20 ms·
Artemis I Launch Attempt Scrubbed
- irrational 4y agoI feel like they need to go the SpaceX route and build dozens of these things and just launch them with the expectation that most will fail, but they learn from each failure to improve the next ones.
- jve 4y agoNot even SpaceX is going to test launch when there are obvious issues.
- quartesixte 4y agoLeak was on launch tower side, no? 8-inch quick disconnect hoses have to be really gnarly to do anything with.
- jbay808 4y agoDo you think they would have learned something worthwhile by proceeding with the launch?
- everybodyknows 4y agoThe worst case would at least yield data from an incontrovertibly true-to-life, no faking, test of the Launch Abort System: https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/launch-abort-motor-for-orion-s-artemis-ii-mission-arrives-at-kennedy-space-center https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/launch-abort-motor-for-or...
- mholt 4y agoIt's like the programmer who just runs their code again without actually testing it in the hopes that something changed
- bastawhiz 4y agoIt's not, actually. They're not running anything. In fact, they're doing the literal opposite of what your comment suggests.
- adastra22 4y agoIt’s an accurate description of todays launch attempt. They decided to repeat assuming the sensor problem that scrubbed the last launch was a sensor issue only. It was not.
- bastawhiz 4y agoAdmitting you don't have enough information to make an informed decision for an investment to implement a fix but also not enough information to be sure the problem isn't transient doesn't seem like that at all.
- minxomat 4y agoWhat’s the record amount of scrubs? I guess we have to ask TLC…
- Rebelgecko 4y agoThe record for the shuttle was 6
- somenameforme 4y agoMake sure you're comparing apples to apples. Launches are usually scrubbed because of weather. Repeatedly bringing a rocket to the pad on launch day that's ultimately not flight-worthy is different than scrubbing because of higher than nominal cross winds. And this case is particularly spectacular because while it's ostensibly just a test, they are literally using the exact same engines that the Space Shuttle used. Not as in the exact model, but literally refurbished RS-25 engines that already completed successful flights on the Space Shuttle.
- Rebelgecko 4y agoSure, STS-61c had 4 scrubs for mechanical issues. STS-71 had a similar ratio. So 4 mechanical scrubs on a semi mature vehicle
- koheripbal 4y agoFailure condition is an exploded rocket, not the number of scrubs.
- newaccount2021 4y ago
- cantaloupe 4y agoMore discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32702211 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32702211
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- allenrb 4y agoConsequences of choosing the wrong first stage fuel (hydrogen) are many. Those tiny molecules want nothing more from life than to sneak through the smallest of openings. Well, possibly second to mating violently with oxygen.
- WalterBright 4y agoDoolittle: Bomb, what is your purpose? Bomb: To explode, of course.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y agoDark Star. Good movie.
- WalterBright 4y agoA forgotten classic.
- IshKebab 4y agoIMDB disagrees! 6.2.
- melling 4y ago6.2 isn’t good but this is a John Carpenter movie, written and directed. In fact, it was his student film. Looks like he was going for a 2001 A Space Odyssey feel.
- pengaru 4y ago> Looks like he was going for a 2001 A Space Odyssey feel. I thought he was communicating just how _boring_ and time consuming space exploration will be, being such vast emptiness.
- pram 4y agoIt's a gestalt imo, kinda like Lynch's Dune. Flawed film with lots of bad parts and bizarre decisions, but also unique and memorable enough to elevate it above 'just bad'
- perihelions 4y agoLikely no next attempt until October, per Eric Berger (Ars Technica): - "Hearing a rollback to the VAB of the SLS rocket is likely, but I don't have confirmation. If that happens, it is very likely that Artemis I does not launch before October 17, at the earliest." - "I'm told that Space Launch System program officials will recommend a rollback to the VAB to investigate the hydrogen leak. The Artemis I mission management team will consider this recommendation at their afternoon meeting, and publicly announce a decision at 4pm ET." https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1566088891395883009 https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1566088891395883009 https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1566104350635835393 https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1566104350635835393
- madaxe_again 4y agoI have my doubts that it will ever launch - the way things are proceeding, they’ll miss October, push to ‘23, and will then end up with parts and systems ageing out due to wear and duty cycles - the rollback to the VAB alone incurs significant wear. Meanwhile, starship will see its first orbital flight (likely not before a few RUDs) while SLS just grows mould. That said, the whole purpose of SLS was to provide jobs and to retain technical expertise in the US, which it has achieved - actually launching the thing is almost besides the point.
- hfgbvhevrt 4y agoWhen is that first starship orbital launch again?
- imtringued 4y agoMusk said he was going to Mars by 2018.
- Teever 4y agoSpaceX could absolutely launch a mars mission with their existing rocket platforms and launch infrastructure. It would be tedious launching little pieces of a larger ship and assembling them in orbit but it could absolutely be done. Instead of doing that they're choosing to build better, bigger rockets, and more infrastructure to make the eventual launches to mars more cost-effective and substantial.
- the_third_wave 4y agoI assume this means the SRBs need to be disassembled to replace the sealing between the segments seeing as how these were stacked beginning in January 2021 [1] and the sealing is guaranteed for 12 months. This has already been extended for 7-8 months but if the launch is to be postponed until October or later they're coming up to 2 years: The joints connecting each piece of Space Launch System’s five-segment rocket motors are certified for one year once booster stacking begins, a clock that began ticking Jan. 7 with the hoisting of the SLS’s left-hand aft center booster segment on top of the booster’s lowermost piece. But the 12-month certification limit, a holdover from the space shuttle program, could be extended with an engineering review, according to John Honeycutt, NASA’s Space Launch System program manager at the Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama. Honeycutt said in January engineers planned to make measurements and collect data as ground teams stacked each segment of the Artemis 1 boosters inside the Vehicle Assembly Building. The data could help NASA and Northrop Grumman extend the certification of the rocket motor joints beyond 12 months. “That gives us the best opportunity to do some sort of a life extension on the booster stacking in the event that we need that,” Honeycutt said. [1] https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/03/09/stacking-complete-for-sls-boosters/ https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/03/09/stacking-complete-for-...
- DougWebb 4y agoYeah, it's not like NASA has ever had a problem ignoring their own procedures when it comes to the seals on these kinds of rockets...
- jeffrallen 4y agoThose who do not learn from history are doomed to... blow up their rockets?
- gsibble 4y agoIt's pretty clear they don't care at this point. They were extended by 6 months and no one has brought it up since then. NASA is feeling political heat to just fly this thing at any cost at this point.
- JumpCrisscross 4y agoWe’ve been quoted $4bn per launch. If this pattern of delays turns out to be fundamental (a big, if plausible, if), what would the launch costs actually be?
- thetinguy 4y agoArtemis is a federal jobs program.
- tonetheman 4y agoMilitary budget for the year was 777B... Give what you said all of the military is a jobs program also.
- arrosenberg 4y agoThe military is a jobs program, thats not a secret.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- JumpCrisscross 4y agoSize of budget doesn’t determine jobs or not. Artemis exists because Congress didn’t like Constellation’s cancellation. Its Block II configuration underperforms Starship at significantly higher cost, both to develop and to operate, all without anywhere close to the technological progress of even Falcon Heavy. SLS exists first to provide jobs. The military-industrial complex has an obvious first and foremost purpose, and it’s pretty good at it.
- DanHulton 4y agoYou think you're being flip, but you're closer to right than you probably expect.
- RichardCNormos 4y agoThe mission of Artemis is to land a woman and a person of color on the moon. It is a federally funded affirmative action program.
- thepasswordis 4y agoAt this rate it seems really unlikely to me that the next mission will have humans on it.
- UberFly 4y agoThe complexity is astronomical, so I'm glad they're being overly careful. Once perfected I hope they keep up the cautiousness so we don't start seeing shuttle-type neglect in the program.
- endymi0n 4y agoDoes anyone get the point with Artemis? Because I really don‘t. To my untrained eye the current outlook on the program looks like that rocket is right now only supposed to make two roundtrips along the moon — and then in that third „Starship HLS“ mission Artemis’ only job is to take up the astronauts to orbit: while Starship (notably designed to be human rated) will be doing all the heavy lifting of the mission. In this context it all looks like a total sham, it would literally be cheaper and easier to send them up in another reusable Starship. What other purpose does Artemis have except building the most expensive trip to orbit existing so NASA can say „hey, we did something about this moon mission too!“?
- ceejayoz 4y ago> Does anyone get the point with Artemis? Making Senators happy.
- imglorp 4y agoRight, the Senate Launch System maximizes transfer of cash from taxpayers to defense contractors. There is absolutely no need to fly any hardware in the process.
- theteapot 4y ago> Does anyone get the point with Artemis? Because I really don‘t. They want to go to the moon.
- djohnston 4y agoBoeing has outsourced so much of their engineering they can't even build airplanes anymore. What's the point of this beyond funding life support for a defense industry dinosaur?
- Trouble_007 4y agoNASA to Stand Down on Artemis I Launch Attempts in Early September, Reviewing Options : https://blogs.nasa.gov/artemis/2022/09/03/nasa-to-stand-down-on-artemis-i-launch-attempts-in-early-september-reviewing-options/ https://blogs.nasa.gov/artemis/2022/09/03/nasa-to-stand-down...