Space Stuff and Launch Info

[mfb]

They requested more information, SpaceX told them they didn't have that information yet, so the Army Corps halted the application until that information is available. Nothing surprising.

----

2 hours 15 minutes until the launch of Axiom-1 with its crew of four, the first fully private mission to the ISS. They have a large range of experiments planned, mainly in the medical sector. Launch coverage

 

[sandy stone]

They requested more information, SpaceX told them they didn't have that information yet, so the Army Corps halted the application until that information is available. Nothing surprising.

----

2 hours 15 minutes until the launch of Axiom-1 with its crew of four, the first fully private mission to the ISS. They have a large range of experiments planned, mainly in the medical sector. Launch coverage

I hate it when concern for the common good gets in the way of rich guys doing whatever they want.

 

[anorlunda]

There's a new 2 hour film released "Return To Space" about SpaceX and NASA astronauts. I saw it last night on Netflix.

I get the impression that Elon Musk is uncomfortable with his NASA partnership, and NASA is uncomfortable with SpaceX. But of course, he doesn't say that directly in the film.

 

[Arjan82]

2 hours 15 minutes until the launch of Axiom-1 with its crew of four, the first fully private mission to the ISS. They have a large range of experiments planned, mainly in the medical sector. Launch coverage

Just wondering: do they also recapture the second stage? Or is that left to burn in the atmosphere?

 

[sophiecentaur]

Just wondering: do they also recapture the second stage? Or is that left to burn in the atmosphere?

The first stage recovery seems an obvious thing to go for - a very expensive component of the flight, with vast energy capability and also, I would guess, some very complex control features. I wonder how much, in comparison, the second stage costs and if it justifies extra facilitates / payload to bring it back safely (it's almost orbital).

 

[mfb]

They looked into second stage recovery, but it would have needed too much redesign and reduced the payload too much. The second stage has been estimated to cost ~10 million, the largest part of the overall marginal launch cost to SpaceX. Boosters should be around 25-30 million, but they can be used 10+ times so the cost per launch is much lower. Fairings are ~6 million (both sides together), they are reused as well.

Starship will be fully reusable.Axiom-1 should dock with the ISS within half an hour. Livestream

 

[sophiecentaur]

They looked into second stage recovery, but it would have needed too much redesign and reduced the payload too much. The second stage has been estimated to cost ~10 million, the largest part of the overall marginal launch cost to SpaceX. Boosters should be around 25-30 million, but they can be used 10+ times so the cost per launch is much lower. Fairings are ~6 million (both sides together), they are reused as well.

Starship will be fully reusable.Axiom-1 should dock with the ISS within half an hour. Livestream

I am such a lazy hound dog* that my main space info comes from you and a few other PF experts. Between you, the wheat is separated from the chaff of space news and I keep up to date with the important stuff.
Thanks, all.

*That's a phrase that my headmaster used for me in 1962. He was not wrong as I've lived by my wits ever since! Most of my input is by diffusion.

 

[mfb]

Axiom-1 reached the ISS.

A reuse milestone: NASA's science mission lead said he prefers reused Falcon 9 boosters over new ones.

And two more coming up:

• A reused Falcon 9 booster will launch two military satellites on Friday. The US military was the last customer requiring new boosters.
• RocketLab wants to catch their first stage in the next mission, planned for April 19. If successful it will be the third orbital rocket to recover parts of the launch system after the Space Shuttle and Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy. I'm not including Buran here as the recoverable part didn't really contribute to the launch.[/size] The mission is called "There And Back Again", when Twitter pointed out that "Catch Me If You Can" would be better RocketLab's CEO Peter Beck replied "you have just named the very next recovery mission after this one"

.

----

NASA is still struggling with the Wet Dress Rehearsal. They have a valve problem that they can't fix on the launch pad, so they decided to do the WDR without fully fueling the upper stage. They'll simply skip the test that failed. The valve will be exchanged later, and so far it doesn't look like they want to repeat that test. NASA keeps repeating how it's a highly reliable system and low risk - but then how did it fail?

Starship is developed with the idea "test early, fail, improve the failing parts, test again". If a component fails they'll replace it and try again a few days later. If a vehicle blows up the next one will be on the launch pad a month later. Some explosions are expected.

NASA wanted to do the exact opposite with SLS. Develop everything for years to have extremely high redundancy, safety margins and so on, so everything will work on the first try. They were so certain that it will work that they considered skipping the Green Run for a while - the test that ended early because of an engine problem and had to be repeated (with extra delays from a valve problem). Now there is another valve problem.
The solid rocket boosters were originally certified to last one year after stacking. That was extended to one and a half years and now two years. It's unclear how much of that extension came from actual certainty that they are still good, and how much from necessity because the program faced delays. Even if Artemis 1 launches successfully in the next months it doesn't look like a very safe rocket. The default response to failing tests was a change of the tests, not a fix of the underlying problem. Combined with the endless delays and absurd costs I think it's save to say that this model doesn't work well.

---

Edit: There was also the Pythom rocket test which had people run away from the dust/exhaust cloud.

 

[Oldman too]

Once again we're coming up on the Planetary Decadal Mission Concept Studies for the 2023-2032 period. Here's a link to some of the more interesting concepts being considered, I'm pleased to see a couple of them involve Ceres exploration.
https://iopscience.iop.org/journal/2632-3338/page/Planetary_Decadal_Mission_Concept_Studies

 

[TeethWhitener]

NASA keeps repeating how it's a highly reliable system and low risk - but then how did it fail?

They were so certain that it will work that they considered skipping the Green Run for a while - the test that ended early because of an engine problem and had to be repeated (with extra delays from a valve problem). Now there is another valve problem.

So basically it’s a repeat of the Challenger mismanagement?

 

[Oldman too]

So basically it’s a repeat of the Challenger mismanagement?

Maybe they are just developing bigger and better fault trees?

 

[nsaspook]

Edit: There was also the Pythom rocket test which had people run away from the dust/exhaust cloud.

OMG, I hope nobody gets killed before that rocket launches.

"Classic liquid rocket bipropellant composed of furfuryl alcohol and fuming nitric acid"

https://www3.epa.gov/region1/airquality/nox.html

Nitrogen Oxides are a family of poisonous, highly reactive gases. These gases form when fuel is burned at high temperatures. NOx pollution is emitted by automobiles, trucks and various non-road vehicles (e.g., construction equipment, boats, etc.) as well as industrial sources such as power plants, industrial boilers, cement kilns, and turbines. NOx often appears as a brownish gas.

 

[Oldman too]

OMG, I hope nobody gets killed before that rocket launches.
View attachment 299925
"Classic liquid rocket bipropellant composed of furfuryl alcohol and fuming nitric acid"

https://www3.epa.gov/region1/airquality/nox.html

Absolutely amazing! The ARS article says it all but let me quote from it, this is one of the co-founders speaking... "You have to work hard, but you do not have to be very smart," Tina Sjögren added.

 

[mfb]

Another gem from their update:

During our expeditions, we lost many friends to the elements, [...]
We didn't survive all our expeditions by luck only, but by rigorous risk preparedness.

Classic survivorship bias.

So basically it’s a repeat of the Challenger mismanagement?

It increasingly looks like it.
The third WDR attempt was also aborted, this time because of a hydrogen leak in the ground support infrastructure.
The WDR was meant as final check that everything is still working, not as part of R&D. If you find a new issue in every test then your rocket isn't ready to fly.

 

[anorlunda]

The WDR was meant as final check that everything is still working, not as part of R&D. If you find a new issue in every test then your rocket isn't ready to fly.

Well said. A wizard at probability and statistics could take each problem not discovered until on the launch pad and turn that into an estimate of how flawed the R&D process was.

I fear that the cynical view is valid. The first priority of NASA's manned space program is jobs, money and politics. A successful flight terminates some spending, rather than perpetuating it. The amazing part is that NASA's unmanned programs are so totally different. Thank goodness for that.

 

[Klystron]

...I fear that the cynical view is valid. The first priority of NASA's manned space program is jobs, money and politics. A successful flight terminates some spending, rather than perpetuating it. The amazing part is that NASA's unmanned programs are so totally different. ...

Very well said. Perhaps the laws and regulations anent using human research subjects causes more bloat compared to unmanned missions. Having worked at both types of mission facilities, the amount of spending associated with human flight crews compared with machines dwarfed the latter. Even offices and buildings appeared more elegant, compensation scales more extreme, and the politics more pervasive.

 

[Oldman too]

How did I miss this. https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/s...n-flagship-crew-capsule-executive-2022-03-28/

"March 28 (Reuters) - SpaceX has ended production of new Crew Dragon astronaut capsules, a company executive told Reuters, as Elon Musk's space transportation company heaps resources on its next-generation spaceship program."

 

[anorlunda]

SpaceX has ended production of new Crew Dragon astronaut capsules

Don't worry, they will have 4 of them. They can make more if needed.

 

[Oldman too]

Don't worry, they will have 4 of them. They can make more if needed.

I noticed that, also that they will continue making spare parts. I did also find the launch cycle statement very interesting, wondered for some time how launch cycles compared to aircraft cycles, not that the forces and stress are comparable but it did cross my mind.

"There's lifetime cycle issues, where once you start using it the third, fourth, fifth time, you start finding different things," said retired NASA astronaut and former SpaceX executive Garrett Reisman, who now consults for the company on human spaceflight matters.

 

[Klystron]

I noticed that, also that they will continue making spare parts. I did also find the launch cycle statement very interesting, wondered for some time how launch cycles compared to aircraft cycles, not that the forces and stress are comparable but it did cross my mind.

"There's lifetime cycle issues, where once you start using it the third, fourth, fifth time, you start finding different things," said retired NASA astronaut and former SpaceX executive Garrett Reisman, who now consults for the company on human spaceflight matters.

I recently read, perhaps here on PF, words to the effect that astronauts prefer to ride the second launch on the premise that the rocket worked successfully once and is still relatively new.

 

[Oldman too]

I recently read, perhaps here on PF, words to the effect that astronauts prefer to ride the second launch on the premise that the rocket worked successfully once and is still relatively new.

I like that statistical approach to not becoming a statistic.

 

[mfb]

I recently read, perhaps here on PF, words to the effect that astronauts prefer to ride the second launch on the premise that the rocket worked successfully once and is still relatively new.

I quoted a leading NASA person saying that for boosters in post #968.

Keeping a permanent crew of four on the ISS needs two Dragon capsules, assuming the rest of the ISS crew uses Soyuz or Starliner that's all they need. The other two capsules combined can make ~5 shorter flights per year.

SLS will now roll back to the assembly building for repairs
Looks like they'll do a full WDR before launch now. That makes a launch in June less likely, but it means they'll have tested everything before flying.

Edit: They'll roll it back, fix it, roll it to the launch pad, do a WDR, and then plan to roll it back to the Vehicle Assembly Building for inspections, before finally rolling it back to the launch pad for a launch. Assuming that plan doesn't change it won't fly in June. Maybe July, likely later. If they have to restack the boosters we are looking at late 2022 the earliest.

 

[Oldman too]

More on the Planetary Decadal Mission Concept Studies.
Item #1: It appears NASA's priority may be Uranus... No pun intended.
https://www.science.org/content/art...top-planetary-target-influential-report-finds

Item #2: The Whitepapers are out!
https://baas.aas.org/vol-53-issue-4
Note: While the whitepapers are indexed here for completeness, we strongly recommend that you use the NASA Astrophysics Data System to explore them, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/searc...6OAnQR2oaAjw)&sort=date asc, bibcode asc&p_=0

 

[mfb]

Axiom-1 landed safely after several delays due to bad weather. Buy 10 days, get 17, I'm sure the astronauts didn't mind. Axiom-2 (2023) is planned to last 16 days.

Now Crew-4 can fly to the ISS. The launch is planned for Wednesday 07:52 UTC or 24 hours after this post, livestream will be e.g. here. There are only two docking ports for Dragon and Crew-3 is still there waiting for Crew-4 to arrive.

We have a whole delay chain in Florida. The repeated WDR attempts of Artemis 1 delayed the Axiom-1 launch, which delayed the return. Weather then delayed it further. That delays Crew-4, which delays the return of Crew-3, which might delay the second uncrewed flight test of Starliner. That could then delay the next WDR attempt of Artemis 1 after its hardware is repaired. A two month chain of delays could end with the same rocket that started it.

Eric Berger says Artemis not before August. That will need an extension of the extension of the booster lifetime.

Rocket Lab wants to fly and recover its booster no earlier than Thursday.

More on the Planetary Decadal Mission Concept Studies.

I hope we get the Enceladus orbiter+lander as that's certainly an interesting place, but the Uranus moons might turn out to be as interesting as the icy moons of Jupiter and Saturn.

Payload to space in the first quarter of 2022
SpaceX 116 tonnes
Roscosmos 19 tonnes
China 14 tonnes
Everyone else together 21 tonnes

Most of the SpaceX mass is Starlink which has recently gotten two airlines as customer, the small JSX and the larger Hawaiian airlines. Both want to provide free high-speed internet on their airplanes starting in late 2022 to early 2023. As Hawaiian airlines largely flies over the ocean they will rely on satellites connecting to each other with laser links.

 

[Oldman too]

There are only two docking ports for Dragon and Crew-3 is still there waiting for Crew-4 to arrive.

Houston, we have a bottleneck! seriously though, I hadn't expected docking to be so tightly scheduled. Hope the weather cooperates better for crew-3. The Artemis fiasco doesn't surprise me in the least. Maybe Space-X can give NASA some pointers on being competitive, something big government seems to struggle with.

Rocket Lab wants to fly and recover its booster no earlier than Thursday.

Any idea if Rocket Lab is scheduling a live stream? I'd sure like to watch that launch/ recovery, should be very interesting. It would be a nice bonus for them to keep that booster out of the seawater also.

I hope we get the Enceladus orbiter+lander as that's certainly an interesting place

I 'm hoping for the same, although any of those targets would be extremely cool. It just occurred to me that if they launch on SLS, I'll probably not live long enough to see any of it realized... at least we have JWST.

 

[mfb]

Rocket Lab will certainly live-stream the launch, but I don't know how much we'll see for the recovery (live and later). The helicopter and the rocket will be pretty far downrange, so the internet connection might be bad, and who knows what camera angles we can get.

Edit: They'll try to have a live feed but it might drop out in between

The Uranus mission will use Falcon Heavy, it's likely the Enceladus mission will do the same. The flight rate of SLS is so low that all launches are needed for Artemis, Starship is still in development, and besides these two Falcon Heavy will stay the heaviest-lift vehicle for a while.

T-1h for Crew-4, crew is in the capsule, propellant load will follow soon.

 

[Oldman too]

This is unexpected, and too cool.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/jpl/na...pots-gear-that-helped-perseverance-rover-land

 

[mfb]

After the weather delayed the launch for several days Rocket Lab is aiming at a launch May 2, 22:35 UTC, that's in 7 hours, or in the two hours after that time. First attempt to recover a large rocket booster with a helicopter.

Livestream will appear here

Other updates might appear on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rocketlab/

Edit: Launch time shifted a bit, now in 8 minutes!

Edit: Capture! Video from the helicopter wasn't great but there was a booster in view in between.

Another edit: Partial success. The behavior of the booster hooked up to the helicopter was different than expected, the pilot decided to lower the booster into the ocean. With contact to salt water it's likely this booster won't fly again, but we'll see.

Press release

 

[mfb]

Curiosity found the entrance to the secret Martian base! Zoom into find the Martian looking at Curiosity.

Larger image here, the image above can be found to the upper left of the center. There is another similar but smaller feature a bit more to the left. It seems to be a rock that tends to break with very clean surfaces.

Edit: Some discussion by geologist

 

[mfb]

Event Horizon Telescope update just started.

They have a picture of Sgr A*, the central black hole of our galaxy. Well, a picture of its accretion disk of course, can't see the black hole itself.