Harmony Just Caused Space X launch Cancellation

[kelleherdl]

11 hours ago, wayne_trisha said:

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.

I sincerely appreciate your explanations and true knowledge about the incident.  I have also found myself personally torn over discussing information online that could be interpreted as ‘shop’ talk.  It boggles my mind that some on this board have such an apparent total ignorance of the complex symphony that is a rocket launch.  To compare a totally flexible, but admittedly also complex, cruise ship sailing with the narrow window of a launch is a mystery to me.  

[chengkp75]

14 minutes ago, alfaeric said:

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.

This all depends on how far the ship went into the zone (i.e. how perpendicular to the border the course was), etc, etc.  It would appear that the course was nearly parallel to the boundary, so changing course is not a real time consuming thing, and right up until a couple of minutes from entering, it could have altered course to just skim the boundary.  This also depends on the vessel speed, as to how quickly it can change direction.  Again, without a complete charting of events, it is impossible to say that this was "known well in advance", and was unavoidable "well in advance".

[John&LaLa]

1 hour ago, later said:

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

 

I'm certain he went south, but not on the required course to avoid the exclusion zone

[later]

40 minutes ago, John&LaLa said:

 

I'm certain he went south, but not on the required course to avoid the exclusion zone

He did and was on the edge of the zone when they aborted the launch as can be seen by the published ship location and no go zone.  But still in and moving.

 

still comes down to even letting ships depart the port during that launch window.  
 

we left on time and the casino boat was still off shore and the MSC just coming out.  I assume they were instructed to return to port.

 

Edited February 2, 2022 by later

[AL3XCruise]

2 hours ago, alfaeric said:

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.

 

Your reference refers to a Falcon 9 V1.1 which did not use pre-cooled fuel, so the fueling procedure was completed earlier.  The newer versions require fueling closer to launch.  The cold fuel has a higher density, effectively allowing more to be pumped into the rocket.  As fuel warms it expands and vents overboard, reducing the amount the rocket has available for launch.  This is why it can't be given much time to warm, meaning options for delay are much more limited than with previous generation rockets, including older Falcons.  Keep in mind a delay before fueling starts is still possible, and the launch can obviously be scrubbed at any time.  SpaceX also has a procedure to defuel and refuel in the event of a delay, but I don't know if that has ever been done in practice.

 

1 hour ago, alfaeric said:

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).

 

One of the CC members with more direct experience to SpaceX ops could probably answer, but based on my knowledge it went exactly as designed.  A time is set for when the range MUST be clear, and if it isn't clear at that time you abort.  Its a systematic approach designed to eliminate errors.  Things may have appeared clear cut, but this is not a one-off scenario.  Having a procedure that works every time and sticking to it provides a higher level of safety.

 

I get that 30 seconds sounds close, but keep in mind last second aborts are possible.  The Shuttle has aborted in the window between main engine ignition and booster start.

Edited February 2, 2022 by AL3XCruise

[John&LaLa]

6 minutes ago, AL3XCruise said:

 

I get that 30 seconds sounds close, but keep in mind last second aborts are possible.  The Shuttle has aborted in the window between main engine ignition and booster start.

 

There was a Falcon launch a couple years ago that aborted immediately after engine ignition.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, later said:

He did and was on the edge of the zone when they aborted the launch as can be seen by the published ship location and no go zone.  But still in and moving.

 

still comes down to even letting ships depart the port during that launch window.  
 

we left on time and the casino boat was still off shore and the MSC just coming out.  I assume they were instructed to return to port.

 

As you say, the ship was on the edge of the zone, so there was a navigable area for the ship to use to leave the port, to the south of the zone.  So, why would the MSC ship be told to return to port, all they had to do was steer a course about 2* south of Harmony's.  If there was no way for a ship to leave port during the launch, the USCG would have shut the port down, but they didn't, because it wasn't necessary.  As for the casino boat, most ship traffic is stopped when the cruise ships start their parade out of port, as the pilots are busy (Canaveral has a limited number), and the ability to pass in the channel is lessened.  I've sat outside Canaveral and PEV many, many times because the pilots won't bring ships in while the cruise ships are coming out.

[pstone1]

It’s really quite simple -

Rocket Launch trumps Cruise Ship!

 

NASA/SpaceX do not adjust their schedules!

 

Plenty of advance notice is given to all aircraft/vessels regarding the location and timing of the active Launch Safety Zone.

[wayne_trisha]

The hazard area was published early last week. Since this launch had the same launch window day after day no changes were made to the coordinates of the hazard area nor the times it was active.

On Friday, Sunday, and Monday numerous cruise ships left the port without entering the hazard area. Obviously the hazard area was avoidable. There were also plenty of boats that stayed out of the hazard area.

SpaceX starts fuel loading around 35 minutes prior to launch.

Many launches, including this launch that was scrubbed, have very short launch windows. This window was 11 minutes but it the T-0 was 6:11. It was either launch at 6:11 or scrub. No time to recycle and try again.

Rockets are scheduled based on orbital mechanics. They must launch at a specific time and trajectory to reach their intended destination in space.

Harmony OTS did not surprise anyone. They were a known target well before the launch was scrubbed.

I have no idea why Harmony went into the hazard area. I think the captain owes me some drinks as this violation directly results in more work for me for each launch.

[alfaeric]

3 hours ago, AL3XCruise said:

 

 

I get that 30 seconds sounds close, but keep in mind last second aborts are possible.  The Shuttle has aborted in the window between main engine ignition and booster start.

I very much understand that there are aborts that happen later than that, or even slight delays.  (which also points out that the launch does not need to launch to the second, regardless of how it's fueled)

 

My point is that I just can't see a massive cruise ship being a surprise just 30 seconds from launch.  Unless it was literally right on the border, and just barely drifted into the zone- even then- it would take some time and effort to move that massive of a body into the zone.

 

Again, there are systems that project the path that the vessel is on, and it runs live.  Someone, somewhere should have seen that the ship was going into the zone.  Both on the ship and in the launch control room.  Suggesting that the launch abort should not have been held that late- otherwise, they were gambling that the ship would exit the zone in time, which didn't happen.

[flamingos]

2 hours ago, pstone1 said:

It’s really quite simple -

Rocket Launch trumps Cruise Ship!

 

NASA/SpaceX do not adjust their schedules!

 

Plenty of advance notice is given to all aircraft/vessels regarding the location and timing of the active Launch Safety Zone.

So, how did this happen?

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, alfaeric said:

Again, there are systems that project the path that the vessel is on, and it runs live.  Someone, somewhere should have seen that the ship was going into the zone.

And, that path projection goes right out the window as soon as the helmsman turns the wheel a little.  As long as the current course could have been projected, it could have been altered in seconds.  The ECDIS system will show your course changing second by second, and even with a large ship, that heading does change that quickly (it may take a few seconds to get the swing started, but then it will go quickly).  So, the USCG sees the ship is going towards the zone on their ECDIS, and calls them, and tells them that on their current heading they will enter the zone.  Then, perhaps, the course changes a litttle, but once the course is shown, it is still heading into the zone, so USCG calls again, and again, and if the ship had put the wheel "hard over", they could have swung the ship and gotten out of the zone, far quicker than you imagine.  Yes, they were hoping that the ship would get out of the zone, and it didn't happen, but by the time they plotted the time the ship would clear the zone (this is not automatic), it was down to seconds on the countdown.  And, regardless of whether the countdown was stopped at 30 seconds, or 3 minutes, the ship violated the safety zone, for no explicable reason, and that is all that matters.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, flamingos said:

So, how did this happen?

Harmony of the Seas operator error.

[flamingos]

10 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Harmony of the Seas operator error.

Not good enough.  If the Coast Guard was trying 'for some time' to correct his course, how did this happen?  

[chengkp75]

21 minutes ago, flamingos said:

Not good enough.  If the Coast Guard was trying 'for some time' to correct his course, how did this happen?  

Again, operator error.  Who else is to blame?  Virtually every day there are airspace violations by small planes into airport restricted airspace.  How does this happen?  Operator error.  There are frequent instances of ships blasting at each other with 5 short blasts on the horn (which means "I'm unsure of your intentions and I doubt whether you're taking sufficient action to avoid collision."), and the ensuing verbal yelling at each other on VHF radio, when ships don't do what the other ship expects.  How does this happen?  Operator error.

 

Harmony either had their radios turned down/off, or just misunderstood/disregarded the USCG instructions.

Edited February 2, 2022 by chengkp75

[pstone1]

4 hours ago, flamingos said:

So, how did this happen?

I’m not sure exactly what you are asking, but I guess we’ll all find out when the investigation is complete.  Clearly someone was not paying attention when they should have been.

[Oceansaway17]

12 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

 

 

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.  

 

yes, I have since heard that it was not a manned paying customer launch but rather something with a satellite. 

I am sorry my original flippy joking bothered you and others.  Obviously here on cc a lot of us do a knee jerk reaction comment.  I know those lauches in the desert bother some for the large amount of money some think is a waste.  Space Ex has and does a lot more launches besides commercial paying customers for a joy ride.   So I have respect for Space Ex.

 

I still think something went wrong in the communications on Sunday because cruise lines and SpaceEx are bother professional companies.  And there was an MSC ship in the mix too

 

And to end on a lite note, I am glad it was hopefully not Captain Johnny on the bridge who I think is still on vacation. And the launch had other delays but did get off on Monday.

toodles

[DirtyDawg]

4 hours ago, flamingos said:

So, how did this happen?

 

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Harmony of the Seas operator error.

Perhaps the Operator is a K.C. Chiefs fan and they were watching the Chiefs 28 point lead slip away Sunday night. 📉

Go Bengals! 🐯

 

🙂

[pepperchili]

10 hours ago, alfaeric said:

I very much understand that there are aborts that happen later than that, or even slight delays.  (which also points out that the launch does not need to launch to the second, regardless of how it's fueled)

 

My point is that I just can't see a massive cruise ship being a surprise just 30 seconds from launch.  Unless it was literally right on the border, and just barely drifted into the zone- even then- it would take some time and effort to move that massive of a body into the zone.

 

Again, there are systems that project the path that the vessel is on, and it runs live.  Someone, somewhere should have seen that the ship was going into the zone.  Both on the ship and in the launch control room.  Suggesting that the launch abort should not have been held that late- otherwise, they were gambling that the ship would exit the zone in time, which didn't happen.

Holds and resets depend on the launch target.  Some targets cannot take any delay.  https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-instantaneous-launch-falcon-rocket-crew-dragon-space-station-weather-2020-5

 

The location of the ship wasn't a "surprise" at 30 seconds.  The range officer had announced that the range was red several minutes before launch time, and that the cause was due to a violation of the safety zone.

 

The range safety officer probably has the info on the ship. I don't know if they sit near the launch director or not, but they were able to communicate the status to the launch team.  "Gambling" makes it sound like there's a downside that was being risked by allowing the count to continue.    The only other thing to do is abort, and that can wait until closer to launch.

[grandgeezer]

5 hours ago, DirtyDawg said:

 

Perhaps the Operator is a K.C. Chiefs fan and they were watching the Chiefs 28 point lead slip away Sunday night. 📉

Go Bengals! 🐯

 

🙂

How did Kansas City blow a 28 point lead when they only scored 24 points for the whole game? 

 

[DirtyDawg]

6 hours ago, grandgeezer said:

How did Kansas City blow a 28 point lead when they only scored 24 points for the whole game? 

 

I guess the operator  was a super duper fan and it was so bad that it felt like KC blew a 28 point lead.  😊

[flamingos]

22 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

right up until a couple of minutes from entering, it could have altered course to just skim the boundary. 

And this is the part I do not understand.  If USCG was talking to the ship, how did this happen?

[A&L_Ont]

7 minutes ago, flamingos said:

And this is the part I do not understand.  If USCG was talking to the ship, how did this happen?

Read below in bold as a possible explanation.

 

15 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Harmony either had their radios turned down/off, or just misunderstood/disregarded the USCG instructions.

 

Edited February 3, 2022 by A&L_Ont

[chengkp75]

8 minutes ago, flamingos said:

And this is the part I do not understand.  If USCG was talking to the ship, how did this happen?

Whether or not the USCG was communicating with the ship or not, no one was forcing the Captain or anyone on the ship to do what was necessary.  I don't understand how you can't see how this could happen.

[Kathscof]

11 minutes ago, flamingos said:

And this is the part I do not understand.  If USCG was talking to the ship, how did this happen?

 

And beyond the explanations already given that could have been possible, you’ll have to ask the people in charge of the boat...