I hope it wasn't another helium COPV finding its inner Megumin. Hydrazine and nitrogen tetroxide tanks are pressurized with helium. In NSF they are speculating that accident happened during pressurization, and not at firing, or at least there are no engine firing visible at the video.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Nikxice
Active Member
Looking at that RUD video a big concern might be that the damage wasn't contained. Wasn't the inner hull or pressure shell designed to protect the crew capsule from such an event? Hope the data and debris allow for a timely well engineered fix. So unfortunate, I think SpaceX had just reached NASA's threshold of having flown 7 or more redesigned COPVs with FH 2. No time to waste here searching for Boeing snipers on a building.
Dragon and Falcon COPVs are different. So this should not effect that threshold. Leaked video is too low res. and short to say anything about cabins pressure vessel. But rumors say it was "all but destroyed". So not good.
Will Boeing do a flight abort test with a capsule that had been up to the space station or will they test with a different new one?
And if SpaceX will only be sending astronauts on new dragon capsules, then a flight abort test should be tested with a new one. This anomaly should not be counted against SpaceX. But I am glad that SpaceX did test with this one since SpaceX will ultimately be safer because of it.
And if SpaceX will only be sending astronauts on new dragon capsules, then a flight abort test should be tested with a new one. This anomaly should not be counted against SpaceX. But I am glad that SpaceX did test with this one since SpaceX will ultimately be safer because of it.
It will count against SpaceX if it was something that's likely unrelated to the capsule having visited space. SpaceX needs to find the cause before putting people in it. Though one can hope the fault *is* related to having visited space, as that would likely have have minimal impact on SpaceX.
If they can for example conclude something in the SuperDraco system didn't survive reentry undamaged, they can just only use new Dragon 2 for carrying astronauts, like they planned anyway, and the Dragon 2's refurbished for cargo missions don't need the SuperDracos anyway.
But now SpaceX has one less capsule. They may need to repurpose the capsule intended for carrying the first astronauts to the in-flight abort test, and then astronauts will go on the next one being built. So it's hard to see this not delaying the first crewed flight, even if the fault can be explained away.
If they can for example conclude something in the SuperDraco system didn't survive reentry undamaged, they can just only use new Dragon 2 for carrying astronauts, like they planned anyway, and the Dragon 2's refurbished for cargo missions don't need the SuperDracos anyway.
But now SpaceX has one less capsule. They may need to repurpose the capsule intended for carrying the first astronauts to the in-flight abort test, and then astronauts will go on the next one being built. So it's hard to see this not delaying the first crewed flight, even if the fault can be explained away.
That spaceflight.com article states: "Then, the company was able to prepare the capsule for this weekends testing just six weeks after the same Crew Dragon spent around an hour in the corrosive saltwater environment following splashdown from the Demo-1 mission."
It would be interesting if the conclusion was that exposure to saltwater led to the failure, given that the capsules were originally intended to land retro-repulsively on land, and it was only because NASA was uncomfortable with that that ocean landings took place.
It would be interesting if the conclusion was that exposure to saltwater led to the failure, given that the capsules were originally intended to land retro-repulsively on land, and it was only because NASA was uncomfortable with that that ocean landings took place.
Last edited:
Very upsetting to watch that video, but it will likely be weeks at a minimum before the cause is definitively identified and we learn what happened. I am not going to speculate as to what might have happened, since I know next to nothing about aerospace engineering and Crew Dragon construction.
The only thing I am almost certain of at this point is that Crew Dragon will not be flying humans to LEO this year.
I hope Boeing does fly humans this year, because the last thing I want is for NASA to keep paying the Russians $70 million/seat.
This new setback reminds me of the sadness I felt when the AMOS-6 F9 exploded on the pad on 9-1-2016. It was terrible to watch, but SpaceX worked through it, identified the cause, and corrected it. However, this new Crew Dragon problem will be more challenging to resolve because here SpaceX is working with NASA and there are obviously critical crew safety issues. Which is why I doubt humans will fly in a Crew Dragon in 2019.
The only thing I am almost certain of at this point is that Crew Dragon will not be flying humans to LEO this year.
I hope Boeing does fly humans this year, because the last thing I want is for NASA to keep paying the Russians $70 million/seat.
This new setback reminds me of the sadness I felt when the AMOS-6 F9 exploded on the pad on 9-1-2016. It was terrible to watch, but SpaceX worked through it, identified the cause, and corrected it. However, this new Crew Dragon problem will be more challenging to resolve because here SpaceX is working with NASA and there are obviously critical crew safety issues. Which is why I doubt humans will fly in a Crew Dragon in 2019.
Last edited:
e-FTW
New electron smell
(First off, I think someone is getting fired. Filming a monitor with your phone then posting online has to be a no-no. Also, get a better phone... ;-)
If you listen to the reactions in the video (crank the volume way up, F-bomb warning though) you hear a few very telling things about the state of mind and spirit of those folks (whoever they are):
- As the anomaly happens, everyone is swearing and one lady can be clearly heard saying “Oh my god!”.
- Then one man goes “Nah, nah... here we go” as the smoke is about to clear and he is thinking the capsule will emerge unscathed. <- I would be that guy
- Then it clears and everyone realizes the capsule is gone, and then you hear the pain.
Mike1080i
Member
The plan Boeing proposed and NASA approved did not include an in flight abort test for Starliner.
e-FTW
New electron smell
e-FTW
New electron smell
Scott thinks oxidizer tank: Scott Manley on Twitter
Scott Manley on Twitter
But as he said in his video, we know nothing. Let’s wait for official word.
Scott Manley on Twitter
But as he said in his video, we know nothing. Let’s wait for official word.
Nikxice
Active Member
Okay, but we all know this is the internet, so that's not going to happen
COPV failure or some other cause, I can now see the Richard Shelby and Tom Stafford old school types questioning the decision to surround Dragon 2 with chemical rockets. Certainly necessary for propulsive landings, but for the lifespan of Dragon 2, SpaceX could decide landing Dragon 2 on terra firma isn't worth pursuing. I can't imagine what kind of redesign solid rocket motors would require, but with Elon's ability to quickly shift gears, suppose nothing can be ruled out.
Not a miss, a trade off, they did simulation along with pad abort test to validate the system. Boeing doesn't have the advantage of previously used rockets to sacrifice for testing.
Hypergols have been around forever so it’s not like the base technology is at fault. Hypergols are the right answer for high thrust and high control authority required in this kind of application; Elon's persistent first principals approach would have concluded that long ago. It’s got to be some clever SpaceX technology tweak that’s the root cause...or potentially Spacex’s faster and looser procedural approach...
I usually think of this forum as better than whataboutism.
In any case, there’s no need to be offended that SpaceX balances risk and speed and technological progress differently than the legacy industry. You can’t change the world moving at a bureaucratic pace, as it were. It’s why they’re so successful and why they’re ushering in the biggest step function in Space since...probably the shuttle? It’s also why many of their public and not so public shortcomings aren’t on the cutting edge of progress. Typically not so spectacular shortcomings, but...
Steven Pietrobon from NSF :
"Here are some drawings of the Dragon 2 propellant system that I got from the HEOC CCP presentation. We see in the first drawing four blue tanks (with a pink stripe at the base) and two grey tanks. The next drawing shows the tanks mated with the crew compartment and then the heat shield attached. It looks like that next to each blue tank, another blue tank (again with a pink stripe at the base) is attached. That matches the red tanks we see in the flight vehicle. That makes total of 2+4+4 = 10 tanks all together. We know that some tanks contain helium, some MMH and some N2O4. If the grey tanks contain helium, than as those tanks are at the sides, then that can't be the source of the explosion. The focus of the explosion seems to be near the thruster quadrant under the right window."
"Here are some drawings of the Dragon 2 propellant system that I got from the HEOC CCP presentation. We see in the first drawing four blue tanks (with a pink stripe at the base) and two grey tanks. The next drawing shows the tanks mated with the crew compartment and then the heat shield attached. It looks like that next to each blue tank, another blue tank (again with a pink stripe at the base) is attached. That matches the red tanks we see in the flight vehicle. That makes total of 2+4+4 = 10 tanks all together. We know that some tanks contain helium, some MMH and some N2O4. If the grey tanks contain helium, than as those tanks are at the sides, then that can't be the source of the explosion. The focus of the explosion seems to be near the thruster quadrant under the right window."
Similar threads
