SpaceX is going to re-do their recent static fire
Rapid iteration. Rapid re-use. The word "rapid" gets used a lot in SpaceX's lingo. But are they as fast as they could be?
Perhaps they are, but the delays due to what looks like mistakes unravels the image a bit.
If SpaceX tested their COPV's before loading it up with explosive fuel mixtures, then maybe they don't blow up Masseys. If they don't blow up Masseys, then they launch over a month ago ( maybe two the way they're going).
The recent static fire seemed to go well, then they started tearing down the modifications made because of Masseys' destruction. They need to remove the mods so that they can stack and launch the thing. But no! After taking down the mods, they find something wrong with the static fire. Now they have to assemble the thing all over again. This is a loss of time. The question is: can these delays be avoided? Was it possible to vet the data before okaying the removal of the modifications?
I had this thought before way back last year when they re-did the heat shield. The heat shield was ready, but the decision was made to re-install a new heat shield. Again, this kind of thing may be unavoidable, but on the other hand, is that really the case?
You don't want to go too fast, as haste makes waste. It requires some sort of balance, it would seem. Perhaps they cannot go any faster, but it really does seem like at least some of it could be streamlined a bit.
No comments:
Post a Comment