SpaceX SpaceX Starship development: 7th flight January 10

[mfb]

Something fell down the launch tower but it doesn't seem to be critical, SpaceX is still aiming at a Monday launch (in under 24 hours!).

SpaceX livestream will be here
Others:
Everyday Astronaut
NASASpaceflight

 

[mfb]

T-3:30:00

NASASpaceflight stream is live.
There are traffic jams on roads towards viewing sites, even though it's 4:30 am local time.

Flight readiness poll will happen at T-2:00:00.

Edit: The propellant storage has started to get active in preparation for propellant loading.

Edit: No sign of propellant loading yet (as of 6:37 local time), looks like they won't aim at an 8:00 launch.
Edit 6:41: 8:20 via SpaceX's twitter account, so it was just a short hold and propellant loading should start soon.
Edit 6:43: Propellant load started

7:25: Ice build-up on booster and ship indicates propellant loading is going well. Under an hour to go. SpaceX coverage should start in 10 minutes.

 

[mfb]

T-35 minutes

SpaceX livestream is up

 

[.Scott]

SpaceX is also providing a link with narration.
T-00:12:00

 

[mfb]

Scrub. They will convert it to a wet dress rehearsal, finishing propellant load but there will be no ignition.

 

[.Scott]

First stage pressurization issue will nix a launch for today.
But they are continuing for reheasal.
Countdown clock will stop at T-00:03:00.

 

[mfb]

Minimum of 48 hours to recycle.
4/19... or 4/20?

1 million watching on the SpaceX channel, 220,000 at NSF, 80,000 at Everyday Astronaut. Probably more at the time they announced the scrub but I didn't check.

 

[mfb]

SpaceX is now aiming at a launch on April 20 (internet is full of 4/20 memes), giving them three days to fix the freezing valve and to replenish the stored propellant. Most of it is recycled, of course, but the operation isn't loss-free.

 

[.Scott]

The FAA has Temporary Flight Restrictions posted for Starbase (Brownsville, TX) for 4/20 and 4/21.

 

[mfb]

Still aiming for an April 20 launch.

The FAA has released a 120 page document discussing environmental impact findings for this flight and the next two. If you ever wanted to know the size of the area around the Starship impact where a Hawaiian Monk Seal could get temporary hearing loss and how many of them we expect closer than that on average: You'll find that in the document (41.37 km² and 0.001241 animals, page 14). Even if we add up all the animals in the list then we still expect not a single temporary hearing loss as most likely outcome, but it's great that millions have been spent determining all these numbers, which also included giving some of these animals hearing loss in the lab to find the pressure thresholds used as inputs.

We can learn more about the flight plan as a side effect of all these calculations: The ship will hit the water at terminal velocity, no chance of a landing burn. The impact is expected to mix methane and oxygen, leading to an explosion with a yield of a bit over 1 tonne of TNT. The booster will do a landing burn and is expected to survive impact, it should sink after water enters through open valves. If not they might use it as military target - shoot it until it sinks.

SpaceX plans a second and third flight with a similar flight profile, but the upper stages will not have a heat shield so they won't survive re-entry. The nominal booster landing is again in the ocean, but with some option to attempt a chopstick capture on the launch pad.
It's likely SpaceX will cancel the remaining missions if they don't think they can improve on them, e.g. if they reach orbit with the first or second flight and don't think they are ready for booster recovery yet. The hardware for the first three flights is at least half a year old, what they are building now (nominally: for a fourth flight) must have hundreds of improvements.

 

[.Scott]

Currently, the FA has TFRs registered for Starbase for Thursday (tomorrow) through Tuesday the 25th. That include Saturday and Sunday.

 

[mfb]

~90 minutes until the launch window opens. Fuel loading of the booster has started.

SpaceX stream
NSF
EDA

 

[Borg]

Looking good today. Fueling nearly complete!

 

[mfb]

We are farther than on Monday, so the valve issue has been solved.
Last 4 minutes.

Possible hold up to 15 minutes at T-40s, this is different from Falcon 9 which basically has to fly or do a larger recycle.

 

[mfb]

Hold at -35 seconds. Might go back to -40 seconds or earlier.

 

[.Scott]

SpaceX Starship Launch at 8:33am CDT (local time) - cleared the pad and still going.

 

[mfb]

LIFTOFF

 

[.Scott]

Five engines appear to be out.
Now six Stage 1 engines are out.

 

[mfb]

6 engines now. Yeah, there were some smaller explosions. We'll see if that is enough thrust to reach orbit.

 

[mfb]

That trajectory looks really wrong

 

[.Scott]

No stage 2 separation - The whole thing is tumbling - RUD.

 

[mfb]

Well, that flight was a bit shorter than planned, but certainly very exciting!

It did clear the pad, so that should be ready for another launch relatively quickly unless they decide it needs a major redesign. It reached something that looked like max-Q even though the thrust was lower than expected and it survived that.

They'll have to check what happened to the engines and work on that.
They'll have to find out why the ship started the separation maneuver that low and why it didn't separate.

Starship became the heaviest object ever to fly.

 

[berkeman]

That was weird when it was tumbling and it blew up and everybody was cheering...

 

[Borg]

I noticed that also. Cheer like your Twitter account depends on it!

 

[mfb]

Well, when it was tumbling there was tension what would happen. After it blew up people celebrated the steps that worked. It didn't reach orbit, but it still went farther than most expected.

 

[.Scott]

That was weird when it was tumbling and it blew up and everybody was cheering...

If you were watching the SpaceX feed, "everyone" was that crowd of SpaceX employees in the flight control building. The SpaceX objective was to clear the tower (rebuilding it would take months) and collect enough data for the next try. They have additional rockets built and close to ready.

They already have some Stage 2 data from a few years ago - so the rocket made it through much of the remaining uncharted engineering territory.

 

[nsaspook]

Flipped 4 times, that's an impressive structural success.

 

[hutchphd]

Flipped 4 times, that's an impressive structural success.

Note that neither stage fell apart during those somewhat parapatetic final maneuvers. To my eye the first stage and then the starship destruction charges were required. The loss of five engines (including one pretty obvious RUD) upon ascent was concerning but impressive nonetheless. Huge.

 

[berkeman]

What was supposed to happen? They said something about the full rocket would tilt back and the upper stage would separate and then the 1st stage would do a retro burn to return? I'm guessing the upper stage would then re-orient and fire its engines to proceed to orbit? Why is the reorientation needed before separation?

 

[mfb]

The engines of the booster started a slow rotation of the rocket. After releasing the clamps that rotation was supposed to separate booster and ship naturally - the rotation *is* the separation mechanism. The ship would have ignited its engines, got into the right orientation again and kept burning to reach an almost-orbital trajectory. The booster would have kept rotating (maybe even used an engine to speed it up more) until it could fire a few engines to reverse its course to return to the coast (30 km offshore in this case, the landing site later).
It's very impressive that the rocket survived in every orientation at a pretty low altitude.

The next ship/booster set might be ready soon but they'll probably have to upgrade the launch pad.
Tank farm damaged
Concrete raining down here

People were joking about Starship digging its own flame trench because SpaceX didn't build one. Looks like the jokes were right, it left a literal crater under the launch mount:

It did take off significantly slower than planned so a nominal launch should damage the pad less than that, at least.

We also learned that an exploding engine doesn't take out the whole ship. It looks like it took out an adjacent engine in two cases (or two engine pairs failed due to a common cause each), but overall the engine failures were well-contained.

 

[.Scott]

Except for an area 4nm in diameter around Starbase itself, there are no active Temporary Flight Restriction areas.

 

[.Scott]

What happens when you leave your car parked in the launch evacuation zone:
https://gizmodo.com/spacex-starship-launch-pad-damage-video-1850357836

 

[nsaspook]

 

[mfb]

SpaceX statement

Starship gave us quite a show during today’s first flight test of a fully integrated Starship and Super Heavy rocket from Starbase in Texas.

At 8:33 a.m. CT, Starship successfully lifted off from the orbital launch pad for the first time. The vehicle cleared the pad and beach as Starship climbed to an apogee of ~39 km over the Gulf of Mexico – the highest of any Starship to-date. The vehicle experienced multiple engines out during the flight test, lost altitude, and began to tumble. The flight termination system was commanded on both the booster and ship. As is standard procedure, the pad and surrounding area was cleared well in advance of the test, and we expect the road and beach near the pad to remain closed until tomorrow.

With a test like this, success comes from what we learn, and we learned a tremendous amount about the vehicle and ground systems today that will help us improve on future flights of Starship.

Thank you to our customers, Cameron County, and the wider community for the continued support and encouragement. And congratulations to the entire SpaceX team on an exciting first flight test of Starship!

Former Canadian astronaut Chris Hadfield discussing the flight

As far as I understand the booster had two hydraulic units to gimbal engines. It looks like one of them failed early during flight. That means half of the engines were unable to change their thrust direction. The other half compensated for a while, but when it came to the flip maneuver something went wrong. It's possible the upper stage didn't separate because it never reached the planned conditions for that.
This won't be an issue in the future as SpaceX will change to electric motors for gimballing.

It's likely most of the damage we saw came from launch pad debris hitting stuff. If they can minimize that then a second flight should be much smoother.

 

[Tom.G]

Except for an area 4nm in diameter around Starbase itself

I must be slow this evening.

I initially read that as 4nanometers - thought that couldn't be right - then settled on nautical miles.

 

[phinds]

I must be slow this evening.

I initially read that as 4nanometers - thought that couldn't be right - then settled on nautical miles.

I'm still thinking it's nanometers, 'cause that's a better story.

 

[.Scott]

The methalox combustion resulted in a zone just below the engines where the "flames" were entirely transparent. Before Starship cleared the tower, the length of this zone was as little as dozens of feet.

But once it got going, it provided a completely unobstructed view of the white-hot engines.

They look like an array of flood lamps. Six of the bulbs need to be replaced.

Some day you'll have to explain Mach Diamonds to your kids by telling them to look at old videos of jet engines, rocket launches, or engine tests.

 

[mfb]

6 engines are out - two at the top, one top right, two bottom right, and the left of the 3 center engines.

Each of these engines has enough thrust to fly two or even three Boeing 747.

 

[PeroK]

6 engines are out - two at the top, one top right, two bottom right, and the left of the 3 center engines.

Each of these engines has enough thrust to fly two or even three Boeing 747.

That's a lot of Boeings blown to pieces!

 

[gleem]

The next ship/booster set might be ready soon but they'll probably have to upgrade the launch pad.

I believe there was some criticism of the design of the launch pad. It seems they were right. I wonder how the repair/redesign will extend the next launch date.

I just found a more dramatic video of the launch pad debris.

https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-medi...0,w_1315/a24c2b340df0ce8847adefa6b2f48d41.mp4

 

[mfb]

Looks like SpaceX was working on a water-cooled steel plate already, but didn't expect to need it for a first test flight:



Here is a slow-motion video of the liftoff from the tower, with some boulders flying in the background:

 

[nsaspook]

 

[nsaspook]

That ship was fighting all the way up to the end.

 

[gleem]

The launch pad, what a mess

Outside of the crater, what other damage might be present? Musk says 1 to 2 months before the next launch attempt. it seems like a lot more to me. How about a completely new one?

 

[mfb]

The floor should be relatively easy to repair.

The chopsticks have moved again, they look fine overall. Debris strikes to the upper part of the launch mount could be the most time-consuming issue.

 

[Tom.G]

Well, Starship got off the ground, but also scatterd a bunch of it!

Excerpt from Los Angeles Times, Thu. Apr. 27, 2023, page A10

[bold] SpaceX launched concrete chunks far away. [/bold]

...[ scattered ] pulverized concrete up to 6.5 miles NorthWest of the launchpad and resulted in about 385 acrers of debris on SpaceX's facility and at nearby Boca Chica State Park...

...many large cocncrete chunks, stailesss-steel sheets, metal and other objects were "hurled thousands of feet away."...

...A 3.5-acre fire also started on Boca Chica State Park, south of the launchpad, the agency (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) said.

 

[Astronuc]

Massive, exploded SpaceX rocket devastated a town and a wildlife reserve — and locals are furious

But the community living near the launch site has been dealing with fallout from the launch, in both senses of the word. The explosion essentially obliterated the launch pad, carving a massive crater and sending chunks of concrete, sheets of stainless steel and other debris flying into the ocean on Boca Chica Beach. A Dodge Caravan was smashed with wreckage, which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reported was scattered over 385 acres, causing a fire that burned 3.5 acres on Boca Chica State Park land.

Clouds of ash and particulates rained down on residents of Port Isabel, about six miles away, settling onto homes, cars, and streets, breaking several windows. It's not clear if the particulate matter is dangerous to breathe or touch, or if it will pollute the soil.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/tech...fe-reserve-and-locals-are-furious/ar-AA1auxQJ

Seems rather sloppy and unnecessary. I understand the desire to launch and cut corners, but there is a 'right way' to launch a rocket, as has been demonstrated over the past 6+ decades, e.g., at Cape Canaveral, aka Kennedy Space Center.

 

[berkeman]

Seems rather sloppy and unnecessary.

Sloppy and clumsy. Unfortunate.

 

[mfb]

Massive, exploded SpaceX rocket devastated a town and a wildlife reserve — and locals are furious

A bit of sand and dust falling down does not "devastate a town", nor do some chunks of concrete falling down "devastate a wildlife reserve". It's sand and concrete parts, they are not toxic. The headline is absurd.

No one was harmed, and no significant damage was found outside of SpaceX's property besides a few broken windows - and I haven't seen a confirmation that these refer to windows of building, not windows of cars parked close to the launch.

If you would put the rocket horizontally and rotated it around one end it would cover an area of 11 acres. The wildfire was 1/3 of that area, and it's in a region that has frequent natural fires anyway - if it's not started by a rocket then a thunderstorm will ignite the same stuff.

Seems rather sloppy and unnecessary.

The sloppy part is on the side of the reporters trying to blow this story up more than the rocket.

but there is a 'right way' to launch a rocket, as has been demonstrated over the past 6+ decades, e.g., at Cape Canaveral, aka Kennedy Space Center.

The maiden flight of the Saturn V (Apollo 4) also damaged the launch pad significantly and threw debris around. Here is a report, damage to the pad is described on page 3-15. Back then we just didn't have 2135 cameras inspecting every centimeter of the area and the internet to show these pictures to everyone within an hour. Back then news focused on the rocket.
Some debris flying around from Apollo 8 and fires in the launch tower.

 

[Rive]

The maiden flight of the Saturn V (Apollo 4) also damaged the launch pad significantly and threw debris around.

Exactly because of that (that we know what should be expected, for 50+ years already ) why this was so gross.

Big rocket does not match well with oversized sloppy stools as 'launch pads'.

I hope the next one will be something more decent.