SpaceX Super Heavy and Starship updates

[DocM]

We are GO for launch!!

 

Clearing out the villagers at 1100 Eastern

 

 

[DocM]

Looking good, pad clearing. 

 

 

 

[DocM]

SN-09: looks about 1500 Eastern

[DocM]

SN-09

 

The tank farm methane recondenser has started. We're in the run-up to fuelling.

[DocM]

SN-09: tank farm is active,

 

 

[DocM]

SN-09

 

Propellant loading, vehicle is venting

[DocM]

Build site & STARGATE evacuation (normal)

[DocM]

HOLD! Looks like a range violation.

 

There was a depressurization of SN-09, 10 min of WTF from the streamers, then a Sheriff's SUV took off like a bat out of Hell cross-country. They intercepted a pickup truck in the boonies and are dealing with it. Looks like the driver's going to have a bad day.

[TrevorLahey]

SpaceX stream is up: 1 minute until launch

 

[DocM]

SpaceX stream

 

 

 

[Louisifer]

aside from the Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly, seems like the first attempt had a better landing.

[DocM]

Good flight but another bad landing. Only one landing engine ignited on time, the other igniting too late. No translation to vertical.

 

[anthdci]

looks like one of the raptors didn't relight properly so it didn't have enough thrust to slow down. 

 

As a massively positive they seem to have the falling with style thing down.

 

 

[+Warwagon MVC]

I wonder why when they do the rapid fire test, they don't fire the engine, turn it off and fire it again a a couple mins later again and again to see if it's reliable.

[Louisifer]

I think they did do a couple of tests on it, but it sitting on the pad is a different story to the turbulence of falling from 10km and flipping its rotation. A few more flights and they should get a more resilient setup for what Starship demands of the engines.

[FloatingFatMan]

9 hours ago, DocM said:

Good flight but another bad landing. Only one landing engine ignited on time, the other igniting too late. No translation to vertical.

 

Nice belly flop!  

[Skiver Veteran]

11 hours ago, warwagon said:

I wonder why when they do the rapid fire test, they don't fire the engine, turn it off and fire it again a a couple mins later again and again to see if it's reliable.

You're only picturing the static fires they do at the launch pad, I'm pretty sure they do things like that back at their test site where they fire the Raptors multiple times before they're even shipped down to Boca Chica. 

Plus again, this is assuming the issue is even with the Raptor itself, last time out the issue was a pressure issue from the landing tanks, I can't remember exactly but I think it was Methane deficient last time around so they had to put in a workaround to increase the pressure for the header tank, so that isn't a problem of the Raptor itself. The Raptor itself is pretty much leading technology in it's field, Full Flow Staged Combustion has only ever been attempted twice before and neither engine actually flew. 

 

We have to keep in mind the environment these are being used in. They're being installed in a field, launched without flame diverters or any sound suppression, chilled and then flown up to 10KM before being switched off (I'd be interested to know where in the flight the one that didn't relight was turned off) where it's falling sideways and then relit whilst pulling a heavy G manoeuvre with less than optimal fuel flow. Just look at the SLS Green run that ended early due to the RS-25 Engine shutdown, an engine that was reused multiple times over the years and was pretty reliable from what I understand. 

This was another pretty successful test, I think they've got to be fairly confident that the Raptors can get Startship up the the Apogee they want for these tests. They've got the belly flop manoeuvre down, Starship looks stable as hell on the fall showing they have good control with the ailerons (lack of a better word or Elonerons as some call them) and I think they've even got to be pretty confident on the last flip manoeuvre working too once they can get that relight down. I forget how many attempts it took them to land a Falcon 9 successfully and that seems like a cake walk in comparison. 

Also, from one of the angles it looks like something broke off just as they attempted the relight so I'm interested to know if it's related.

 

You see it around the 08:28 mark in NSF video...
 

 

[Steven P. Administrators]

57 minutes ago, Skiver said:

Also, from one of the angles it looks like something broke off just as they attempted the relight so I'm interested to know if it's related.

 

You see it around the 08:28 mark in NSF video...
 

 

Yep now that you mention it, it is clear to see something breaks off. I was watching the SpaceX stream which was filming from a different angle and I didn't notice it.

[Skiver Veteran]

7 minutes ago, Steven P. said:

Yep now that you mention it, it is clear to see something breaks off. I was watching the SpaceX stream which was filming from a different angle and I didn't notice it.

There is a chance it's just some insulation from under the skirt and absolutely nothing to be concerned about, just not something I noticed last time so worth noting. 

[TrevorLahey]

2 hours ago, Skiver said:

There is a chance it's just some insulation from under the skirt and absolutely nothing to be concerned about, just not something I noticed last time so worth noting. 

Almost looked like a bit of a fireball when it breaks off to me.

[DocM]

19 hours ago, Steven P. said:

Yep now that you mention it, it is clear to see something breaks off. I was watching the SpaceX stream which was filming from a different angle and I didn't notice it.

That was insulation from inside the engine bay.

[DocM]

20 hours ago, Skiver said:

You're only picturing the static fires they do at the launch pad, I'm pretty sure they do things like that back at their test site where they fire the Raptors multiple times before they're even shipped down to Boca Chica. 
>

They have three horizontal and one vertical Raptor stand, and are building another horizontal. Each engine goes through a series of tests from just lighting each pre-burner (oxygen rich or methane rich) to lighting the full engine for a series of qualification tests. 

 

Raptor is a Full Flow Staged Combustion engine, considered a holy grail for bi-propellant rocket engines and very complex. The Soviets tried developing one in the 1960's and the US about 2005/6, but SpaceX is the first to get as far as flying one. That there are bugs to work out is to be expected

[DocM]

Oh, My...pedal to the metal.

 

 

 

[DocM]

Tests today. Pad is clear.

Either cryo-testing SN-10 or popping the 3mm steel SN-7.2 test tank to see what it can take.

[DocM]

They popped SN 7.2 to see how much pressure 3mm steel tanks can take.

 

Looking like a GO for SN-10 soon, incorporating lessons learned.