totm nov 2023 SpaceX Discussion Thread

[Ultimate Steve]

On 1/20/2018 at 8:33 PM, CatastrophicFailure said:

 

I ship it!

 

So this post isn't 100% joke, I heard that NASA told SpaceX to try and completely redesign the COPV's again.

[CastleKSide]

3 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said:

So this post isn't 100% joke, I heard that NASA told SpaceX to try and completely redesign the COPV's again.

Do you have a source or a reason why? 

 

At least they can be busy while the gov is... um.. experiencing technical difficulties

[Ultimate Steve]

Just now, CastleKSide said:

Do you have a source or a reason why? 

 

At least they can be busy while the gov is... um.. experiencing technical difficulties

The link is at /r/SpaceX on the front page somewhere. I can't access it right now because I'm at school.

The new COPV's would be made of Inconel and be significantly heavier. IIRC SpaceX was already rejiggering their COPV's following Amos-6 and they should be safer. However, NASA, being somewhat unnecessarily risk averse, asked them to redesign again, and this might delay Crew Dragon a few more months... If they end up using them, I think Boeing might get there first...

[CatastrophicFailure]

That sounds most concerning. 

So, they’re risk-averse to SpaceX’s tanks, but perfectly OK with the SRB’s on Atlas (not to mention SLS)... 

[KSK]

31 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

That sounds most concerning. 

So, they’re risk-averse to SpaceX’s tanks, but perfectly OK with the SRB’s on Atlas (not to mention SLS)... 

This is starting to sound like looking for your car keys under a lamppost. Not because the chances of finding them there are any greater but because that's the only place you can see to look. The COPVs are the only part we know has failed, so by the Lord Harry we're going to ratchet up the requirements for those bad boys until the stack of paperwork is so high that we won't need a rocket to get to orbit any more.

Or there could be a sensible reason. Who can tell.

Edited January 22, 2018 by KSK

[CatastrophicFailure]

3 hours ago, Ultimate Steve said:

IIRC SpaceX was already rejiggering their COPV's following Amos-6 and they should be safer

So, assuming the word from NASA is correct, I wonder how many successful flights are needed for the COPV’s to be “safe enough?” How much does SpaceX need to demonstrate their understanding of the deep cryo fueling process? There’s still the hubbub about fueling with the crew on board, after all. Would a successful Falcon Heavy flight count as one or three?

Meanwhile, NASA is perfectly fine putting people on an untested configuration of the SLS then sending them to the moon in a craft flown only once before, and not complete even then...   

[CatastrophicFailure]

Likely won’t make it by the 30th, but launch has probably slipped anyway...

[DAL59]

The government shutdown has ended, so I hope they'll announce the static fire date soon.  

[cubinator]

Whoopee! We can return to our regular "2 days left" schedule!

[tater]

Quote

"Based on the data available, our team did not identify any information that would change SpaceX's Falcon 9 certification status," Lieutenant General John Thompson, commander of the Space and Missile Systems Center, told Bloomberg News."

 

[CatastrophicFailure]

37 minutes ago, tater said:

Based on the data available, our team did not identify any information that would change SpaceX's Falcon 9 certification status," Lieutenant General John Thompson, commander of the Space and Missile Systems Center, told Bloomberg News."

$30,000 for a hammer, $40,000 for a toilet seat... $1 billion for a “misplaced” satellite... 

I hope the aliens at Area 51 at least Get decent cable after this. 

[PB666]

9 hours ago, Ultimate Steve said:

The link is at /r/SpaceX on the front page somewhere. I can't access it right now because I'm at school.

The new COPV's would be made of Inconel and be significantly heavier. IIRC SpaceX was already rejiggering their COPV's following Amos-6 and they should be safer. However, NASA, being somewhat unnecessarily risk averse, asked them to redesign again, and this might delay Crew Dragon a few more months... If they end up using them, I think Boeing might get there first...

Quote

Inconel alloys are oxidation-corrosion-resistant materials well suited for service in extreme environments subjected to pressure and heat. When heated, Inconel forms a thick, stable, passivating oxide layer protecting the surface from further attack. Inconel retains strength over a wide temperature range, attractive for high temperature applications where aluminum and steel would succumb to creep as a result of thermally induced crystal vacancies. Inconel’s high temperature strength is developed by solid solution strengthening or precipitation hardening, depending on the alloy. - Wikipedia

Does this mean that we are headed for a block 6 F9 with even more thrust and dV,

3 hours ago, tater said:

Quote

No one has officially confirmed this on the record, but sources have told Ars that, after the launch, the Zuma payload never successfully separated from the rocket. Instead, it remained partially or completely attached to the second stage and re-entered Earth's atmosphere after 1.5 orbits.

hmmm, so space X knowingly ditched their satellite? lol.  . . . . . . . .lol .. .. . .....rofl.

Edited January 23, 2018 by PB666

[tater]

10 minutes ago, PB666 said:

 

hmmm, so space X knowingly ditched their satellite? lol.  . . . . . . . .lol .. .. . .....rofl.

Customer supplied the separation mechanism.

[mikegarrison]

5 hours ago, PB666 said:

hmmm, so space X knowingly ditched their satellite? lol.  . . . . . . . .lol .. .. . .....rofl.

If it was in an orbit that was going to decay soon, I'm sure the customer would have preferred that their secret payload was intentionally brought down in the middle of the ocean rather than chancing that some parts of it would survive re-entry and be found intact.

[PB666]

2 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

If it was in an orbit that was going to decay soon, I'm sure the customer would have preferred that their secret payload was intentionally brought down in the middle of the ocean rather than chancing that some parts of it would survive re-entry and be found intact.

The orbit was X x 900 which 900 appears to be the Pe, it was not going to decay soon.

[Hannu2]

8 hours ago, PB666 said:

Does this mean that we are headed for a block 6 F9 with even more thrust and dV,

No. New structure will be more heavy than current aluminium tank, which means less dv.

[tater]

 

[Green Baron]

Did they say which Wednesday ?

[PB666]

1 hour ago, Hannu2 said:

No. New structure will be more heavy than current aluminium tank, which means less dv.

I meant more dV for the F9 (first stage).

[PB666]

15 hours ago, tater said:

Customer supplied the separation mechanism.

What I find incredible about the statement is not this but the way the story developed.

First . . . . fluff comes in . . . . .

Second . . . . .there is a ton of mental gymnastics that goes on here by our members over the fluff, we performed exactly as desired by the fluff creators.

Third . . . .the facts then get hashed out . . . .Lets do this QM style the observables.

   There is an observed particle roughly over Sudan, roughly an orbit and a third time period after lift-off with (IOW we have measurements but  we lack certain qualities like angular velocity, r-proper, radial velocity)

Forth . . . .an attempt was made to estimate the last known state . . . .it is then openly stated here that the stability of the orbit could not be predicted unless the altitude and radial velocity was known before any deorbit manuevers.
Fifth  .. . . .it is stated that if the failure was as the media stated and that if SpaceX performed its task then only one option as viable, that space X deorbited the satellite (I believe I stated that first, and what I meant was that all other possibilities would have been subterfuge and SpaceX would have been oblivious of Zuma mission performance). The intent was there is a remaining lie to dispatch, and that all other lies and forms of subterfuge had been logically dispatched. (the remaining possibility was that there was a vehicle in an unstable orbit which was plausible but difficult to design based on where the vehicle was launched from and later spotted)

Sixth . . . .information then declares or interprets that the orbit was 900 km above the earth at what would either be its minimum or it near its point of circularization, a point in which it was going to deorbit from (so it it was the maximum it would have been silly to deorbit from that point), but anyway . . . Leaving only one unlikely possibility the PL, if lost to atmosphere, had to be deorbited with the second stage.

Seven . . .We have " but sources have told Ars that, after the launch, the Zuma payload never successfully separated from the rocket. Instead, it remained partially or completely attached to the second stage and re-entered Earth's atmosphere after 1.5 orbits."   Uh, ok, gotcha, bud, you read KSP.

So basically someone found out that the fluff was a logical trap, and had to leak out the one remaining viable possibility after the rest of the world (<-me, not a rocket scientist) had already figured out what that possibility was.

Imagine us hearing a feast inside a house, we whimper, no response, we cry and scratch at the door [scratch, scratch, large annoying scratch] . . . . a bowl of food appears . . .and we become quite satisfied with what we have been fed . . .but its still dog-food. That is why I laughed.

 

 

Edited January 23, 2018 by softweir
Vulgarity

[magnemoe]

8 hours ago, PB666 said:

What I find incredible about the statement is not this but the way the story developed.

First . . . . fluff comes in . . . . .

Second . . . . .there is a ton of mental gymnastics that goes on here by our members over the fluff, we performed exactly as desired by the fluff creators.

Third . . . .the facts then get hashed out . . . .Lets do this QM style the observables.

   There is an observed particle roughly over Sudan, roughly an orbit and a third time period after lift-off with (IOW we have measurements but  we lack certain qualities like angular velocity, r-proper, radial velocity)

Forth . . . .an attempt was made to estimate the last known state . . . .it is then openly stated here that the stability of the orbit could not be predicted unless the altitude and radial velocity was known before any deorbit manuevers.
Fifth  .. . . .it is stated that if the failure was as the media stated and that if SpaceX performed its task then only one option as viable, that space X deorbited the satellite (I believe I stated that first, and what I meant was that all other possibilities would have been subterfuge and SpaceX would have been oblivious of Zuma mission performance). The intent was there is a remaining lie to dispatch, and that all other lies and forms of subterfuge had been logically dispatched. (the remaining possibility was that there was a vehicle in an unstable orbit which was plausible but difficult to design based on where the vehicle was launched from and later spotted)

Sixth . . . .information then declares or interprets that the orbit was 900 km above the earth at what would either be its minimum or it near its point of circularization, a point in which it was going to deorbit from (so it it was the maximum it would have been silly to deorbit from that point), but anyway . . . Leaving only one unlikely possibility the PL, if lost to atmosphere, had to be deorbited with the second stage.

Seven . . .We have " but sources have told Ars that, after the launch, the Zuma payload never successfully separated from the rocket. Instead, it remained partially or completely attached to the second stage and re-entered Earth's atmosphere after 1.5 orbits."   Uh, ok, gotcha, bud, you read KSP.

So basically someone found out that the fluff was a logical trap, and had to leak out the one remaining viable possibility after the rest of the world (<-me, not a rocket scientist) had already figured out what that possibility was.

Imagine us hearing a feast inside a house, we whimper, no response, we cry and scratch at the door [scratch, scratch, large annoying scratch] . . . . a bowl of food appears . . .and we become quite satisfied with what we have been fed . . .but its still dog-food. That is why I laughed.

How likely is the did not separate theory? 
For one they had doen one orbit, if satellite was stuck it would make sense to do another orbit or more sending more signals, perhaps rotate or shake second stage if it was almost free. 
Know second stage have limited battery life and this is the limit on how many orbits it can do before it dies.
However to deorbit the satellite is an high level decision, spaceX would not take that one, it has to come from the satellite operators and they would also not take that easy until everything else is tested. 

Another thing is that Pe is likely to be fairly low, stage will deorbit anyway, downside is that you have little control over there, on the other hand it it likely that parts of the satellite would survive?
Now putting the second stage into orbit would be another option, not sure how much dV reminded but it was some as they had dV for deorbit and the satellite was pretty light. 
This would give you more time trying to fix the problem and might some use out of satellite anyway. 

I find it more likely that this was an cover story. 

[CatastrophicFailure]

48 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

For one they had doen one orbit, if satellite was stuck it would make sense to do another orbit or more sending more signals, perhaps rotate or shake second stage if it was almost free. 

From what I’ve been given to understand, the Orbit was already circularized & stable... and SpaceX apparently has no contact with the upper stage after launch (in this case). It’s running all its maneuvers, including deorbit, automatically, and there’s no way to send it new commands. 

Which kinda raises a red flag to me. Amidst a veritable sea of red flags. Sure it’s plausible, but...

Sorry, no. I’m not buying anything we’re being spoon fed on this. 

[PB666]

47 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

From what I’ve been given to understand, the Orbit was already circularized & stable... and SpaceX apparently has no contact with the upper stage after launch (in this case). It’s running all its maneuvers, including deorbit, automatically, and there’s no way to send it new commands. 

Which kinda raises a red flag to me. Amidst a veritable sea of red flags. Sure it’s plausible, but...

Sorry, no. I’m not buying anything we’re being spoon fed on this. 

When you define the probability of something that could occur in a periodic manner you need to define some sort of wave-function that defines the likelihood that a certain event is going to happen at a certain position vector. The inability to control the vehicle after it reaches it burn to orbit point is indeed a red flag, but SpaceX has said nothing in that regard, and indeed it does seem to be able to control its function under a variety of other circumstances. We also have to realize that the satellite is very heavy relative to the second stage after, if the second stage unknowingly burned the PL back into the atmosphere then it might have reentered anywhere (say over the western pacific and landing on California. This is not what appears to have happened, all signs indicate that the F92S burnt up in the S. Indian Ocean and burnt up where it was supposed to have burnt up. So what is the exact evidence that the PL was still attached to the F92S when it finally burn't in. The possibility that the 'Source' gives is just as likely or less likely as the PL was released after finishing its transfer burn to 900 km, then a period of zero probability as S2 burns to orbit, and resumption of probability, as with the likelihood of all points in between that point and the final burn-back to deorbit. IOW the probability functions extends from about 1000 kn east of CC around the Earth once and up to Sudan with a small gap that includes the circularization burn and a small part of the burn-back burn. So that we are once again left with an untenable conclusion, despite a source saying its tenable. . . . .

Space X, which is control of the orbiter knows whether its mission succeeded or not, even though the Space X has no knowledge of the fate of Zuma, and the Fed says that only SpaceX knows whether they completed the mission successfully, and yet a source is saying that Zuma was ditched with the orbiter, and SpaceX had no control over the orbiters fate after circularization. So spaceX has knowledge of what its orbiter did but no knowledge over whether the mission failed. I can just see this, two men in deep black suits with dark sunglasses, and a card board box placing the box over SpaceXs computer screen as the guidance displays the inertial readings from S2 as it burned back to prevent some SpaceX FC officers from seeing those values. Or how about standing outside and shutting off power to the building. Whoopsie. ROFL. 

Has anyone ever watched Get Smart?

I expect now that tomorrow someone will leak that during the burn back that the data feed from the orbiter to SpaceX was shut-off or diverted to NASA. Dah-ta-da dah', Dah-ta-da dawh'. Da ta da, de da ta  . .[i.e phoney spy saga music] . .

The thing about clandestine operations, they always work better when all potential sources of information about those operation actually keep their mouths shut.[an uncleverly disguised hint]

 

 

Edited January 23, 2018 by PB666

[CatastrophicFailure]

 

[NSEP]

Good!

I thought this whole government shutdown thing would last 3 weeks and delay Falcon Heavy by 2 months or something.