Thread: SpaceX SN10
View Single Post
  #8  
Old March 7th 21, 01:42 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,307
Default SpaceX SN10

In article , says...

On 2021-03-04 4:14 PM, Snidely wrote:

It looked to me like the exhaust of one of the engines was more yellow
than the others.

/dps


Yes it appears to have been running fuel rich. There's a bit of dark
smoke involved as well which can be seen in some of the ascent videos.

Also seems to have been a methane leak after bouncedown that eventually
ignited. Also there were seen to be excessive methane leakage even as
SN10 was conducting its single engine power down descent. It
occasionally flared up in flame at least twice and there was a fire
on-going after it came to 'rest' before the rapid unscheduled relaunch
and disassembly.

See Scott Manley video mentioned elsewhere in this thread for details.
As he points out (and I have to agree) the RUD appears to be due to an
oxygen tank pressure failure which ruptured both tanks, largely
propelled the SN10 re-aloft and trigger the subsequent explosion.


Elon Musk tweeted that the hard landing was caused by the landing Raptor
being commanded to high thrust, but the thrust level didn't change. He
said they have not seen that before.

The landing 'legs' or pogos as I prefer to call them seem to be the

next
issue now. Manley shows video that clearly shows several that failed to
lock into position and three that do.


The landing legs have already been redesigned, but we won't see them
until a later SN#. Iterating this rapidly means there is a delay caused
by learning a lesson, designing a fix, and incorporating that fix into a
later SN#.

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.