I can understand hydrazine offloading and the hazards associated, but I'm wondering if there is such a need for xenon offloading.

  • $\begingroup$ Xenon is not explosive, toxic or cancerogenic but narcotic and very expensive. Venting some of it should be avoided anyway. $\endgroup$ – Uwe Jul 26 '18 at 17:58
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think it ever happened. I suspected this to be the case for Akatsuki, when its main engine failed and it used RCS for orbital insertion - dumping fuel for non-functional engine would be a reasonable move - but Akatsuki used a standard hypergolic bipropellant for main engine (hydrazine-dinitrogen tetroxide), not xenon. $\endgroup$ – SF. Jul 26 '18 at 19:31
  • $\begingroup$ As hypotetical case - offloading before launch, say because a technical issue found. I don't know did it ever hapeened. $\endgroup$ – Heopps Jul 27 '18 at 10:37
  • $\begingroup$ Seems to me it would be irresponsible not to have a procedure to offload a high pressure gas, e.g. in that sense xenon is no different to the helium used as a pressurant gas (300bar) for bipropellant engines. $\endgroup$ – Puffin Jul 27 '18 at 17:53
  • $\begingroup$ @Uwe - Yes re: rare and expensive. I've yet to find any web references that give reason for offloading $\endgroup$ – Doug Ramsay Jul 27 '18 at 20:29

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.