The big two launches we've all been watching and waiting on went off Thursday as scheduled - more or less. Meaning the first launch, Blue Origin's New Glenn went after a few delays and Starship Flight Test 7 went after about 35 minutes of delays (hat tip to Scott Manley for noticing something I never did - that the first letters of that name spell out BONG).
In a strange irony, while neither mission met all of its major goals, Blue Origin had the more successful flight. BONG made orbit and released its payload, but lost its booster so there was no booster landing and no recovery. SpaceX recovered the SuperHeavy booster - another dramatic capture of the returning booster being caught in the giant Chopsticks - but lost the Starship before it reached the point in its suborbital flight where it could do the many tests scheduled for the ship.
Of the two, SpaceX had the worse result. While we were all watching the returning Super Heavy booster maneuvering into position to be grabbed in mid-air by the Chopsticks the telemetry from the Starship was revealing trouble as the six engines started shutting down. The telemetry is visible in the lower right hand corner of this video - here's a screen grab around when the first engine shut down.
You can see the three vacuum Raptors with the large engine bells around the
outer ring still running but the inner (sea level) Raptors have seen one shut down. There are videos that appear to show that the ship had exploded with debris burning up on the way down, like
this link to X from Space.com.
While it's easy to pick on Blue for not succeeding at landing the booster, I don't think anyone familiar with the problems involved in recovering a booster that starts out almost at the Kármán line and hypersonic velocity would attack a failure on their first attempt. SpaceX required 19 launches before it finally landed an orbital rocket for the first time, back in December 2015, and Blue Origin CEO David Limp had said, "Our objective is to reach orbit, anything beyond that is a bonus. Landing our booster offshore is ambitious—but we’re going for it. No matter what, we will learn a lot."
We know that Ship 33 today was the first Block 2 Starship to fly and that there were many changes, but that's no excuse. We also know that if there's one thing we can absolutely say about SpaceX is that they'll attack this instantly and will let us know what they find soon after they know.
"Starship experienced a rapid unscheduled disassembly during its ascent burn. Teams will continue to review data from today's flight test to better understand root cause. With a test like this, success comes from what we learn, and today’s flight will help us improve Starship’s reliability," SpaceX said via X this evening.
I noticed that the methane tank levels were far lower than oxygen tank when the telemetry stopped updating. Methane tank got opened up by an exploding engine? Or a methane leak and the methane starved out sooner?
ReplyDeleteSpaceX has already said that it was a fire in the aft end that caused the boom. And I'm sure we'll know by tomorrow or Saturday what caused the fire.
ReplyDeleteA spectacular failure. Sigh.
Well, there's always the next launch in 2-4 weeks, that is, if the issue isn't with the whole Gen2 Starships.
And Elon now says that there was an oxygen/fuel leak in the cavity above the engine that was too much for the vents to handle. Changes will be adding fire suppression above the firewall and larger vents.
DeleteLess than 8 hours and the issue's been identified and plans to correct are being implemented.
I love SpaceX.
When I was watching videos last night, I ran into someone (I think Ellie in Space) that had a video showing flames coming out of a hinge taken from one of the Starship cameras that point at a flap. That had "uh oh" written all over it.
DeleteThe flames were almost unnoticeable. One of those things that once you know what to look for you go, duh, something's wrong.
DeleteLooking forward to more video from the Starship to see the oops.
Design. Build. Test (launch). analyze failure(s). Lather, rinse, repeat.
ReplyDeleteGit 'R Done, SpaceX. Carry on!
"So long, and thanks for all the fish!", eh?
A few months ago, I think we were all joking about them having the answer to a different problem within 20 minutes. Seems about what it took yesterday.
DeleteYep. Fire suppression and larger vents might be nice, but it's more important that they find out exactly WHY they had a leak in the first place. I haven't heard anything yet on that score.
DeleteHaving multiple Starlink connectivity gives them constant real-time data. Rather than having to piece together information from after the fact, they are able to see exactly what is going on.
DeleteThat, and they're not close-mouthed over what happens.
It's that last that I really appreciate.
DeleteThat last one is the most important - and I really appreciate that, too.
DeleteI used to tell any newbie engineers I was mentoring that I reserve the right to be wrong. I try not to but sometimes I still screw up. SpaceX seems to be saying the same thing. "We know we're not infallible geniuses and we're going to do something wrong. We'll fix it to the best of our abilities."
A wise man learns more from his failures than his successes.
ReplyDeleteSun Tsu (maybe)
Absolutely. If you have a success, it is impossible to know how close you came to failure. But if you have a failure, you can know how close you came to success.
Delete