mikegarrison Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 On 1/9/2018 at 8:15 AM, GoSlash27 said: tomf, Another possibility: They changed the name to "Zuma" because "crossbow" was too obvious. Expect an MIT professor to wind up with a house full of popcorn shortly. Best, -Slashy This was a fine post, but I need to correct you. Expect a Caltech professor to wind up with a house of popcorn shortly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh IN SPACE Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 Perhaps ZUMA is a reference to Montezuma II, of Tenochtitlan? Come on FH static fire, let's go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 STATIC FIRE DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 5 minutes ago, sevenperforce said: STATIC FIRE DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY Don't jinx it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 (edited) (also Atlas launch today, and Virgin just announced that today will be a test flight of Spaceship 2---and a Chinese launch, and an Indian launch... busy day) Edited January 11, 2018 by tater Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 Is prop load that big of a milestone? They just pump RP-1 and LOX into the tanks until they're full. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 1 minute ago, sh1pman said: Is prop load that big of a milestone? They just pump RP-1 and LOX into the tanks until they're full. Yeah, it is. They are testing all the propellant loading gear for 2 extra boosters that has never been used before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaff Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, tater said: Yeah, it is. They are testing all the propellant loading gear for 2 extra boosters that has never been used before. Whilst I understand prop loading is a big milestone, surely the whole point of the Heavy is it’s easy because you just get what works for the F9 and add 2 more exactly the same. Should almost be mundane by now surely? Edited January 11, 2018 by Jaff . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 12 minutes ago, Jaff said: Whilst I understand prop loading is a big milestone, surely the whole point of the Heavy is it’s easy because you just get what works for the F9 and add 2 more exactly the same. Should almost be mundane by now surely? All the mechanical systems are untested. They of course need a dress rehearsal. What if there is debris in the fuel lines, etc, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 34 minutes ago, Jaff said: Whilst I understand prop loading is a big milestone, surely the whole point of the Heavy is it’s easy because you just get what works for the F9 and add 2 more exactly the same. Should almost be mundane by now surely? Rocket science has all the intricacies, systematic dependencies, and precision of a professional pit crew, albeit without quite so much haste. So take any racing pit crew and tell them "okay, now instead of doing one car at a time, we're going to bolt three race cars in tandem, and you can change the tires and refuel all of them at once." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZooNamedGames Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 39 minutes ago, Jaff said: Whilst I understand prop loading is a big milestone, surely the whole point of the Heavy is it’s easy because you just get what works for the F9 and add 2 more exactly the same. Should almost be mundane by now surely? Having been present at the first launch attempt of EFT-1 and hearing that there was a fault with the Delta IV's fuel valve (wouldn't shut iirc); I personally don't think they can test fueling enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSK Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Jaff said: Whilst I understand prop loading is a big milestone, surely the whole point of the Heavy is it’s easy because you just get what works for the F9 and add 2 more exactly the same. Should almost be mundane by now surely? That's what they thought a year ago... Edited January 11, 2018 by KSK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 Related to FH test fire: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaff Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 27 minutes ago, KSK said: That's what they thought a year ago... No doubt but they’ve learnt from that and have had many successes since. And like I said orevioudlybthe idea is these are just 3 F9’s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lukaszenko Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Jaff said: No doubt but they’ve learnt from that and have had many successes since. And like I said orevioudlybthe idea is these are just 3 F9’s Indeed no doubt they learned from THAT. Undoubtedly, one of the things they learned is that there are many more "thats" which they don't know about, and every time you change something, and even if you don't, those "thats" can creep up on you. Remember, there are millions of things that can happen to a rocket, and only one of them is good. Edited January 11, 2018 by Lukaszenko Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZooNamedGames Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 43 minutes ago, KSK said: That's what they thought a year ago... Technically the rocket is supposed to do that. It's just that the explosion is supposed to be forced out the bottom rather than expanding outward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Augustus_ Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 1 hour ago, tater said: Is NASA suffering from "favorite son" syndrome? Since when was Starliner further along than D2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Baron Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 Just guessing: the NASA dates are for the certification flights, everything should be ready by then, but the companies can undertake private flights if they like/can afford/don't damage too much ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 Venting. 18 minutes ago, _Augustus_ said: Is NASA suffering from "favorite son" syndrome? Since when was Starliner further along than D2? It's not Starliner, I bet it's LV certification. Atlas V is already man-rated. F9 requires 5 block 5 flights to get a certification. Live stream of venting: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 Static fire scrubbed for today, it looks like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 Still psyched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motokid600 Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 I wonder if they found a problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSK Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 55 minutes ago, tater said: It's not Starliner, I bet it's LV certification. Atlas V is already man-rated. F9 requires 5 block 5 flights to get a certification. You reckon NASA will accept one booster flown five times? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damien_The_Unbeliever Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Lukaszenko said: Indeed no doubt they learned from THAT. Undoubtedly, one of the things they learned is that there are many more "thats" which they don't know about, and every time you change something, and even if you don't, those "thats" can creep up on you. Remember, there are millions of things that can happen to a rocket, and only one of them is good. Whilst I agree with the general sentiment, this is actually untrue for SpaceX specifically. Getting the payload into the correct orbital position is the outcome that's required. Whether or not they get a flight-proven first stage back means that there are shades of good. (Still vastly outnumbered by the number of possible bad outcomes) Edited January 11, 2018 by Damien_The_Unbeliever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightfury Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts