SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the will-it-go-well-or-will-it-go-BOOM? dept.
NASA’s Massive Artemis Moon Rocket Set for Second Hot Fire Test – Watch Live Coverage Today:
NASA is targeting a two-hour test window that opens at 3 p.m. EDT Thursday, March 18, for the second hot fire test of the core stage for the agency’s Space Launch System (SLS) rocket at NASA’s Stennis Space Center near Bay St. Louis, Mississippi.
The agency plans to begin live coverage on NASA Television, the agency’s website, and the NASA app approximately 30 minutes before the hot fire. The team will refine the timeline as it proceeds through operations. NASA will provide updates on the operations and the target hot fire time at @NASA and the Artemis blog.
[...] A post-test briefing will follow on NASA Television approximately two hours after the test.
Previously:
Green Run Update: NASA Proceeds with Plans for Second Hot Fire Test
After a Decade, NASA’s Big Rocket Fails its First Real Test
NASA TV to Air Hot Fire Test of Rocket Core Stage for Artemis Missions
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Socrastotle on Thursday March 18 2021, @03:32PM (11 children)
Can somebody enlighten me here. Windows for launches make perfect sense. High altitude cross winds are unpredictable and launching into these conditions can be dangerous. And so you have a window of time where you still have enough fuel to hit your destination, and you simply hope for acceptable wind conditions within that window. But a static fire is simply firing the engines. So I don't understand the notion of a window for this.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by takyon on Thursday March 18 2021, @03:51PM (6 children)
SpaceX has test windows for Starship static fires. They have to close roads and evacuate the area.
If we accept that NASA must at least target a specific time for the static fire, having a window gives them some more flexibility to check for problems and restart the countdown if needed (you can find instances of a SpaceX rocket's computer(s) aborting during a launch/test window, with another attempt later in the window).
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday March 18 2021, @04:10PM (1 child)
Didn't that very thing happen with the recent SN 10 test fright?
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Thursday March 18 2021, @04:39PM
Yes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_development_history#Starship_SN10 [wikipedia.org]
Also, SN9 had three static fire tests within the same window on January 13, which may have been an impromptu decision.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 18 2021, @11:12PM (3 children)
This is the delayed second test for their failed test back in February. Arranging for a second test in the same month seems to be a stretch for Boeing, let alone in the same test window. And people wonder why SLS is half a decade late.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday March 18 2021, @11:21PM (1 child)
I was hoping for an explosion this time.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 18 2021, @11:56PM
An explosion now would leave a (theoretically) functional Orion capsule and ESM, worth about $1 billion each and potentially launchable using ULA's Vulcan. No, I'm expecting the big fireworks to happen during launch when it will be the most expensive, cause the most delays, and won't leave an opportunity for a competing rocket to save the day.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 18 2021, @11:52PM
The first test was Jan 16. The retest was supposed to be in Feb but got delayed until today due to more problems with the rocket. Sorry for the noise.
(Score: 3, Informative) by KilroySmith on Thursday March 18 2021, @04:26PM
Rockets aren't yet as reliable as passenger aircraft; when loading a zillion tons of cryogenic and flammable fluids into the rocket containing thousands of sensors (temperature, pressure, strain, flow, position, etc) through dozens of valves, it's common for something to indicate a fault. Happens to every rocket system out there. The standard procedure is to halt the countdown, double-check the reported fault condition against redundant sensors, make a decision whether the fault is real or false, and if it's real whether it should stop the launch or not. Making those checks and decisions takes time, which delays the launch until later in the window.
Ever been on a flight where the captain says "We'll have to wait here for a few minutes until Maintenance has a chance to check out ?" I have, several times.
(Score: 3, Funny) by DannyB on Thursday March 18 2021, @06:06PM (1 child)
Just like javascript for flight control software makes perfect sense.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Friday March 19 2021, @12:46AM
Someday, someone will actually get Microsoft into court over that stupidly-granted trademark.
Seems like the usual pattern though is that Microsoft files suit over a trademark violation, and then (presumably, behind closed doors) offers to either drag out the court case until their victim is bankrupt and can't pursue it to final victory, or pay them to change their name. Not surprisingly everyone has chosen the second option.
Someday though. Someday...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 18 2021, @11:08PM
Test fires need windows to get the right people together at the same specific time. You can't fly in a dozens of busy engineers, technicians, & assembler observers from the 10 different places the parts were assembled and tell them the test will happen sometime in the next 5 days.
(Score: 3, Funny) by DannyB on Thursday March 18 2021, @08:47PM (4 children)
So they fired for over eight minutes. Nothing blew up.
During the build up to the test, I liked how they confidently talk about SLS and the Orion capsule will be the way humans will return to the moon. Uh, I wouldn't place bets on that just yet.
They got the full duration test data they were after today.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 19 2021, @12:18AM (3 children)
If Senator Shelby and his cronies on the Appropriations Committee have anything to say about it, and they very much do, then SLS will be the only way that Americans return to the moon, if at all. This is the man who threatened to kill NASA's manned space program completely if ULA even mentioned in-space refuelling, let alone tried to develop the technology, because it would allow them to compete with SLS.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Friday March 19 2021, @12:49AM
> SLS will be the only way that NASA returns to the moon
Fixed that for you. Other Americans will be free to hire Starship for a tiny fraction of the cost. And it won't be NASA establishing a commercially viable fuel (oxygen) refinery on the moon.
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Friday March 19 2021, @10:52AM (1 child)
Shelby is retiring after 2022, at least.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 19 2021, @07:55PM
True, but his best crony Bill 'Ballast' Nelson is being appointed as head of NASA. I'm halfway expecting him to cut the commercial crew program (that is saving NASA hundreds of millions per launch) so he can plow more money into SLS. He already tried it once as a Senator and managed to expropriate half the funding.