Oopsies First
It's hard to get more details without subscribing to Bloomberg, if they even
have the details, but the
Rocket Report
relays Bloomberg is saying they lost the upper stages for the next two New
Glenn flights; that is, the second and third flights, after the
fast-approaching first flight.
Blue Origin experiences rocket stage incidents. Blue Origin sustained failures in recent weeks of testing, including a factory mishap that damaged a portion of a future New Glenn rocket, Bloomberg reports. The upper portion of one rocket crumpled into itself, in part due to worker error, while it was being moved to a storage hangar, the publication reported. In a separate incident, another upper rocket portion failed during stress testing and exploded. Repairs are underway, another person said, noting there were no injuries during either episode.
Running into a tight timeline ... Notably, the incidents with these stages involved hardware that had been intended for use on the second and third launches. The upper stage that will be used by the first launch of New Glenn appears to not have been impacted. It is unclear whether these incidents will impact the debut launch of New Glenn, which is facing a tight deadline in mid-October to launch a Mars mission for NASA.
I'm having a hard time reconciling "exploded" and "repairs are underway." I suppose I'm envisioning something like the RFA explosion in the UK Spaceport (first story) and it could have been something much smaller and therefore less destructive. The first one, with the second stage crumpling in onto itself "in part due to worker error" could have a very simple explanation. As Inc. (magazine?) stated:
Though we don't know exact details, in this case what seems to have happened is that workers moved the rocket stage from a place where it had been exposed to Florida's typically hot weather into a cool, air-conditioned space without controlling its pressure valves properly. When it cooled enough, the gas pressure inside dropped too far for the structure to withstand.
It's actually a well-known problem with examples that go back to the early days of spaceflight.
A few hours ago (on Friday, August 23) a launch date for the New Glenn first flight, the ESCAPADE probes to Mars, was announced: No Earlier Than Sunday, October 13.
Dave Limp, Blue Origin's new CEO, left, and founder Jeff Bezos observe the New Glenn rocket on its launch pad, February 21 at CCSFS. Image credit: Jeff Bezos via Instagram.
As for that Starliner Promise
Boeing and NASA experts have been continuing their efforts to determine how to return astronauts Butch and Suni from the Starliner test flight. While I've read things that sounded more definite than this, like "they're going to announce their decision Saturday," at the NASA blogs they say:
NASA’s decision on whether to return Starliner to Earth with astronauts aboard is expected no earlier than Saturday, Aug. 24 at the conclusion of an agency-level review chaired by Ken Bowersox, the associate administrator of NASA’s Space Operations Mission Directorate. The agency flight readiness review is where any formal dissents are presented and reconciled. Other agency leaders who routinely participate in launch and return readiness reviews for crewed missions include NASA’s administrator, deputy administrator, associate administrator, various agency center directors, the Flight Operations Directorate, and agency technical authorities.
NASA will host a televised news conference following the review’s conclusion to discuss the agency’s decision and next steps. More information on the news conference will be shared once confirmed.
How can you see it? Space.com has a YouTube channel
that you can check on during the day - since we really have no idea when
they'd have the video conference. You can check them during the day, either at
their home page or
the article on this announcement.
The issues that BO had with differential cooling of pressure vessels was something known to the USA as soon as the military got its hot little hands on captured V2s.
ReplyDeleteBallistic missiles, either medium range or full ICBMs, designed to work with liquid fuels always had to be pressurized with a neutral gas, as the missiles were designed to lift the largest payload possible and thus the structure of the missiles were designed to be supported by the pressure of the fuel.
Oh, it's hot in Florida! Duh.
The real question, of course, is will this affect the potential launch? Two handling mishaps so close together. That's crazy stupid.
Boeing needs to remove their garbage from the docking port, they are getting in the way. NASA needs to poop or get off the pot and either kick it overboard or do it automagically without Butch and Suni.
ReplyDeleteAnd then Boeing needs to get out of the Space Program. Period. Dot.
As for BO techs not having the sense god gave to a goose and make sure pressure was equalized in the tanks, I wonder if they hired the Boeing techs that couldn't make the cut. A real rookie mistake!
Yes, a lot of ULA employees transferred over to BO for the money, especially those on the Atlas and Delta programs.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIf I remember correctly, SpaceX had the exact same kind of mishap with their first Falcon 1, when a valve stuck and the tank collapsed during transport on a plane. Valves! It's always the valves!
ReplyDeleteIt would be dead simple to make a foolproof alarm that would look at the differential pressure on a tank and scream its fool head off if it ever went negative. For that matter, why is the pressurization system automated and redundant? This is a medium-probability-high-risk failure mode.
"...why isN'T the pressurization..."
DeleteThe NASA multimedia web page shows the CFT status news conference scheduled for 1 pm EDT today.
ReplyDeleteThanks for that. I have the YouTube tab open waiting for it to start.
Delete