Harmony Just Caused Space X launch Cancellation

[pepperchili]

8 hours ago, alfaeric said:

Chief- one more "question"- it was reported that SpaceX scrubbed the launch with 30 seconds left.  Any thoughts why they waited?  Given all of the location maps that the Harmony was located- it seemed pretty clear that it would take some considerable time to get out of the zone.  Like a few min.

 

All of the < 10 min procedures could have been scrubbed when it was clear that there wasn't time for the ship to clear the zone- even if they went the fastest way out of the zone.

Once rocket fueling begins, it's very difficult to change the launch time.  The fuel they use is chilled to increase the density, and starts warming up after loading.  They can't move the launch time ahead without unloading the fuel and starting over.  That process takes long enough it would exceed the launch window for the day.

 

The ship presence appeared to be treated pretty much the same as any other launch violation (like weather rules).  You can't start a hold because of the fuel expansion, so might as well just run the clock down to the limit just in case it clears.  Given all the prep to get to T-10m, there's not much work saved by not going all the way down to 30 seconds. There's still going to be a lot to do to recycle for the next day.  Counting out the final few minutes with a known violation and hoping isn't too strange. Sometimes even on bad weather days you get lucky and a break appears right when you need.  If they'd known of the violation before fueling, that would be different.

 

Also, while someone knows where the ship is in relation to the zone, I'm not sure that specific info makes all the way up to the flight director.   I'd guess the range officer just tells them theres a ship, CG is trying to get it to move, and it probably won't be out in time.

[SE fla]

Really now

[grandgeezer]

5 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

If SpaceX wants their money, they are going to have to sue in civil court over it.  Whether there is a fine or not is up to the USCG, and SpaceX will see nothing of it.  And, I just love all the folks who want the Captain fired for every thing that goes wrong, without knowing virtually anything about what went on, or the maritime industry.  The industry, with the notable exception of Carnival Corp, has moved on from the "blame" culture, where the individual is punished for things gone wrong, and instead have graduated to a pro-active management system that looks for root causes of the incident and seeks ways to prevent them happening again, over simple punishment of an individual.

As I stated up front, if the investigation shows this incident happened as stated, action should be taken. From the information provided so far, this reeks with gross negligence. 
Pro active management could, and should still take place, but to let it slide is just wrong. If you do the crime, you do the time.

[flamingos]

I'm still trying to figure out how this happened.  If the USCG was 'working with' Harmony's captain, and they waited until the last second to abort, how long were they aware of this incursion? It's just bizarre.

[alfaeric]

1 hour ago, pepperchili said:

Once rocket fueling begins, it's very difficult to change the launch time.  The fuel they use is chilled to increase the density, and starts warming up after loading.  They can't move the launch time ahead without unloading the fuel and starting over.  That process takes long enough it would exceed the launch window for the day.

 

The ship presence appeared to be treated pretty much the same as any other launch violation (like weather rules).  You can't start a hold because of the fuel expansion, so might as well just run the clock down to the limit just in case it clears.  Given all the prep to get to T-10m, there's not much work saved by not going all the way down to 30 seconds. There's still going to be a lot to do to recycle for the next day.  Counting out the final few minutes with a known violation and hoping isn't too strange. Sometimes even on bad weather days you get lucky and a break appears right when you need.  If they'd known of the violation before fueling, that would be different.

 

Also, while someone knows where the ship is in relation to the zone, I'm not sure that specific info makes all the way up to the flight director.   I'd guess the range officer just tells them theres a ship, CG is trying to get it to move, and it probably won't be out in time.

According to SpaceX, fuelling starts 2 hours before launch.  And since they've bumped plenty of launches for various reasons, they can bump the launch even when it's fueled.   I've watched plenty of launches where it was delayed for 5-30 min.   Or until the next day if the clouds don't clear up.  Scrubbing or delaying a launch has happened plenty of times before.  

 

Again, the ship takes a long time to change directions- so someone dropped the ball when the ship went autonomous (10min from launch)- as it would have been pretty clear sometime between 10 and 0 min that the ship was going in the direction to the zone.  Did someone thing it was going slow enough to not make it and hoped?  

 

If this wasn't intentional, the ball was dropped somewhere.

[AL3XCruise]

31 minutes ago, alfaeric said:

According to SpaceX, fuelling starts 2 hours before launch.  And since they've bumped plenty of launches for various reasons, they can bump the launch even when it's fueled.   I've watched plenty of launches where it was delayed for 5-30 min.   Or until the next day if the clouds don't clear up.  Scrubbing or delaying a launch has happened plenty of times before.  

 

Again, the ship takes a long time to change directions- so someone dropped the ball when the ship went autonomous (10min from launch)- as it would have been pretty clear sometime between 10 and 0 min that the ship was going in the direction to the zone.  Did someone thing it was going slow enough to not make it and hoped?  

 

I'm not sure where you are getting that, I've seen quoted from SpaceX engineers discussing the fueling closet to launch and the very limited or non-existent option for delays.  Keep in mind this applies to the Falcon 9FT and possibly some older variants (I don't know if all F9 models have used cold fueling).  At about 10 minutes prior to launch fueling is complete or nearly so.  

 

I'm trying to understand the concern that they waited to cancel the launch.  It isn't like someone was going to forget about the ship, nor were they going to save money by sending everyone home eight minutes sooner.  My guess would be 30 seconds is a procedural check point where a go/no go is made regarding range safety, and that is why they made the call then.  Up until that point there is no downside to waiting.

 

 

Edited February 1, 2022 by AL3XCruise

[F27TW]

 

Where does the pilot figure into all this?    The pilot was on board as the ship left the port. . woudn't you have thought he might have mentioned something about "uh .. we prolly shouldn't leave just yet"  ?  .... . . . .. 

[Biker19]

3 hours ago, eyecantwait said:

We went to a lot of shuttle launches when the kids were little. Was really nice to see the beach full of people waiting for the launch.

Grills was packed, including everyone by the water side railing. 

[chengkp75]

18 minutes ago, F27TW said:

 

Where does the pilot figure into all this?    The pilot was on board as the ship left the port. . woudn't you have thought he might have mentioned something about "uh .. we prolly shouldn't leave just yet"  ?  .... . . . .. 

The pilot had probably already left the ship when it entered the zone, and there was fair passage leaving the port, so there was no reason not to leave at the time they wanted.  And, besides, the Captain can overrule the pilot any time he wants.

[wayne_trisha]

10 hours ago, Rayhorn said:

@alfaeric

 

I think harmony crossed into the exclusion zone just prior to the abort.

 

The coast guard was aware of her position and it sounds like they were attempting to get her to turn away but once she crossed over they called for the abort. 

Your narrative is very close. Your timeline is about 30 minutes off.

The Coast Guard is a great member on our launch team but they have zero authority to scrub a launch. They do have authority to redirect watercraft and were actively directing Harmony OTS out of the hazard area.

[Rayhorn]

17 minutes ago, wayne_trisha said:

Your narrative is very close. Your timeline is about 30 minutes off.

The Coast Guard is a great member on our launch team but they have zero authority to scrub a launch. They do have authority to redirect watercraft and were actively directing Harmony OTS out of the hazard area.

Thanks for you first hand info about the timeline. That’s very interesting to know.

 

I knew the Coast Guard wasn’t calling for the scrub. My original wording was not clear at all. I had been talking about the coast guard and then subsequently said “once she crossed over they called for the abort”. I see now that to anyone reading my phrasing, it would appear as though I was saying the CG called for the abort. The “they” that I was referring to was actually the launch team but as I didn’t specify that, it wasn’t clear at all.

 

Thank you for your very interesting insight on this thread. It’s really neat to hear from someone who is involved with the launch.

[wayne_trisha]

20 minutes ago, Rayhorn said:

Thanks for you first hand info about the timeline. That’s very interesting to know.

 

I knew the Coast Guard wasn’t calling for the scrub. My original wording was not clear at all. I had been talking about the coast guard and then subsequently said “once she crossed over they called for the abort”. I see now that to anyone reading my phrasing, it would appear as though I was saying the CG called for the abort. The “they” that I was referring to was actually the launch team but as I didn’t specify that, it wasn’t clear at all.

 

Thank you for your very interesting insight on this thread. It’s really neat to hear from someone who is involved with the launch.

Thanks! It is really interesting as an insider to see the general public's perception of what happened. I started to type up a nice long post about what happened but decided this might not be a great idea. I coordinated the sea space hazard area and while I have verified I was 100% correct on the times/coordinates, I might be a part of the investigation. 

 

But based on what I heard, not WATCHED as my side only watches air targets, I think the sea surveillance people and the USCG are 100% NOT at fault.

[John&LaLa]

On 1/31/2022 at 9:32 AM, F27TW said:

How theatrical ..  "launch scrubbed"   .. they couldn't just wait a little?

 

Ship should have waited😉

[John&LaLa]

On 1/31/2022 at 6:25 PM, Baron Barracuda said:

No sympathy for Space X here.  Several years ago was flying from EWR to FLL on a Saturday morning ahead of a Sunday sailing.  Arrived at airport to discover all flights from the Northeast to south Florida were on hold due to anticipated Space X launch.  Launch was delayed, delayed, delayed and after 3 1/2 hours finally scrubbed.  Didn't arrive in MIA until almost 4pm and watched lots of folks with Carnival & Royal luggage tags desperately racing through airport.  Not sure if they all made their ships.  

 

Don't fly day of cruise. Problem solved

[John&LaLa]

23 hours ago, ReneeFLL said:

Why would a captain willfully ignore an exclusion zone?

 

To place his vessel in a good line of sight🤔

 

Who knows, maybe same reason the Concordia Cpt wanted to show off for his girlfriend. 

 

Pure unfounded speculation of course😉

[M&Msmom]

To be fair to the ship or ships involved. The ships in port sail nearly every Sunday at that time. This launch was scrubbed from the day before. Shouldn’t they have been aware of the sailing time before they rescheduled the launch, and then planned accordingly?

[Oceansaway17]

Oh dear my joking about poor Space ex with a couple paying passengers might have made so folks hot under the collar.

 

There has been a lot of chatter about the large amount of money spent on these commercial flights like the Amazon guy.
So I jokingly was sticking up for the ship.

I mean it is a port and with Sunday being a big sailing day.

So IMHO, I still stand by my comment given the context I meant it to be —qty of people on spacecraft versus a big ship.

 

I do not think a captain would sail on purpose into violation area so then it begs to ask why port pilots did not have a line of communications with Space ex.

There is more activity from ships so future launches need to do a better job of scheduling as well.

peace out all

[Oceansaway17]

3 hours ago, John&amp;LaLa said:

 

Don't fly day of cruise. Problem solved

Not everyone can fly the day before and to hold up commercial flights for 4 hrs is not so good.

[Rayhorn]

3 hours ago, M&amp;Msmom said:

Shouldn’t they have been aware of the sailing time before they rescheduled the launch, and then planned accordingly?

 

58 minutes ago, Oceansaway17 said:

There is more activity from ships so future launches need to do a better job of scheduling as well.

They don’t pick a launch time based on convenience. The window of time when a launch is viable directly correlates to the intended orbit of whatever payload is being launched. There are many different types of satellite orbits like geostationary, sun synchronous, etc. There’s also interplanetary orbital dynamics for things like probes launched to orbit around the sun, moon, or another celestial body. There is typically a relatively narrow window of time when the object can be launched and everything is in the right position to insert the object into the correct orbit. 

 

There are others that I’m sure can give a much better explanation, but the point I am trying to make is that they didn’t choose 6:11PM  (or whatever it was) because that seemed like a good time to do it…They chose that time because that’s when there was the greatest chance of the payload being able to be successfully inserted into the correct orbit. 
 

Also, as others have mentioned, there was a clear path out of the harbor and into the open ocean that didn’t interfere with the exclusion zone. It was possible for Harmony to have departed safely and on time and still remained outside the exclusion zone. 
 

Hopefully that makes sense. 

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, Rayhorn said:

Also, as others have mentioned, there was a clear path out of the harbor and into the open ocean that didn’t interfere with the exclusion zone. It was possible for Harmony to have departed safely and on time and still remained outside the exclusion zone. 
 

Yep.  If there was no clear, navigable course from the port to the sea, the USCG NOTMAR would have included a port shutdown while the safety zone was active.  There is no interference between the space center operations and port operations, so there is no need for the space center to work around the port's schedule.  This was not a "road closure" from the port, it was a "detour".

 

3 hours ago, Oceansaway17 said:

I do not think a captain would sail on purpose into violation area so then it begs to ask why port pilots did not have a line of communications with Space ex.

There is no need for the pilots (who were likely off the ship by the time they were even close to the safety zone, to communicate with SpaceX, since SpaceX did not set up the safety zone, it was the USCG, and the USCG's jurisdiction, and who had been broadcasting the Safety Notice, and who were in contact with the ship.

 

4 hours ago, Oceansaway17 said:

So IMHO, I still stand by my comment given the context I meant it to be —qty of people on spacecraft versus a big ship.

First off, there was no one on the spacecraft, it was a satellite launch.  Second, let's look at the cost comparison between that hunk of metal getting where it can work, or a bunch of people on vacation.  Spacecraft wins by costing more to delay than the cruise ship.  

[alfaeric]

12 hours ago, AL3XCruise said:

 

I'm not sure where you are getting that, I've seen quoted from SpaceX engineers discussing the fueling closet to launch and the very limited or non-existent option for delays.  Keep in mind this applies to the Falcon 9FT and possibly some older variants (I don't know if all F9 models have used cold fueling).  At about 10 minutes prior to launch fueling is complete or nearly so.  

 

I'm trying to understand the concern that they waited to cancel the launch.  It isn't like someone was going to forget about the ship, nor were they going to save money by sending everyone home eight minutes sooner.  My guess would be 30 seconds is a procedural check point where a go/no go is made regarding range safety, and that is why they made the call then.  Up until that point there is no downside to waiting.

 

 

From the launch procedure page- https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/SpaceX_NASA_CRS-6_PressKit-2.pdf

 

Not sure if that link will show up or not, but they start fueling 2 hours before the scheduled launch.  But they have also scrubbed or delayed plenty of launches before.  Sure, they want to be as close as possible, and there's a specific window, but the time isn't actually fixed to the second.

 

My  point about the 30 second point is that it seems like some kind of surprise- which it couldn't have been.  The ship takes a long time to change course, and the course is well predicted on systems to prevent collisions on the seas.  

[chengkp75]

33 minutes ago, alfaeric said:

My  point about the 30 second point is that it seems like some kind of surprise- which it couldn't have been.  The ship takes a long time to change course, and the course is well predicted on systems to prevent collisions on the seas.

I would need to see a chart showing ship position, course, speed, with the safety zone overlaid, and with the launch countdown corresponding to each ship position fix, in order to determine what you are asking.

[later]

9 hours ago, John&LaLa said:

 

To place his vessel in a good line of sight🤔

 

Who knows, maybe same reason the Concordia Cpt wanted to show off for his girlfriend. 

 

Pure unfounded speculation of course😉

He didn’t. He was instructed to change direction to the south which he did and we were still moving.

Edited February 2, 2022 by later

[John&LaLa]

6 hours ago, Oceansaway17 said:

Not everyone can fly the day before and to hold up commercial flights for 4 hrs is not so good.

 

There are always reasons for delays 😉

[alfaeric]

56 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

I would need to see a chart showing ship position, course, speed, with the safety zone overlaid, and with the launch countdown corresponding to each ship position fix, in order to determine what you are asking.

I agree, but we are also talking about the largest cruise ship in the world (at one time), so it changing directions is not anywhere near like driving a car.  It takes quite a bit of time and space to do that, right?

 

So if it were on course to go into the zone, that should have been known well before it did it.  And at some time, it would have been known that the entry into the zone was inevitable- probably well before 30 seconds prior to the launch.  

 

The last call to the ship to change directions didn't make it to someone, somewhere- no idea where it broke down, and I'm not going to speculate.  But, IMHO, it wasn't a surprise at all.  Perhaps the SpaceX group was gambling that it would not make it, and they could launch?  Dunno.  Again, this needs to be looked into so that this can be prevented in the future- especially if the scrub call costs more when it happens at 30 seconds vs. 5 min (an example- I honestly have no idea if that's even true).