6 ms·
SpaceX Rocket launch aborted in final second due to technical problems
- checker659 14y agoSo what happens next?
- philipDS 14y agoNext launch is scheduled for the 22th of May. https://twitter.com/#!/DShankar/status/203772440093003776 https://twitter.com/#!/DShankar/status/203772440093003776
- wolf550e 14y agohttp://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/003/status.html http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/003/status.html 1040 GMT (6:40 a.m. EDT) Gwynne Shotwell, president of SpaceX, says technicians will inspect Engine No. 5 on the Falcon 9's first stage beginning at around 12 p.m. EDT (1600 GMT). Further data analysis of readings from the engine during the ignition prompted SpaceX to order hands-on inspections before clearing the rocket for liftoff. The next launch opportunity is still Tuesday at 3:44 a.m. EDT (0744 GMT), but that is pending the outcome of today's inspection. Shotwell said the abort was triggered one-half second before liftoff after all nine engines were ignited. Alan Lindenmoyer, NASA's commercial crew and cargo manager, said there should be another launch opportunity May 23 at 3:22 a.m. EDT (0722 GMT). 0940 GMT (5:40 a.m. EDT) The target launch time for Tuesday is 3:44:34 a.m. EDT (0744:34 GMT). 0926 GMT (5:26 a.m. EDT) The rocket is being drained of propellant as the launch team backs out of this morning's countdown following an abort moments before liftoff at 4:55 a.m. EDT (0855 GMT). 0915 GMT (5:15 a.m. EDT) NASA plans a post-scrub news conference at 6:30 a.m. EDT (1030 GMT). We'll carry it live. 0905 GMT (5:05 a.m. EDT) The strongback has been returned to a position next to the Falcon 9. 0901 GMT (5:01 a.m. EDT) SpaceX reports the problem triggering the abort was a high chamber pressure reading on Engine No. 5 of the first stage. Aborts are common in Falcon 9 countdowns when computers recognize a limit out of a predefined range. Sometimes the fix is as simple as adjusting the acceptable range in the computer, but with a one-second launch window this morning, there will no opportunity to resolve the issue today. 0858 GMT (4:58 a.m. EDT) The launch team is safing the rocket and Dragon spacecraft after this morning's abort. The next launch opportunity is Tuesday morning at 3:44 a.m. EDT (0744 GMT), assuming whatever issue caused the abort is resolved in time. 0856 GMT (4:56 a.m. EDT) It's not clear what caused the abort just before liftoff, but this will mean Falcon 9 will not launch today. The rocket had a near-instantaneous launch window in which it could fly today. 0855 GMT (4:55 a.m. EDT) ABORT. The ignition sequence started, but there was a countdown cutoff before launch.
- andypants 14y agoI think it's pretty amazing that this kind of thing can be co-ordinated down to a 1 second launch window.
- uxp 14y agoIt's less that is _can_ and more that it _has to_ in order to be optimal. The launch window pretty much guarantees that if the rocket launches, and stays on a course that is designed to get it outside of earth's atmosphere using as little fuel as possible, it will meet up with the orbiting space station "by chance". Launching outside of this window means that it would have to spend fuel to realign itself and go find the space station on it's own.
- mkramlich 14y agoProbably one of their many hacks at getting the launch cost down as much as possible.
- learc83 14y agoI've been anticipating this launch for a while now. I stayed up till 4:55 to watch it; I even made popcorn. Listening to the countdown 10...3 2 1 ignition...sputtering flame...and...nothing... You could hear the disappointment in his voice for a split second, but only a second. Then right back to professional composure. Calling out commands, putting the rocket back into safe mode. Impressive even for a failure. Guess I'll be up late again on the 22nd.
- reneherse 14y agoSame here with the popcorn. And cranking the speakers up in anticipation of a good roar. It's a little dissapointing, but the most important thing is that the launch be successful, no matter the layers of safeguards and tests that need to happen. It's fascinating to see just how precise a level of control and automation that exists over all aspects of the system. Well, to truly butcher a saying of our former rulers across the pond, "The launch is dead, long live the launch!" Deepest, deepest apologies for that one.
- tjmc 14y agoIn honour of those across the pond - here's their last attempt at a rocket launch ;-) Worth watching the whole thing, but go to about 7:15 for the business end... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b4WzWFKQ20 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b4WzWFKQ20
- arethuza 14y ago"The United Kingdom remains the only country to have successfully developed and then abandoned a satellite launch capability." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Streak_%28missile%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Streak_%28missile%29 :-(
- _djo_ 14y agoThat's not entirely true. South Africa developed the RSA-series of ICBMs and space rockets in the late 1980s along with a concurrent satellite program. The RSA-3 was successfully tested in a number of launches from the Overberg Test Range in the Southern Cape of South Africa. With the end of the Cold War, the abandonment of Apartheid and the unbanning of the ANC in 1990 both the defence budget and the rocket program budget were slashed and the RSA program and Greensat satellite were put on hold as a result. An attempt was made to drum up international orders for RSA-3 launches and the development of an even larger variant, the RSA-4, but nothing ever came of it and the entire program was shut down forever around 1994. The sole remaining RSA-3 rocket is on display at the South African Air Force Museum at Zwartkop Air Force Base. Nowadays South Africa is slowly rebuilding its satellite capability and built two micro-satellites on a shoestring budget, both of which had reasonable service lives in orbit, but it has some way to go to rebuild the capability it lost.
- perlgeek 14y agoI'm fascinated. I didn't even know that rocket engines could simply be shut down like this. I guess that's because they don't use solid fuel engines?
- reneherse 14y agoAlso, the rocket is held in place during the first moments after ignition, giving a window of time for the launch to be aborted without loss of the vehicle.
- gouranga 14y agoOr a spectacular ground based explosion which appears to be prevalent in the leading edge of rocket development :(
- raverbashing 14y agoSeeing a gentle shutdown of a rocket is an amazing feet But the "explosions" are usually from the rocket self destruction mechanism Pretty and kinda sad yes, the alternative is worse. I believe there are some videos of russian rockets not self-destructing on Youtube
- gouranga 14y agoIt is unforutnately a rarity. The N1 looked like the ultimate awesome machine but it failed miserably :(
- rst 14y agoThe semi-formal term of art is RUD --- Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly.
- gouranga 14y agoNever heard that one before. Made me LOL :)
- 14y ago
- rms 14y agoNow everyone has time to use www.hipmunk.com to book flights to Florida for possibly weeks long stays at your favorite Eastern Orlando resort.
- cynest 14y agoBecause missing launch windows hasn't de riegeur since spaceflight's beginnings?
- jsherry 14y agoRead from an article on CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/19/tech/us-spacex/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/19/tech/us-spacex/index.html): "This is not a failure," Shotwell (SpaceEx President) told reporters. "We aborted with purpose. It would have been a failure if we lifted off with an engine trending in this direction." Perhaps that's PR spin, but I think that it comes from a very responsible position. Well said.
- api 14y agoIt's true. This is a brand new vehicle, and you want to start with tight limits and gradually expand them as you know they are safe. Otherwise stuff fails and you don't know why. This is a test flight.
- cek 14y agoI'm kind of blown away that the engines don't have to be torn-down and rebuilt or something after being ignited and shut down like this. I assumed that since the booster stages are not re-usable, the design would be more optimized for "one use". And the controlled explosion of a rocket igniting seems to count as "one use". Clearly I'm wrong. I guess they are so robust (for saftey & redundancy reasons) that a few seconds of burn don't do any irreversible damage.
- joshmlewis 14y agoI can't imagine being in the rocket and what's going through your head as your about to take off, the rush of it all, and then at the last second it's like nope. That feeling must have been incredibly interesting.