[Merged] SpaceX’s Starship Rocket Explodes After Launch/Starship hop - Page 6

3point14 · 6th March 2021, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy

Just guessing, but in normal operations it probably detaches before the orbit is circularized so it's orbit still intersects the atmosphere. And probably pretty close to intersecting the surface of the Earth.

No, the Starship they're testing at the moment is meant to be the orbital bit (or, at least, a representation of it). Something that looks very like it is intended to sit on top of the Superheavy and go orbital after separation from Superheavy.

RecoveringYuppy · 6th March 2021, 10:24 AM

Originally Posted by 3point14

No, the Starship they're testing at the moment is meant to be the orbital bit (or, at least, a representation of it). Something that looks very like it is intended to sit on top of the Superheavy and go orbital after separation from Superheavy.

Note that I've edited my post.

smartcooky · 6th March 2021, 01:00 PM

Originally Posted by Belz...

What do you mean by no entry burn? At that speed there has to be one, no?

Nope.

The "entry burn" is peculiar to Falcon 9 first stage boosters. Cold-gas thrusters orient the stage tail first, then as it begins to enter the atmosphere the booster stage accelerates under the pull of gravity. Then, three of the Falcon 9's engines light up for the entry burn, the purpose of which is to keep the booster speed from increasing to the point that the convective and radiative heat of re-entry will damage the engine end of the booster.

Starship will begin its entry in much the same way as the Shuttle Orbiter, there will be a retro (oe re-entry) burn in orbit to slow it down enough to fall into a ballistic trajectory for re-entry but that is not the same as the Falcon 9's entry burn, it is for an entirely different reason.

RecoveringYuppy · 6th March 2021, 02:22 PM

So that might be a semantic issue. There is still a burn for both cases but in one case it's just to de-circularize the orbit, in the other case it's to counteract a lot of kinetic energy?

So I'm guessing the current round of tests don't yet include a heat shield.

smartcooky · 6th March 2021, 02:54 PM

Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy

So that might be a semantic issue. There is still a burn for both cases but in one case it's just to de-circularize the orbit, in the other case it's to counteract a lot of kinetic energy?

I wouldn't call it semantic - these are genuinely different burns for completely different reasons.

Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy

So I'm guessing the current round of tests don't yet include a heat shield.

SpaceX are testing heat shield tiles in patches on the hulls of these test articles, not so much for their integrity as heat shields, but to test methods of attachment, and how well they stand up to the forces involved. Unlike the Shuttle Orbiter tiles in which every one of the tiles was unique to the position in which it was located, these are generic and interchangeable.

Here some photos (by Mary, a.k.a bocachicagal) showing SN9 and SN10 on the pad - the black patches are the TPS tiles

Belz... · 6th March 2021, 07:04 PM

Originally Posted by 3point14

There'll be a re-entry burn.

I think he means there won't be a burn after re-entry to reduce speed to reduce shock heating.

Ah. Not the meaning of "burn" I understood. Got it.

Originally Posted by smartcooky

Nope.

The "entry burn" is peculiar to Falcon 9 first stage boosters. Cold-gas thrusters orient the stage tail first, then as it begins to enter the atmosphere the booster stage accelerates under the pull of gravity. Then, three of the Falcon 9's engines light up for the entry burn, the purpose of which is to keep the booster speed from increasing to the point that the convective and radiative heat of re-entry will damage the engine end of the booster.

Starship will begin its entry in much the same way as the Shuttle Orbiter, there will be a retro (oe re-entry) burn in orbit to slow it down enough to fall into a ballistic trajectory for re-entry but that is not the same as the Falcon 9's entry burn, it is for an entirely different reason.

No I thought you meant there would be no burn from the reentry, not from the thrusters.

3point14 · 30th March 2021, 07:02 AM

Oops...

GodMark2 · 30th March 2021, 10:50 AM

Originally Posted by 3point14

Oops...

They did it again?

3point14 · 30th March 2021, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by GodMark2

They did it again?

Yes, but worse than last time.

GodMark2 · 30th March 2021, 03:18 PM

Did you believe you're more than just friends?

a_unique_person · 30th March 2021, 03:27 PM

The explosion wasn't as spectacular?

arthwollipot · 30th March 2021, 04:56 PM

I haven't had a chance to see the video yet - was it a full geobraking situation or did it sit for a while before exploding like that other time?

Trebuchet · 30th March 2021, 05:11 PM

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

I haven't had a chance to see the video yet - was it a full geobraking situation or did it sit for a while before exploding like that other time?

No video of what actually happened, but the answer is neither. It blew up while still in the air and rained debris over a considerable area. The reason for no video is dense fog. They may now be regretting launching under those conditions.

crescent · 30th March 2021, 05:12 PM

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

I haven't had a chance to see the video yet - was it a full geobraking situation or did it sit for a while before exploding like that other time?

The only video I've yet seen was nothing. Literally. The cameras on the rocket itself cutout just as the engines were igniting for the landing burn. Everything else obscured by fog. Thick, thick fog, it didn't seem to be visible from the ground.

Maybe other ISF'ers have seen good video, but I have not.

Trebuchet · 30th March 2021, 05:26 PM

Originally Posted by crescent

The only video I've yet seen was nothing. Literally. The cameras on the rocket itself cutout just as the engines were igniting for the landing burn. Everything else obscured by fog. Thick, thick fog, it didn't seem to be visible from the ground.

Maybe other ISF'ers have seen good video, but I have not.

A good video of the actual explosion? No, due to the fog. Cameras cut out due to the explosion. But this one from NSF is pretty good in showing the flash and rain of debris.
If I'm the FAA, I won't be allowing them to launch in those conditions again.

ETA: Watch the yucca on the left, whose flower spike had not fully opened yet and now never will.

arthwollipot · 30th March 2021, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by Trebuchet

No video of what actually happened, but the answer is neither. It blew up while still in the air and rained debris over a considerable area. The reason for no video is dense fog. They may now be regretting launching under those conditions.

Hmmm. That's not great.

Mikemcc · 5th April 2021, 07:50 AM

Elon replied to Spacex360 on Twitter:

Quote:

Ascent phase, transition to horizontal & control during free fall were good.

A (relatively) small CH4 leak led to fire on engine 2 & fried part of avionics, causing hard start attempting landing burn in CH4 turbopump.

This is getting fixed 6 ways to Sunday.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1379022709737275393

a_unique_person · 17th April 2021, 11:21 PM

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Spacex chosen for next moon missions.

Belz... · 18th April 2021, 01:35 AM

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Spacex chosen for next moon missions.

I wonder if it's because they are confident that SpaceX can deliver on time, or if they're less confident that NASA could.

a_unique_person · 18th April 2021, 03:42 AM

Spacex is cheaper. There that.

Belz... · 18th April 2021, 03:43 AM

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

Spacex is cheaper. There that.

You know what they say about getting the cheapest contractor?

Andy_Ross · 18th April 2021, 03:55 AM

It's nothing new.

Apollo Lander was designed and built by Grumman.

Contracting to a specialist company is a good idea.

Belz... · 18th April 2021, 03:59 AM

I'm aware of that.

RecoveringYuppy · 18th April 2021, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by Belz...

I wonder if it's because they are confident that SpaceX can deliver on time, or if they're less confident that NASA could.

What do you mean by NASA? NASA wasn't one of the competitors as far as I know. Blue Origins and Dynetics were the competitors.

Belz... · 18th April 2021, 09:03 AM

Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy

What do you mean by NASA? NASA wasn't one of the competitors as far as I know. Blue Origins and Dynetics were the competitors.

Right. Retracted.

smartcooky · 30th April 2021, 02:57 AM

SN15 due to attempt its 10Km flight and then try to stick the landing in about 11½ to 12 hours time.

However chances look grim. I've checked LabPadre's NerdleCam and at 4:45 am the weather at Boca Chica looks crap - 15 knot winds (29kph) and its pissing with rain. Unless there is a dramatic improvement, I can't see it happening.

RecoveringYuppy · 30th April 2021, 09:25 AM

What would you have said about the heavy fog they launched in not too long ago?

ETA: Appears to be clear weather now?

Another ETA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXG7W7skekw Clear skies. On second thought, actually looks like high clouds, narrators are expressing concern about weather.

RecoveringYuppy · 30th April 2021, 10:50 AM

Haven't been following closely, but appears to be scrubbed.

3point14 · 4th May 2021, 07:10 AM

Trying again today it seems.

Trebuchet · 4th May 2021, 07:55 AM

Not worth a proper poll, but what's your bet?
A) Scrubbed, weather
B) Scrubbed, other
C) Blows up on launch
D) Lands hard, blows up
E) Blows up mid-air
F) Lands, blows up after
G) Lands, mission success!

3point14 · 4th May 2021, 07:56 AM

I'm going with lands heavily, some damage, no fireball.

3point14 · 4th May 2021, 10:00 AM

Turns out is was A or B, not sure which.

Trebuchet · 4th May 2021, 11:43 AM

Appears to probably have been weather.

smartcooky · 4th May 2021, 01:27 PM

Originally Posted by Trebuchet

Appears to probably have been weather.

High altitude winds over the minimum allowed.

smartcooky · 5th May 2021, 03:16 PM

Propellant load is happening now, and they are about 7 minutes or so from launch

Tim Dodd (Everyday Astronaut) live feed here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htnG_mABtSQ

And its away!!!

3point14 · 5th May 2021, 03:20 PM

*Tim.

smartcooky · 5th May 2021, 03:30 PM

And it stuck the landing!!

crescent · 5th May 2021, 03:35 PM

Still on fire.

3point14 · 5th May 2021, 03:37 PM

Most impressive.

smartcooky · 5th May 2021, 03:39 PM

They're detanking, so the fire must be out now

ETA: Musk tweets "Flaming nominal"

6th March 2021, 10:06 AM	#201
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,734	Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy Just guessing, but in normal operations it probably detaches before the orbit is circularized so it's orbit still intersects the atmosphere. And probably pretty close to intersecting the surface of the Earth. No, the Starship they're testing at the moment is meant to be the orbital bit (or, at least, a representation of it). Something that looks very like it is intended to sit on top of the Superheavy and go orbital after separation from Superheavy.
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,734	__________________ Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted] Last edited by 3point14; 6th March 2021 at 10:08 AM.

6th March 2021, 01:00 PM	#203
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 24,829	Originally Posted by Belz... What do you mean by no entry burn? At that speed there has to be one, no? Nope. The "entry burn" is peculiar to Falcon 9 first stage boosters. Cold-gas thrusters orient the stage tail first, then as it begins to enter the atmosphere the booster stage accelerates under the pull of gravity. Then, three of the Falcon 9's engines light up for the entry burn, the purpose of which is to keep the booster speed from increasing to the point that the convective and radiative heat of re-entry will damage the engine end of the booster. Starship will begin its entry in much the same way as the Shuttle Orbiter, there will be a retro (oe re-entry) burn in orbit to slow it down enough to fall into a ballistic trajectory for re-entry but that is not the same as the Falcon 9's entry burn, it is for an entirely different reason.
	__________________ Those who claim that something can't be done need to stop getting in the way of those who are actually doing it! - Anonymous Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!! Last edited by smartcooky; 6th March 2021 at 01:03 PM.

6th March 2021, 02:54 PM	#205
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 24,829	Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy So that might be a semantic issue. There is still a burn for both cases but in one case it's just to de-circularize the orbit, in the other case it's to counteract a lot of kinetic energy? I wouldn't call it semantic - these are genuinely different burns for completely different reasons. Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy So I'm guessing the current round of tests don't yet include a heat shield. SpaceX are testing heat shield tiles in patches on the hulls of these test articles, not so much for their integrity as heat shields, but to test methods of attachment, and how well they stand up to the forces involved. Unlike the Shuttle Orbiter tiles in which every one of the tiles was unique to the position in which it was located, these are generic and interchangeable. Here some photos (by Mary, a.k.a bocachicagal) showing SN9 and SN10 on the pad - the black patches are the TPS tiles
	__________________ Those who claim that something can't be done need to stop getting in the way of those who are actually doing it! - Anonymous Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!!

6th March 2021, 07:04 PM	#206
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a post-fact world Posts: 96,875	Originally Posted by 3point14 There'll be a re-entry burn. I think he means there won't be a burn after re-entry to reduce speed to reduce shock heating. Ah. Not the meaning of "burn" I understood. Got it. Originally Posted by smartcooky Nope. The "entry burn" is peculiar to Falcon 9 first stage boosters. Cold-gas thrusters orient the stage tail first, then as it begins to enter the atmosphere the booster stage accelerates under the pull of gravity. Then, three of the Falcon 9's engines light up for the entry burn, the purpose of which is to keep the booster speed from increasing to the point that the convective and radiative heat of re-entry will damage the engine end of the booster. Starship will begin its entry in much the same way as the Shuttle Orbiter, there will be a retro (oe re-entry) burn in orbit to slow it down enough to fall into a ballistic trajectory for re-entry but that is not the same as the Falcon 9's entry burn, it is for an entirely different reason. No I thought you meant there would be no burn from the reentry, not from the thrusters.
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward Last edited by Belz...; 6th March 2021 at 07:07 PM.

30th March 2021, 07:02 AM	#207
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,734	Oops...
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,734	__________________ Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]

6th March 2021, 10:24 AM	#202
RecoveringYuppy Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 14,185	Originally Posted by 3point14 No, the Starship they're testing at the moment is meant to be the orbital bit (or, at least, a representation of it). Something that looks very like it is intended to sit on top of the Superheavy and go orbital after separation from Superheavy. Note that I've edited my post.

6th March 2021, 02:22 PM	#204
RecoveringYuppy Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 14,185	So that might be a semantic issue. There is still a burn for both cases but in one case it's just to de-circularize the orbit, in the other case it's to counteract a lot of kinetic energy? So I'm guessing the current round of tests don't yet include a heat shield.

30th March 2021, 10:50 AM	#208
GodMark2 Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Oregon, USA Posts: 2,260	Originally Posted by 3point14 Oops... They did it again?
	__________________ Knowing that we do not know, it does not necessarily follow that we can not know.

30th March 2021, 11:51 AM	#209
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,734	Originally Posted by GodMark2 They did it again? Yes, but worse than last time.
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,734	__________________ Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]

30th March 2021, 03:18 PM	#210
GodMark2 Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Oregon, USA Posts: 2,260	Did you believe you're more than just friends?
	__________________ Knowing that we do not know, it does not necessarily follow that we can not know.

30th March 2021, 03:27 PM	#211
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open. Posts: 46,005	The explosion wasn't as spectacular?
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. “Perception is real, but the truth is not.” - Imelda Marcos

30th March 2021, 04:56 PM	#212
arthwollipot Observer of Phenomena Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Ngunnawal Country Posts: 85,474	I haven't had a chance to see the video yet - was it a full geobraking situation or did it sit for a while before exploding like that other time?
	__________________ A million people can call the mountains a fiction Yet it need not trouble you as you stand atop them https://xkcd.com/154/

30th March 2021, 05:11 PM	#213
Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Port Townsend, Washington Posts: 38,281	Originally Posted by arthwollipot I haven't had a chance to see the video yet - was it a full geobraking situation or did it sit for a while before exploding like that other time? No video of what actually happened, but the answer is neither. It blew up while still in the air and rained debris over a considerable area. The reason for no video is dense fog. They may now be regretting launching under those conditions.
	__________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.

30th March 2021, 05:12 PM	#214
crescent Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Colorado Posts: 5,591	Originally Posted by arthwollipot I haven't had a chance to see the video yet - was it a full geobraking situation or did it sit for a while before exploding like that other time? The only video I've yet seen was nothing. Literally. The cameras on the rocket itself cutout just as the engines were igniting for the landing burn. Everything else obscured by fog. Thick, thick fog, it didn't seem to be visible from the ground. Maybe other ISF'ers have seen good video, but I have not.

30th March 2021, 05:26 PM	#215
Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Port Townsend, Washington Posts: 38,281	Originally Posted by crescent The only video I've yet seen was nothing. Literally. The cameras on the rocket itself cutout just as the engines were igniting for the landing burn. Everything else obscured by fog. Thick, thick fog, it didn't seem to be visible from the ground. Maybe other ISF'ers have seen good video, but I have not. A good video of the actual explosion? No, due to the fog. Cameras cut out due to the explosion. But this one from NSF is pretty good in showing the flash and rain of debris. If I'm the FAA, I won't be allowing them to launch in those conditions again. ETA: Watch the yucca on the left, whose flower spike had not fully opened yet and now never will.
	__________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant. Last edited by Trebuchet; 30th March 2021 at 05:30 PM.

30th March 2021, 05:27 PM	#216
arthwollipot Observer of Phenomena Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Ngunnawal Country Posts: 85,474	Originally Posted by Trebuchet No video of what actually happened, but the answer is neither. It blew up while still in the air and rained debris over a considerable area. The reason for no video is dense fog. They may now be regretting launching under those conditions. Hmmm. That's not great.
	__________________ A million people can call the mountains a fiction Yet it need not trouble you as you stand atop them https://xkcd.com/154/

5th April 2021, 07:50 AM	#217
Mikemcc Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: UK Posts: 1,913	Elon replied to Spacex360 on Twitter: Quote: Ascent phase, transition to horizontal & control during free fall were good. A (relatively) small CH4 leak led to fire on engine 2 & fried part of avionics, causing hard start attempting landing burn in CH4 turbopump. This is getting fixed 6 ways to Sunday. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1379022709737275393
	Last edited by Mikemcc; 5th April 2021 at 07:57 AM.

18th April 2021, 03:42 AM	#220
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open. Posts: 46,005	Spacex is cheaper. There that.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. “Perception is real, but the truth is not.” - Imelda Marcos

18th April 2021, 03:43 AM	#221
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a post-fact world Posts: 96,875	Originally Posted by a_unique_person Spacex is cheaper. There that. You know what they say about getting the cheapest contractor?
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

18th April 2021, 03:55 AM	#222
Andy_Ross Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 46,390	It's nothing new. Apollo Lander was designed and built by Grumman. Contracting to a specialist company is a good idea.

18th April 2021, 03:59 AM	#223
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a post-fact world Posts: 96,875	I'm aware of that.
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

18th April 2021, 08:36 AM	#224
RecoveringYuppy Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 14,185	Originally Posted by Belz... I wonder if it's because they are confident that SpaceX can deliver on time, or if they're less confident that NASA could. What do you mean by NASA? NASA wasn't one of the competitors as far as I know. Blue Origins and Dynetics were the competitors.

18th April 2021, 09:03 AM	#225
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a post-fact world Posts: 96,875	Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy What do you mean by NASA? NASA wasn't one of the competitors as far as I know. Blue Origins and Dynetics were the competitors. Right. Retracted.
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

30th April 2021, 02:57 AM	#226
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 24,829	SN15 due to attempt its 10Km flight and then try to stick the landing in about 11½ to 12 hours time. However chances look grim. I've checked LabPadre's NerdleCam and at 4:45 am the weather at Boca Chica looks crap - 15 knot winds (29kph) and its pissing with rain. Unless there is a dramatic improvement, I can't see it happening.
	__________________ Those who claim that something can't be done need to stop getting in the way of those who are actually doing it! - Anonymous Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!!

30th April 2021, 09:25 AM	#227
RecoveringYuppy Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 14,185	What would you have said about the heavy fog they launched in not too long ago? ETA: Appears to be clear weather now? Another ETA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXG7W7skekw Clear skies. On second thought, actually looks like high clouds, narrators are expressing concern about weather.
	Last edited by RecoveringYuppy; 30th April 2021 at 09:37 AM.

30th April 2021, 10:50 AM	#228
RecoveringYuppy Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 14,185	Haven't been following closely, but appears to be scrubbed.

4th May 2021, 07:10 AM	#229
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,734	Trying again today it seems.
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,734	__________________ Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]

4th May 2021, 07:55 AM	#230
Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Port Townsend, Washington Posts: 38,281	Not worth a proper poll, but what's your bet? A) Scrubbed, weather B) Scrubbed, other C) Blows up on launch D) Lands hard, blows up E) Blows up mid-air F) Lands, blows up after G) Lands, mission success!
	__________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.

4th May 2021, 07:56 AM	#231
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,734	I'm going with lands heavily, some damage, no fireball.
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,734	__________________ Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]

4th May 2021, 10:00 AM	#232
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,734	Turns out is was A or B, not sure which.
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,734	__________________ Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]

4th May 2021, 11:43 AM	#233
Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Port Townsend, Washington Posts: 38,281	Appears to probably have been weather.
	__________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.

4th May 2021, 01:27 PM	#234
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 24,829	Originally Posted by Trebuchet Appears to probably have been weather. High altitude winds over the minimum allowed.
	__________________ Those who claim that something can't be done need to stop getting in the way of those who are actually doing it! - Anonymous Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!!

5th May 2021, 03:16 PM	#235
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 24,829	Propellant load is happening now, and they are about 7 minutes or so from launch Tim Dodd (Everyday Astronaut) live feed here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htnG_mABtSQ And its away!!!
	__________________ Those who claim that something can't be done need to stop getting in the way of those who are actually doing it! - Anonymous Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!! Last edited by smartcooky; 5th May 2021 at 03:29 PM.

5th May 2021, 03:20 PM	#236
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,734	*Tim.
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 21,734	__________________ Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]

5th May 2021, 03:30 PM	#237
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 24,829	And it stuck the landing!!
	__________________ Those who claim that something can't be done need to stop getting in the way of those who are actually doing it! - Anonymous Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!!