On 2023-04-21 20:22, Snidely wrote:
Note also that SpaceX had already decided to install a water deluge
system (which would have reduced the energy reaching the concrete) and
was working on a flame diverter.
I had always thought that water deluge wa to control noise. Would't the addition of water->steam to rocket exhaust add to the mass hitting the concrete? Or does throwing water at speed=0 into the mix result in the
exhaust slowing down as it accelerates the water? Does the boiling of
water end up cooling exhaust substantially? Or not enough to matter?
Is there any information on how well the inside of the OLM ring faired?
the anchoring mechanism and all other gizmos on the inside of ring?
The umbilical case on top of OLM was not pulverized so this is good.
But did the stuff inside survive?
From point of view of reusability, my concern is that the sheer power of
the rocket at launch might not make it possible to have undamaged OLM
after every launch.
And since lots was damaged around the OLM (in particular punctured tanks
at tank farm), the design of the launch site may have flaws if there is
no "path" for a flae trench to send exhaust to.
Also note that a flame trench may not have been as easy as a diverter structure, due to the water table issue.
Apparently, the OLM is already fairly high off the ground, but the beams
that support it all around make it difficult to make an above ground
flame diverter/trench. I am not all that concerned about a below ground
flame trench that is filled with water. Wouldn't the exhaust very
quickly push that water out to sea with said water providing some
protection to the flame trench floor?
We don't know yet if the concrete shrapnel is the cause of the first
engine outs, but there's certainly speculation about that.
Am more concerned about engine shutdowns well after launch. The engine
tests we've seen in last 2 years have actually been engine start tests,
not engine runs, except for 1 engine and 6 engine tests where engine ran
for a number of seconds after spin-up And the 6 engine test causing much concrete damage).
Melon Husk claims that he welcomes dissenting opinions and when backed
with fact is willing to change his mind. I a quite curious on whether
staff at SpaceX are affraid to speak up against his "aspirations" to
provide reality check so Husk's aspirational goal of simple OLM without
flame trench was never challenged, whether there were challenges but
Husm overturned them, or whether the engineers really thought the pad
would survive.
(I use Melon Husk because last december, my twitter account was
suspended because they found a post I had made in June 2022 quoting a
public SEC letter send to him and I was forced to delete it to
re-instate account, so now, I no longer mention his name so their
algorithms won't find what I say about him). (and deleted all tweets I
made about hium back to 2017).
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)