NASA 'encouraged' by tanking test for SLS moon rocket, but launch plan is still in flux:
NASA says it achieved all its objectives during today's launch-pad rehearsal for fueling up its giant Space Launch System rocket for an uncrewed round-the-moon mission known as Artemis 1 — but will have to review the data, check the weather and get final approvals before going ahead with plans for a liftoff next Tuesday.
The test at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida was meant to verify that hydrogen fuel leaks encountered during the past month's launch attempts were fixed. A hydrogen leak did crop up today during the process of filling the SLS rocket's tanks with super-cooled propellants. "Engineers were able to troubleshoot the issue and proceed with the planned activities," NASA said afterward.
In the wake of the earlier launch scrubs, engineers replaced the suspect seals in the fueling system. Mission managers also changed the fuel-loading procedure to take what they called a "kinder, gentler" approach — and they relaxed their rules for today's test. Concentrations of hydrogen in the air surrounding the rocket were allowed to exceed the 4% limit that was previously in place. NASA launch commentator Derrol Nail said that the leak rate surpassed 5% at one point, but tapered back down to less than 4%.
"If we were in terminal count, which is what this was testing, it would have been a violation and stopped the count," Nail explained during today's webcast. "But for the ground rules that were set for today, they were within those."
Nail said the launch team "is looking forward to getting back that data and taking a close look at it."
Launch director Charlie Blackwell-Thompson put a positive spin on the test's outcome. "All of the objectives that we set out to do, we were able to accomplish today," she said.
Blackwell-Thompson said mission managers will assess the data as part of the process of determining whether to go forward with the scheduled launch attempt on Sept. 27. "I am extremely encouraged by the test today," she said.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bradley13 on Friday September 23 2022, @06:19PM (1 child)
Not one, but two hydrogen leaks, but the test was a "success". Honestly, a Wickwick event would be a relief. End this.
In other rocket news, Arianespace is upset that the EU is encouraging rocket startups, because it means it Arianespace cuts into the Arianespace subsidies.
Subsidies were once necessary. Cost-pkus contracts were once necessary. That time is passing, if it has not already passed. Buy services. Watch the old, subsidized players die off.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by mrchew1982 on Saturday September 24 2022, @01:00PM
Classic "move the goalpost" way of passing the test... I really hope that this thing doesn't kill anyone!
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Friday September 23 2022, @06:27PM (1 child)
NASA is encouraged by tanking the test... or what?
(Score: 2) by NateMich on Friday September 23 2022, @07:15PM
I think that's just a quote, but we're so used to that meaning something else that it looks odd.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Beryllium Sphere (r) on Friday September 23 2022, @06:29PM (3 children)
So I would have expected them to hold it to some number less than 4% so there would be a safety margin.
Over 4% they are betting that there's no static discharge or other ignition source.
Of all the places to have a fire, a joint near a hydrogen line seems like not one of the best.
(Score: 3, Funny) by SomeRandomGeek on Friday September 23 2022, @07:03PM (2 children)
Yes, but an explosion during the launch when the tanks will be full will destroy the entire vehicle and more, while an explosion during this test would have merely covered up the evidence of their incompetence.
(Score: 4, Funny) by NateMich on Friday September 23 2022, @07:18PM (1 child)
Give them a break already. NASA has only been using hydrogen in rockets for like 60 years now.
You can't expect them to have this down yet.
(Score: 3, Touché) by turgid on Friday September 23 2022, @08:12PM
Yes but all the old folks who knew how to do it were expensive so got retired.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Snotnose on Friday September 23 2022, @08:30PM (3 children)
I have 3-4 snarky comments ready to go, yet when I get to it they have all been snarked.
Does anyone at this point this this spacecraft will meet it's obectives? I myself am 50/50 it will blow up within 30 seconds of launch, and that includes before they use the quick disconnects.
Problem is, I don't know if I fear this will happen, or if I hope it will happen. No people on board makes it a 50/50 for me.
Of course I'm against DEI. Donald, Eric, and Ivanka.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 24 2022, @12:48AM
The new and exciting bet is on whether Starship will beat SLS to orbit.
It looked like SLS was going to win, until it suffered an embarrassing leak. Now Starship is aiming for November, but SLS has that Go Fever.
(Score: 2) by Beryllium Sphere (r) on Saturday September 24 2022, @01:08AM
Its objectives? It already has met them. "The purpose of a system is what it does", and it has transferred billions to the contractors.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 24 2022, @02:47AM
I am sure Petrov and Boshirov have arrived to Florida already and are closely followed by FBI.
(Score: 2) by ElizabethGreene on Sunday September 25 2022, @05:44PM
Data point: The flammability limit for hydrogen in air is around 4%, and the explosion limit is around 18%. Below those it won't sustain a flame or detonation.
Opinion: Last December there was an article that moved the first launch date of SLS out to March, and I asked about the bookmaker's odds of it flying before January. I'm still not confident it will happen. IIRC the boosters have a best-if-used-by date in November, and we're well into the Atlantic coast hurricane season. Another serious glitch and some uncooperative weather could easily bump this out to next year.
The fangirl part of me wants SpaceX to get Starship to orbit before Artemis does just for the LOL factor. The taxpayer part of me just wants to see something staunch flow of money gushing down that hole. The crusty old fart part of me knows that, like the superconducting supercollider, I'll never forgive them if they cancel it now. Inflation will make those Billions an afterthought in a few decades, lets finish it and go get some science done.