Tim Dodds asks Elon that if they were venting the fuel tanks as the cryogenic fuel warmed up, 'why not use the vented fuel for control purposes.' Elon was bemused... evidently this is what SpaceX tried, and even Tim during his broadcast of ITF3, said that he wondered if the vents iced up and ended up sending the jet of cold air in the wrong direction? Some wags are now saying that Tim Dodds is indirectly responsible for the loss of control...

"The best part is no part" to quote Elon, but perhaps now they will need to add some tried and tested hot or cold gas, thrust control system.
These users thanked the author Chalkie for the post:
Patrick AL
User avatar
Patrick AL
Frequent AvComer
Posts: 722
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2015 4:34 pm
Closest Airfield: FACT
Location: Cape Town
Has thanked: 1058 times
Been thanked: 343 times

Re: SpaceX

Unread post by Patrick AL »

Chalkie wrote: Fri Mar 15, 2024 2:28 pm
heisan wrote: Fri Mar 15, 2024 12:45 pm Yup. Was a really impressive launch. Primary objectives achieved, and most secondary objectives achieved.

But, there are still major issues. My guess is that the grid fins were sticking (look at the way they start jerking), and they lost control of the booster. Rapid rotation probably created too much fuel slosh for the engines to relight (any gas bubble in the fuel line, and a raptor pretty much goes boom).

For the ship, it clearly had no RCS authority for the last half of the flight. My guess would be that they got some liquid fuel in the RCS system, which froze (see the ice flying off the first time the front flap moves).
I doubt the grid fins were sticking, they use Tesla electric motors and are capable of moving fast, software can be tweaked to slow down movement, but I think it was the Mach shockwaves judging by how the grid fins vibrated. The trouble starts as they decelerate below 2000km/h and they lose control at about 1000km/h.

One of the early interviews of Everyday Astronaut, Tim Dodds asks Elon that if they were venting the fuel tanks as the cryogenic fuel warmed up, 'why not use the vented fuel for control purposes.' Elon was bemused... evidently this is what SpaceX tried, and even Tim during his broadcast of ITF3, said that he wondered if the vents iced up and ended up sending the jet of cold air in the wrong direction? Some wags are now saying that Tim Dodds is indirectly responsible for the loss of control...

"The best part is no part" to quote Elon, but perhaps now they will need to add some tried and tested hot or cold gas, thrust control system.
:lol: :lol: that 'Space Cadet' Tim :roll: ,- must be totally ---- and rapidly disassembled, unscheduled! :mrgreen: - by the speculation! :lol: :lol:

He is a fantastic reporter to all things space =D>

Great to watch his presentations on rocket dynamics and rocketry in general. 8)
-and his interviews of Elon and walkthroughs of Space X facilities are fantastic.

And Tim was selected to be a lucky passenger on the first private Dragon Mission-to-be ---which has been bought by a rich industrialist

I remember that discussion - bemused, but also intrigued, is how Elon had looked -and would be a great feather-in-the-cap for Tim if indeed his idea saw use and test!
These users thanked the author Patrick AL for the post:
Chalkie
:smt051
User avatar
GrahamW
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1330
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 10:40 am
Closest Airfield: FAUL
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 177 times

Re: SpaceX

Unread post by GrahamW »

When they were developing the F9 it also took them several flights to nail the landing. They had to collect data and itterate untill they nailed it so we will probably see several more RUD's
These users thanked the author GrahamW for the post (total 2):
ChalkiePatrick AL
Graham Wallbridge

The secret to getting ahead is getting started - Mark Twain

Return to “Space”