jt2hunt said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

No one should be making launch date predictions until SpaceX has its customary tangle with the FAA first.

---

Debbie downer

---

It's not my first rodeo

TexAgs91 said:

---

---

I saw that a week or so ago... That's one NOISY spacecraft!!!

Received an overpressure notice for tomorrow (21st)!!! Booster 10 static fire test???? I really don’t know what to think but we’ll find out tomorrow! Go SpaceX!🔥🔥🔥

⁦@NASASpaceflight⁩ pic.twitter.com/lHag0DNOOM

— Mary (@BocaChicaGal) December 21, 2023

!

Here is an enhanced view of the Starlink Pez dispenser door testing.

🎥: @LabPadre
✂️: @DeffGeff pic.twitter.com/wUUymggdiM

— Zack Golden (@CSI_Starbase) December 21, 2023

Bregxit said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

---

I saw that a week or so ago... That's one NOISY spacecraft!!!

---

Compared to what? I don't know that we have ever had video and audio from inside a spacecraft from orbit to the ground.

---

I can't compare it to anything per se, but that doesn't mean it isn't noisy! It may just be the attitude control thrusters firing to steer the capsule to the LZ. If it's more that will be a lot to listen to all the way to the moon

lb3 said:

---

Ag_of_08 said:

---

The had one that had an issue after it had jettisoned it's Orbital module, but I can't remember the mission number. I swear Scott Manley talked about it at one point.

If I remember correctly they changed the order of operations after that, and now jettison the orbital module after the retro burn and separation, so if something goes wrong they could potentially make an emergency return to the ISS if retro fire fails( in you ditch the OM, it loses some of its rcs ability, and has no docking port)

---

I think we're talking different retros.

I thought we were discussing the one that is triggered by a whip or rod contacting the ground a meter or so before touchdown.

---

Sorry I was thinking orbital retros.

Slow motion view of six-engine static fire pic.twitter.com/0O3H0jb9oq

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) December 20, 2023

Man it still looks like they tear up whatever they're on when they fire up multiple Raptors.

Other than the bidet, it's like you can't even light those up without breaking something

And potentially damaging the ship.

They need another bidet

So is the rocket bolted down during the static fire or do the engines not get anywhere close to full thrust?

How does the rocket not move any during these static fire events?

OnlyForNow said:

---

So is the rocket bolted down during the static fire or do the engines not get anywhere close to full thrust?

How does the rocket not move any during these static fire events?

---

Hold downs are in place.

Most rockets have something holding them down until launch anyway. For static fire you just don't open them up.

I don't know about Starship, but for the Booster the static fire is at (IIRC) 50% thrust. The hold down clamps are not strong enough to hold 33 Raptors at full thrust. Shoot I don't think the booster is strong enough if the clamps could hold it.

Recall on IFT2 they released the clamps 30 minutes before launch.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

I don't know about Starship, but for the Booster the static fire is at (IIRC) 50% thrust. The hold down clamps are not strong enough to hold 33 Raptors at full thrust. Shoot I don't think the booster is strong enough if the clamps could hold it.

Recall on IFT2 they released the clamps 30 minutes before launch.

---

Starship with only 6 engines is probably fine to go full tilt.

I don't think they'd even bother trying to engineer a system to hold down 100% booster thrust. They're not even going to 100% during normal launch if I'm not mistaken.

Booster 10 static fire test stream with commentary.

Not frosty yet.

Seems like a hold at the moment.

EDIT: Over an hour now - extremely slow de-tank. The stream commentary is a bit perplexed as to what happened. Usually an abort would be a much faster de-tanking procedure. The tank farm has changed quite a bit so that could be part of it.

I'm hearing something about a burst disk in the tank farm

Officially done for the day. Booster depressurized. Roads open.

Decay said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

I don't know about Starship, but for the Booster the static fire is at (IIRC) 50% thrust. The hold down clamps are not strong enough to hold 33 Raptors at full thrust. Shoot I don't think the booster is strong enough if the clamps could hold it.

Recall on IFT2 they released the clamps 30 minutes before launch.

---

Starship with only 6 engines is probably fine to go full tilt.

I don't think they'd even bother trying to engineer a system to hold down 100% booster thrust. They're not even going to 100% during normal launch if I'm not mistaken.

---

Maybe this has been discussed, but it's something I literally just thought about...

Can they static fire the vacuum raptors at the test pad? I know they can use specialized facilities to lower the ambient pressures but I've only ever seen them discussed for single engine test stands. Firing at sea level with a vacuum optimized nozzle can lead to some violent shock waves from flow separation that can destroy an combustion chamber and therefore the whole engine.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Decay said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

I don't know about Starship, but for the Booster the static fire is at (IIRC) 50% thrust. The hold down clamps are not strong enough to hold 33 Raptors at full thrust. Shoot I don't think the booster is strong enough if the clamps could hold it.

Recall on IFT2 they released the clamps 30 minutes before launch.

---

Starship with only 6 engines is probably fine to go full tilt.

I don't think they'd even bother trying to engineer a system to hold down 100% booster thrust. They're not even going to 100% during normal launch if I'm not mistaken.

---

Maybe this has been discussed, but it's something I literally just thought about...

Can they static fire the vacuum raptors at the test pad? I know they can use specialized facilities to lower the ambient pressures but I've only ever seen them discussed for single engine test stands. Firing at sea level with a vacuum optimized nozzle can lead to some violent shock waves from flow separation that can destroy an combustion chamber and therefore the whole engine.

---

While that is supposed to be a risk, I think they are okay with the strength of the engine bells. I believe they fire all six.

Meanwhile, at Starbase...😅

Potential Booster 10 Static Fire test. https://t.co/crIhHogU9t

— Chris Bergin - NSF (@NASASpaceflight) December 22, 2023

I don't think anything is happening today. Road still open.

Next closure is Wednesday 8a til 8p.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Decay said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

I don't know about Starship, but for the Booster the static fire is at (IIRC) 50% thrust. The hold down clamps are not strong enough to hold 33 Raptors at full thrust. Shoot I don't think the booster is strong enough if the clamps could hold it.

Recall on IFT2 they released the clamps 30 minutes before launch.

---

Starship with only 6 engines is probably fine to go full tilt.

I don't think they'd even bother trying to engineer a system to hold down 100% booster thrust. They're not even going to 100% during normal launch if I'm not mistaken.

---

Maybe this has been discussed, but it's something I literally just thought about...

Can they static fire the vacuum raptors at the test pad? I know they can use specialized facilities to lower the ambient pressures but I've only ever seen them discussed for single engine test stands. Firing at sea level with a vacuum optimized nozzle can lead to some violent shock waves from flow separation that can destroy an combustion chamber and therefore the whole engine.

---

Vacuum engines are typically test fired without the full expansion nozzle.

bmks270 said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Decay said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

I don't know about Starship, but for the Booster the static fire is at (IIRC) 50% thrust. The hold down clamps are not strong enough to hold 33 Raptors at full thrust. Shoot I don't think the booster is strong enough if the clamps could hold it.

Recall on IFT2 they released the clamps 30 minutes before launch.

---

Starship with only 6 engines is probably fine to go full tilt.

I don't think they'd even bother trying to engineer a system to hold down 100% booster thrust. They're not even going to 100% during normal launch if I'm not mistaken.

---

Maybe this has been discussed, but it's something I literally just thought about...

Can they static fire the vacuum raptors at the test pad? I know they can use specialized facilities to lower the ambient pressures but I've only ever seen them discussed for single engine test stands. Firing at sea level with a vacuum optimized nozzle can lead to some violent shock waves from flow separation that can destroy an combustion chamber and therefore the whole engine.

---

Vacuum engines are typically test fired without the full expansion nozzle.

---

SpaceX fires their Raptor Vacs in McGregor using a stiffener structure when performing full duration test firings. Flow separation does not get past the throat so the chambers shouldn't be at risk. Plus I do not think the nozzles are removable. I can't remember if the engines are film cooled or propellant loop cooled. I want to say it's the latter and therefore not removable.

I don't think firing Raptor Vacs at sea level is a problem without reinforcement at the short durations they fire them for Ship static fires.

Kceovaisnt- said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Decay said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

I don't know about Starship, but for the Booster the static fire is at (IIRC) 50% thrust. The hold down clamps are not strong enough to hold 33 Raptors at full thrust. Shoot I don't think the booster is strong enough if the clamps could hold it.

Recall on IFT2 they released the clamps 30 minutes before launch.

---

Starship with only 6 engines is probably fine to go full tilt.

I don't think they'd even bother trying to engineer a system to hold down 100% booster thrust. They're not even going to 100% during normal launch if I'm not mistaken.

---

Maybe this has been discussed, but it's something I literally just thought about...

Can they static fire the vacuum raptors at the test pad? I know they can use specialized facilities to lower the ambient pressures but I've only ever seen them discussed for single engine test stands. Firing at sea level with a vacuum optimized nozzle can lead to some violent shock waves from flow separation that can destroy an combustion chamber and therefore the whole engine.

---

Vacuum engines are typically test fired without the full expansion nozzle.

---

SpaceX fires their Raptor Vacs in McGregor using a stiffener structure when performing full duration test firings. Flow separation does not get past the throat so the chambers shouldn't be at risk. Plus I do not think the nozzles are removable. I can't remember if the engines are film cooled or propellant loop cooled. I want to say it's the latter and therefore not removable.

I don't think firing Raptor Vacs at sea level is a problem without reinforcement at the short durations they fire them for Ship static fires.

---

Thanks for the insight.

I found a picture of a vacuum engine test, and it looks like it's designed so that there isn't much flow separation at sea level.

PJYoung said:

---

Meanwhile, at Starbase...😅

Potential Booster 10 Static Fire test. https://t.co/crIhHogU9t

— Chris Bergin - NSF (@NASASpaceflight) December 22, 2023

I don't think anything is happening today. Road still open.

Next closure is Wednesday 8a til 8p.

---

I'm staying at Margaritaville right now. Didn't see anything.

bmks270 said:

---

Kceovaisnt- said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Decay said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

I don't know about Starship, but for the Booster the static fire is at (IIRC) 50% thrust. The hold down clamps are not strong enough to hold 33 Raptors at full thrust. Shoot I don't think the booster is strong enough if the clamps could hold it.

Recall on IFT2 they released the clamps 30 minutes before launch.

---

Starship with only 6 engines is probably fine to go full tilt.

I don't think they'd even bother trying to engineer a system to hold down 100% booster thrust. They're not even going to 100% during normal launch if I'm not mistaken.

---

Maybe this has been discussed, but it's something I literally just thought about...

Can they static fire the vacuum raptors at the test pad? I know they can use specialized facilities to lower the ambient pressures but I've only ever seen them discussed for single engine test stands. Firing at sea level with a vacuum optimized nozzle can lead to some violent shock waves from flow separation that can destroy an combustion chamber and therefore the whole engine.

---

Vacuum engines are typically test fired without the full expansion nozzle.

---

SpaceX fires their Raptor Vacs in McGregor using a stiffener structure when performing full duration test firings. Flow separation does not get past the throat so the chambers shouldn't be at risk. Plus I do not think the nozzles are removable. I can't remember if the engines are film cooled or propellant loop cooled. I want to say it's the latter and therefore not removable.

I don't think firing Raptor Vacs at sea level is a problem without reinforcement at the short durations they fire them for Ship static fires.

---

Thanks for the insight.

I found a picture of a vacuum engine test, and it looks like it's designed so that there isn't much flow separation at sea level.

---

Good observation! The flow separation looks to be a few inches at most. Hard to tell if this is affected by throttle and what percent throttle they are running the engine in this image.

You can also see the bell nozzle reinforcement ring and bracket installed on the engine bell on that test stand. This is something you don't see installed on the ship mounted Raptor Vacs.

Bump, the remains;

Views of B1058 on the deck of Just Read the Instructions. Starlink 6-32 was the 19th launch and landing of this booster. The crew encountered rough conditions not far from Port Canaveral. Farewell old friend. @NASASpaceflight SCL views:https://t.co/lIR57w4WqB pic.twitter.com/6rew5JDySI

— Julia Bergeron (@julia_bergeron) December 26, 2023

Fair winds and following seas.

Following rough conditions in the Atlantic after the Starlink 6-32 mission, Falcon 9 first stage B1058.20 became unstable and tipped over on drone ship, Just Read The Instructions.

📸 - @NASASpaceflight

📺 - https://t.co/AFdPuCYKLR pic.twitter.com/clEGaxpeeR

— Max Evans (@_mgde_) December 26, 2023

So the answer is no, they won't be repairing this one, though maybe/plausibly an engine or two might get re-used?

A happier note:

#NASAWebb has had a busy year, and what better way to celebrate the telescope’s two years in space than to remember the science headlines it made in 2023! Credit: STScI. pic.twitter.com/Haf3A1zyjI

— Space Telescope Science Institute (@SpaceTelescope) December 25, 2023

Looks like the LOx tank section broke off and fell overboard when the rocket fell.

That's unfortunate. That's the first one to break free from the octograbber I believe?

The newer ones have self stabilizing legs so that probably won't be an issue in the future.

Quote:

---

During transport back to Port early this morning, the booster tipped over on the droneship due to high winds and waves. Newer Falcon boosters have upgraded landing legs with the capability to self-level and mitigate this type of issue

---

I remember when a successful landing of these boosters was news. Now, they have made it so launches and recoveries so routine the only time you hear anything is if something goes wrong which isn't very often.

I thought they vented everything when they landed. That thing was still spicy

Kansas Kid said:

---

I remember when a successful landing of these boosters was news. Now, they have made it so launches and recoveries so routine the only time you hear anything is if something goes wrong which isn't very often.

---

The genus of Elon is that he knew to accept failures, even if it pushed things further back than he liked. And with each failure things kept getting better. It's that kind of mentality that has made him, and his companies, so successful.

Long March 3B booster fell in Guangxi https://t.co/5L9yha3Liz pic.twitter.com/zb3Czc1Zgw

— China 'N Asia Spaceflight 🚀𝕏 🛰️ (@CNSpaceflight) December 26, 2023

Oh China.

Italian photographer Valerio Minato just won NASA’s Astronomy Picture of the Day pic.twitter.com/fWpziONEBj

— James Lucas (@JamesLucasIT) December 25, 2023

Tourin.

PJYoung said:

---

Long March 3B booster fell in Guangxi https://t.co/5L9yha3Liz pic.twitter.com/zb3Czc1Zgw

— China 'N Asia Spaceflight 🚀𝕏 🛰️ (@CNSpaceflight) December 26, 2023

Oh China.

---

WAIT... was that the whole stage that failed to make orbit or a spent piece?

The Chinese don't give a damn when spent booster parts crash into the countryside. If it lands on your house and/or kill someone they'll let you thank them for the privilege and go on about life.