Boeing Successful Abort Test

The Boeing Star Liner capsule had a successful abort test today. Only 2 of the 3 parachutes opened, but Boeing does not expect this mishap to delay an unmanned launch to the International Space Station in December.

https://spaceflightnow.com/2019/11/04/boeing-starliner-pad-abort/

I hope they have other systems better than 2/3 right.

I like how they ignore the gigantic Elephant in the room. I guess you could call it successful because it ended well. What's that saying, any landing you walk away from...

OverTheTop said:

I hope they have other systems better than 2/3 right.

Click to expand...

I found it confidence building even with two of three chutes deploying it was a very soft landing.

Yes, the designed it so it would land OK with only two.
How do they know, or why do they believe, that only ONE will fail????
Especially since they don't know what caused the failure.

Personally, I'd call this a failure.

Maybe it was just the terrible camera work, but it looked like it landed pretty close to that huge brown cloud of nitrogen tetroxide, which is horribly toxic. I was really shocked at how bad the video was, unless they did that on purpose to hide the parachute anomaly. Maybe the had the live feed on delay so they could prevent showing a failure. That might account for the long delay between the countdown and the actual liftoff.


Tony

manixFan said:

it looked like it landed pretty close to that huge brown cloud of nitrogen tetroxide, which is horribly toxic.

Click to expand...

In an actual abort scenario, the service module will fall in the ocean.

I'm a little confused by why both Boeing and SpaceX chose to go with liquid biprop abort systems instead of Apollo-style solids. In the case of SpaceX, all that N2O4/MMH is in tanks that the crew is sitting next to the whole flight. At least with Starliner it's farther away.

There was a near-fatality with hydrazine/N2O4 during the descent of ASTP, though, so it's not like Apollo was immune to such problems.

One idea is that the vehicle is carrying all that abort propellant so high up, it is a shame to jettison it in the old escape tower manner. This way the propellant could be carried all the way to orbit and used for orbital maneuvering there.

Also, others point out that the upper stages of the Apollo had hypergolic propellants all over the place. They were in the LEM lander and in the Command Service Module attitude control system and the CSM main engine.

I think I read somewhere that it is considered a likely successful landing with one chute and one drogue.

manixFan said:

Maybe it was just the terrible camera work, but it looked like it landed pretty close to that huge brown cloud of nitrogen tetroxide, which is horribly toxic

Click to expand...

Yep. I wouldn't be in a hurry to open the hatch with NTO in the air. Great idea that they dumped it deliberately though.

And when they ditch the service bus in the ocean.....just try not to swim in the patch of nitric acid

I thought I heard in the video unlike other missions before this is designed to land on land

I think if you look carefully in the video, you can see the capsule swaying back and forth on just 2 chutes. Probably 3 chutes would make the astronaut's ride a lot more steady.

John Taylor said:

I thought I heard in the video unlike other missions before this is designed to land on land

Click to expand...

In an abort from KSC, it lands in the water. In a normal landing the SM burns up long before touchdown.

Seems that the drogue that was supposed to yank the 3rd chute out, separated for whatever reason. So, the 3rd chute was never pulled out. Scary thing about that is however that happened, it could happen to all three.

As for the SM crashing into the ocean, true, BUT, it's going to smash when it hits the water, and bust a lot of stuff, the plumbing if not the tanks directly. At least some of the Nitrogen Tetroxide will get out on impact, and more will bubble up from the sinking SM wreckage. If the wind direction is not favorable, then the wind could blow that toxic cloud to the rescue vehicles and the spacecraft. Imagine having to keep the astronauts inside the spacecraft for an hour or two for those fumes to dissipate.

ALSO, the spacecraft is getting bathed in Nitrogen Tetroxide after the flip-around maneuver. I was REALLY surprised by that stuff being "dumped" (????) out. It's as though the recovery crews may need to wear HazMat suits and "wash" the spacecraft to remove residue, before opening the crew hatch.

As for the video, no conspiracy BS. This was flown at White Sands, all the camera views in flight seemed to be White Sands cameras. The camera with the closest-up view, they switched to, as the operator had trouble keeping it in frame, and the autofocus (?) took it out of focus for awhile. I expect most of the other cameras had good views, but not as close-up. Certainly NASA and Boeing will have those camera views to use in reviewing what happened. Except since it's pretty certain that a drogue chute came unconnected for whatever reason, a wider-back camera view may not be as much use as studying the actual hardware itself, to see what broke or became disconnected.

If the drogue connection was burned or melted, they will be in DEEP CRAP (and I don't mean "crap"). All those hot gases coming out the back of the SM after the flip-around, it really does make me wonder if the thing got burned/melted. I am not even so sure those hot gases/venting after burnout was supposed to happen, it's bizarre.

The most exciting thing is that it sounds like a real unmanned orbital practice launch is not far away!

Stacking of the Atlas V for the first unmanned Starliner flight to the ISS has begun.

https://spaceflightnow.com/2019/11/...que-atlas-5-rocket-for-starliner-test-flight/

Exciting times!

Parachute Fails To Deploy During Boeing's Starliner Abort Test

Horrible tracking camera work and a nice deadly orange cloud of dinitrogen tetroxide from the service module after impact.

Arguably, landing on 2 chutes is better than burning up on the pad like Space-X did. From Scott Manley's reporting Space-X will be doing their next abort test from an in-flight Falcon-9. This should be spectacular. I think extra nitrogen tetroxide (N2O4) disposal will be a problem for both Boeing and Space-X. The boiling point for nitrogen tetroxide is about 70 Deg.F. and it can decompose to the toxic reddish brown nitrogen dioxide gas (NO2) quite readily.

aerostadt said:

I think extra nitrogen tetroxide (N2O4) disposal will be a problem for both Boeing and Space-X. The boiling point for nitrogen tetroxide is about 70 Deg.F. and it can decompose to the toxic reddish brown nitrogen dioxide gas (NO2) quite readily.

Click to expand...

As deadly as NTO is, it is also highly reactive. If it escapes to the environment, it will likely break down soon instead of creating a persistent hazard. Considering those thrusters are only used in emergencies and away from the uninvolved public, I guess the the trade-off isn't that bad. For the first responders, that cloud looks nasty though...

Reinhard

aerostadt said:

Arguably, landing on 2 chutes is better than burning up on the pad like Space-X did.

Click to expand...

Landing with zero chutes is just as deadly. This is not a case of "bad luck" where three chutes were extracted but one failed to inflate properly. Something seriously bad apparently happened to the connection between the 3rd chute's drogue and the main, leaving the main still packed in the spacecraft. However THAT happened, could have happened to all three. See my previous post as to a possible cause for that.

I'm very puzzled by the nitrogen tetroxide fumes, or "brown exhaust smoke" as seen during the turn-around as the drogues for the 3 mains began to come out. I won't be surprised to hear there was something else "anomalous" about the entire test, than the parachute problem alone, and it may be related.

Reinhard said:

As deadly as NTO is, it is also highly reactive. If it escapes to the environment, it will likely break down soon instead of creating a persistent hazard. Considering those thrusters are only used in emergencies and away from the uninvolved public, I guess the the trade-off isn't that bad. For the first responders, that cloud looks nasty though...

Reinhard

Click to expand...

Yes, and the NTO containers will fall into the ocean. If a good portion sinks, it will be quickly diluted.

Well its official. Boeing announced that they failed to attach one of the drogues to its main chute leaving it in the spacecraft. Who around here has forgotten to close a quick link???
Steve

I think we all have forgotten to properly attach something, but how the hell did Boeing's QC fail to catch that? Aerospace companies are held to a higher standard than most, and that is one hell of an embarrassing and concerning method of failure. That said, it is also an easy to fix one, but I expect there will be major workplace training and management restructuring.

SDramstad said:

Boeing announced that they failed to attach one of the drogues to its main chute leaving it in the spacecraft.

Click to expand...

SERIOUSLY!!! Somebody deserves a good butt-kicking for that. I assume it is on a procedural checklist somewhere. If it isn't then the list maker deserves the kick.

https://twitter.com/ChrisG_NSF/status/1192515066001809408?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1192516175886012416&ref_url=https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=49382.280


https://twitter.com/i/status/1192535693421006848

On the video you can see the one drogue chute come out and just fly away.....

Boeing-produced video, of the "very successful" test. No close-ups, but does show the whole flight very well. The flight path is as-intended (to get it out over the ocean, for a real pad abort).