After multiple weather related delays, SpaceX was able to launch a 3-time used Falcon 9 from Kennedy Space Center’s launch pad 39A. Atop this rocket was a Crew Dragon Capsule containing two mannequins and a whole lot of sensors. This wasn’t a normal launch; this was the inflight abort test many of us have been waiting months to see.

Less than 2 minutes after launch, and after sustaining Max Q, SpaceX had their Falcon 9 just… turn off. This had two effects. As planned, software onboard correctly processed sensor and system data to recognize the problem, and released the Dragon Crew Capsule and fired its Draco Engines to get it the expletive out of there. The next thing that happened was the unstable rocket proceeded, as planned, to explode in a very dramatic way.

The jettisoned capsule accelerated away with a maximum acceleration of 3.4 g. This is significantly easier on the body than what astronauts experienced during a necessary abort on a Soyuz capsule in October 2018. After reaching a maximum altitude around 25 miles or 40 km, the system began its safe journey home, with all parachutes deploying as planned and a safe splash down into the ocean. This successful test prepares the way for a launch sometime this year.

In a press conference following the abort test, there was a clear attempt to maintain a single narrative between NASA administrator Jim Bridenstein and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk,  and Musk stated they’d agreed on messaging prior to appearing, roughly 15 minutes late, on the press conference stage. Musk made it clear that SpaceX should have hardware ready to go by the end of February or at worst early March, and should be ready for launch shortly there after. Bridenstein, on the other hand, stressed the desire for additional tests of the parachute system on the Crew Dragon, and said that NASA is going to be rethinking how to use this new hardware, and consider if they’d like to change their current plan to have a short mission to the ISS, and instead have the astronauts stay for an extended period. That latter option would require additional training, and would delay launch by an unknown amount of time. Many of us wonder why NASA didn’t provide training for both kinds of missions – long or short – already and some question if this is a delaying tactic to allow Boeing and its Atlas launched Starliner a chance to catch up in development. Bridenstein was extremely clear that NASA wants to have multiple suppliers of human space launch services, and continues to publicly back Boeing and United Launch Alliance. In December, when our Daily Space team visited Kennedy, we found that the information given during facility bus tours actually stressed these older companies and talked about how it would be Boeing that returned Americans to space from American soil. Since NASA is a government funded agency, there is complex politics behind every public message – messages often designed to keep the congress people who write the budgets happy. As we watch the similarly politically motivated actions in the following months, we will be playing close attention to see if Boeing puts their capsule through the same tests and experiences the same timeline delays as we’re seeing for SpaceX. We are a fan of a take it slow, test everything, and move forward boldly kind of approach, but we want to see fairness in how these two companies are allowed to advance their technologies. 

More about the abort test:

• SpaceX successfully blows up a Falcon 9 rocket in escape test launch (Cnet)
• SpaceX’s Crew Dragon returns to shore after successful abort test (photos) (Space.com)