see ya on Friday!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/29/2022 10:28AM by Steve G..

Not surprised, launch delays are normal. Finding issues means the check system is working

---

“No persons are more frequently wrong, than those who will not admit they are wrong.” -- François de La Rochefoucauld

"Those who cannot accept the past are condemned to revise it." -- Geo. Mathias

The German word for contraceptive is “Schwangerschaftsverhütungsmittel”. By the time you finished saying that, it’s too late

Quote
Ombligo
Not surprised, launch delays are normal. Finding issues means the check system is working

Yup... I won't be shocked if they scrub the next one, too.
Better to find the leaks and fix them, than to not find them, and have them cause something "untoward" to happen on launch.

---

Paul F.
-----
A sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand. - Lucius Annaeus Seneca c. 5 BC - 65 AD
----
Good is the enemy of Excellent. Talent is not necessary for Excellence.
Persistence is necessary for Excellence. And Persistence is a Decision.
--

--

--
Eureka, CA

Quote
Ombligo
Not surprised, launch delays are normal. Finding issues means the check system is working

Kind of.

One might wonder how they missed multiple issues in the fuel-system including (according what I've read so far) flaky sensors on the bleed lines and cracks in the core stage leaking fuel in the exact same place that they found cracks/leaks last spring.

---

….I don’t want no scrub…..

---

_____________________________________

I reject your reality and substitute my own!

Oh, great! Let's launch a massive rocket with enormously destructive power without ever having had a successful test of the fuel-system even after modding the lines to "fool" the computer into bypassing safeties!

[arstechnica.com]

Beginning in April of this year, NASA conducted four separate "wet dress rehearsal" tests during which the agency aimed to fully fuel the SLS rocket and countdown to T-10 seconds, ending the test before ignition of the main engines. Each of these four tests ultimately ended prematurely, although the fourth attempt in June saw engineers bring the rocket down to T-29 seconds.

However, to reach that late stage in the countdown, NASA had to "fool" the flight computer. During the test, a 4-inch hydrogen line—smaller than the problematic 8-inch line on Monday—had a leaky seal. To complete the wet dress test, NASA chose to mask the leak from the ground launch sequencer, the ground-side computer that controls the majority of the countdown.

Because of this masking, NASA could not complete the engine chill portion of the test. Had it done so, the agency may well have uncovered the problem that caused a scrub on Monday. In hindsight, therefore, NASA probably should have completed a full wet dress rehearsal before rolling the rocket out for a launch...

This is not the NASA that I knew growing up.

---

==

So their wet dress test wasn't actually a wet dress test... more of a damp hem test.

Gotta wonder if that was a NASA decision, or a Boeing "Oh, it'll be FINE... trust us, we're the ExPerTS" decision.

---

Paul F.
-----
A sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand. - Lucius Annaeus Seneca c. 5 BC - 65 AD
----
Good is the enemy of Excellent. Talent is not necessary for Excellence.
Persistence is necessary for Excellence. And Persistence is a Decision.
--

--

--
Eureka, CA