Friday, May 16, 2025

Small Space News Story Roundup 59

A couple of items for a slow news day

Australia's first orbital launch scrubbed because the rocket's nose fell off

Back in March, as the first quarter of the year was coming to a close, I did an article on launches that were possibly coming before the start of April.  I had seen mention of a rocket called Eris from an Australian company called Gilmour. 

An interesting one that I know absolutely nothing about is from Australia.  A company called Gilmour is launching their Eris rocket's TestFlight1, "NET March 2025" from an Orbital Spaceport in Australia.

As the weeks went by, I loosely kept checking in to see if a date had been announced.  It ended up being quite a bit later than March - this week.  Instead, the nose cone fell off the rocket hours before it was supposed to leave the launch pad Thursday.  

Gilmour, the Australian startup that developed the Eris rocket, announced the setback in a post to the company's social media accounts Thursday.

"During final launch preparations last night, an electrical fault triggered the system that opens the rocket’s nose cone (the payload fairing)," Gilmour posted on LinkedIn. "This happened before any fuel was loaded into the vehicle. Most importantly, no one was injured, and early checks show no damage to the rocket or the launch pad."

Gilmour was gearing up for a launch attempt from a privately owned spaceport in the Australian state of Queensland early Friday, local time (Thursday in the United States). The company's Eris rocket, which was poised for its first test flight, stands about 82 feet (25 meters) tall with its payload fairing intact. It's designed to haul a payload of about 670 pounds (305 kilograms) to low-Earth orbit.

It's unusual not because missions never get ruined by a malfunctioning payload fairing; it's that the malfunction tends to be the other way - not opening when desired or not opening properly.  

As regularly happens, Gilmour had set low expectations for the mission, "the test data we get is the goal of the mission" as they often say.  While the rocket has everything needed to fly to low-Earth orbit, officials said they were looking for just 10 to 20 seconds of stable flight on the first launch, enough to gather data about the performance of the rocket and its unconventional hybrid propulsion system.

Gilmour's Eris rocket stands on its launch pad earlier this week at Bowen Orbital Spaceport in the Australian state of Queensland. Credit: Gilmour Space

SpaceX Extends Falcon 9 Reuses Again

Remember when the talk was that they hoped to get 10 flights out of a Falcon 9 booster?  Then it became 20?  Now the goal is 30.  Fleet leader B1067 just notched its 28th mission on Tuesday morning, May 13th

Liftoff from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center happened on Tuesday, May 13, at 1:02 a.m. EDT (0502 UTC). It was the 100th launch of a single-stick Falcon 9 rocket from this pad.
...
Booster landings have truly become routine... A little more than eight minutes after liftoff, SpaceX landed B1067 on its drone ship, Just Read the Instructions, which was positioned in the Atlantic Ocean to the east of the Bahamas. This marked the 120th successful landing for this drone ship and the 446th booster landing to date for SpaceX.

There are currently seven Falcon 9s in the fleet with 20 or more flights and a total of 19 boosters counted as actively flying.

Starship Flight Test 9 slips later

As of Friday afternoon, 5/14, NextSpaceflight shows IFT-9 to be Memorial Day, Monday evening, May 26th, at 7:30 EDT, 6:30 Central (local) time.  There have been some reports I hesitate to quote that the FAA has refused to approve SpaceX's launch because their people have problems with the Flight 8 failure analysis.  Since the launch date has moved later at a one day per day rate, there might well be "something else" going on. 



14 comments:

  1. OUCH! They blew the fairing off on the pad.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, it's understandable that the nosecone fell off as they do have things upside down in Australia...

    At least they're trying. Very trying.

    I'll see myself out now...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I found it impossible to resist the line that the launch was scrubbed because the rocket's nose fell off.

      Delete
    2. Well they are on the other side, upside down under.

      Delete
  3. Yeah, "orbit is hard", its a lot harder if your payload fairing falls off before you have added fuel.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That new test tank of Spacex's with the slanted hydraulic ram ports, kind of looks like heavy thruster locations for unsupported off earth landings, (so they can avoid causing "launchnados" say on the moon and mars).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, those reach into the tank to wiggle and stress the downcomer pipes, which was the probable cause of IFT 7 and 8's failures. See: POGO

      Delete
  5. It must have been designed by the Gilmour Girls. Mom are you sure that the nose won't fall off the Rocket? Oh Rory, just because you went to Harvard doesn't mean you know rocket science. I slept with an Astronaut once at a Holiday Inn Express.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "The front fell off."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM

    ReplyDelete
  7. Surprising exactly no one where the Australian space program is concerned, alcohol was involved.

    Cheers, mates! Good on ya!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Remember ways back, Elon mentioned something that potentially, like as many as 50 flights and recoveries, if they got them to break twenty flights/recoveries.
    Not too shabby, thats breaking into jet airline reliability territory.
    Anyone know if or when the Merlin engines TBO is? I imagine they are not doing full de-mounts and tear-downs, considering how quickly they turn the boosters around. Be interesting to see their standard inspection process.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Telemetry can give SpaceX a clue as to when the engine is degrading. Physical inspection and NDT can tell you if things are cracking as well.

      Delete
  9. Seems the FAA has a serious perception issue, these are "test flights", after all considerations, they have never from my recollection of how they treat "experimental" class airplanes copters etc, because the methods they employ for experimental is they want to know exactly nothing, paint that word on your home built and it disappears from their eyes. Maybe SpaceX should paint that in big yellow letters down the boosters and ships.

    ReplyDelete