After multiple days of delays due to both weather and then the FAA getting into a snit about whether they should be granted permission to fly, SpaceX got blue skies and a go ahead today. Unfortunately, SN9, affectionately nicknamed Eileen Dover, did not improve on the results of SN8 or Snate. In fact, she "leaned over" again when she was supposed to be standing tall. Seen here a split second before the fireball.
Once again SpaceX streamed the video live from a few minutes before launch through the crash. The complete video is here and by tomorrow there should be some choice edits of the footage.
Count me among those who thought this would be an improvement over Snate, maybe even completing the landing. Instead, it appeared that the last seconds of flight, the flip from horizontal to vertical, might have been worse. It seems that they restarted two engines (as intended) but one shutdown within no more than a half second. Another negative is the stubby little legs that these Starships have in place of the long legs of Falcon 9 didn't extend like they should for landing. The positive is that I didn't see any engine burning copper in a green flame like Snate did.
If I recall correctly it took 12 attempts to land a Falcon 9 before they got that technology developed, and I believe Elon has said he expected to go through a similar number for this tricky maneuver.
In case you missed it last Friday, that's SN10 on the left of that screen capture. SN10 is expected to repeat this test, possibly before the end of the month.
Once again SpaceX streamed the video live from a few minutes before launch through the crash. The complete video is here and by tomorrow there should be some choice edits of the footage.
Count me among those who thought this would be an improvement over Snate, maybe even completing the landing. Instead, it appeared that the last seconds of flight, the flip from horizontal to vertical, might have been worse. It seems that they restarted two engines (as intended) but one shutdown within no more than a half second. Another negative is the stubby little legs that these Starships have in place of the long legs of Falcon 9 didn't extend like they should for landing. The positive is that I didn't see any engine burning copper in a green flame like Snate did.
If I recall correctly it took 12 attempts to land a Falcon 9 before they got that technology developed, and I believe Elon has said he expected to go through a similar number for this tricky maneuver.
In case you missed it last Friday, that's SN10 on the left of that screen capture. SN10 is expected to repeat this test, possibly before the end of the month.
I watched the replay earlier today. I was hopeful they'd nail the landing, but not quite there yet. Looked like the second engine tried to fire more than once, but wouldn't stay lit.
ReplyDeleteOK, now the odd flap orientation makes more sense to me now.
ReplyDeleteLeigh
Whitehall, NY
Yep. It didn't have enough thrust to complete the flip maneuver, so the flaps looked folded the wrong way.
DeleteStill better than BO, just saying...
ReplyDeleteI read yesterday that Bezos is stepping down as CEO at Amazon, and one of the reasons cited was Blue Origin. Along with a few other things he's involved with.
DeleteSN10 appears a bit close for comfort. Murphy could try to take both out at once.
ReplyDeleteI agree. I would almost be certain there would be some shrapnel damage to the other rocket.
DeleteLeigh
Whitehall, NY
They're close but not as close as they look in that capture. There's a bit of depth compression from the telephoto lens. The distance from SN10 to the launch stand that SN9 took off from is about twice the height of one of the prototypes. It looks like less distance in that screen cap.
DeleteThe distance from 10 to where 9 hit the ground is four or five heights.
Which is not to say some debris could not have hit 10. We'll be finding out more today.
Oops. Meant to add a video link:
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMwyuqbL66Q
Skip to around 6:00 minutes.