|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Today's SLS Green Run test ended prematurely
Today's SLS Green Run test ended prematurely. It was supposed to fire for something like 8 minutes to simulate a full duration burn on an actual flight. It only got to something like a minute and 20 seconds when it shutdown. Wane Hayle tweeted that he heard "MCF" (Major Component Failure) called out. It will be interesting to find out what failed. Could have been something as minor as a sensor dying or as bad as the RS-25 engine dying. Will also be interesting to see if NASA declares the test a success and ships the stage to KSC after such a short test. 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. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Today's SLS Green Run test ended prematurely
JF Mezei wrote:
On 2021-01-16 17:55, Jeff Findley wrote: Today's SLS Green Run test ended prematurely. It was supposed to fire for something like 8 minutes to simulate a full duration burn on an actual flight. It only got to something like a minute and 20 seconds when it shutdown. Wane Hayle tweeted that he heard "MCF" (Major Component Failure) called out. I heard something like "DCT anomaly". ~50 seconds in: "MCF" callout (Major Component Failure) A few seconds later: "Copy that, but we’re still running, we’ve still got four good engines, right?" "Yeah, copy that" ~67 seconds in: *Either* "TVC violation" or "TCC violation" is called out. A few seconds later: Engines are clearly in shutdown sequence. So either "Thrust Vector Control" hardware failure or "Test Commit Criteria" violation - which could be anything including "the engines are shutting down for some reason". I initially heard it as TVC since it happened JUST as they started gimballing the engines which would use the TVC hardware.. but when some claimed it was TCC I listened again and it could be either, I don't think it's possible to distinguish those two in that circumstance. Press conference at 19:30 Saturday (Eastern). It mentioned some FID (Failure ID) callouts preceding the MCF for Engine 4 and that it was the "engine controller" that commanded the shutdown. SPN don't mention the TVC/TCC callout which hints it might have been TCC, not TVC (but not proof). They also say they MAY decided that this is sufficient testing. Wasn't it this test some were trying to skip in an effort to reduce delays? I'd say it's proven exactly why it was necessary. Either way remember that they said the same about the need to retest the Boeing Starliner on it's "immediately afterwards" press conferance so I wouldn't put too much stock in that. Apparently a re-test would take at least a month to prepare, not counting any changes or fixes but those might be able to be done in parallel. They also mentioned a flash at the thermal blankets near engine 4 just as they initiated the engine gimballing around the time the shutdown started, and that the only damage they've found so far is on the thermal blanket there. As SPN notes they have a number of other engines if they decide to swap out engine 4 (and send it back to refurbishing) or they might decide it's repairable. It's much too early for anything really substantive. https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/01/1...t-test-firing/ https://old.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLoung...ch_system_hot/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Woo! Another RSRM static test today | Scott Lowther | History | 2 | August 17th 05 02:21 PM |
Woo! Another RSRM static test today | Scott Lowther | Policy | 2 | August 17th 05 02:21 PM |
Sacramento SIV-B Static Test Facility Today | Rusty | History | 6 | January 13th 05 06:00 PM |
Sacramento SIV-B Static Test Facility Today | Rusty | Policy | 2 | January 12th 05 10:29 PM |
Green laser pointer field test? | Florian | Amateur Astronomy | 4 | January 6th 05 08:21 AM |