Slashdot Mirror
SpaceX Falcon 9 Launch and Historic Landing Aborted
An anonymous reader writes With only 29 seconds in the countdown, SpaceX had to abort the launch due to a last-minute problem with actuator drift, affecting the motors that control the second stage's rocket thrust. "SpaceX had to scrub Tuesday's attempt to launch a Falcon 9 rocket to the International Space Station and make a historic rocket landing. The landing experiment would have involved putting the first stage of the two-stage rocket on a floating platform in the Atlantic Ocean, about 200 miles off the coast of Florida. Such a feat has never been done before. A successful maneuver would have marked a significant step toward making rockets more reusable and driving down the cost of spaceflight."
I know that they need to get successful launches, but the ability to scrub at the last moment is more important than a "balls-to-the-wall-let's-go-anyway-can-do" attitude. Unlike in Hollywood, there's no room for space cowboys in space.
They'll get it right when it's the right time.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
But this makes it sound like, "Oh noes, this is technically IMPOSSIBLE LET'S JUST GIVE UP!"
Really it's just rescheduled a few days; the platform landing attempt will still happen; if it doesn't succeed on this go around they will eventually perfect it.
What I find impressive is SpaceX's turnaround time on scrubbed launches. I mean, sometimes they've fixed problems and relaunched within hours - 3 days is rather long by their standards and may have more to do with launch windows than anything else.
Who knows whether they'll nail this particular landing. But I'm pretty confident in the long run that they'll be nailing landing after landing with only the occasional random mishap (which is allowable, since it's unmanned). Now, whether they can collect, transport, refurbish, and relaunch cheaper than just building a new one, especially with their proportionally low production costs, that is yet to be seen. Best of luck to them, though!
If you play a Ke$ha song backwards, you hear messages from Satan. Even worse, if you play it forwards you hear Ke$ha.
They've had a lot of practice!
The announcer said they might try again as early as Friday, just before SpaceX live stream was terminated.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
Not sure where 29 seconds came from. I didn't see it in the article linked. Official NASA count is 1 minute 21 seconds... not that it's too significant of an error in the original post.
"The SpaceX Falcon 9 launch scheduled for this morning at 6:20 a.m. EST aborted with one minute, 21 seconds left on the countdown clock. A thrust vector control actuator for the Falcon 9’s second stage failed to perform as expected, resulting in a launch abort.
"SpaceX is evaluating the issue and will determine the next opportunity to launch the company’s fifth commercial resupply services mission to the International Space Station. The next available opportunity to launch to the station would be Friday, Jan. 9."
may have more to do with launch windows than anything else
Yes, the next ISS launch window is Friday morning.
... and in case you were wondering:
Actuator drift occurs when a valve is out of null, resulting in a piston moving slowly or drifting when there is no control signal (e.g. when the electrical power is off).
Now to research what is "out of null"....
I have never been a fanboi of anything or anyone in my life, but if Elon Musk were to ask me to jump off a bridge I would be smiling all the way down.
basically, it's when a valve that would ordinarily be held closed by a pressure gradient (or a mechanical spring) favouring its swing side is missing that pressure gradient and being pulled open by backpressure or another, external force such as gravity. It's like when an airliner does a water landing. The doors would ordinarily hold the air in because they act like valves - the pressure inside the cabin holds them in place. When the airframe is under water, external pressure exceeds internal pressure, and the door seals will inevitably fail. Lesson for the day: in the event of a water landing, get the fuck out of the aircraft.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
You may want to refresh your definition of fanboi. If Musk asked me to jump off a bridge I'd want a damn good reason or my respect for him would plummet dramatically. Followed rapidly by him, if I judged his reason grossly lacking. After all, clearly he believes *someone* has to go off the bridge.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Unlike in Hollywood, there's no room for space cowboys in space.
Cowboy Bebop would disagree with you.
Agreed. I think the couple of days is due to orbital mechanics more than anything else. It could also be that because this resupply is so critical they're going to do some additional testing.
From what I know about SpaceX their testing regime is pretty insane already.
Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
Elon Musk just did an AMA (ask me anything) on Reddit. Here's one Q/A.
Mr Musk, How will you secure the first stage of the Falcon 9 to the barge when it lands? Gravity or some mechanism? REPLY [–]ElonMuskOfficial " Mostly gravity. The center of gravity is pretty low for the booster, as all the engines and residual propellant is at the bottom. We are going to weld steel shoes over the landing feet as a precautionary measure." http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/c...
After a landing, generally speaking, it is better to get the fuck out of the aircraft anyway. I tried to stay in one of those things for a few nights but the TSA kicked me out.
It can't be historic until they actually land... never mind take off.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
Huh? Why would you be impressed by that? Fast turnarounds, where possible, are pretty much the gold standard in the launch industry. You just don't hear about them as much because other launch companies aren't surrounded by the Musk's hype-and-media Reality Distortion Field.
I never understand why "problems" always seem to pop up at the very last moment for space launches.
I'm pretty sure Mr. Jobs both patented AND trademarked his innovative yet elegant Reality Distortion Field. Please select a non-infringing term when discussing Mr. Musk's abilities. Thank you.
Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
They don't. Usually, problems crop up during the pre-launch, are fixed, and the launch sequence is resumed. When they happen at the last moment, they're more memorable because they *stop* the launch. (This is due to the launch window passing, making it impossible to fulfill the main purpose of having the launch in the first place.)
The reason they crop up during the last moments before launch, is because that's when they're doing the final pre-launch checks to make sure that all of the systems are operating as expected. If they didn't do these checks, the launches would occur, and be much more spectacular on average. (Kabooooom!)
Could you remind me when, say, the Shuttle ever had, say, a countdown terminated after engine fire during holddown, a defective part replaced, and then a launch just a couple hours late? Because SpaceX has done that. Their turnaround is impressive by anybody's standards. Heck, that would be an impressive turnaround time for a broken part on a Volvo, let alone a freaking rocket.
If you play a Ke$ha song backwards, you hear messages from Satan. Even worse, if you play it forwards you hear Ke$ha.
As the subject line says.
If the Shuttle were the only other launch vehicle out there, that would be a valid question. Instead, it just exposes you as an ignorant jackass.
No, it's only impressive if you're completely and utterly ignorant of the launch industry. (Which is essentially the level of knowledge among the members of Drooling Fanboi club.) Otherwise, it's just another fast turnaround, barely worth mentioning at all.
IIRC, ISS launch windows are once every three days, so yes, it's a launch window problem.
Hahahahahaha
What I find impressive is SpaceX's turnaround time on scrubbed launches. I mean, sometimes they've fixed problems and relaunched within hours - 3 days is rather long by their standards and may have more to do with launch windows than anything else.
Probably didn't hit their mark for livestream viewers.