SpaceX Tuesday...
Discussion
The comments on the various articles I've seen range from bats
t crazy to those showing a clear misunderstanding of how an investigation like this proceeds.
Like an aircrash, the investigators involved will not make any announcement until they are certain they have evidence to back up any conclusion they may come to - this process may take several months. Unfortunately far too many people seem to think the answers should be available almost immediately, and start claiming things are being covered up or other barmy conspiracy theories when the investigators don't make an immediate announcement
t crazy to those showing a clear misunderstanding of how an investigation like this proceeds. Like an aircrash, the investigators involved will not make any announcement until they are certain they have evidence to back up any conclusion they may come to - this process may take several months. Unfortunately far too many people seem to think the answers should be available almost immediately, and start claiming things are being covered up or other barmy conspiracy theories when the investigators don't make an immediate announcement
The Chinese are reportedly furious about the rocket's destruction. Their takeover of the satellite's Israeli owner, Spacecom, was dependent up its successful deployment. Now they have to start again.
Spacecom haven't had the best of luck lately. Their Amos-5 satellite stopped working in 2015 after only 4 years in operation.
Spacecom haven't had the best of luck lately. Their Amos-5 satellite stopped working in 2015 after only 4 years in operation.
p1stonhead said:
Tin foil hat time but just how batst mental am I on a scale of 1-10 that one of my thoughts were 'perhaps someone shot it with a rifle'?
It was Dr No.t mental am I on a scale of 1-10 that one of my thoughts were 'perhaps someone shot it with a rifle'?Let's remember that the audio on the USLaunchReport video was recorded from about 2 miles away, so it's picking up delayed sounds from the pad and other sounds from near the camera.
It's unlikely any low level sounds will be from the pad, so clunks and rattles can probably be ruled out as being linked to the anomaly.
It's unlikely any low level sounds will be from the pad, so clunks and rattles can probably be ruled out as being linked to the anomaly.
Sylvaforever said:
Cryogenic propellants, such as liquid oxygen, freeze atmospheric water vapour into ice. This can damage or block seals and valves and can cause leaks and other failures.
This is exactly my theory, the fuel is super cooled (i guess it makes it denser = fit more in) on a day with a certain amount of humidity and heat that can cause the connections to cool and ice to form, water expands when it freezes. Its not too difficult to imagine water in a seal freezes and expands popping the seal. then either a spark from the metal coupling or charge of static ignites it and BOOM.
They haven't been able to isolate the cause and it could still be the rocket or the ground equipment. So they're going to put it down to experience and carry on anyway. They're looking at a return to flight in November, from Cape Canaveral (Launch Pad 39A). This is from SpaceX's President & COO, Gwynne Shotwell.
They're not going to test fire with the payload attached any more. At least for now.
The loss of the rocket has not effected their insurance rates apparently. Presumably a loss rate was built into the price anyway.
Also the Falcon Heavy's maiden launch will likely be in Q1 2017 from either Cape Canaveral or Vandeberg. That's to be decided.
Sauce:
https://twitter.com/pbdes
They're not going to test fire with the payload attached any more. At least for now.
The loss of the rocket has not effected their insurance rates apparently. Presumably a loss rate was built into the price anyway.
Also the Falcon Heavy's maiden launch will likely be in Q1 2017 from either Cape Canaveral or Vandeberg. That's to be decided.
Sauce:
https://twitter.com/pbdes
Beati Dogu said:
They haven't been able to isolate the cause and it could still be the rocket or the ground equipment. So they're going to put it down to experience and carry on anyway. They're looking at a return to flight in November, from Cape Canaveral (Launch Pad 39A). This is from SpaceX's President & COO, Gwynne Shotwell.
They're not going to test fire with the payload attached any more. At least for now.
The loss of the rocket has not effected their insurance rates apparently. Presumably a loss rate was built into the price anyway.
Also the Falcon Heavy's maiden launch will likely be in Q1 2017 from either Cape Canaveral or Vandeberg. That's to be decided.
Sauce:
https://twitter.com/pbdes
Isn't not being able to figure it out like, really quite bad?They're not going to test fire with the payload attached any more. At least for now.
The loss of the rocket has not effected their insurance rates apparently. Presumably a loss rate was built into the price anyway.
Also the Falcon Heavy's maiden launch will likely be in Q1 2017 from either Cape Canaveral or Vandeberg. That's to be decided.
Sauce:
https://twitter.com/pbdes
p1stonhead said:
Isn't not being able to figure it out like, really quite bad?
I suspect if they knew what happened Mr Musk would have made the announcement and no even with 3,000 lines of data you may not always be able to explain an accident I am sure they will have some theories but not certainties Beati Dogu said:
They haven't been able to isolate the cause and it could still be the rocket or the ground equipment. So they're going to put it down to experience and carry on anyway. They're looking at a return to flight in November, from Cape Canaveral (Launch Pad 39A). This is from SpaceX's President & COO, Gwynne Shotwell.
They're not going to test fire with the payload attached any more. At least for now.
The loss of the rocket has not effected their insurance rates apparently. Presumably a loss rate was built into the price anyway.
Also the Falcon Heavy's maiden launch will likely be in Q1 2017 from either Cape Canaveral or Vandeberg. That's to be decided.
Sauce:
https://twitter.com/pbdes
Presumably thats an insurance requirement to test without the payload my guess is that would limit the liability........if you were the underwriter wouldn't you insist They're not going to test fire with the payload attached any more. At least for now.
The loss of the rocket has not effected their insurance rates apparently. Presumably a loss rate was built into the price anyway.
Also the Falcon Heavy's maiden launch will likely be in Q1 2017 from either Cape Canaveral or Vandeberg. That's to be decided.
Sauce:
https://twitter.com/pbdes
Toaster said:
p1stonhead said:
Isn't not being able to figure it out like, really quite bad?
I suspect if they knew what happened Mr Musk would have made the announcement and no even with 3,000 lines of data you may not always be able to explain an accident I am sure they will have some theories but not certainties There may well be no evidence of just what happened.
Beati Dogu said:
They haven't been able to isolate the cause and it could still be the rocket or the ground equipment. So they're going to put it down to experience and carry on anyway. They're looking at a return to flight in November, from Cape Canaveral (Launch Pad 39A). This is from SpaceX's President & COO, Gwynne Shotwell.
They're not going to test fire with the payload attached any more. At least for now.
The loss of the rocket has not effected their insurance rates apparently. Presumably a loss rate was built into the price anyway.
Also the Falcon Heavy's maiden launch will likely be in Q1 2017 from either Cape Canaveral or Vandeberg. That's to be decided.
Sauce:
https://twitter.com/pbdes
OK... somewhat scary.They're not going to test fire with the payload attached any more. At least for now.
The loss of the rocket has not effected their insurance rates apparently. Presumably a loss rate was built into the price anyway.
Also the Falcon Heavy's maiden launch will likely be in Q1 2017 from either Cape Canaveral or Vandeberg. That's to be decided.
Sauce:
https://twitter.com/pbdes
Hopefully they have a clue where abouts the problem started (02 filling etc), their engineers should be able to make some rough educated guesses and at least try and mitigate some things, or put in more telemetry/cameras to catch the issue next time..
This thing is supposed to be flying people next year. I know dragon2 has its emergency escape trick but I'd really not want to trust that to a 1:20 odds on kaboom.
Sylvaforever said:
As stated earlier static discharge compounded by earthing or bonding failure is difficult reproduce after an explosive event as we have witnessed.There may well be no evidence of just what happened.
If there is no evidence as you say then its a best guess and you know what thats sometimes thats the best that can be done. I imagine they'll cover suspected areas with high speed cameras & remote recording.
Here's Gwynne Shotwell in her own words earlier today. She was at the Summit for Satellite Financing in Paris
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYs2h1ek6HM
Here's Gwynne Shotwell in her own words earlier today. She was at the Summit for Satellite Financing in Paris
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYs2h1ek6HM
Beati Dogu said:
I imagine they'll cover suspected areas with high speed cameras & remote recording.
Here's Gwynne Shotwell in her own words earlier today. She was at the Summit for Satellite Financing in Paris
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYs2h1ek6HM
I am staggered that every inch of the rocket isnt covered by ultra high def cameras already to be honest.Here's Gwynne Shotwell in her own words earlier today. She was at the Summit for Satellite Financing in Paris
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYs2h1ek6HM
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff