Scroll down to read this post.

 

Genesis cover

On Christmas Eve 1968 three Americans became the first humans to visit another world. What they did to celebrate was unexpected and profound, and will be remembered throughout all human history. Genesis: the Story of Apollo 8, Robert Zimmerman's classic history of humanity's first journey to another world, tells that story, and it is now available as both an ebook and an audiobook, both with a foreword by Valerie Anders and a new introduction by Robert Zimmerman.

 

The print edition can be purchased at Amazon. from any other book seller, or direct from my ebook publisher, ebookit. The ebook is available everywhere for $5.99 (before discount) at amazon, or direct from my ebook publisher, ebookit. If you buy it from ebookit you don't support the big tech companies and the author gets a bigger cut much sooner.


The audiobook is also available at all these vendors, and is also free with a 30-day trial membership to Audible.
 

"Not simply about one mission, [Genesis] is also the history of America's quest for the moon... Zimmerman has done a masterful job of tying disparate events together into a solid account of one of America's greatest human triumphs."--San Antonio Express-News


ULA successfully completes second test launch of its new Vulcan rocket

ULA this morning successfully completed the second test launch of its new Vulcan rocket, lifting off from Cape Canaveral from Florida.

It placed a dummy test payload into orbit in order to obtain from the Space Force certification that will allow the company to begin operational military launches and actually make money from the rocket. ULA hopes to launch two such Vulcan launches before the end of the year, and then hopes to do ten more Vulcan launches in 2025, along with ten Atlas-5 launches as it closes out that rocket’s inventory before retiring it.

UPDATE: An explosion on of Vulcun’s two solid-fueled strap-on boosters during the launch today might prevent a quick certification from the military. Though the rocket successfully put the payload into its correct orbit, it appears the nozzle failed on that booster, throwing it out sideways, fortunately away from the rocket. The video here shows this clearly. I was startled by this explosion during the launch, but then forgot about it (until my readers reminded me) when the payload reached orbit as planned.

The strap-on boosters are manufactured by Northrop Grumman. Before using them again ULA needs to get clarity on this issue. We also must wonder if the FAA will step in as it has for SpaceX to ground ULA. At the moment it has decided not to do so.

This was ULA’s fifth launch in 2024, so there is no change in the 2024 launch race leader board.

95 SpaceX
44 China
11 Russia
11 Rocket Lab

American private enterprise now leads the rest of the world combined in successful launches 112 to 67, while SpaceX by itself now leads the entire world, including American companies, 95 to 84.

The support of my readers through the years has given me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Four years ago, just before the 2020 election I wrote that Joe Biden's mental health was suspect. Only in this year has the propaganda mainstream media decided to recognize that basic fact.

 

Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Even today NASA and Congress refuse to recognize this reality.

 

In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.

 

Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.

 

Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black.

 

You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are five ways of doing so:

 

1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.

 

2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
 

3. A Paypal Donation:

4. A Paypal subscription:


5. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
 
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652

 

You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.

15 comments

  • John

    Good enough for government work anyway.

    https://x.com/dwisecinema/status/1842173022792299003

    Whatever part that was, it was extra :).

  • John

    Another view of the ‘off-nominal’ event.

    https://x.com/_mgde_/status/1842178511093580209

    Rocket obviously recovered well.

  • Richard M

    From Woods170, a well connected regular over at the NSF forums, just now:

    Word I got from a ULA source, just minutes ago, is that the affected SRB suffered a major failure of its nozzle and they consider themselves lucky it was pointed mostly away from the core stage. Likely started with a nozzle burn-through.

    Edit: update from my source:
    Investigation of what went wrong with the SRB 1 is coming. Initial assessment is that it violently shedded a major portion of its nozzle.

    This would align with observations from the launch webcast which showed a circular object falling away after the sparkly event.

    https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=61114.msg2629790#msg2629790

    Obviously, ULA has to investigate this; and I assume, unless someone at the ULA processing facility accidentally dropped the SRB after its arrival, that this is most likely some sort of QA or QC problem that happened at Northrop Grumman’s Promontory, Utah plant. If so, it ought to be very fixable, and maybe ULA can still be certified without another test flight. Everything else seemed to work nominally; the core and the Centaur seem to have done a great job compensating for the loss of thrust resulting from the SRB-1 nozzle failure.

    Still, it’s something they have to nail down; I believe the first NSSL mission requires a Vulcan in the VC-4 configuration, which means it will have FOUR solid rocket boosters. They need to make sure the SRB’s are completely reliable.

  • Richard M

    NASASpaceFlight’s Adrian Bell tweets:

    “We asked the @FAANews about today‘s Vulcan launch.”

    Statement by the FAA:

    Quote: “The FAA is aware an anomaly occurred during the United Launch Alliance (ULA) Vulcan Centaur 2 mission that launched from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida on Oct. 4, 2024. This involved one of the solid rocket boosters. No public injuries or public property damage have been reported. The FAA is assessing the operation and will issue an updated statement if the agency determines an investigation is warranted.” — FAA

    https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=61114.msg2629837#msg2629837:~:text=https%3A//twitter.com/bccarcounters/status/1842234216169525466

  • All: I am adding this info abut the anomaly to the main post. I was startled by it when I watched the video but then forgot about it when the payload reached orbit without problems.

  • Since ULA supports this Administration/Junta or at least does not do anything that the Junta objects to, the FAA will not ground Vulcan nor give them any problem. The Banana Republic of North America (formerly the U.S.A) is working in its full perversity.

  • Since ULA supports this Administration/Junta or at least does not do anything that the Junta objects to, the FAA will not ground Vulcan nor give them any problem. The Banana Republic of North America (formerly the U.S.A) is working in its full perversity.

  • Ray Van Dune

    From the rapid and significant excursion of the Vulcan rocket hull that I saw, I think ULA is also very lucky that the ultimate SRB nozzle separation happened early in the boost phase, and not nearer Max-Q.

  • Max

    Watching the video it’s amazing it continue flying after the event first started (as it’s entering the cloud) and the explosion that occurs a short time later blew away from the rocket, with five pieces to the side and four more larger ones that can be seen ejected out the bottom, with more parts falling off as it rises higher into the air.
    This will be used to show one of the advantages of solid rocket boosters.

  • Edward

    Scott Manley quickly put together a video about this. It may not say much more about the anomaly (“observation”) than was said here, but it includes some interesting background. Manley’s analysis of the anomaly begins about 13 ½ minutes into his video:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIHg-PPUZnk (17 minutes)

    I had noticed the surprising flash about 24 seconds into the flight, so the debris spreading away a dozen seconds later wasn’t that surprising. The successful mission is surprising. They must have had quite a bit more liquid propellants than were needed, because the length of the bell part of the engine helps create quite a bit of the exhaust velocity that provides the thrust from the engine.

    I’m sure that no matter how proprietary this investigation is for the Northrup Grumman company, there will be a leak of a satisfying amount of information as to the cause. However, I suspect that the root cause was a lesson learned decades ago.

  • Ray Van Dune

    Strangely, the FAA seems disinterested in investigating this failure because it was ultimately overcome, even though it seems it was only by chance that it was not catastrophic.

    Furthermore, the fact that the booster and upper stage had sufficient fuel to overcome the failure is probably due to limitations in the realism of the test.

  • Ray Van Dune: We mustn’t get things backwards. The FAA response to the Vulcan launch is correct: Stay out of the way. It just illustrates the partisan and biased nature of its treatment of SpaceX, which has had far less serious issues.

  • Jeff Wright

    An early Falcon had an engine explosion and was mostly successful as well.

    Both tough birds.

    In Scott Manley’s comment section I thought I saw something about Armadillo’s John Carmack having a computer program that saved the day here—anyone have more information on this?

  • Edward

    Robert Zimmerman wrote: “The FAA response to the Vulcan launch is correct: Stay out of the way. It just illustrates the partisan and biased nature of its treatment of SpaceX, which has had far less serious issues.

    The FAA used to do this, too, with SpaceX, back in the days before Musk became Democrat enemy #2. A few years ago, a Falcon second stage failed to fire at all for a reentry, and eventually parts fell in Oregon or Washington state. The FAA did not ground the Falcon until that issue was resolved, when people could have been killed or injured or property damaged. Now that Musk is the big evil bad guy, well, any and every excuse to ground anything Musk!

    Preventing our government from over regulating us is important so that they don’t abuse the very limited powers that the Constitution grants them. No wonder Obama considered the Constitution a document of negative rights — they were negative for an overbearing, tyrannical government.

  • GeorgeC

    I worked as a contractor for the FAA Volpe Center 1997-2002. The idea that FAA regulation as good at the time as airline type rating could help with stable financing of commercial space was being kicked around. Papers being written etc. I suspect that the FAA attitude towards SpaceX is driven by the fact that SpaceX
    dominates the mass to orbit contest with 90% share based on vertical integration and a more simple mechanical design without need for suppliers of pesky SRB for example.

    Blue Origin is best positioned in the US to survive as a launch company. If they had full freedom to improve and perfect BE4 then it would be better than being restricted by ULA Vulcan requirements. Is there any launch by a Vulcan that a New Glenn or Falcoln could not do?

Readers: the rules for commenting!

 

No registration is required. I welcome all opinions, even those that strongly criticize my commentary.

 

However, name-calling and obscenities will not be tolerated. First time offenders who are new to the site will be warned. Second time offenders or first time offenders who have been here awhile will be suspended for a week. After that, I will ban you. Period.

 

Note also that first time commenters as well as any comment with more than one link will be placed in moderation for my approval. Be patient, I will get to it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *