SpaceX

Last edited:
I don’t get the feeling that Whittaker is some kind of firebrand..a little hidebound maybe. If he gets pushed out—THEN you might get a Greta Thunberg type put in his place out of spite—depending upon how the political pendulum swings.

Warren Buffet was pushing for a “Texas Emergency Power Reserve” in recent years:
https://www.texastribune.org/2021/03/25/warren-buffett-texas-power-plants/
Perhaps SpaceX could get some of that via building general LNG tankage as part of diversification?
 
F9 is suspended from flying for the third time in three months, and for the second time it’s an issue with the upper stage.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1840245345118498987
View: https://twitter.com/spacex/status/1840245345118498987


After today’s successful launch of Crew-9, Falcon 9’s second stage was disposed in the ocean as planned, but experienced an off-nominal deorbit burn. As a result, the second stage safely landed in the ocean, but outside of the targeted area.

We will resume launching after we better understand root cause
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1840249260429758822
View: https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/1840249260429758822


So where did the Crew-9 second stage come down?
Here is the ground track of Crew-9 based on the TLE (orange) and the planned stage 2 deorbit area (white rectangle)
Click to expand...

The most likely failure mode that still results in reentry is a slight underburn (less delta-V, higher resulting perigee). If you underburn too much the perigee will be too high for reentry to occur. So you expect the entry to be further along the orange line but not by too much
Click to expand...

Here is the ground track showing the planned reentry area at bottom left. My analysis suggests that an off nominal deorbit that still ends up with stage reentry will impact on the orange line somewhere between the end of the white rectangle and the equator
Click to expand...

Of course one can imagine weirder scenarios, where the stage points stably in the wrong direction during the burn and ends up in a high apogee arc splashing down further downrange, but it's unlikely.
Click to expand...

More possible is an *overburn* (failure of the engine to shut down) resulting in early reentry nearer (but still safely south of) New Zealand. But I think an underburn is more likely. Hopefully we'll hear more.
Click to expand...
 
I understand a Raptor did a 15 minute burn recently.

On the SuperDracos---I thought Dragon exhausted it's hypergolics on de-orbit--SuperDracos only as launch escape.
 
publiusr said:
On the SuperDracos---I thought Dragon exhausted it's hypergolics on de-orbit--SuperDracos only as launch escape.
Click to expand...
there two divide system with own propellant
the RCS used to dock and de-Orbit
the SuperDracos serve as Launch escape system and now as emergency landing propulsion
in case the Parachute malfunction.
 
Falcon 9 has been cleared for flight for the Hera mission only:

From the FAA: "The SpaceX Falcon 9 vehicle is authorized to return to flight only for the planned Hera mission scheduled to launch on Oct. 7 from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida. The FAA has determined that the absence of a second stage reentry for this mission adequately mitigates the primary risk to the public in the event of a reoccurrence of the mishap experienced with the Crew-9 mission.

Safety will drive the timeline for the FAA to complete its review of SpaceX’s Crew-9 mishap investigation report and when the agency will authorize Falcon 9 to return to regular operations."
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1842943824026280038
View: https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1842943824026280038
 
Space X is Launching Hera and begin preparation for Europa Clipper launch.
The FAA allow those Launches because the second stage goes into deep space...

For FAA Chief Mike Whitaker thing are not looking good
Since his bizarr statement about SpaceX has to take Boeing Safety Standars.
(Starliner, 737Max disasters, 777 Pro and issue with SLS production, now supply line with faulty parts)
Join the Head of NTSB the dispute and roasting Whitaker about this and that FAA ignore this issue at Boeing.

For moment is strange rumor that SpaceX will launch IFT-5 this October !
According this rumor IFT-5 is repeat of IFT-4 flight
but that FAA now consider now the new Heat shield design now a safety hazard
make this rumor very unlikely.
 
GZTbklrW8AEOwvF
 
https://twitter.com/x/status/1843797123420303789
View: https://twitter.com/spacex/status/1843797123420303789


In addition to the thousands (>10k) of Starlink kits we are delivering in response to Hurricane Helene, the @Starlink team and @TMobile activated our Direct to Cell satellites to provide emergency alerts for all phones and carriers of those in affected areas.

The @FCC has also rapidly approved emergency special temporary authority for coverage in Florida ahead of Hurricane Milton.

We have now enabled basic texting (SMS) for those on T-Mobile phones in hurricane affected areas. Text messages have already been sent and received. You can text loved ones, text 911 and continue to receive emergency alerts.

If a phone connects to a Starlink satellite, it will have 1 to 2 bars of signal and show "T-Mobile SpaceX" in the network name. Users may have to manually retry text messages if they don't go through at first, as this is being delivered on a best-effort basis. The service works best outdoors, and occasionally works indoors near a window.
Click to expand...
 
Let's wait and see sferrin, lets wait and see. Surly the FAA cannot delay the Starship launch any longer, It has been delayed long enough time to get it launched I think.
 
https://twitter.com/x/status/1845147269089116580
View: https://twitter.com/bccarcounters/status/1845147269089116580


Statement of the FAA on the license:
Click to expand...

FAA STATEMENT (Oct. 12, 2024)

The FAA has issued a license modification authorizing SpaceX to launch multiple missions of the Starship/Super Heavy vehicle on the Flight 5 mission profile. The FAA determined SpaceX met all safety, environmental and other licensing requirements for the suborbital test flight. The Flight 5 mission profile involves launch of the combined Starship/Super Heavy vehicle from Boca Chica, Texas, a return to the launch site of the Super Heavy booster rocket for a catch attempt by the launch tower, and a water landing of the Starship vehicle in the Indian Ocean west of Australia.
Click to expand...

Edit to add:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1845153091965833399
View: https://twitter.com/bccarcounters/status/1845153091965833399


The @FAANews has confirmed the license includes the same mishap exceptions as flight 4.

@NASASpaceflight
Click to expand...

"The Starship/Super Heavy Flight 5 license authorization includes the same Test Induced Damage Exceptions previously approved for Flight 4. SpaceX identified test objectives associated with certain flight events and system components of the Starship vehicle. The three approved exceptions include: failure of the thermal shield during high-heating; the flap system is unable to provide sufficient control under high dynamic pressure; and the failure of the Raptor engine system during the landing Starship burn.
There are no test induced damage exceptions related to the Super Heavy booster rocket."

FAA responding to NSF
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1845153328210018448
View: https://twitter.com/bccarcounters/status/1845153328210018448


The @FAANews confirms the go-ahead for flight 6 as well:

@NASASpaceflight
Click to expand...

"The SpaceX Starship/Super Heavy Flight 5 license authorization also includes FAA approval of the Flight 6 mission profile. The FAA determined the changes requested by SpaceX for Flight 6 are within the scope of what has been previously analyzed. Any modifications requested by SpaceX to the approved Flight 6 scope of operations may require further FAA evaluation. Contact SpaceX for additional detail."

FAA responding to NSF
Click to expand...
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom