Running the igniter 1000 times in a row doesn't add reliability unless the
igniter is so immature that there is some doubt that it can be run 1000
times in a row. If there is no doubt, then it's just a validation exercise.
The same way flying two Conrad squares in less than three hours was just a
validation exercise.
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 7:08 AM Randall Clague <rclague@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Running the igniter
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:01 AM Henry Vanderbilt <
hvanderbilt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
That looks remarkably like an XCOR runway static test crew back in the
day. It got pretty routine after a while.
Aside from the background blatantly not being Mojave. Switzerland looks
a lot nicer!
On 4/21/2016 1:43 AM, Bruno Berger wrote:
Apropos boring firings...tests.
An old picture from a firing of a rocket engine attached to one of the
Swiss Mirage fighters... (SEPR):
http://www.spl.ch/news/SEPR/Testlauf.jpg
Look at the staff :-)
Bruno
Am 21.04.16 um 09:30 schrieb Michael Clive:
It got really boring.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Randall Clague <rclague@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:rclague@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
XCOR did 1000 consecutive igniter tests several times. It almost
became a rite of passage for interns.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:39 PM Lars Osborne
<lars.osborne@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:lars.osborne@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Does anyone have data for what is the most number of ignitions
performed on bi-propellant, non-hypergolic rocket igniter
without being rebuilt? I know that XCOR has done thousands of
runs on their igniters, but I don't know how often they get
rebuilt or if anyone has performed comparable reliability
What is the state of the art for igniter cycles?
Thanks,
Lars Osborne