so, Artemis test flight AKA Should Launch Someday, 16-Nov-2022

[Dark Adaptation]

Looks like NASA has set the date for November 14 12:07 am for launching, with a 69 minute window. That is, if it doesn't get scrubbed again. When will the rocket ever be clean enough to launch? 😜

Here's what'll really happen: The earliest they can roll the rocket out to the launch pad is Nov. 4. It'll be rolled out on Nov. 8 :).  We'll all be in suspense on the night of Nov. 13, waiting for when the rocket will launch, our eyes glued to NASA live TV. At 12:00, we'll have a lovely view of the rocket. At 12:07, it'll be sadly announced that the rocket launch has been scrubbed because of another engine leak. They'll spend another month trying to figure out whether they can fix it on the launch pad, or will they have to roll it back to wherever they normally fix it? They'll eventually roll it back, and the cycle will begin again. 

All another day in the life of this thread and the Artemis moon mission. 😁😁

[Alan White]

Let's been more optimistic and it will launch by Christmas, 
Which Christmas no one knows, but it will go by Christmas...

[maw lod qan]

Let's hope it goes off as now scheduled!

I put in for the 14th off! 👍👍

Can you just image a Saturn V size night launch!!

[Alan White]

13 hours ago, maw lod qan said:

Let's hope it goes off as now scheduled!

I put in for the 14th off! 👍👍

Can you just image a Saturn V size night launch!!

Good luck, I hope you get a true spectacle. 

[DaveL59]

so the billion dollar roman candle is back on the pad, fingers crossed they get to light the blue touchpaper this time round...

Artemis I Moon Rocket Arrives at Launch Pad Ahead of Historic Mission – Artemis (nasa.gov)

14-Nov currently the target.

 

Edited November 7, 2022 by DaveL59

[DaveL59]

So its on the pad and was aiming for 14-Nov but seems even mama natura isn't convinced it should be allowed to try to fly, now delayed to 16-Nov for a tropical storm

NASA Prepares Rocket, Spacecraft Ahead of Tropical Storm Nicole, Re-targets Launch – Artemis

 

Edited November 9, 2022 by DaveL59

[Ratlet]

It is the year 2565. 

Cockroach philosophers debate over who the god Tak was from the ancient precursors and why the ancient digital texts they recovered give praise to the mysterious postman.  They believe that this priesthood, who worshipped the stars, were all related through a common auntie Flo who would send the postman with gifts.

Artemis is due to launch in 2 weeks and Tesla are promising a self driving car in 2566.

Edited November 9, 2022 by Ratlet

[malc-c]

2 hours ago, DaveL59 said:

So its on the pad and was aiming for 14-Nov but seems even mama natura isn't convinced it should be allowed to try to fly, now delayed to 16-Nov for a tropical storm

NASA Prepares Rocket, Spacecraft Ahead of Tropical Storm Nicole, Re-targets Launch – Artemis

 

That crawler has done more miles in the past couple of months than it did in  whole decade of  the 1970's  !! - especially if they wheel it back to the assembly building once more due to yet another storm !

[DaveL59]

On 09/11/2022 at 21:58, malc-c said:

That crawler has done more miles in the past couple of months than it did in  whole decade of  the 1970's  !! - especially if they wheel it back to the assembly building once more due to yet another storm !

you never know, by the time they light the blue touchpaper it may have done more miles than SLS ever will 😉 

Edited November 11, 2022 by DaveL59

[Dark Adaptation]

It's almost as if it was never meant to launch. Now tropical storms. So perhaps I was wrong about it being scrubbed (fingers crossed ), but then of course storms had to come along and delay it to Nov 16.

"We're sorry to disappoint you, but the launch has been delayed until November 18."

"We're sorry to disappoint you, but the launch has been delayed until December 5."

"We're sorry, but--"

That crawler must be getting tired .

[Chefgage]

Not really looked into the specifics of the Artemis rocket. But comparing the launch to space X launches it seems a bit strange/embarrassing for NASA???

With space X seemingly launching every in other day with no issues but NASA cannot seem to get just one rocket in the air

[Louis D]

Boeing is the Artemis prime contractor.  They are a legacy defense contractor (think B-29s and F-15s).  They build to a spec from the government on a cost-plus basis.  They were required to do things a certain way as a result.  Everything has to work perfectly on the first launch.

SpaceX was self-funded, so they had a clean slate with which to start.  They used aggressive prototype development techniques.  Thus, all of the spectacular launch failures they've had.

Here's an anecdote of saving weight to increase payload.  Some SpaceX engineer did the numbers and questioned why they were using 4mm thick fuel tank walls when 3mm would suffice.  Tanks had always been that thick going back to the 50s.  Elon said, go ahead and make a tank 3mm thick, fuel it up and put it through the flight qualification tests.  It worked perfectly, and they saved 25,000 pounds that could be added to the payload instead.  By comparison, no Boeing engineer would have dared speak up because the culture is to always design to the government requirements.  Asking to change them would have taken years of back and forth between subcontractors, Boeing, and the government, and the engineer would have risked his/her career to even bring it up because it shows they're not a team player willing to go along with the herd.  Thinking outside the box is simply not in defense contractors' culture.

The lone exception are skunk works projects like the SR-71 and the Manhattan Project where defense contractors are given very high level requirements and are allowed to run wild with them with very little public oversight.

[Mr Spock]

Is this rocket still a thing or has it gone the way of the metric system 😜

[Dark Adaptation]

They've got a 120 minute window to launch. After 1:04 am, they've only got two hours. Seems like enough....

[DaveL59]

1 hour ago, Mr Spock said:

Is this rocket still a thing or has it gone the way of the metric system 😜

Definitely a thing but likely never a wonderous thing 😉 

[Mr Spock]

1 hour ago, Dark Adaptation said:

They've got a 120 minute window to launch. After 1:04 am, they've only got two hours. Seems like enough....

But do they know 120 mins and two hours are the same?

[DaveL59]

Latest news is Time Magazine say SLS is one of the greatest inventions of 2022! 🤣

Also comments here on the ultra-slow CAA approval process for the Cosmic Girl launch from Cornwall that was hoped to go any time now 😞 

Edited November 11, 2022 by DaveL59

[Dark Adaptation]

1 hour ago, DaveL59 said:

Latest news is Time Magazine say SLS is one of the greatest inventions of 2022! 🤣

It'll be one of the greatest inventions of 2023 too  

Meanwhile, in the background, SpaceX is working away on the 4th rocket in 2023 alone....

 

Remember that one rocket that they told to expect the instructions in the metric system, and some poor person sent them in imperial? The rocket wanted kilometers, and it got miles. 

Needless to say that mission didn't work.

So some poor intern is going to use the wrong system, somehow, or the wrong measurements, and there will be an unexpected mission to the sun  

Edited November 11, 2022 by Dark Adaptation
Added more.

[Dark Adaptation]

I like how they say they're scheduling the Next Attempt instead of The Rocket Will Launch at so and so time. It allows for room for such things like this to happen.

[Carbon Brush]

1 hour ago, Dark Adaptation said:

Remember that one rocket that they told to expect the instructions in the metric system, and some poor person sent them in imperial? The rocket wanted kilometers, and it got miles. 

Needless to say that mission didn't work.

If memory serves me correctly it was a Mars orbiter mission. Or was there another?😁
Not forgetting Hubble mirror profiling in metric or inch, requiring a service mission from Specsavers.

For those unsure about what units to use, lengths are measured in inches and sixteenths. Area in football pitches and volume in olympic swimming pools.

Only this week I had a USA customer asking about cable size for a large electric motor. I gave him a number in mm sq.
He asked what it was in AWG🥴. I had to explain to him that AWG is a unit that is peculiar to the USA.
Adding there is a small region, called the rest of the planet, who always 🤣 use metric.

[Paul M]

19 minutes ago, Carbon Brush said:

If memory serves me correctly it was a Mars orbiter mission. Or was there another?😁

I remember that too. Can't remember the details though. Back in the 90's I feel. I'm thinking it was an error at the minor component level.

But I do remember the Gimli Glider story. It's aviation not spaceflight but a reminder of how things can go wrong: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider

Edit: Mars Climate Orbiter, NASA and contractors used different units for engine thrust calculations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter

Edited November 11, 2022 by Paul M

[DaveL59]

9 minutes ago, Carbon Brush said:

If memory serves me correctly it was a Mars orbiter mission. Or was there another?😁
Not forgetting Hubble mirror profiling in metric or inch, requiring a service mission from Specsavers.

For those unsure about what units to use, lengths are measured in inches and sixteenths. Area in football pitches and volume in olympic swimming pools.

Only this week I had a USA customer asking about cable size for a large electric motor. I gave him a number in mm sq.
He asked what it was in AWG🥴. I had to explain to him that AWG is a unit that is peculiar to the USA.
Adding there is a small region, called the rest of the planet, who always 🤣 use metric.

aha! is that why the quick-connects leaked, an M??? tube going into a UNC hole? 😉 

[Carbon Brush]

3 minutes ago, Paul M said:

But I do remember the Gimli Glider story. It's aviation not spaceflight but a reminder of how things can go wrong:

Wandering off topic, but you may like it. I once had an argument with a CAA flight examiner. This was during a check flight.
Background. It is a requirement for the pilot to have knowledge of aircraft data in the pilot operating handbook. Speeds, weights, etc.
In this case he asked me the fuel tank capacity, which I quoted in litres. No - he wanted to know the capacity in US gallons - it was a Cessna.
I told him I had no idea and saw no use for this information. Before he could criticise I quickly justified my response.
Fuel is always supplied to the aircraft in litres. I know the fuel burn in litres/hour. I know fuel weighs 0.72Kg/litre for my weight and balance calculations.
Why the (insert expletive) would I be interested in US gallons?
After this he stayed on more relevant matters. 

Sadly the Gimli glider is only one of many 'oops' in civil aviation worldwide where kilos, pounds, litres, US gallons, imperial gallons have been confused.

Anyway. Watching for November 16th. Hoping they have fuel calculations right, and correct pipe fittings, and kind weather.
Who suggested a launch site in an area known for tropical storms? Sunny Cornwall or rainy Scotland sound much better🤣

[DaveL59]

4 minutes ago, Carbon Brush said:

 

Anyway. Watching for November 16th. Hoping they have fuel calculations right, and correct pipe fittings, and kind weather.
Who suggested a launch site in an area known for tropical storms? Sunny Cornwall or rainy Scotland sound much better🤣

ahh but then it'd be tied up for years, decades even, awaiting CAA approval to launch 😉 

Might as well just roll it into the museum as a relic of a never-quite-got-to-be bygone era...

Edited November 11, 2022 by DaveL59

[Louis D]

1 hour ago, Carbon Brush said:

Who suggested a launch site in an area known for tropical storms?

Closer to the equator for a better launch boost, and the entire Atlantic Ocean to abort into.