Saturday, September 3, NASA called off the SLS takeoff once again. Should we talk about failure or failure of the launch, as has been said and written so much in the media. of course not. Here’s why.
Surprisingly, many media outlets described a failure in . The analysis surprises us. Are we talking about failure when, for more than two years, Announces that the future spacecraft will conduct a test flight in 6 months? Of course not. the same for me Which is still not ready to fly even though its maiden flight was scheduled for July 2020.
Artemis I, which does not take off despite two attempts, is clearly not a failure for NASA and its industrial partners. It would be a matter of failure if It failed to reach the Moon or crashed onto its surface, and if it failed to return to Earth safely. It is clear that all other adventures cannot be considered a failure. These are incidents, admittedly somewhat limiting, that are inherent in any program under development or in the qualification phase.It flies away and explodes, so
On August 29, NASA had to cancel the flight after several flights And when one of the four main stage RS-25 engines failed to reach the proper firing temperature. September 3 It happened while the launch tanks were being filled, causing NASA to suspend the procedure and then cancel the launch.
natural ignition delay
Although SLS is built on elaborate technologies inherited from previous software, including And the Saturn V for example, this launcher is still new. Thus, these ignition delays are not very surprising but rather common for newer launchers. This first assignment for Artemis is above all an illustrative journey. He must not only qualify the operator but also prove the ability of the vehicle and its ESM service module to operate in a variety of flight configurations.
Since the last Apollo moon landing mission in December 1972, we’ve been waiting for humans to return to the moon for nearly 50 years. We are only a few years away!