Elon Musk on stage at his September 27th presentation at the IAC. Image: SpaceX
When Elon Musk speaks publicly about SpaceX and their efforts to make space travel less expensive, people listen. He attracts all kinds of scientists and journalists to his presentations. But he also attracts… other types of people. And those people ask some strange questions.
Musk must be getting used to it by now. He’s one of those public figures that, by virtue of his efforts to bring the future closer, attracts a lot of interest. But some of the questions in the Q&A following his presentation on Sept. 27 were truly bizarre.
Anybody could stand in line at one of the microphones in the audience and ask their question. And ask they did.
One man started off by saying he just recently attended Burning Man in the desert. Mars is like one big desert, he said, with no water to wash away all the sewage. What will future Mars colonists do with all their s**t he asked?
I felt bad for the guy. Here was his chance to ask Musk, who is clearly some sort of hero the guy, any question about space travel. And he chose to ask about poop. It was truly cringe-worthy, but Musk handled it well. He must be used to it.
Elon Musk looking perplexed after being grilled about Martian toilets. Image: SpaceX
It’s not like it’s not a legitimate concern, way down the line, if we ever do establish a city. But good grief. Musk was there to talk about the Interplanetary Transport System, not the nuts and bolts of city planning. It’s clear that this gentleman travelled all that way just to ask about sewage. Fail. (Jump to 1:06:30 in the video for that bit of magic.)
Another person asked everyone to give Elon a hand because he “Inspires the s**t out of us!” (At 1:10:35 in the video.) Musk looked uncomfortable. I don’t think he likes the hero-worship part of his gig. The guy then tried to give him a comic book about Mars, but complained that security wouldn’t let him. Ummmm, yeah.
One person complained that SpaceX won’t hire internationally, and how can they claim to be going interplanetary when they won’t even hire from other countries? Musk patiently explained that when it comes to rocketry, the government tightly restricts who is allowed to come from other countries to work on projects. Rocketry is governed by the same rules as weaponry, as it turns out. Thanks for explaining, Elon.
There were others. One lady wanted to come upstairs and give him a kiss, on behalf of all the ladies. Another asked if they were going to mathematically determine the most expendable human on Earth, and send them to Mars? That gem is 1:16:45 in the video. BTW, that guy thought it would be Michael Cera. Huh?
The same guy wanted to pitch a comedy video to him after the presentation. He was, unfortunately, turned down.
Another guy, who called himself a “local idiot” asked if Elon himself was planning on going to Mars. The guy said he would’ve hated to put in all this work and then not go. Musk’s answer was, in short, that he would like to go, but only if a good succession plan was in place in case he perished. That way the company’s work could continue.
There were some good questions too, of course. Questions about launch site for the craft, where it will be manufactured, and other pertinent questions around who should be the first people to go. Others asked about the journey itself, and how travellers would be kept safe from radiation and other hazards. So the Q&A wasn’t a waste of time by any means.
The whole presentation is worth watching, if you haven’t already. For those of you who just want to watch the wackiest parts of the Q&A, you’re in luck. There’s a highlight video.
SpaceX's newly revealed Interplanetary Transit System will make travel to Mars, and other destinations in our Solar System, possible. Image: SpaceX
Today, Elon Musk elaborated on his plans to make humanity a planet-faring species. We’ve known for a long time that Mars is SpaceX’s destination, but the fine details haven’t been revealed. In today’s talk at the International Astronautical Congress (IAC), Musk revealed a game-changer for travel to Mars, and beyond.
If anyone has ever guessed that Musk’s plans involved a refuelling ship, I’ve never heard them say it out loud. But that’s exactly what Musk revealed. SpaceX plans to launch a Mars-bound craft into orbit, then launch a refuelling craft to refill the interplanetary ship’s fuel tanks. Only then would the Interplanetary Transport System (ITS) depart for Mars.
SpaceX’s proposed system is all about lowering the cost of travel to Mars. Only when the cost is lowered, does a sustained presence there become realistic. And Musk’s ITS system will definitely lower the cost.
Traditional space travel would cost $10 billion to get one person to Mars. Musk said that they can get it down to the median cost of a house in the US, about $200,000 US. The idea is that anyone who really wanted to could save up enough money and go to Mars. Musk did acknowledge that it will be tricky to reduce the cost of the Earth to Mars trip by a whopping 5 million percent.
There are four keys to reducing the cost:
full reusability
refilling in orbit
propellant production on Mars
right propellant
The ITS would feature reusable boosters, reusable spaceships, and refuelling in orbit. The interplanetary ship would be launched into orbit around Earth and parked there. Fuel ships would make 3 to 5 trips to fill the tank of the interplanetary ship waiting in orbit. From there, Musk thinks that the trip to Mars could take as little as 80 days. In the more distant future, that could be cut to 30 days.
The ITS requires an extraordinarily powerful booster, featuring 42 of SpaceX’s Raptor engines. Image: SpaceX
If this whole system isn’t shocking enough, and thrilling enough, for you, Musk has more than just one of these craft in mind. He imagines a fleet of them, perhaps 1,000, travelling en masse back and forth to Mars.
The ITS and its vital statistics. Image: SpaceX
The driving force behind all this is, of course, making Mars possible. In his presentation, Musk said we have two paths. One is to stay on Earth and face extinction from some doomsday event. The other is to become an interplanetary species, and use Mars to back up Earth’s biosphere. The SpaceX system is designed to make the second path possible.
Musk talked about the need to create a self-sustaining city in its own right. That obviously won’t happen right away, but it’ll never happen unless transport to Mars, and back, becomes feasible. With the proposed SpaceX system, Mars will be an option. Musk thinks that the ITS could also get us to one of the Jovian moons, if we could create fuel production and depots. In fact, he said we can probably go all the way to Pluto and beyond.
The ITS requires huge fuel tanks, one of which is seen here at SpaceX’s production facility. Image: SpaceX
There are a lot of challenges for this system. It’s far from a done deal. The system will require newer, more powerful engines. But SpaceX is already working on that. It’s called the Raptor, and testing has already begun.
Musk talked about the impressive exploration done on Mars by NASA and other agencies, but stressed that it’s time to take things further and aim for a sustained presence on Mars. To that end, SpaceX plans on sending a craft to Mars during every Earth-Mars opposition, which happens about every 2 years. Initially, that will be done with an unmanned Dragon capsule.
The mood at Musk’s presentation was one of excitement. The crowd was definitely there to see him. There was one humorous moment when Musk remarked “Timelines. I’m not the best at this sort of thing.” This is a nod to the difficulties with creating a timeline for something like the ITS. But really, what agency can adhere to strict schedules when doing something that’s never been done before? Especially in the realm of interplanetary travel?
The excitement surrounding Musk’s plans for travel to Mars is palpable. That’s understandable, considering the magnitude of what he’s talking about, and considering how long people have dreamed of going to Mars. The fact that someone with a track record like SpaceX’s is starting to lay the groundwork for travel to, and a presence on Mars, is exciting. There’s no way around it.
But there are lots of questions. Musk is the first to admit that he doesn’t have all the answers. He says up front that he sees his role as developing the transport system. Once that is moving ahead, others will address the challenges of establishing a presence on Mars.
One of the primary questions is around energy, and there are two sides to that. Fuel processing will have to be established quickly on Mars if the ships are to return to Earth.
This slide from Musk’s presentation show some of the considerations around producing fuel on Mars. Image: SpaceX
Musk also talked about the three possible fuel types to be derived on Mars.
This slide from Musk’s presentation shows the availability/desirability of the three types of fuel that could be derived from Mars. Image: SpaceX
The ITS ships will be able to carry a large payload, so it’s possible that the parts and pieces for a fuel plant could be pre-built somehow, then sent to Mars. There is an enormous amount of detail missing when it comes right down to it, but human ingenuity being what it is, this may be solvable.
Assuming that a rocket fuel plant could be assembled on Mars, that begs the second energy question. Creating this fuel will in itself require lots of energy. Much more than solar can provide. Musk briefly mentioned the possibility of nuclear energy, but didn’t go into detail. That’s understandable, because he clearly sees his role as developing the transportation system.
Establishing nuclear energy on Mars would also require a lot of infrastructure. On Earth, uranium processing is an enormous task. How will that be done on Mars? Is there enough uranium in Mars’ crust? Conventional atomic reactors use water, lots of it, to produce energy. Where will that water come from on Mars? Will the same amount be needed?
Or will thorium reactors be used? If you’re not up on thorium reactors, they are different than uranium reactors and are worth reading about. They use thorium for fuel, not uranium, and are different in other ways. They’re safer and produce less waste, but is there sufficient thorium available on Mars? Thorium is much more plentiful in Earth’s crust than uranium.
Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are being developed for use on Earth. They are built in one location, then moved to their operational location. They can be linked together and require less sophisticated operators. Perhaps SMRs using thorium will provide the energy required for the ITS to work.
These questions are all important of course, and they bear thinking about. But one thing that can’t be denied is Musk’s vision. Anyone that wants humanity to survive, or that grew up reading science fiction, will love what Musk is doing. For that matter, anyone with a sense of adventure will love Musk.
Musk’s overall vision of us as a planet-faring species is something that will be a long time coming, I think. Fleets of interplanetary cargo ships plying the solar system, with fuelling depots along the way. An established human presence on Mars, the Moon, and perhaps the moons of the gas giants, and all the way out to Pluto.
It seems like a fanciful dream, but remember what Musk said at the start of his presentation. There are really only two paths. The first is to restrict ourselves to Earth, and die at the hands of some sort of extinction event.
The second path is to head outward and expand throughout the solar system.
It’s not science fiction anymore. It’s simple survival.
SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket moments after catastrophic explosion destroys the rocket and Amos-6 Israeli satellite payload at launch pad 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL, on Sept. 1, 2016. A static hot fire test was planned ahead of scheduled launch on Sept. 3, 2016. Credit: USLaunchReport
SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket moments after catastrophic explosion destroys the rocket and Amos-6 Israeli satellite payload at launch pad 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL, on Sept. 1, 2016. A static hot fire test was planned ahead of scheduled launch on Sept. 3, 2016. Credit: USLaunchReport
The Accident Investigation Team (AIT) is composed of SpaceX, the FAA, NASA, the U.S. Air Force, and industry experts.
“At this stage of the investigation, preliminary review of the data and debris suggests that a large breach in the cryogenic helium system of the second stage liquid oxygen tank took place,” SpaceX reported on the firm’s website in today’s anomaly update dated Sept. 23- the first in three weeks.
The helium system is used to pressurize the liquid oxygen tank from inside.
The explosion took place without warning at SpaceX’s Space Launch Complex-40 launch facility at approximately 9:07 a.m. EDT on Sept. 1 on Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fl, during a routine fueling test and engine firing test as liquid oxygen and RP-1 propellants were being loade into the 229-foot-tall (70-meter) Falcon 9. Launch of the AMOS-6 comsat was scheduled two days later.
Indeed the time between the first indication of an anomaly to loss of signal was vanishingly short – only about “93 milliseconds” of elapsed time, SpaceX reported.
93 milliseconds amounts to less than 1/10th of a second. That conclusion is based on examining 3,000 channels of data.
SpaceX reported that investigators “are currently scouring through approximately 3,000 channels of engineering data along with video, audio and imagery.”
Aerial view of pad and strongback damage at SpaceX Launch Complex-40 as seen from the VAB roof on Sept. 8, 2016 after fueling test explosion destroyed the Falcon 9 rocket and AMOS-6 payload and damaged the pad at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL on Sept. 1, 2016. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
Both the $60 million SpaceX rocket and the $200 million AMOS-6 Israeli commercial communications satellite payload were completely destroyed in a massive fireball that erupted suddenly during the planned pre-launch fueling and hot fire engine ignition test at pad 40. There were no injuries since the pad had been cleared.
The Sept. 1 calamity also counts as the second time a Falcon 9 has exploded in 15 months and the second time it originated in the second stage and will call into question the rocket’s reliability.
The first failure involved a catastrophic mid air explosion about two and a half minutes after liftoff, when a strut holding the helium tank inside the liquid oxygen tank failed in flight during the Dragon CRS-7 cargo resupply launch for NASA to the International Space Station on June 28, 2015 – and witnessed by this author.
However SpaceX says that although both incidents involved the second stage, they are unrelated – even as they continue seeking to determine the root cause.
“All plausible causes are being tracked in an extensive fault tree and carefully investigated. Through the fault tree and data review process, we have exonerated any connection with last year’s CRS-7 mishap.”
And they are thoroughly reviewing all rocket components.
“At SpaceX headquarters in Hawthorne, CA, our manufacturing and production is continuing in a methodical manner, with teams continuing to build engines, tanks, and other systems as they are exonerated from the investigation.”
But SpaceX will have to conduct an even more thorough analysis of every aspect of their designs and manufacturing processes and supply chain exactly because the cause of this disaster is different and apparently went undetected during the CRS-7 accident review.
And before Falcon 9 launches are allowed to resume, the root cause must be determined, effective fixes must be identified and effective remedies must be verified and implemented.
Large scale redesign of the second stage helium system may be warranted since two independent failure modes have occurred. Others could potentially be lurking. It’s the job of the AIT to find out – especially because American astronauts will be flying atop this rocket to the ISS starting in 2017 or 2018 and their lives depend on its being reliable and robust.
After the last failure in June 2015, it took nearly six months before Falcon 9 launches were resumed.
Launches were able to recommence relatively quickly because the June 2015 disaster took place at altitude and there was no damage to pad 40.
That’s not the case with the Sept. 1 calamity where pad 40 suffered significant damage and will be out of action for quite a few months at least as the damage is catalogued and evaluated. Then a repair, refurbishment, testing and recertification plan needs to be completed to rebuild and return pad 40 to flight status. Furthermore SpaceX will have to manufacture a new transporter-erector.
Since the explosion showered debris over a wide area, searchers have been prowling surrounding areas and other nearby pads at the Cape and Kennedy Space Center, hunting for evidentiary remains that could provide clues or answers to the mystery of what’s at the root cause this time.
Searchers have recovered “the majority of debris from the incident has been recovered, photographed, labeled and catalogued, and is now in a hangar for inspection and use during the investigation.”
To date they have not found any evidence for debris beyond the immediate area of LC-40, the company said.
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk had previously reported via twitter that the rocket failure originated somewhere in the upper stage near the liquid oxygen (LOX) tank during fueling test operations at the launch pad, for what is known as a hot fire engine ignition test of all nine first stage Merlin 1D engines.
Engineers were in the final stages of loading the liquid oxygen (LOX) and RP-1 kerosene propellants that power the Falcon 9 first stage for the static fire test which is a full launch dress rehearsal. The anomaly took place about 8 minutes before the planned engine hot fire ignition.
And the incident took place less than two days before the scheduled Falcon 9 launch of AMOS-6 on Sept. 3 from pad 40.
The explosion also caused extensive damage to the launch pad as well as to the rockets transporter erector, or strongback, that holds the rocket in place until minutes before liftoff, and ground support equipment (GSE) around the pad – as seen in my recent photos of the pad taken a week after the explosion during the OSIRIS-REx launch campaign.
Mangled SpaceX Falcon 9 strongback with dangling cables (at right) as seen on Sept. 7 after prelaunch explosion destroyed the rocket and AMOS-6 payload at Space Launch Complex-40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL on Sept. 1, 2016 . Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
Fortunately, many other pad areas and infrastructure survived intact or in “good condition.”
“While substantial areas of the pad systems were affected, the Falcon Support Building adjacent to the pad was unaffected, and per standard procedure was unoccupied at the time of the anomaly. The new liquid oxygen farm – e.g. the tanks and plumbing that hold our super-chilled liquid oxygen – was unaffected and remains in good working order. The RP-1 (kerosene) fuel farm was also largely unaffected. The pad’s control systems are also in relatively good condition.”
The rocket disaster was coincidentally captured as it unfolded in stunning detail in a spectacular up close video recorded by my space journalist colleague Mike Wagner at USLaunchReport.
Watch this video:
Video Caption: SpaceX – Static Fire Anomaly – AMOS-6 – 09-01-2016. Credit: USLaunchReport
Even as investigators and teams of SpaceX engineers sift through the data and debris looking for the root cause of the helium tank breach, other SpaceX engineering teams and workers prepare to restart launches from the other SpaceX pad on the Florida Space Coast- namely Pad 39A on the Kennedy Space Center.
So the ambitious aerospace firm is already setting its sights on a ‘Return to Flight’ launch as early as November of this year, SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell said on Sept. 13 at a French space conference.
“We’re anticipating getting back to flight, being down for about three months, so getting back to flight in November, the November timeframe,” Shotwell announced during a panel discussion at the World Satellite Business Week Conference in Paris, France – as reported here last week.
SpaceX reconfirmed the November target today.
“We will work to resume our manifest as quickly as responsible once the cause of the anomaly has been identified by the Accident Investigation Team.”
“Pending the results of the investigation, we anticipate returning to flight as early as the November timeframe.”
SpaceX is renovating Launch Complex 39A at the Kennedy Space Center for launches of the Falcon Heavy and human rated Falcon 9. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
As SpaceX was launching from pad 40, they have been simultaneously renovating and refurbishing NASA’s former shuttle launch pad at Launch Complex 39A at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) – from which the firm hopes to launch the new Falcon Heavy booster in 2017 as well as human rated launches of the Falcon 9 with the Crew Dragon to the ISS.
So now SpaceX will utilize pad 39A for commercial Falcon 9 launches as well. But much works remains to finish pad work as I recently witnessed.
Stay tuned here for Ken’s continuing Earth and Planetary science and human spaceflight news.
Up close view of top of mangled SpaceX Falcon 9 strongback with dangling cables (at right) as seen on Sept. 7 after prelaunch explosion destroyed the rocket and AMOS-6 payload at Space Launch Complex-40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL on Sept. 1, 2016 . Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.comOverview schematic of SpaceX Falcon 9. Credit: SpaceX
SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
For Elon Musk, it’s always been about Mars. Musk, and his company SpaceX, haven’t always been explicit about how exactly they’ll get to Mars. But SpaceX’s fourteen years of effort in rocketry have been aimed at getting people into space cheaper, and getting people to Mars.
Musk has revealed hints along the way. One of the boldest was his statement at Code Conference 2016. At that conference he said, “I think, if things go according to plan, we should be able to launch people probably in 2024, with arrival in 2025.”
He went on to explain it this way: “The basic game plan is we’re going to send a mission to Mars with every Mars opportunity from 2018 onwards. They occur approximately every 26 months. We’re establishing cargo flights to Mars that people can count on for cargo.”
Those comments certainly removed any lingering doubt that Mars is the goal.
But a recent Tweet from Musk has us wondering if Mars will just be a stepping stone to more distant destinations in our Solar System. On Sept. 16th, Musk tweeted:
Turns out MCT can go well beyond Mars, so will need a new name…
And the new name is Interplanetary Transport System (ITS).
So, is SpaceX developing plans to go beyond Mars? Is the plan to establish cargo flights to Mars still central to the whole endeavour? Does the name change from Mars Cargo Transporter (MCT) to Interplanetary Transport System (ITS) signal a change in focus? These questions may be answered soon, on September 27th, when Musk will speak at the International Astronautical Congress (IAC), in Guadalajara, Mexico.
Musk hinted back in January that he would be revealing some major details of the MCT at the IAC later this month. In January, he said at the StartmeupHK Festival in Hong Kong that “I’m hoping to describe that architecture later this year at IAC … and I think that will be quite exciting.”
So, lots of hints. And these hints bring questions. Is SpaceX developing a super heavy rocket of some type? A BFR? If the Mars Colonial Transport system can go much further than Mars, maybe to the moons of the gas giants, won’t that require a much larger rocket than the Falcon Heavy?
In the past, SpaceX has conceptualized about larger rockets and the engines that would power them. At the 2010 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) Joint Propulsion Conference, SpaceX presented some of these conceptual designs. They featured a super-heavy lift vehicle larger than the Falcon Heavy, dubbed the Falcon X. Beyond that, and in increasingly powerful designs, were the Falcon X Heavy, and the Falcon XX Heavy.
These were only concepts, but it’s six years later now. Surely, any further thinking around a super-heavy lift vehicle would have started there. And if the MCT can now go well beyond Mars, as Musk said in his Tweet, there must be a more powerful rocket. Mustn’t there?
So with one tweet, Musk has sucked the air out of the room, and got everybody speculating. But Musk isn’t the only one with eyes on building a greater human presence in space. He has a competitor: Jeff Bezos, former Amazon CEO, and his company Blue Origin.
The New Shepard reusable rocket is Blue Origin’s flagship. Image: Blue Origin
The original space race pitted the USA against the USSR in a battle for scientific supremacy and prestige. The USA won that race, and they’re still reaping the benefits of that technological victory. But a new race might be brewing between Musk and Bezos, between SpaceX and Blue Origin.
The two companies haven’t been directly competing. They’ve both been working on reusable rockets, but Blue Origin has concerned itself with sub-orbital rocketry designed to take people into space for a few minutes. Space tourism, if you will. SpaceX’s focus has always been on orbital capability, and more.
But not to be outdone by SpaceX, Blue Origin has recently announced the New Glenn orbital launch vehicle, to be powered by seven of their new, powerful, BE-4 engines.
In rocketry, size definitely matters. Image: Blue Origin
There’s definitely some one-upmanship going on between Musk and Bezos. So far, it’s mostly been civil, with each acknowledging each other’s achievements and milestones in rocketry. But they’re also both quick to point out why they’re better than the other.
Bezos, with the announcement of the New Glenn orbital launch vehicle, and the BE-4 engines that will power it, took every opportunity to mention the fact that his company spends zero tax dollars, while SpaceX benefits from financial arrangements with NASA. Musk, on the other hand, likes to point out the fact that Blue Origin has never delivered anything into orbit, while SpaceX has delivered numerous payloads into orbit successfully.
But for now, anyway, the focus is on SpaceX, and what Musk will reveal at the upcoming IAC Congress. If he reveals a solid plan for recurring cargo missions to Mars, the excitement will be palpable. And if he reveals plans to go further than Mars, with much larger rockets, we may never catch our breaths.
Special Guests:
This week’s guests will be the Universe Sandbox Developers Dan Dixon (Project Lead & Creator) and Jenn Seiler (Astrophysicist & Developer).
We’ve had an abundance of news stories for the past few months, and not enough time to get to them all. So we are now using a tool called Trello to submit and vote on stories we would like to see covered each week, and then Fraser will be selecting the stories from there. Here is the link to the Trello WSH page (http://bit.ly/WSHVote), which you can see without logging in. If you’d like to vote, just create a login and help us decide what to cover!
We record the Weekly Space Hangout every Friday at 12:00 pm Pacific / 3:00 pm Eastern. You can watch us live on Universe Today, or the Universe Today YouTube page.
SpaceX is renovating Launch Complex 39A at the Kennedy Space Center for launches of the Falcon Heavy and human rated Falcon 9. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
SpaceX is renovating Launch Complex 39A at the Kennedy Space Center for launches of the Falcon Heavy and human rated Falcon 9. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
“We’re anticipating getting back to flight, being down for about three months, so getting back to flight in November, the November timeframe,” Shotwell announced on Sept. 13, during a panel discussion at the World Satellite Business Week Conference being held in Paris, France.
The catastrophic Sept. 1 launch pad explosion took place without warning at SpaceX’s Space Launch Complex-40 launch facility at approximately 9:07 a.m. EDT on Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fl during a routine fueling test.
Both the $60 million SpaceX rocket and the $200 million AMOS-6 Israeli commercial communications satellite payload were completely destroyed in a massive fireball that erupted suddenly during a routine and planned pre-launch fueling and engine ignition test at pad 40 on Sept. 1.
However, SpaceX is still seeking to determine the root cause of the catastrophe, which must be fully determined, corrected and rectified before any new Falcon 9 launches can actually occur.
Indeed nailing down the root cause has thus far confounded SpaceX investigators and was labeled as the “most difficult and complex failure” in its history said SpaceX CEO and Founder Elon Musk in a series of update tweets on Sept. 9. He also sought the public’s help in ascertaining the elusive cause via any audio/video recordings.
The rocket failure originated somewhere in the upper stage near the liquid oxygen (LOX) tank during fueling test operations at the launch pad, for what is known as a hot fire engine ignition test of all nine first stage Merlin 1D engines, said Musk.
Engineers were in the final stages of loading the liquid oxygen (LOX) and RP-1 kerosene propellants that power the Falcon 9 first stage for the static fire test which is a full launch dress rehearsal. The anomaly took place about 8 minutes before the planned engine hot fire ignition.
Shotwell also stated that the launch would occur from SpaceX’s other Florida Space Coast launch pad – namely the former Space Shuttle Launch Complex 39A on the Kennedy Space Center.
SpaceX also operates a third launch pad at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.
“We would launch from the East Coast on Pad 39A in the November timeframe. And then Vandenberg would be available … for our other assorted customers,” Shotwell stated.
SpaceX has signed a long term lease with NASA to use Pad 39A.
Shotwell did not say which payload would be the first to launch.
Mangled SpaceX Falcon 9 strongback with dangling cables (at right) as seen on Sept. 7 after prelaunch explosion destroyed the rocket and AMOS-6 payload at Space Launch Complex-40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL on Sept. 1, 2016 . Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
The incident took place less than two days before the scheduled Falcon 9 launch of AMOS-6 on Sept. 3 from pad 40.
The Sept. 1 calamity disaster also counts as the second time a Falcon 9 has exploded in 15 months and will call into question the rocket’s reliability. The first failure involved a catastrophic mid air explosion about two and a half minutes after liftoff, during the Dragon CRS-9 cargo resupply launch for NASA to the International Space Station on June 28, 2015 – and witnessed by this author.
While launching from pad 40, SpaceX has simultaneously been renovating and refurbishing NASA’s former shuttle launch at Complex 39A – from which the firm hopes to launch the new Falcon Heavy booster as well as human rated launches of the Falcon 9 with the Crew Dragon to the ISS.
SpaceX will have to finish the pad 39A upgrades soon in order to have any hopes of achieving a November return to flight launch date, and a lot of work remains to be done. For example the shuttle era Rotating Service Structure (RSS) is still standing. The timing for its demolishment has not been announced, according to a source.
Prior to launching from 39A, SpaceX would presumably roll out a Falcon 9 rocket to conduct fit checks and conduct a full launch dress rehearsal and first stage static hot fire engine test to confirm that all the newly installed equipment, gear and fueling lines, pumps, etc. are fully functional, operational and safe.
Aerial view of pad and strongback damage at SpaceX Launch Complex-40 as seen from the VAB roof on Sept. 8, 2016 after fueling test explosion destroyed the Falcon 9 rocket and AMOS-6 payload at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL on Sept. 1, 2016. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
The rocket disaster was coincidentally captured as it unfolded in stunning detail in a spectacular up close video recorded by my space journalist colleague at USLaunchReport – shown below.
Here is the full video from my space journalist friend and colleague Mike Wagner of USLaunchReport:
Video Caption: SpaceX – Static Fire Anomaly – AMOS-6 – 09-01-2016. Credit: USLaunchReport
The 229-foot-tall (70-meter) SpaceX Falcon 9 had been slated for an overnight blastoff on Saturday, September 3 at 3 a.m. from pad 40 with the 6 ton AMOS-6 telecommunications satellite valued at some $200 million.
The AMOS-6 communications satellite was built by Israel Aerospace Industries for Space Communication Ltd. It was planned to provide communication services including direct satellite home internet for Africa, the Middle East and Europe.
The Falcon 9 rocket and AMOS-6 satellite were swiftly consumed in a huge fireball and thunderous blasts accompanied by a vast plume of smoke rising from the wreckage that was visible for many miles around the Florida Space Coast.
“Loss of Falcon vehicle today during propellant fill operation,” Musk tweeted several hours after the launch pad explosion.
“Originated around upper stage oxygen tank. Cause still unknown. More soon.”
The explosion also caused extensive damage to the rockets transporter erector, or strongback, that holds the rocket in place until minutes before liftoff, and ground support equipment (GSE) around the pad – as seen in my new photos of the pad taken a week after the explosion.
Dangling cables and gear such as pulley’s and more can clearly be seen to still be present as the strongback remains raised at pad 40. The strongback raises the rocket at the pad and also houses multiple umbilical line for electrical power, purge gases, computer communications and more.
One of the four lightning masts is also visibly burnt and blackened – much like what occurred after the catastrophic Orbital ATK Antares rocket exploded moments after liftoff from a NASA Wallops launch pad on Oct 28, 2014 and witnessed by this author.
Black soot also appears to cover some area of the pads ground support equipment in the new photos.
So it’s very likely that repairs to and re-certification of pad 40 will take at least several months.
Up close view of top of mangled SpaceX Falcon 9 strongback with dangling cables (at right) as seen on Sept. 7 after prelaunch explosion destroyed the rocket and AMOS-6 payload at Space Launch Complex-40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL on Sept. 1, 2016 . Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
Launch of SpaceX Falcon 9 carrying JCSAT-16 Japanese communications satellite to orbit on Aug. 14, 2016 at 1:26 a.m. EDT from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fl. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
And Shotwell pointed to the numerous successful SpaceX launches in her conference remarks.
“So now let’s look to the good. We did have an extraordinary launch year. We launched 9 times in just under 8 months, in the past year successfully,” Shotwell elaborated.
Shotwell was referring to the upgraded, full thrust version of the Falcon 9 first launched in Dec. 2015
“We rolled out a new vehicle, which we flew last December. And that vehicle was the vehicle that was designed to land.”
“And so we did recover the first stage six times. Twice back on land. And four times on the droneship. Which I think is an extraordinary move for the industry.”
“I don’t know that everyone appreciates it, but certainly that is a leap forward in launches for our customers.”
SpaceX Falcon 9 launches and lands over Port Canaveral in this streak shot showing rockets midnight liftoff from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida at 12:45 a.m. EDT on July 18, 2016 carrying Dragon CRS-9 craft to the International Space Station (ISS) with almost 5,000 pounds of cargo and docking port. View from atop Exploration Tower in Port Canaveral. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
This recovered 156-foot-tall (47-meter) SpaceX Falcon 9 first stage has arrived back into Port Canaveral, FL after successfully launching JCSAT-16 Japanese communications satellite to orbit on Aug. 14, 2016 from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fl. NASA’s VAB in the background – as seen from Exploration Tower on Aug. 19. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
Size comparison between the New Glenn and all other rockets currently in operations (with the Saturn V for comparison). Credit: Blue Origin
Space exploration is becoming a lucrative domain for private aerospace companies (aka. the NewSpace industry). With opportunities for launch and resupply services growing, costs dwindling, and the cancellation of the Space Shuttle Program, private companies have been stepping up in recent years to provide their own launch vehicles and services to fill the gap.
Take Jeff Bezos, for example. Back in 2000, the founder of Amazon.com created Blue Origin to fulfill his lifelong dream of colonizing space. For years, Bezos and the company he founded have been working to produce their own fleet of reusable rockets. And as of the morning of Monday, Sept. 12th, he unveiled their newest and heaviest rocket – the New Glenn.
Much like SpaceX, Blue Origin has been committed to the creation of reusable rocket technology. This was made clear with the development of the New Shepard suborbital rocket, which was unveiled in 2006. Named in honor of the first American astronaut to go into space (Alan Shepard), this rocket made its first flight in April of 2015 and has had an impressive record, nailing four out of five soft landings in the space of just over a year.
New Shepard comes in for a landing with drag brakes and landing gear deployed. Credit: Blue Origin.
With the New Glenn – named in honor of astronaut John Glenn, the first American astronaut to orbit the Earth – the company now intends to take the next step, offering launch services beyond Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) and for crewed missions. As Bezos said during the press conference:
“New Glenn is designed to launch commercial satellites and to fly humans into space. The three-stage variant-with its high specific impulse hydrogen upper stage—is capable of flying demanding beyond-LEO missions.”
According to Bezos, Blue Origin will have both a two-stage and three-stage variant of the rocket. Whereas the two-stage will provide heavier lift capacity to LEO, the three-stage will be able to reach further, and will the company’s go-to when sending crewed missions into space. Work on the rocket began back in 2012, and the company hopes to make their first launch prior to 2020.
As Bezos said during the unveiling, this rocket carries on in the same tradition that inspired the creation of the New Shepard:
“Building, flying, landing, and re-flying New Shepard has taught us so much about how to design for practical, operable reusability. And New Glenn incorporates all of those learnings. Named in honor of John Glenn, the first American to orbit Earth, New Glenn is 23 feet in diameter and lifts off with 3.85 million pounds of thrust from seven BE-4 engines. Burning liquefied natural gas and liquid oxygen, these are the same BE-4 engines that will power United Launch Alliance’s new Vulcan rocket.”
A United Launch Alliance (ULA) Delta IV rocket launching from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fl, on July 23rd, 2015. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
The rocket will have a sea-level thrust of 1.746 million kg (3.85 million lbs), placing it ahead of the Delta IV Heavy – which has a sea-level thrust of about 900,000 kg (2 million lbs) – but behind the 2.268 million kg (5 million lbs) of the Falcon Heavy. Both variants will be powered by BE-4 engines, which are also manufactured by Blue Origin. The third-stage also employs a single vacuum-optimized BE-3 engine that burns liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen.
However, the most interesting facet of the New Glenn is the fact that it will be reusable, with its first stage providing braking thrust and deployable legs (similar to the Falcon 9). In creating a heavy lift rocket that employs a retrievable first-stage, Blue Origin has signaled its intent to give SpaceX a run for its money when it comes to the development of reusable rocket technology.
It is also likely to raise the company’s profile, which has so far been limited to conducting sub-orbital research for NASA and dabbling in the space-tourism industry. But once the New Glenn is up and running, it is likely to begin securing contracts to provide resupply services the ISS, as well as contracts with companies and research institutions to place satellites in orbit.
The Falcon Heavy, once operational, will be the most powerful rocket in the world. Credit: spacex.com
According to The Verge, Bezos also hinted that his company has another project in mind – called the New Armstrong. While no details have been given just yet, the name of this rocket is a clear allusion to the Moon Landing, and hints that the company may have designs on possible moon missions in the coming decades.
This is an exciting time for the NewSpace industry. In the coming months, SpaceX is expected to conduct the first launch of the Falcon Heavy, which will be the most powerful rocket built in the US since the retirement of the Apollo program’s Saturn V launcher. And if they keep to their current schedule, Blue Origin will be following this in a few years time with the launch of the largest rocket of the post-Apollo era.
Big rockets and big lift capacities can mean only thing: big things lie ahead of us!
Mangled SpaceX Falcon 9 strongback with dangling cables (at right) as seen on Sept. 7 after prelaunch explosion destroyed the rocket and AMOS-6 payload at Space Launch Complex-40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL on Sept. 1, 2016 . Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
Mangled SpaceX Falcon 9 strongback with dangling cables (at right) as seen on Sept. 7 after prelaunch explosion destroyed the rocket and AMOS-6 payload at Space Launch Complex-40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL on Sept. 1, 2016 . Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
CAPE CANAVERAL AIR FORCE STATION, FL – More than a week after the catastrophic launch pad explosion that eviscerated a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket during a fueling test, the bold and burgeoning aerospace firm is still confounded by the “most difficult and complex failure” in its history, and is asking the public for help in nailing down the elusive cause – says SpaceX CEO and Founder Elon Musk in a new series of tweets, that also seeks the public’s help in the complex investigation.
“Turning out to be the most difficult and complex failure we have ever had in 14 years,” Musk tweeted on Friday, Sept. 9 about the disaster that took place without warning on Space Launch Complex-40 at approximately 9:07 a.m. EDT on Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fl. on Sept. 1, 2016.
Both the $60 million SpaceX rocket and the $200 million AMOS-6 Israeli commercial communications satellite payload were completely destroyed in a massive fireball that erupted suddenly during a routine and planned pre-launch fueling and engine ignition test at pad 40 on Wednesday morning Sep. 1.
“Still working on the Falcon fireball investigation,” Musk stated.
Check out my new up close photos of launch pad 40 herein – showing dandling cables and pad damage – taken over the past few days during NASA’s OSIRIS-REx launch campaign which successfully soared to space on Sept 8. from the adjacent pad at Space Launch Complex-41.
The rocket failure originated somewhere in the upper stage during fueling test operations at the launch pad for what is known as a hot fire engine ignition test of all nine first stage Merlin 1D engines, said Musk.
However, the countdown dress rehearsal had not yet reached the point of ignition and the Merlin engines were still several minutes away from typically firing for a few seconds as the rocket was to be held down during the pre-planned hot fire test.
“Important to note that this happened during a routine filling operation. Engines were not on and there was no apparent heat source,” Musk elaborated.
Engineers were in the final stages of loading the liquid oxygen (LOX) and RP-1 kerosene propellants that power the Falcon 9 first stage for the static fire test which is a full launch dress rehearsal.
Mangled SpaceX Falcon 9 strongback with dangling cables as seen on Sept. 7 after prelaunch explosion destroyed the rocket and AMOS-6 payload at Space Launch Complex-40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL on Sept. 1, 2016 . Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
The explosion mystery and its root causes are apparently so deep that SpaceX is asking the public for help by sending in “any recordings of the event” which may exist, beyond what is already known.
“If you have audio, photos or videos of our anomaly last week, please send to [email protected]. Material may be useful for investigation,” Musk requested by twitter.
Indications of an initial “bang” moments before the calamity are also bewildering investigators.
“Particularly trying to understand the quieter bang sound a few seconds before the fireball goes off. May come from rocket or something else.”
The explosion is also being jointly investigated by multiple US Federal agency’s.
“Support & advice from @NASA, @FAA, @AFPAA & others much appreciated. Please email any recordings of the event to [email protected].”
The incident took place less than two days before the scheduled Falcon 9 launch on Sept. 3.
It also caused extensive damage to the rockets transporter erector, or strongback, that holds the rocket in place until minutes before liftoff, and ground support equipment (GSE) around the pad – as seen in my new photos of the pad taken a week after the explosion.
Dangling cables and gear such as pulley’s and more can clearly be seen to still be present as the strongback remains raised at pad 40. The strongback raises the rocket at the pad and also houses multiple umbilical line for electrical power, purge gases, computer communications and more.
One of the four lightning masts is also visibly burnt and blackened – much like what occurred after the catastrophic Orbital ATK Antares rocket exploded moments after liftoff from a NASA Wallops launch pad on Oct 28, 2014 and witnessed by this author.
Black soot also appears to cover some area of the pads ground support equipment in the new photos.
US Air Force personnel immediately jumped into action to assess the situation, set up roadblocks and look for signs of blast debris and “detect, dispose and render safe any possible explosive threats.”
However SpaceX has not released a full description of the damage to the pad and GSE. It cost approximately $15 Million to repair the Antares pad and flights have not yet resumed – nearly 2 years after that disaster.
Up close view of top of mangled SpaceX Falcon 9 strongback with dangling cables (at right) as seen on Sept. 7 after prelaunch explosion destroyed the rocket and AMOS-6 payload at Space Launch Complex-40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL on Sept. 1, 2016 . Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
The rocket disaster was coincidentally captured as it unfolded in stunning detail in a spectacular up close video recorded by my space journalist colleague at USLaunchReport – shown below.
Here is the full video from my space journalist friend and colleague Mike Wagner of USLaunchReport:
Video Caption: SpaceX – Static Fire Anomaly – AMOS-6 – 09-01-2016. Credit: USLaunchReport
The 229-foot-tall (70-meter) SpaceX Falcon 9 had been slated for an overnight blastoff on Saturday, September 3 at 3 a.m. from pad 40 with the 6 ton AMOS-6 telecommunications satellite valued at some $200 million.
Mangled SpaceX Falcon 9 strongback after prelaunch explosion destroyed the rocket and AMOS-6 payload. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
The Falcon rocket and AMOS-6 satellite were swiftly consumed in a huge fireball and thunderous blasts accompanied by a vast plume of smoke rising from the wreckage that was visible for many miles around the Florida Space Coast.
“Loss of Falcon vehicle today during propellant fill operation,” Musk tweeted several hours after the launch pad explosion.
“Originated around upper stage oxygen tank. Cause still unknown. More soon.”
Aerial view of pad and strongback damage at SpaceX Launch Complex-40 as seen from the VAB roof on Sept. 8, 2016 after fueling test explosion destroyed the Falcon 9 rocket and AMOS-6 payload at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL on Sept. 1, 2016. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
Thankfully there were no injuries to anyone – because the pad is always cleared of all personnel during these types of extremely hazardous launch complex operations.
“The anomaly originated around the upper stage oxygen tank and occurred during propellant loading of the vehicle. Per standard operating procedure, all personnel were clear of the pad and there were no injuries,” SpaceX reported in a statement.
“We are continuing to review the data to identify the root cause. Additional updates will be provided as they become available.”
This also marks the second time a Falcon 9 has exploded in 15 months and will call into question the rocket’s reliability. The first failure involved a catastrophic mid air explosion about two and a half minutes after liftoff, during the Dragon CRS-9 cargo resupply launch for NASA to the International Space Station on June 28, 2015 – and witnessed by this author.
All SpaceX launches are on hold until a thorough investigation is conducted, the root cause is determined, and effective fixes and remedies are identified and instituted.
After the last failure, it took nearly six months before Falcon 9 launches were resumed.
Any announcement of a ‘Return to Flight’ following this latest launch failure is likely to be some time off given the thus far inscrutable nature of the anomaly.
The planned engine test was being conducted as part of routine preparations for the scheduled liftoff of the Falcon 9 on Saturday, September 3, with an Israeli telecommunications satellite that would have also been used by Facebook.
The AMOS-6 communications satellite was built by Israel Aerospace Industries for Space Communication Ltd. It was planned to provide communication services including direct satellite home internet for Africa, the Middle East and Europe.
SpaceX is simultaneously renovating and refurbishing NASA’s former shuttle launch pad at the Kennedy Space Center at Pad 39A – from which the firm hopes to launch the new Falcon Heavy booster as well as human rated launches of the Falcon 9.
SpaceX is renovating Launch Complex 39A at the Kennedy Space Center for launches of the Falcon Heavy and human rated Falcon 9. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
SpaceX has indicated they hope to have the pad upgrades complete by November, but a lot of work remains to be done. For example the shuttle era Rotating Service Structure (RSS) is still standing. The timing for its demolishment has not been announced.
Damage at SpaceX Launch Complex-40 following Sept. 1, 2016 launch pad explosion. Credit: Lane Hermann
Stay tuned here for Ken’s continuing Earth and Planetary science and human spaceflight news.
Up close view of mangled SpaceX Falcon 9 strongback with dangling cables as seen on Sept. 7 after prelaunch explosion destroyed the rocket and AMOS-6 payload at Space Launch Complex-40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL on Sept. 1, 2016 . Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.comSpaceX Falcon 9 rocket moments after catastrophic explosion destroys the rocket and Amos-6 Israeli satellite payload at launch pad 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL, on Sept. 1, 2016. A static hot fire test was planned ahead of scheduled launch on Sept. 3, 2016. Credit: USLaunchReport
SpaceX and NASA find themselves at odds over the company's fueling policy. Credit: SpaceX
SpaceX experienced a rather serious setback last week as a Falcon 9 rocket exploded on the launch pad while preparing for a static fire test. The launch was meant to deploy one of Spacecom latest communications satellites (AMOS-6), which was also destroyed in the accident. Mercifully, no one was hurt, and an investigation was quickly mounted to determine the root cause.
However, in the aftermath of the explosion, it appears that SpaceX could be facing legal battles, as Spacecom indicated that it is seeking compensation for the loss of their satellite. According to a recent press released by the Israel-based telecommunications company, this will either take the form of $50 million, or a free flight aboard another SpaceX launch.
As the sixth satellite to be launched by the telecommunications company, the AMOS-6 satellite was intended to provide phone, video and internet services for the Middle East, Europe, and locations across sub-Sahara Africa. As such, it’s destruction was certainly a loss for the company.
A Falcon 9 test firing its nine first-stage Merlin engines at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Feb of 2015. Credit: NASA/Frankie Martin
But as they stated in their press release – which was released on Monday, Sept. 5th – their plan is “to recover funds invested in the project” and to replace the satellite as soon as possible. As David Pollack, Spacecom CEO and president, was quoted as saying:
“Spacecom has crafted a plan of action which represents the foundation upon which we shall recover from AMOS-6’s loss. Our program includes, among other measures, exploring the possibility of procuring and launching a replacement satellite. Working quickly and efficiently, management is engaging with current and potential partner. Spacecom will serve all of its current and future financial commitments.”
In addition to covering their losses, these moves are clearly intended to ensure that the company can still move ahead with its planned merger. Prior to the launch, Spacecom was engaged in talks with the Beijing Xinwei Group – a Chinese telecommunications company – about being acquired for $285 million. One of the conditions of this deal was the successful launch of the AMOS-6 and completion of in orbit testing.
As Pollack told the Financial Times, his company is still in the process of negotiating the merger, but the price may come down as a result of the loss. “We are speaking to them;” he said, “we are trying to adapt it to the new situation. It definitely might go ahead… everybody is trying to keep the deal”.
The damaged gantry at the SpaceX launch pad after the explosion. Credit: Karla Thompson
Spacecom has also suggested that the firm might pursue an additional $205 million in compensation from Israel Aerospace Industries, which manufactured the satellite. Not surprising, since the price of their stock had dropped by over a third since the accident took place.
Since the accident took place, SpaceX has been keeping the public updated on the results of their investigation. On Friday, Sept 2nd, they released the latest finds, which included where the problems began:
“The anomaly on the pad resulted in the loss of the vehicle. This was part of a standard pre-launch static fire to demonstrate the health of the vehicle prior to an eventual launch. At the time of the loss, the launch vehicle was vertical and in the process of being fueled for the test. At this time, the data indicates the anomaly originated around the upper stage liquid oxygen tank. Per standard operating procedure, all personnel were clear of the pad. There were no injuries.”
No indications have been given yet as to what could have caused the tanks to explode, but the company is still processing the data and posting updates on a regular basis. In any event, the recent accident appears to have been a minor setback for the private aerospace giant, which will be pushing ahead with a full year of launch contracts.
This will likely include the first launch of the Falcon Heavy, which is expected to take place before 2016 is out.
SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket moments after catastrophic explosion destroys the rocket and Amos-6 Israeli satellite payload at launch pad 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL, on Sept. 1, 2016. A static hot fire test was planned ahead of scheduled launch on Sept. 3, 2016. Credit: USLaunchReport
SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket moments after catastrophic explosion destroys the rocket and Amos-6 Israeli satellite payload at launch pad 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL, on Sept. 1, 2016. A static hot fire test was planned ahead of scheduled launch on Sept. 3, 2016. See the full video below. Credit: USLaunchReport
The SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket that suffered a catastrophic explosion this morning, Thursday, Sept. 1, at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida was captured in stunning detail in a spectacular video recorded by my space journalist colleague at USLaunchReport.
As seen in the still image above and the full video below, the rocket failure originated somewhere in the upper stage during fueling test operations at the launch pad, less than two days prior to its planned launch on Sept. 3. The rocket was swiftly consumed in a massive fireball and thunderous blasts accompanied by a vast plume of smoke rising from the wreckage visible for many miles.
Both the SpaceX rocket and the $200 million AMOS-6 Israeli commercial communications satellite payload were completely destroyed in the incident. Thankfully there were no injuries to anyone, because the pad is cleared during these types of operations.
It took place during this morning’s prelaunch preparations for a static hot fire test of the nine Merlin 1 D engines powering the Falcon 9 first stage when engineers were loading the liquid oxygen (LOX) and RP-1 kerosene propellants for the test, according to SpaceX CEO Elon Musk.
“Loss of Falcon vehicle today during propellant fill operation,” tweeted SpaceX CEO and founder Elon Musk this afternoon a few hours after the launch pad explosion.
“Originated around upper stage oxygen tank. Cause still unknown. More soon.”
The Falcon 9 explosion occurred at approximately 9:07 a.m. EDT this morning at the SpaceX launch facilities at Space Launch Complex 40 on Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, according to statements from SpaceX and the USAF 45th Space Wing Public Affairs office.
All SpaceX launches will be placed on hold until a thorough investigation is conducted, the root cause is determined, and effective fixes and remedies are identified and instituted.
The planned engine test was being conducted as part of routine preparations for the scheduled liftoff of the Falcon 9 on Saturday, September 3, with an Israeli telecommunications satellite that would have also been used by Facebook.
During the static fire test, which is a full launch dress rehearsal, the rocket is loaded with propellants and is held down at pad 40 while the engines are typically fired for a few seconds.
Here is the full video from my space journalist friend and colleague Mike Wagner of USLaunchReport:
Video Caption: SpaceX – Static Fire Anomaly – AMOS-6 – 09-01-2016. Credit: USLaunchReport
The 229-foot-tall (70-meter) SpaceX Falcon 9 had been slated for an overnight blastoff on Saturday, September 3 at 3 a.m. from pad 40 with the 6 ton AMOS-6 telecommunications satellite valued at some $200 million.
In the video you can clearly see the intensely bright explosion flash near the top of the upper stage that quickly envelopes the entire rocket in a fireball, followed later by multiple loud bangs from the disaster echoing across and beyond the pad.
Seconds later the nose cone and payload break away violently, falling away and crashing into the ground and generating a new round of loud explosions and fires and a vast plume of smoke rising up.
At the end the rocket is quite visibly no longer standing. Only the strongback erector is still standing at pad 40. And both the strongback and the pad structure seems to have suffered significant damage.
This would have been the 9th Falcon 9 launch of 2016.
SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket moments after catastrophic explosion destroys the rocket and Amos-6 Israeli satellite payload at launch pad 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL, on Sept. 1, 2016. A static hot fire test was planned ahead of scheduled launch on Sept. 3, 2016. Credit: USLaunchReport
SpaceX media relations issued this updated statement:
“At approximately 9:07 am ET, during a standard pre-launch static fire test for the AMOS-6 mission, there was an anomaly at SpaceX’s Cape Canaveral Space Launch Complex 40 resulting in loss of the vehicle.”
“The anomaly originated around the upper stage oxygen tank and occurred during propellant loading of the vehicle. Per standard operating procedure, all personnel were clear of the pad and there were no injuries.”
“We are continuing to review the data to identify the root cause. Additional updates will be provided as they become available.”
Listen to my BBC Radio 5 Live interview conducted late this afternoon:
Today’s explosion and the total loss of vehicle and payload will certainly have far reaching consequences for not just SpaceX and the commercial satellite provider and end users, but also NASA, the International Space Station, the US military, and every other customer under a launch contact with the fast growing aerospace firm.
The ISS is impacted because SpaceX is one of two NASA contracted firms launching cargo resupply missions to the ISS – along with Orbital ATK.
Continued operations of the ISS depends on a reliable and robust lifeline of periodic supply trains from SpaceX and Orbital ATK.
In fact the most recent SpaceX Drago cargo freighter launched on the CRS-9 mission to the ISS on July 18 as I witnessed and reported here. And just successfully returned to Earth with 3000 pounds of NASA science cargo and research samples last week on Aug. 26.
The SpaceX Dragon launches to the ISS will be put on hold as the investigation moves forward.
Furthermore SpaceX is manufacturing a Crew Dragon designed to launch astronauts to the ISS atop this same Falcon 9 rocket. So that will also have to be evaluated.
SpaceX is also trying to recover and recycle the Falcon 9 first stage.
To date SpaceX has recovered 6 first stage Falcon 9 boosters by land and by sea.
SpaceX Falcon 9 launches and lands over Port Canaveral in this streak shot showing rockets midnight liftoff from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida at 12:45 a.m. EDT on July 18, 2016 carrying Dragon CRS-9 craft to the International Space Station (ISS) with almost 5,000 pounds of cargo and docking port. View from atop Exploration Tower in Port Canaveral. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
Indeed as I reported just 2 days ago, SpaceX announced a contract with SES to fly the SES-10 communications satellite on a recycled Falcon 9, before the end of the year and perhaps as soon as October.
But this explosion will set back that effort and force a halt to all SpaceX launches until the root cause of the disaster is determined.
Here’s one of my photos showing the prior SpaceX rocket failure in June 2015 during the CRS-7 cargo delivery mission to the ISS:
SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon resupply spaceship explode about 2 minutes after liftoff from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida on June 28, 2015. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
Here’s the prior SpaceX Falcon 9 on pad 40 before the successful liftoff with the JCSAT-16 Japanese telecom satellite on Aug. 14, 2016:
SpaceX Falcon 9 set to deliver JCSAT-16 Japanese communications satellite to orbit on Aug. 14, 2016 from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fl. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
The AMOS-6 communications satellite was built by Israel Aerospace Industries for Space Communication Ltd. It was planned to provide communication services including direct satellite home internet for Africa, the Middle East and Europe.
Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Emergency Management quickly provided initial on-scene response and set up roadblocks, said the Air Force in a statement.
“Days like today are difficult for many reasons,” said Brig. Gen. Wayne Monteith, 45th Space Wing commander.
“There was the potential for things to be a lot worse; however, due to our processes and procedures no one was injured as a result of this incident. I am proud of our team and how we managed today’s response and our goal moving forward will be to assist and provide support wherever needed. Space is inherently dangerous and because of that, the Air Force is always ready.”
Stay tuned here for Ken’s continuing Earth and Planetary science and human spaceflight news.
A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket is destroyed during explosion at the pad on Sept. 1, 2016. Only the strongback remains. A static hot fire test was planned ahead of scheduled launch on Sept. 3, 2016 of Amos-6 comsat. Credit: NASAThis recovered 156-foot-tall (47-meter) SpaceX Falcon 9 first stage has arrived back into Port Canaveral, FL after successfully launching JCSAT-16 Japanese communications satellite to orbit on Aug. 14, 2016 from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fl. NASA’s VAB in the background – as seen from Exploration Tower on Aug. 19. Credit: Ken Kremer/kenkremer.com
