The webcast has not yet started but will be here when it does.
2218 GMT: T minus 0 seems to have been pushed back to 2330 GMT. I will report as I get news.
2225 GMT: T minus 0 is now set for 0005 GMT; webcast is to begin at approximately 2305 GMT.
2300 GMT: There will be two burns of the second stage, separated by about an hour. The second burn is strictly a test. In operation it would be a correction or plane change or circularization burn. Most importantly, this will prove they have an engine that is restartable in microgravity. This is not as easy to do as you might think…
2307 GMT: Web cast is now live.
2317 GMT: Fuel and oxidizer loads of the first and second stage are in progress. The video signal is having some problems however, as I am sure any watchers will have noticed!
2328 GMT: First stage LOX fill completed.
2331 GMT: First stage fuel load completed.
2336 GMT: This just in: “Media call note that the webcam problems are unknown and this is what you all may be stuck with.”
2339 GMT: Both stages fully loaded with Kerosene (RP1), LOX and Helium tank pressurization .
2348 GMT: T-218 now, Helium top off. The are having some telemetry probs with the stage 1 recovery ship… which has just now been solved.
2350 GMT: All operator stations report ready status for terminal countdown. Cleared for launch!
2356 GMT: Entering terminal count! T-10.
0006 GMT: Terminal count abort after engine ignition. Impressive that they could stop it here, sad that they had to. Will report as I here more.
0016 GMT: This is amazing. They are recyling to T-10!!! I have *never* in my life seen such a thing! Ignition has always been the point of no return or at least a full scrub. I stand in awe.
0021 GMT: Shutdown was due to chamber pressure being 1% low. There was apparently a fair amount of swearing going on… they may still try for a launch. Range is okay with a recycle.
0044 GMT: They are well into the recycle for a second try. Count is still in a hold at T-16 while they recycle.
0056 GMT: The clock is running again. T-14:30!
0057 GMT: Cleared for launch again.
0101 GMT: Into terminal count again at T-10.
0112 GMT: Launch successful! Passing through Max Q. Now the big one coming up is Stage sep…
0114 GMT: THEY DID IT!!!! SECOND STAGE SEP AND FIRE: FARING SEP CONFIRMED!!!!! 117km altitude!!!!
0126 GMT: There is some discussion as to whether the first stage sep bumped the second stage engine bell. There were some signs of oscillation of the engine before it got out of range and the webcast terminated. So they made it into space but we will have to wait to find out if this test flight made orbit.
I wonder why their video feed does that weird trapezoidal wobbling thing?
Never seen anything like it: and I have worked on site professional webcasts for almost as long as audio and video streaming have existed!
However, since it appears on all cameras so far, it is upstream of the actual cameras.
It looks like a raster synchronization problem. Data’s being shipped as ye olde rasters not as pixels, and it’s being time shifted resulting in a visual offset. If it’s being shipped via satellite or something, perhaps it’s the error correction on a lossy line that’s time skewing it? That’s my guessing.
The LD (Launch Director) sounds a bit tired… she seems to be losing track of things at times, not at all as crisp as yesterday. I suspect some of them got little sleep last night…
Darn, they aborted after lighting up!
“Motherfucker” indeed.
Someone doesn’t know his microphone is on…
An amazingly stoppable vehicle.
If I understand what they’re saying correctly, they’re trying again at around 2am…?
I think some potential buyers are going to be rather impressed.
However, the lady doing the countdown needs a cup of coffee. Someone go get her one!
Yes. They are going through a recycle on the countdown checklists. I have never seen this before. As I said in my last update to the article, this is unprecedented. A recycle *AFTER* an engine ignition. Wow. I am in awe.
Sounds like they just dumped all the fuel and shut down, and the stream’s gone. Scrubbed for today, then?
I thought I heard “fuel offload”, is that part of a recycle?
They targeting a new lift off time of 01:10 GMT
That is incredible.
Whee! it flew.
Jawdropping. That imagery from the vehicle deserves to become iconic. I’ve just lost the webcast stream again, though – does anyone know if there’s anywhere else streaming it?
I can’t get a stream either, I think their streaming server fell over.
Space.com are reporting what might be bad news(Link).
I did wonder if that second stage nozzle swiveling around and around was intentional.
I’d just come to the conclusion that what I thought was the nozzle moving must be the camera panning to show the curvature of the earth better, when the webcast went down.
Now I feel somehow responsible 😉
Surely someone is watching on radar?
I am waiting for further news. The word is that the SpaceX people popped the champagne bottle. Even if they had a late problem in the second stage, this was just a second test flight of a new vehicle and they were prepared to lose it.
I was getting rather worried about the bell swivelling as it definitely looked like a positive feedback loop was getting started and that is bad news in a control system as all engineers know. One pro has suggested it might be due to fuel slosh as the second stage tank emptied.
We can only wait for news, but one way or another, this was excellent news. A small private company, funded by Elon Musk, has launched a rocket to at least near orbital velocity and definitely to orbital altitude and attitude.
If SpaceX didn’t make it with this one, they were with in kissing distance.
I remarked to people here that it was oscillating in a worrying way abotu a minute before the feed was lost. And the oscillations were getting *much* bigger by then.
I don’t think the thrust vector ever got far enough off the velocity vector to affect the ability to get to orbit, but I would not be at all surprised if the gimballs hit their limits. Quite unnecessarily, as it obviously had plenty of control — it was overcontrolling. Some feedback equation wasn’t right as it got lighter, and the moment of inertia decreased? The fuel started sloshing? (if it wasn’t at the start it probably was at the end!) And the telemetry antenna may well have gotten pointed away from the trackers, if they have a directional one at that end.
Whatever it is, it should be easy enough to fix for next time. It was looking sooo good up to that point.
So what happens now? Is it confetti, or is it going to fall back down, or is it likely to stay up?
Here are some comments from Elon in a press interview a few minutes ago:
—-
Elon: I only just came from the command trailer, so it is a bit premature to say anything. We didn’t achieve the desired orbit, but at this moment I do not know the state of the second stage.”
The only thing I can say for sure right now is that it is not in the intended orbit. THe likelihood is that it re-entered after about half an orbit or so.
“The roll control caused the second stage engine to shut off prematurely.”
“I would say we have retired about 90% of the risk associated with the rocket. This was a test launch, not a satellite launch.”
My guess is it is down.
Even if down, the statement from Elon says that the roll control oscillation did not go to vehicle destruct. The automated systems prevented that. So they had a too short burn and failed to reach the desired orbit. That might mean a 45 minute trip half way around the world or it could mean several orbits and then an early re-entry. We’ll not know until the data comes in.
Not bad for a second flight. And as Bruce notes, the oscillation problem is most likely easily fixed in the control equations.
I just hope it didn’t/doesn’t clonk someone on the head coming down. I wonder what’s half-an-orbit away from where they launched?
I believe the second stage went out of control, due to the positive feedback evident in the oscillation.
I’ve posted a clip of the stage seperation, as I believe the problem may have stemmed from here:
Read my scoop of the events.
Most likely it would burn up pretty completely.
In any case, it is very late so I am going to sign off. If I hear anything of interest I will post it tomorrow.
A viable private-enterprise space economy can’t be far away now!
This might be the place to mention a new business that I thought of a while back- The Space Gas Station!
A type of space-craft regularly trotted out as a future cargo-vessel is the Light-Sail. This craft uses a yet-to-be-invented super-light-weight plastic mirror, kilometers in area, as a sail, with light from the sun providing the equivalent of ‘wind’. This has a drawback, that the light is one-way. You need lots of reaction mass to slow down, and for manoeuvring around planets in safety.
However, you could harvest reaction mass from space!
Plasma is energetic protons and electrons. Hydrogen gas is composed of one proton and one electron. A magnetic field could trap both kinds. Just slow them down, carefully introduce them to each other, and cool the new-made hydrogen gas into a chamber- viola- Space Gas!
Instead of getting rich on far-away planets, you get rich by selling fuel to other pioneers, staying safely in orbit in your station, whilst it slowly but surely harvests space for you. I call this reverse-ion idea, the Squirrel Engine. (And Space-ships could refill their tanks inbetween ports, if the ships were big enough to have such systems.)
And a big space station might be an ideal place to turn into a Libertarian outpost, financed by Space Gas.
After all, it’s no use dreaming small!
Not a bad second attempt (historically speaking first launches fail ~50% of the time and second
launches fail ~25% of the time so Space-X is about average in this regard), but it seems the company has lots of work to do before even the small current launcher can be considered “tried and trusted” for launching commercial satellites.
—
I doubt that Space X will meet its very ambitious schedule goals for the Dragon/Falcon 9. They’re counting on launching a much bigger rocket in a year from now, and a sophisticated manned spacecraft and that bigger rocket in a year and a half!
http://www.spacex.com/dragon.php
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/03/14/212603/spacex-unveils-new-dragon-capsule-details.html
nick.g.: The way light sails work makes it easy to change direction so long as you are in solar orbit. If you tilt your sail in the direction of your orbital velocity, the vector thrust of the photons increases your velocity and you move to a higher orbit. Tilt it the other way and the thrust subtracts from your orbital velocity and you move inwards.
The magnetic field is probably not the way to go. However if you do manage to collect positive ions your craft will steadily increase its charge. At some point you will attract those electrons… hopefully not in one gigantic thunderbolt from the black!
I might add that spacecraft do build up these charges and some use an electron gun to neutralize it. This could be particularly bad if two craft with very different charges try to dock :-^
Which is why I think that this squirrel system should be used by a space station that makes fuel for space-ships. A space-station could have two long arms, one positive, one negative, and thus stay electrically neutral. The base could even be on an asteroid or moon, creating the gas using solar energy systems for use by ships that might be using nuclear power, for which they need reaction gas.
And yes, i know of the principle that light-sails could do the equivalent of tacking, but what if you inadvertently sped up too much, and were going to miss the right planet completely? This has always seemed the main drawback to a light-sail.
Having some reaction mass, kept just in case you needed to change direction quickly, would be the prudent thing to do. It would also be useful for tricky orbital moves when near a planet.
And, of course, if a ship did have this Squirrel system, it need not be bound to a fixed orbit, but could change it’s destination if needed, as it refuelled itself on the voyage. I think NASA and ESA and private business would be interested in ships that can refuel themselves, and space stations that can turn plasma into fuel. I do think it would fill a niche.
Also, I know something about vectors, and if a light-sail were to try to change direction by light-pressure, every use of the sails MUST add to the outward thrust, even if only in a small way. You couldn’t use light-sails to reverse an outward thrust! If a light-sail went faster than the clutch of solar gravity, then it would keep sailing until it reached another star-system and could trun around! Or another mass, like a planet or a brown dwarf, was found to enable it to move around it using the gravity from that mass.
Sailing purely by light would be a high-risk venture needing precise computations and an iron nerve, and would probably be the sport of the very rich! Perhaps Space-gas sellers could be amongst those rich!
Nope. You can go to Venus and Mercury with a solar sail. No problem at all. I haven’t time to go into the physics, mainly because it is rather late, but I suspect you are confusing your frames of reference. You can go to Mars… and you can come back to Earth. It is not quite tacking. It is adding or subtracting to your orbital velocity in a sun-centric coordinate system.
Remember, in orbit you go faster to go slower 😉
I can see how a sail could go from Earth orbit to an inner planet, though you’d need very good computations. I can even see that such motions leave you some room for error.
But I still think that going from Earth to Mars would be trickier, because if you go outward too fast, you CAN’T tack back, unless you manage to reach another convenient planet out there! Then you could engage in tricky orbital manoeuvres- but only if you’ve got a gravity-point you can coast towards, and spin around.
AND I think that light-sails, whilst elegant, will not be as popular as rockets, IF we have a convenient fuel source. If my Squirrel system works, and we can make enough hydrogen to be useful, then people would choose it. Light-sails, to be useful, must be big, but a rocket that buys gas can be quite small. Economically, this system would be better.
Nothing tricky or complicated about it. You are ignoring the Sun’s gravity. Think of that pail of water spinning over your head. If you remove energy from the forward direction, you have to pull in the rope. Same thing with a solar sail. You change the tilt from prograde to retrograde and there is a vector force that is removing energy from your orbit. You fall inwards.
Exactly like what happens if you fire a rocket engine in a retrograde direction, no matter what the angle. The angle does affect the shape of the orbit however.
It’s really simple orbital mechanics.
Dale, a rocket is self-contained, so you can point the thrust anywhere, just like a motor-boat. Sails rely on an outside source. A mirror ‘bounces’ light from itself, let’s say. How do you ‘bounce’ the light directly away from the sun? I’m not ignoring gravity- I did state that you’d have a problem IF you were going faster than the Sun’s gravity could slow you. Then you’d want some spare mass to eject overboard!
In any case, I still feel that Solar sails will be a small niche market. IF my Squirrel system is viable, and we can squirrel hydrogen away and sell it as a fuel to others, we should be able to earn a fortune.
And I think that the market will use both types- rockets And sails. But the sail-craft will be inherently large, and probably slower than the rockets. Small, nifty rockets for quick interplanetary travel, and slow, luxurious sails for the rich, pampered tourist. Much like aircraft and liners today.
You are not getting it.
Okay. Some basics. When a photon strikes a mirror, there is a momentum exchange. The photon always travels at c, so the rebound is perfectly elastic and the sail gains twice the ‘impact’ momentum of the photon.
The photon imparts the energy normal to the surface it strikes.
We decompose the vector into a solar radial component, which is always outwards, and a component at right angles to it that is the instantaneous tangent to the orbital direction of the mirror. There is also always a force inwards due to solar gravity.
If the tangent component is negative wrt to the orbital direction, it subtracts from it. When it does so the sun’s gravity pulls it inwards.
You must realize that the size of the radial vector outwards is very small; if you were not in orbit you would simply fall into the sun a little more slowly.
Solar sails spiral outwards or spiral inwards depending on the direction of the tilt.
There are lots of references on the physics of solar sails around the net. I am sure you can find some that will give you some idea of what is going on that is much better pedagogically than I am capable of doing.
O.K., some basics for you. When any craft reaches solar escape velocity, that means that if it then ‘coasts’ along, it will still leave the solar system, assuming it doesn’t crash into another object in space. If a light sail were to obtain this escape velocity by mistake, it could not then use light alone to decrease its’ speed, because the tilt of the mirror-sail would still add a little bit to the outward momentum, even if it also went sideways. Perhaps I should have called it Escape Velocity before, but it’s been a while since I last used the term.
In any case, there’s no need to argue with each other. Let’s wait until we have actual space-ships in flight, and see if Lloyds of Lunatown will insure sails that don’t carry some reaction-mass. Last one to reach Pluto has to pay for the drinks!
Mostly solar sail do not even come close to solar escape velocity unless you do a Forward style laser in close solar orbit and a zone lens out around Jupiter or Saturn.
Sails operating in the solar system will operate very much like spaceships with ion engines. Very low thrust over a very long time yields pretty decent velocity… except that the energy source falls off as the square of the distance from the sun, so the your acceleration does the same.
For the most part, solar sails are not very good for outer solar system work.
Now there is a microwave sail idea around that could indeed be accelerated to solar escape velocity at very high-G using a powerful but not ridiculously so microwave beam. I think that is also a Bob Forward design.
Best design for a solar sail is the Drexler Sail, but we probably need nanotechnology to build one. It could do the trip to Mars in weeks if not sooner, and return in a similar time. A Drexler sail *might* be able to get up enough velocity to have a hyperbolic remnant.
The star sailing sails are a different beast…. the size of North America in order to have enough collecting area.
I just did a google search and found a good site for you to learn more: http://www.solarsails.info
If i promise to only order ONE pan-galactic gargle-blaster, does that mean we have a bet? (You would have to actually reach Pluto solely by light-sail- it wouldn’t count if you only reach the orbit of Pluto, screaming for help from the Space Patrol) I would use only rockets powered by my own Space-Gas. Anyone else want to join in?