[troll voice]
Well, this just shows SpaceX’s immaturity and lack of experience with vertical processing. NASA has a sixty year track record of moving tall rockets around in an assembly building, and they remain totally focused on doing it with excellence.
I will bet that instead of conducting a thorough, two-year investigation, and an audit of all procedures, Elon will just have them hammer out the dents, slap some Bondo on it, and launch it like nothing happened.
The workers and peasants of the Soviet Union perfected rocket horizontality over sixty years ago.
Meanwhile SN10 and 11 are in various stages of completion. I would be surprised too if they fly SN9 with that horizontal pressure against the tank wall. I wonder if slight pressurization with nitrogen gas would have helped keep it rigid against that kind of force.
In the Boca Chica Discord they have more details. Apparently they were jacking SN9 up to change the brake pads because SN8 had trouble stopping. However, I can’t find confirmation of that.
I hear University of Pisa’s Civil Engineering Dept. is interested in obtaining SN9 if not flyable…
+1 ^_^
Something about a matching launch tower….
Mud jacking. I know this contractor who would be able to straighten that church bell tower someplace in Italy in no time at all!
Man I hate it when the car falls off the lift. Hope nobody was under it.
Someone on nasaspaceflight.com made the excellent point that the damage to SN9 is not really the issue. The damage to the building, on the other hand, if serious enough, could lead to significant delays.
Two steps forward, one step back (let’s hope).
It was probably just a software error, perhaps similar to the clock error on the Boeing CST-100 flight. It executed its pitch-over too soon.
What’s all the worry? SN8 would have landed just fine in Mars gravity running engine rich.. Not an issue for those one-way Mars One folks, right?
Nasa Spaceflight has a livestream of SpaceX attempting to put SN9 back on its perch.
As an aside, I wonder if they weren’t paying enough attention because they were thinking about this NC State mechanical and aerospace engineering dept paper that uses vector field equations to unify Newtonian mechanics, Maxwell’s equations, and special and general relativity?
When things like that are running around in your head, it’s easy to forget to lock the jack stand.
Glad to hear that SpaceX was able to correct the erectile dysfunction of SN9.
Why did they use a crane instead of just firing the RCS thrusters? Isn’t that exactly what they’re for?
Nah, N2 thrusters don’t have the power to help. What would, though, is Raptors. Turns out, SN9 had at least two installed when it got tipsy.
So, tank in a small prop load from the tank far, load it in SN9, and fire up the Raptors. That would have corrected the lean and gotten it out of the highbay. It’d also have given the highbay an architecturally pleasing occulus in the roof.
Yeah, but its nose was against the wall and the Raptors are rear-steer only.
There is no problem that more thrust cannot fix.
Dave’s First Rule of Rocketry.
A corollary which is with big enough engine(s) you can make any damn thing fly.
[troll voice]
Well, this just shows SpaceX’s immaturity and lack of experience with vertical processing. NASA has a sixty year track record of moving tall rockets around in an assembly building, and they remain totally focused on doing it with excellence.
I will bet that instead of conducting a thorough, two-year investigation, and an audit of all procedures, Elon will just have them hammer out the dents, slap some Bondo on it, and launch it like nothing happened.
The workers and peasants of the Soviet Union perfected rocket horizontality over sixty years ago.
Meanwhile SN10 and 11 are in various stages of completion. I would be surprised too if they fly SN9 with that horizontal pressure against the tank wall. I wonder if slight pressurization with nitrogen gas would have helped keep it rigid against that kind of force.
I checked the construction status diagram (highly recommended) and SN10 just needs flaps and a nose.
In the Boca Chica Discord they have more details. Apparently they were jacking SN9 up to change the brake pads because SN8 had trouble stopping. However, I can’t find confirmation of that.
Oops. Wrong link. Construction status diagram
I hear University of Pisa’s Civil Engineering Dept. is interested in obtaining SN9 if not flyable…
+1 ^_^
Something about a matching launch tower….
Mud jacking. I know this contractor who would be able to straighten that church bell tower someplace in Italy in no time at all!
Man I hate it when the car falls off the lift. Hope nobody was under it.
Someone on nasaspaceflight.com made the excellent point that the damage to SN9 is not really the issue. The damage to the building, on the other hand, if serious enough, could lead to significant delays.
Two steps forward, one step back (let’s hope).
It was probably just a software error, perhaps similar to the clock error on the Boeing CST-100 flight. It executed its pitch-over too soon.
What’s all the worry? SN8 would have landed just fine in Mars gravity running engine rich.. Not an issue for those one-way Mars One folks, right?
Nasa Spaceflight has a livestream of SpaceX attempting to put SN9 back on its perch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyfjwXo9hjk
As an aside, I wonder if they weren’t paying enough attention because they were thinking about this NC State mechanical and aerospace engineering dept paper that uses vector field equations to unify Newtonian mechanics, Maxwell’s equations, and special and general relativity?
When things like that are running around in your head, it’s easy to forget to lock the jack stand.
It’s dust and boogers all the way down…
Bad day. Truly awesome week. That is a really good deal. https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1338182663698489344
Glad to hear that SpaceX was able to correct the erectile dysfunction of SN9.
Why did they use a crane instead of just firing the RCS thrusters? Isn’t that exactly what they’re for?
Nah, N2 thrusters don’t have the power to help. What would, though, is Raptors. Turns out, SN9 had at least two installed when it got tipsy.
So, tank in a small prop load from the tank far, load it in SN9, and fire up the Raptors. That would have corrected the lean and gotten it out of the highbay. It’d also have given the highbay an architecturally pleasing occulus in the roof.
Yeah, but its nose was against the wall and the Raptors are rear-steer only.
There is no problem that more thrust cannot fix.
Dave’s First Rule of Rocketry.
A corollary which is with big enough engine(s) you can make any damn thing fly.