SN9's failure to land

Jan 19, 2020
4
4
515
It is beyond me why SpaceX waits until the last 5 seconds to get the SN9 (and the SN8 for that matter) VERTICAL. This launch seems to prove that they learned very little from SN8's explosive landing? Same old, same old? The answer is fairly clear: get SN10 vertical with plenty of time so that the Raptor engines make sufficient correction and touchdown softly? Or the weight of SN8 and SN9 is greater than the Raptor engines used to land? Either way, I would like to see them stick the landing!
 
Aug 2, 2020
1
0
10
It is beyond me why SpaceX waits until the last 5 seconds to get the SN9 (and the SN8 for that matter) VERTICAL. This launch seems to prove that they learned very little from SN8's explosive landing? Same old, same old? The answer is fairly clear: get SN10 vertical with plenty of time so that the Raptor engines make sufficient correction and touchdown softly? Or the weight of SN8 and SN9 is greater than the Raptor engines used to land? Either way, I would like to see them stick the landing!
I watched the entire launch right through the crash landing and believe that they will soon enough succeed. Each launch provides information on what is happening. Everything else about the flight went very well and it appears that one of the Raptor engines failed to ignite as the vehicle was moving toward a vertical landing. once they solve this problem, whatever the cause, SpaceX will have the beginning of a fully operational Starship and will undoubtedly be able to us e the lessons learned on the heavy lift launcher itself.
 
Feb 1, 2020
159
82
660
It is beyond me why SpaceX waits until the last 5 seconds to get the SN9 (and the SN8 for that matter) VERTICAL. This launch seems to prove that they learned very little from SN8's explosive landing? Same old, same old? The answer is fairly clear: get SN10 vertical with plenty of time so that the Raptor engines make sufficient correction and touchdown softly?...
SpaceX is taking an experimental approach to the design of the Starship system. So far, SN 8 and 9 have crashed on landing. SN8 slowly, and SN9 at near terminal speed for a human in free fall. That's 30 and 120 MPH respectively.'
The analysis isn't really out yet, but apparently, only one of the two engines intended to slow the vessel to a couple of meters per second or less as it hit the ground failed. the result was it slammed in at 200 KPH!
Space X is still working on the mechanics and command protocols for all this. But it's not an unexpected disaster.
What they accomplished with these two tests was that the aerodynamics of the 'Belly Flop' worked. The rocket got close to the ground and in perfect position before the rocket re-light.
What they failed at was getting the engines to relight. That has to be done relatively close to the ground, as the rocket can only be throttled to a limited degree. Only one of the two needed Raptor engines re-lit. It was a different cause, but the same problem as SN-8
this should not be a surprise as the two rockets were nearly identical. The failures are different, but this is instructive. Most likely SN 10 will suffer the same fate in a few weeks. It is after all nearly the same rocket as it's two predecessors.
...
But SpaceX is learning from all this.
...
Sometime between now and summer, SpaceX will probably successfully land a Starship on the pad.
Then it will be the turn of the Booster to go through it's own set of crashes.
That shouldn't be quite as hard. The Booster lands in much the same way as the Falcon 9. There are differences however.
Most folks don't recall it, but the Grasshopper prototypes crashed a few times as well before SpaceX ever tried to recover a Falcon 9 booster. The first few attempts at recovery of a Falcon 9 also failed.
Then they stopped failing. Successful landings became a normally expected thing.
This is taking the same sort of pathway. By summer, and maybe five or so more crashes, and the Starship Upper stage will be successfully landing.
But don't plan on riding one for a year or two.
It takes several successful flights to orbit before a craft can be Human Rated. SpaceX isn't ready for cargo, let alone Human flight on a Starship vehicle. Maybe by 2023.
Meanwhile, SpaceX will continue to make it's money with Falcon 9 launches.
 
Feb 18, 2021
4
0
10
SpaceX is taking an experimental approach to the design of the Starship system. So far, SN 8 and 9 have crashed on landing. SN8 slowly, and SN9 at near terminal speed for a human in free fall. That's 30 and 120 MPH respectively.'
The analysis isn't really out yet, but apparently, only one of the two engines intended to slow the vessel to a couple of meters per second or less as it hit the ground failed. the result was it slammed in at 200 KPH!
Space X is still working on the mechanics and command protocols for all this. But it's not an unexpected disaster.
What they accomplished with these two tests was that the aerodynamics of the 'Belly Flop' worked. The rocket got close to the ground and in perfect position before the rocket re-light.
What they failed at was getting the engines to relight. That has to be done relatively close to the ground, as the rocket can only be throttled to a limited degree. Only one of the two needed Raptor engines re-lit. It was a different cause, but the same problem as SN-8
this should not be a surprise as the two rockets were nearly identical. The failures are different, but this is instructive. Most likely SN 10 will suffer the same fate in a few weeks. It is after all nearly the same rocket as it's two predecessors.
...
But SpaceX is learning from all this.
...
Sometime between now and summer, SpaceX will probably successfully land a Starship on the pad.
Then it will be the turn of the Booster to go through it's own set of crashes.
That shouldn't be quite as hard. The Booster lands in much the same way as the Falcon 9. There are differences however.
Most folks don't recall it, but the Grasshopper prototypes crashed a few times as well before SpaceX ever tried to recover a Falcon 9 booster. The first few attempts at recovery of a Falcon 9 also failed.
Then they stopped failing. Successful landings became a normally expected thing.
This is taking the same sort of pathway. By summer, and maybe five or so more crashes, and the Starship Upper stage will be successfully landing.
But don't plan on riding one for a year or two.
It takes several successful flights to orbit before a craft can be Human Rated. SpaceX isn't ready for cargo, let alone Human flight on a Starship vehicle. Maybe by 2023.
Meanwhile, SpaceX will continue to make it's money with Falcon 9 launches.
Thats a terrible excuse lets just keeping making same mistakes and hope we get it right eventually

Why not use falcons stabilising legs to land comfortably?

Why not backup engine?

Why no counter measures at all?

Why waste money

Money cant be the excuse when your willing to let it go to waste like that
 
Feb 1, 2020
159
82
660
Space X is actually doing quite well with it all. The first few Falcon Nine's as I said above crashed on landing. We just had another crash on landing this week. Rockets actually take a lot of abuse. This weeks Falcon Nine had flown (If I recall correctly) six times previous to this. It most likely had an engine malfunction during landing.
Falcon's stabilizing legs aren't sturdy enough for the Starship. If they were, then that's what SpaceX would use. The Starship test vehicles seem to have six to eight landing legs. Those are the little things that fold back until they are needed. I don't know what their actual load bearing strength is. I've heard somewhere that the legs may be changed out at some point in the future. That point isn't yet however.
The empty vehicle needs two engines to land. It has three engines. Three is enough to launch the thing up a couple of miles into the air. But two is almost too much for landing. They need to hit zero velocity relative to the ground just as they actually hit the ground.
So, relax and watch the fun!
It's all a learning game for Space X now. Over the next year, I would expect them to work the bugs out. So there will be some more crashes, as I said above, but there will also be success at the end of the road.
I think that the Starship will be flying by the time those tickets around the moon are redeemed.

The next hurdle will be the Super Heavy Booster, then the refuelingn option. The complete package will need the refueling bit. There is also a question of the cargo and passenger modification, as well as the Moon Lander version and the Point to Point craft. So we can expect developement to continue on for at least two to four more years.
Don't worry about the cost. Space X is paying for all this out of income from the launch business. These craft cost around twenty million each. This from a company that took in a couple of Billion last year from Falcon Nine launches.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts