Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Remember Artemis 1? It sat exposed on the launch pad through Hurricane Nicole, and it's unclear if it sustained any damage   (cnn.com) divider line
    More: Facepalm, Wind, Kennedy Space Center, Tropical cyclone, launch pad, wind gusts, wind sensors, NASA officials, Hurricane Nicole  
•       •       •

612 clicks; posted to STEM » on 11 Nov 2022 at 2:05 AM (11 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



29 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2022-11-11 2:10:29 AM  
If the forces experienced during lift off and ascent were translated to a hurricane category, what category do we think it would be?
 
2022-11-11 2:19:45 AM  
Eh, just throw a tarp over it.
 
2022-11-11 2:39:30 AM  
Is everyone enjoying Idiocracy 2
 
2022-11-11 2:45:36 AM  

BlazeTrailer: If the forces experienced during lift off and ascent were translated to a hurricane category, what category do we think it would be?


They cannot be equated/compared. The large-scale forces experienced by a rocket pushing itself axially through air that is (relatively speaking) essentially stationary are by and large stable and predictable (largely, a mounting ram pressure as it picks up speed, counteracted by rapidly falling air density), and clear air also by default lacks flying debris.

The forces experienced by a structure being buffeted by intensely turbulent radial flow are completely different.
 
2022-11-11 3:12:37 AM  

erik-k: BlazeTrailer: If the forces experienced during lift off and ascent were translated to a hurricane category, what category do we think it would be?

They cannot be equated/compared. The large-scale forces experienced by a rocket pushing itself axially through air that is (relatively speaking) essentially stationary are by and large stable and predictable (largely, a mounting ram pressure as it picks up speed, counteracted by rapidly falling air density), and clear air also by default lacks flying debris.

The forces experienced by a structure being buffeted by intensely turbulent radial flow are completely different.


I agree with you - zero sum.
 
2022-11-11 4:36:44 AM  
I occasionally buy a new car. That's an expensive thing to do, of course, so I keep it in the garage.

Something cheap like Artemis? It's probably half used parts, amirite? Leave it in the driveway.
 
2022-11-11 6:20:06 AM  
This rig is a test flight. Very little, if any, of this particular rocket will be reused. Part of testing is seeing if it can remain flightworthy after enduring weather like it has. I'm sure they'll give it a thorough inspection, and fix what they can at the launch site, or if it's more than they can handle they'll trundle it back to the building.
 
2022-11-11 7:16:45 AM  

edmo: I occasionally buy a new car. That's an expensive thing to do, of course, so I keep it in the garage.

Something cheap like Artemis? It's probably half used parts, amirite? Leave it in the driveway.


I think half of it is repurposed shuttle parts, so yeah.
 
2022-11-11 7:32:23 AM  

zimbach: This rig is a test flight. Very little, if any, of this particular rocket will be reused. Part of testing is seeing if it can remain flightworthy after enduring weather like it has. I'm sure they'll give it a thorough inspection, and fix what they can at the launch site, or if it's more than they can handle they'll trundle it back to the building.


Sure, but part of testing is seeing if it's flight worthy in the first place. First things first
 
2022-11-11 8:08:43 AM  

New Farkin User Name: zimbach: This rig is a test flight. Very little, if any, of this particular rocket will be reused. Part of testing is seeing if it can remain flightworthy after enduring weather like it has. I'm sure they'll give it a thorough inspection, and fix what they can at the launch site, or if it's more than they can handle they'll trundle it back to the building.

Sure, but part of testing is seeing if it's flight worthy in the first place. First things first


I'm not sure "is it hurricane proof" is really the test they were hoping to conduct when they spent all those billions.
 
2022-11-11 8:12:56 AM  

Invincible: New Farkin User Name: zimbach: This rig is a test flight. Very little, if any, of this particular rocket will be reused. Part of testing is seeing if it can remain flightworthy after enduring weather like it has. I'm sure they'll give it a thorough inspection, and fix what they can at the launch site, or if it's more than they can handle they'll trundle it back to the building.

Sure, but part of testing is seeing if it's flight worthy in the first place. First things first

I'm not sure "is it hurricane proof" is really the test they were hoping to conduct when they spent all those billions.


The test Congress cared about was "can billions be spent on this?" which is the one test it's passed with flying colors
 
2022-11-11 8:24:20 AM  

New Farkin User Name: Invincible: New Farkin User Name: zimbach: This rig is a test flight. Very little, if any, of this particular rocket will be reused. Part of testing is seeing if it can remain flightworthy after enduring weather like it has. I'm sure they'll give it a thorough inspection, and fix what they can at the launch site, or if it's more than they can handle they'll trundle it back to the building.

Sure, but part of testing is seeing if it's flight worthy in the first place. First things first

I'm not sure "is it hurricane proof" is really the test they were hoping to conduct when they spent all those billions.

The test Congress cared about was "can billions be spent on this?" which is the one test it's passed with flying colors


Yeah, but that's been well established by prior experiments. Nothing new learned there.
 
2022-11-11 8:34:07 AM  
They could get Ensign Ricky to give it a whirl before the actual bridge crew takes off in it.

startrek.comView Full Size


Wait... he's busy testing something else. Give him an hour.
 
2022-11-11 8:53:18 AM  

BlazeTrailer: If the forces experienced during lift off and ascent were translated to a hurricane category, what category do we think it would be?


Rockets are built to handle much higher dynamic pressure, but only from one direction. If you make them strong enough to handle them from any direction, they'll be too heavy to fly.  So, if the winds came from directly nose on, the booster would handle it with aplomb, it would be facing much higher wind pressure seconds after liftoff. If the booster were to yaw a couple of degrees when it was near max Q? It would rip into a thousand pieces in an eye blink.

Since the hurricanes winds were not constant and nose on....it would be unclear how the booster would handle them. They are stronger than you think - they have to be able to stand on the pad with a full load of fuel and payload, so there's quite a bit of structure.

The problem with very large rocketry is that everything is slower to move. For Ian, they had a ton of warning that that the hurricane was coming. Nicole was first named as a subtropical storm on Monday,  only became a tropical storm Tuesday afternoon and a Hurricane late Wednesday, then made landfall a few hours later. NASA didn't have a chance to rollback the booster.

It does point to a flaw with the VAB being that large a distance from the launch pad, but it was built in the expectation of the Saturn V being the smallest booster they'd build there, and the Nova series was thought to need much more safety distance. The mobile shelter they use with the Atlas V and Delta IV makes it much easier to protect the booster on the pad, it only takes a few hours to roll the shelter back over the rocket, plus whatever time you need to defuel the booster if you've already loaded it up.
 
2022-11-11 8:57:42 AM  
No need to worry. NASA's record of launches after bad weather is excellent. Well, maybe not excellent. Really good! No.......not really good. Ok. Yeah. Ok. Hmmmmm.....
 
2022-11-11 9:05:15 AM  
Watching Fark Rocket Scientists feel they're entirely qualified to critique, condemn, and 2nd-guess actual rocket scientists is my favorite.
 
2022-11-11 9:14:13 AM  

erik-k: BlazeTrailer: If the forces experienced during lift off and ascent were translated to a hurricane category, what category do we think it would be?

They cannot be equated/compared. The large-scale forces experienced by a rocket pushing itself axially through air that is (relatively speaking) essentially stationary are by and large stable and predictable (largely, a mounting ram pressure as it picks up speed, counteracted by rapidly falling air density), and clear air also by default lacks flying debris.

The forces experienced by a structure being buffeted by intensely turbulent radial flow are completely different.


One can only wonder how the seals on the solid rocket motors were effected by getting slapped back and forth. The seals that are over a year past their original certification date.
 
2022-11-11 9:26:05 AM  
It's the equivalent of "the dog ate my homework".  Now if it experiences an unplanned sudden rapid disassembly they can blame the weather and not this endless sinkhole for pork.
 
2022-11-11 9:33:05 AM  
So boosters that have been stacked for months longer then thy were supposed to be, a core stage that sort of worked in one test firing and possible hurricane damage. I really hope it works but...
 
2022-11-11 9:36:06 AM  

GregInIndy: Watching Fark Rocket Scientists feel they're entirely qualified to critique, condemn, and 2nd-guess actual rocket scientists is my favorite.


If it wasn't clear enough already, the coalition that built the SLS are not rocket scientists. They are contractors who set about to cargo cult a space launch system from already developed parts and have managed to make their failure cost to launch a single rocket cost more than the entire original apollo program.
 
2022-11-11 9:37:34 AM  

GregInIndy: Watching Fark Rocket Scientists feel they're entirely qualified to critique, condemn, and 2nd-guess actual rocket scientists is my favorite.


Actual rocket scientists are pissed to no end at the waste and idiocy of the SLS. From using old shuttle parts to liquid hydrogen as a propellant to the pointlessness of using the same companies (and, more importantly, congressional districts) to build the damn thing, they'll talk your ear off. The combined cost of SpaceX, Rocket Lab, and Blue Origin (all of which have flying rockets) is less than half of the amount paid for the SLS, and both SPaceX and Rocket Lab will likely turn profits relatively soon for such large endeavors.

The SLS costs about $1 billion to launch, or $58,000 per kilogram, which is still cheaper than the Shuttle (about $2.6 billion). By comparison, the average cost to orbit in 2000 was $32k ($94k for the Shuttle) per kilogram. SpaceX's Falcon 9 (which, again, has an actual track record with NASA) costs $67 million per launch, or $3,400 per kg.

All figures in 2022 dollars

Tell me again how the SLS doesn't suck in the current climate?
 
2022-11-11 9:45:24 AM  

GregInIndy: Watching Fark Rocket Scientists feel they're entirely qualified to critique, condemn, and 2nd-guess actual rocket scientists is my favorite.


bit of a difference between a farker armchair-quarterbacking a war or proudly proclaiming that an area of scientific study is bullshiat and pointing out that that an overbudget, behind-schedule rocket that isn't as useful as what came before and that doesn't work yet is overbudget, behind schedule, isn't as useful as what came before and doesn't work yet.
 
2022-11-11 10:33:49 AM  

enry: edmo: I occasionally buy a new car. That's an expensive thing to do, of course, so I keep it in the garage.

Something cheap like Artemis? It's probably half used parts, amirite? Leave it in the driveway.

I think half of it is repurposed shuttle parts, so yeah.


The main engines are all Shuttle engines that have flown before. Really expensive and complicated engines that were designed to be reused, but will now be dumped in the Atlantic.
 
2022-11-11 2:51:22 PM  
They should just revert to VAB, and add a few thrusters and some struts.
 
2022-11-11 3:04:09 PM  

I hereby demand that I be given a Fark account: The problem with very large rocketry is that everything is slower to move. For Ian, they had a ton of warning that that the hurricane was coming. Nicole was first named as a subtropical storm on Monday,  only became a tropical storm Tuesday afternoon and a Hurricane late Wednesday, then made landfall a few hours later. NASA didn't have a chance to rollback the booster.

It does point to a flaw with the VAB being that large a distance from the launch pad, but it was built in the expectation of the Saturn V being the smallest booster they'd build there, and the Nova series was thought to need much more safety distance.


According to my google-fu, it takes 10-12 hours to roll to/from the VAB. That's plenty of time to dodge a hurricane.
 
2022-11-11 6:01:37 PM  

erik-k: The forces experienced by a structure being buffeted by intensely turbulent radial flow are completely different.


It's an entirely different kind of buffeting altogether.
 
2022-11-11 8:25:51 PM  
CordycepsInYourBrain:

According to my google-fu, it takes 10-12 hours to roll to/from the VAB. That's plenty of time to dodge a hurricane.

I read in an earlier posting that they can only do the roll to/from VAB so many times.  Once they go beyond that number of times, bad things happen, and this roll out was the last roll out they could do.  Bird had to stay at the pad because it had gone back and forth too many times.
 
2022-11-11 9:03:40 PM  

Warmachine999: CordycepsInYourBrain:

According to my google-fu, it takes 10-12 hours to roll to/from the VAB. That's plenty of time to dodge a hurricane.

I read in an earlier posting that they can only do the roll to/from VAB so many times.  Once they go beyond that number of times, bad things happen, and this roll out was the last roll out they could do.  Bird had to stay at the pad because it had gone back and forth too many times.


The rocket is certified to go back and forth only so many times, and if it exceeds that it's in violation of the standard and they'd need to I believe refurbish parts of it or get the violation waived. Of course, sitting out in the storm probably generated new violations, in addition to the violations they already accrued and were waived like having the SRBs stacked for too long and leaving in an old battery for the flight termination system. One more violation probably wouldn't have killed them!
 
2022-11-12 12:57:28 AM  

CordycepsInYourBrain: I hereby demand that I be given a Fark account: The problem with very large rocketry is that everything is slower to move. For Ian, they had a ton of warning that that the hurricane was coming. Nicole was first named as a subtropical storm on Monday,  only became a tropical storm Tuesday afternoon and a Hurricane late Wednesday, then made landfall a few hours later. NASA didn't have a chance to rollback the booster.

It does point to a flaw with the VAB being that large a distance from the launch pad, but it was built in the expectation of the Saturn V being the smallest booster they'd build there, and the Nova series was thought to need much more safety distance.

According to my google-fu, it takes 10-12 hours to roll to/from the VAB. That's plenty of time to dodge a hurricane.


I imagine there's a *bit* more time required than just the travel time for the crawler.

The time required to "safe" everything, disconnect a bunch of stuff, and go through all the necessary checklists before they even fire up the crawler probably takes longer than the travel time.  It's not like hopping in the car and scooting down to the grocery store.

They probably did have enough time to move it, but I'm sure each crawler trip has its own risks and puts its own stresses on the vehicle.
 
Displayed 29 of 29 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.