SpaceX Resupply Mission To Launch March 30

An anonymous reader writes "Originally scheduled to launch on March 16, SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft will now launch March 30. From the article: 'Officials delayed launch from March 16 after engineers raised concerns that petroleum stains discovered on thermal blankets could contaminate sensitive components on a high-definition imaging camera and an optical communications experiment mounted inside the Dragon spacecraft's trunk. "After careful review and analysis, engineering teams representing both the ISS and SpaceX have determined Dragon is ready to fly 'as-is.' All parties agree that the particular constituents observed in Dragon's trunk are in line with the previously defined environments levels and do not impose additional risk to the payloads," SpaceX said in a statement.'"

Comments

Faster please

[sixoh1]

Also per Rand Simberg and others, it appears that Space X is going to launch their 54-ton capable heavy launch vehicle THIS year - thats something like 6 years ahead of NASA's porkbarrel SLS.

Lets cross our fingers and hope that Elon's engine of creative destruction will blow up the market for government directed launch vehicle technology, and start using the Billions allocated for 1960s rocket technology for something like permanent cis-Lunar habitation, asteroid visits, and/or experimenting with off-planet manufacturing so we can start learning how to build and stay beyond LEO.

Re:Faster please

[DerekLyons]

Also per Rand Simberg and others, it appears that Space X is going to launch their 54-ton capable heavy launch vehicle THIS year

That's what they said last year. Rand, and other space bloggers, are very unreliable sources as their predictions are generally based on what they hope will happen and less on any form of concrete analysis. They live inside a fishbowl inside an echo chamber inside a reality distortion field.

Re:Faster please

[taiwanjohn]

Hear, hear! And if their test with landing legs succeeds, we might even be able to skip a few steps toward that goal. It's about time we stopped letting senators design rockets and hired actual rocket scientists to do that instead.

Re:Faster please

[Teancum]

Gwynne Shotwell already announced it won't launch until 1st quarter of next year at the earliest. I would take her word over Rand Simberg any day.

One of the big things that needs to happen with the Falcon Heavy is to complete the engine test stand in McGregor that will fire all 27 engines for a full mission burn simulation. There appears to be some construction going on that may get that to happen this summer, so I don't think this is something you can shrug off and suggest will never happen, but there certainly are some steps that must happen first before that launch goes off. The current hang-up doesn't appear to be getting engines built for other launches as the Hawthorn plant (from the same interview) is now producing about one full 9 engine rocket core each month, three of which are going to be used for the Falcon Heavy.

The lease on pad 39A at Cape Canaveral is also going to be used for the Falcon Heavy launch, but the upcoming flight is going to launch at Vandenberg instead for the initial test flight. Pad work on the Vandenberg launch site has been ongonig for a couple of years now in preparation for the Falcon Heavy. One of the problems with LC-40 is that the strongback lifter system is positioned in the wrong location to work with the Falcon Heavy in terms of having the flame trench positioned for all 27 engines properly and needs to be rotated 90 degrees, hence why the move for 39A. That is one of the things being worked on in Vandenberg.

I won't even touch the rest of the disparaging remarks you made here about SpaceX, but I will say that sometimes fans do get the best of themselves and are overly optimistic. I hope that is some actual analysis that shows some reasoning for some actual launch dates, and I'll even admit the launch could be pushed back another six months to another year even beyond next year. On the other hand, critical issues like getting the engines developed are already done and the other sub-systems are not really seen as significant critical path issues. The largest hang-up is the cross-feed system between the cores that may or may not even be fully implemented on the maiden flight.

Re:Faster please

[Teancum]

To paraphrase.. "No bucks, no Buck Rodgers." Congress et. al. will never allow that to happen, it's too much fun playing with budgets and screwing things up in general.

This is unusual even for Congress though. The excellent engineering firm known as the upper house of the American legislature went so far as to specify faring sizes, metallurgy requirements, engine thrust ISP numbers, and concrete mixes being used in the construction the manufacturing plants to make these parts. They really outdid themselves even for typical pork barrel projects to absolutely ensure that there was no possibility that any other contractor could have possibly met the RFP requirements. By the time the legislation was written, there wasn't anything left for the engineers to actually do other than supervision of the rocket construction itself.

It is almost as if the rocket was already designed even before the initial hearings on the proposal began. That wouldn't happen in America, would it?

Re:Faster please

[Teancum]

While I agree with the sentiment, I'd point out that NASA's will, in theory, be able to lift 70 or 130 tons. So it is a bit better.

By which time SpaceX will have the MCT close to completion. This is a rocket so large that pad 39 at the Cape can't be used because the flame trench is too small. I don't know what 100 tons of payload to the surface of Mars translates in terms of tonnage to LEO, but it is safe to say a little bit more than 130 metric tons.

Besides, the 130 ton version of the SLS will still be a couple of years away even after the first launch happens for the 70 ton version, assuming it flies at all.

Reusable booster rocket

[frank249]

SpaceX,will also achieve a spaceflight first.

After delivering cargo to the International Space Station, the first stage of the Falcon 9 rocket used for the flight will fire its engines for the second time. The burn will allow the rocket to reenter the atmosphere in controlled flight, without breaking up and disintegrating on the way down as most booster rockets do.

After recovering the rocket from the water on Sunday, SpaceX engineers and technicians will study it to determine what it would take to refurbish such a rocket for reuse. SpaceX also has plans to recover and reuse the second stage rocket, but for now, it will recover only the first stage and its nine Merlin engines, which make up the bulk of the cost of the rocket.

Re:Reusable booster rocket

[taiwanjohn]

In case anyone hasn't seen it yet, here's their video animation of the flight profile for a completely "reusable" mission.

Re:Iff the Republicans allow it

[Bruce Perens]

Next you are going to tell me that the Republicans want to push grandma off the cliff, take food from starving children, and ruin the environment.

Yes... What's your point?

Re:Iff the Republicans allow it

[drinkypoo]

Republicans are decidedly NOT anti science and technology, just for reasonable spending levels.

Right, and what's reasonable to them is whatever doesn't conflict with creationism, which most of them believe in. Science is right out.

Good change

[Ecuador]

It is a good change to hear "hey we will delay the launch because our camera might be affected", from the old "- ehh, we should delay launch after that freezing weather, the O-rings might fail - shut up, we are already late, from what I see in this powerpoint it should be ok"

Re:Iff the Republicans allow it

[drinkypoo]

Right, and what's reasonable to them is whatever doesn't conflict with creationism, which most of them believe in. Science is right out.

Seriously? Ignorance knows no bounds.

Yes, seriously. The majority of republicans are some form of creationist.

Besides, we where talking about the false narrative that says the Republicans wanted to destroy NASA. I don't think that is true.

That's because you're ignoring the voting record. I guess ignorance really does know no bounds.

Re:Iff the Republicans allow it

[drinkypoo]

Go to Thomas.gov

If you even knew how to use google you'd find more references than you can use. But you fail the internets. I'm not doing your homework for you.