28 Apr 2024, 17:11 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Spacex Starship OFT Posted: 14 Mar 2024, 12:56 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/23/08 Posts: 6972 Post Likes: +3634 Company: AssuredPartners Aerospace Phx. Location: KDVT, 46U
Aircraft: IAR823, LrJet, 240Z
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I'm guessing that they have the data that they need.
The booster had a problem restarting the engines for the landing burn. If the graphic was correct, among other things it was trying to light engines that weren't supposed to light, and of the three that were supposed to light they got one. I don't have a guess as to what went wrong there, but starting a rocket motor with several hundred kph of wind up the pipe is probably not that easy.
The ship loss on re-entry I think was the result of an unchecked rotation of the vehicle. You can see that in all of the video, which cuts out as the antennae rotate toward the planet and then is restored as they rotate back upward. I think the rotation was intentional as part of the orbital fuel transfer experiment, but it was supposed to stop before re-entry. Since it did not, instead of a heat shielded rocket, you had a sort of rotisserie effect that eventually claimed the vehicle.
Fix the engine re-light issue and whatever caused the unstable re-entry and we're good to go.
IFT4!!! Thought I heard them say the Booster landing burn was to initially be 13 engines and then scaling back to fewer. Got to rewatch tonight. Tj
_________________ Tom Johnson-Az/Wy AssuredPartners Aerospace Insurance Tj.Johnson@AssuredPartners.com C: 602-628-2701
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Spacex Starship OFT Posted: 14 Mar 2024, 13:42 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 04/26/13 Posts: 19984 Post Likes: +19747 Location: Columbus , IN (KBAK)
Aircraft: 1968 Baron D55
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Thought I heard them say the Booster landing burn was to initially be 13 engines and then scaling back to fewer. That would make more sense. In that case they started to light a scattered few and then lost all but one in a matter of a second or two. I don't know what vertical speed is at that point, but since they didn't use an Entry Burn to decelerate before the Landing Burn, it might have been as simple as they blew the candles out.
_________________ My last name rhymes with 'geese'.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Spacex Starship OFT Posted: 14 Mar 2024, 17:58 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/07/17 Posts: 7043 Post Likes: +5807 Company: Malco Power Design Location: KLVJ
Aircraft: 1976 Baron 58
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Nice job so far, 15 mins. into the mission.
From a post I made earlier, around 8:40 EDT (just after initial 8:30 scheduled launch):
The YouTube live feed from SpaceX via NASA TV went down to T-5 seconds or so around 8:30 EDT, with a cheering throng as liftoff was only seconds away, then switched before liftoff to a video of Elon hawking his new venture into cryptocurrency (really?!) and encouraging clicking on a QR code. I see on the NYT site that at least 30 mins. previous Space X had actually pushed the lunch back to 9:30 or so EDT. Terrible coverage. Elon sounds like the Pillow Guy. There were multiple fake streams on YouTube purporting to be from SpaceX and Elon. All were scams. The official stream is always on X (Twitter) not YouTube. I prefer YouTube and so watched Tim Dodd’s (EverydayAstronaut) stream.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Spacex Starship OFT Posted: 14 Mar 2024, 18:20 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 02/21/18 Posts: 627 Post Likes: +783
Aircraft: C182R
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The YouTube live feed from SpaceX via NASA TV went down to T-5 seconds or so around 8:30 EDT, with a cheering throng as liftoff was only seconds away, then switched before liftoff to a video of Elon hawking his new venture into cryptocurrency (really?!) and encouraging clicking on a QR code. Terrible coverage. Elon sounds like the Pillow Guy. SpaceX do not stream launches on YouTube - they stopped quite a while ago. Quite a few frankly very obvious scams have sprung up pretending to be them. You were watching one of those.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Spacex Starship OFT Posted: 14 Mar 2024, 22:40 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/03/08 Posts: 3293 Post Likes: +1231 Location: HPN/NY
Aircraft: T210M
|
|
They even had the same names for the presenters as on the SpaceX site. Hmmm. Quite the spoof.
_________________ http://www.scottdyercfi.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Spacex Starship OFT Posted: 14 Mar 2024, 23:00 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/30/11 Posts: 3939 Post Likes: +2427 Location: Greenwood, MO
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The YouTube live feed from SpaceX via NASA TV went down to T-5 seconds or so around 8:30 EDT, with a cheering throng as liftoff was only seconds away, then switched before liftoff to a video of Elon hawking his new venture into cryptocurrency (really?!) and encouraging clicking on a QR code. Terrible coverage. Elon sounds like the Pillow Guy. SpaceX do not stream launches on YouTube - they stopped quite a while ago. Quite a few frankly very obvious scams have sprung up pretending to be them. You were watching one of those. I initially latched on to that stream too. Channel name was SpaceX. The crypto stuff seemed weird, so I went to the feed on X. They do a nice job with it.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Spacex Starship OFT Posted: 15 Mar 2024, 11:49 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/06/08 Posts: 4702 Post Likes: +2705
Aircraft: B55 P2
|
|
They did a retro burn to near zero velocity at ~100km altitude then dropped, They were at about 1100 km/h according to the video, pretty close to sonic. I could easily imagine the ~sonic wind causing relight issues in the engines. These are different engines than are used in falcon and I assume this was the first attempt at relight with that high airflow Username Protected wrote: Thought I heard them say the Booster landing burn was to initially be 13 engines and then scaling back to fewer. That would make more sense. In that case they started to light a scattered few and then lost all but one in a matter of a second or two. I don't know what vertical speed is at that point, but since they didn't use an Entry Burn to decelerate before the Landing Burn, it might have been as simple as they blew the candles out.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Spacex Starship OFT Posted: 15 Mar 2024, 11:50 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/06/08 Posts: 4702 Post Likes: +2705
Aircraft: B55 P2
|
|
Friend of mine from NASA thought they were not able to maintain the correct attitude on reentry and so exposed some of the non shielded area.
This version apparently has very low thrust attitude jets - something they could change pretty easily. Also the hypersonic aerodynamics may not have been quite right and the center of pressure could have been off a bit - can fix by moving the fins.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Spacex Starship OFT Posted: 15 Mar 2024, 16:48 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 04/26/13 Posts: 19984 Post Likes: +19747 Location: Columbus , IN (KBAK)
Aircraft: 1968 Baron D55
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Friend of mine from NASA thought they were not able to maintain the correct attitude on reentry and so exposed some of the non shielded area. That is a very polite way of saying "tumbling". I agree. It's clear from the video that the ship is rotating slowly about its roll axis and later adds some motion in the pitch axis, all of which is unchecked for the duration of the video.
_________________ My last name rhymes with 'geese'.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Spacex Starship OFT Posted: 15 Mar 2024, 17:44 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/07/11 Posts: 724 Post Likes: +413 Location: KBED, KCRE
Aircraft: Phenom 100
|
|
welp, there's your problem, lol.
Chip-
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Spacex Starship OFT Posted: 15 Mar 2024, 18:55 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/06/08 Posts: 4702 Post Likes: +2705
Aircraft: B55 P2
|
|
Yes, unable to maintain correct attitude, followed by a thermal event, followed by rapid unintended disassembly. Booster engines may have had a hard start due to the aerodynamics. I guess NASA doesn't like to say "tumbled out of control, caught fire and exploded". All seems fixable. It will be an interesting test when they get a controlled reentry to see how the tiles survive. Username Protected wrote: Friend of mine from NASA thought they were not able to maintain the correct attitude on reentry and so exposed some of the non shielded area. That is a very polite way of saying "tumbling". I agree. It's clear from the video that the ship is rotating slowly about its roll axis and later adds some motion in the pitch axis, all of which is unchecked for the duration of the video.
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024
|
|
|
|