As they had apparently not started and were in the fuelling phase, this is unlikely. Let's refrain from the rampant speculation...
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
As they had apparently not started and were in the fuelling phase, this is unlikely. Let's refrain from the rampant speculation...
Priority setting: finish blog post vs dealing with $200m rocket explosion
I'd be willing to give Elon a pass on the blog post.
Pretty sure it's because triaging the more important task is what Elon would consider a first principal.
Last edited:
That *sugar* is beyond *cotton-candy-state*.
What The satellite was doing, was a rapid antenna-removing-hydrazine-detanking -somersault...
My bet is that the problem stems from the fact that they are using cryogenic oxygen that is colder than other rocket manufacturers are willing to use like ULA. I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night so I would know.
habanero69
I Dont Need Cialis. I Drive an EV.
Viewing in ultra slow-motion (.25) it seems to be a vertical shaped explosion pattern which "MIGHT" suggest a ruptured seam maybe? Wish it could be slowed down further. But then again I'm not a scientist/structural specialist either so I'm probably 100% wrong. Obviously telemetry will provide what they need.
it is my understanding that the static fire test is a full "dress rehearsal" of the launch - you just don't let the rocket go. Then, unload the propellant and safe the rocket after the test is done.
Yeah but do you need the additional risk of fueling the second stage with the customer's payload onboard?
Freezeframing through it appears to originate at the upper stage umbilical. Hopefully the source of ignition is traced to the TE not the launch vehicle.
Freezeframing through it appears to originate at the upper stage umbilical. Hopefully the source of ignition is traced to the TE not the launch vehicle.
"Space is hard". Very sorry to see this. Don't know if the explosion came from the rocket or some of the launch support infrastructure.
Edit: oops, had my post window open for so long I missed @Skotty's post showing Elon's tweet. But still unsure if the explosion came from within the second stage or was associated with some of the propellant feed lines into the spacecraft.
Edit: oops, had my post window open for so long I missed @Skotty's post showing Elon's tweet. But still unsure if the explosion came from within the second stage or was associated with some of the propellant feed lines into the spacecraft.
Nigh on impossible. And if you were gong to sabotage a rocket, you'd want a blaze of glory waterfalling down into the Atlantic 30 seconds after liftoff, not some ground failure where if spacex wanted, they could save face and manufacture any number of non-booster related causes.
This is a frustrating turn of events for the spacecraft industry. Spacex has been pressuring customers to perform the hot fire while integrated for some time now, in order to save a few days of processing time. The very conservative industry has been very skeptical of the concept, and this is a huge step backward. Progress and risk are always at odds with heritage, and spacex is well known . This will take some time for the industry to recover. But...Its not the end of the world. Rockets fail, causes are identified, corrective actions are implemented. Customers will scrutinize those steps, but generally the collective technical prowess of the industry is sensible enough to set aside their FUD and agree to move forward.
On a personal note, as a spacecraft manufacturer, it was heartbreaking to see the fairing tumble to the ground and explode. As a former floor engineer and test conductor of 'wet' spacecraft moves, its a somber reminder of how much energy is in a fueled spacecraft.
Skotty
2014 S P85 | 2023 F-150L
I wonder if it's possible that it could have been caused by something as mundane as a static discharge during fueling.
As for payload, makes you wonder if they should maybe work on a new, quicker means for attaching payload to a rocket, so it can be attached at the latest possible time before liftoff. Some sort of payload crane/rig with a quick connect that could potentially allow payload to be mounted as late as after fueling and just before liftoff.
As for payload, makes you wonder if they should maybe work on a new, quicker means for attaching payload to a rocket, so it can be attached at the latest possible time before liftoff. Some sort of payload crane/rig with a quick connect that could potentially allow payload to be mounted as late as after fueling and just before liftoff.
habanero69
I Dont Need Cialis. I Drive an EV.
Makes sense, but ya gotta believe if they were able to, they would. Disturbing a fueled rocket with all that propellant on board is probably too risky; one teensy spark and......
Nigh on impossible. And if you were gong to sabotage a rocket, you'd want a blaze of glory waterfalling down into the Atlantic 30 seconds after liftoff, not some ground failure where if spacex wanted, they could save face and manufacture any number of non-booster related causes.
This is a frustrating turn of events for the spacecraft industry. Spacex has been pressuring customers to perform the hot fire while integrated for some time now, in order to save a few days of processing time. The very conservative industry has been very skeptical of the concept, and this is a huge step backward. Progress and risk are always at odds with heritage, and spacex is well known . This will take some time for the industry to recover. But...Its not the end of the world. Rockets fail, causes are identified, corrective actions are implemented. Customers will scrutinize those steps, but generally the collective technical prowess of the industry is sensible enough to set aside their FUD and agree to move forward.
On a personal note, as a spacecraft manufacturer, it was heartbreaking to see the fairing tumble to the ground and explode. As a former floor engineer and test conductor of 'wet' spacecraft moves, its a somber reminder of how much energy is in a fueled spacecraft.
Thanks for indulging my James Bond flight of fancy, and for the explanations. As Elon says, space is indeed hard and that's that, I suppose. Live to fly another day.
I'm oddly reminded of Karl Urban's Leonard McCoy, acting nervous about spacecraft, saying "I may throw up on you."
Similar threads
- Article
