JRP3
Hyperactive Member
If you want to get very tin foiley slow it down and watch closely around the 1:10 mark, a bird/drone(?) flies right over the rocket as it explodes...
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
If you want to get very tin foiley slow it down and watch closely around the 1:10 mark, a bird/drone(?) flies right over the rocket as it explodes...
thegruf
Active Member
^ now somewhat BBQ'd
Just feel gutted for all the team(s) involved.
We know you'll pick yourselves up and come back even stronger
Just feel gutted for all the team(s) involved.
We know you'll pick yourselves up and come back even stronger
How many times has this happened in the history of rocketry? How many escape systems would have been carried to orbit needlessly?
The escape system is an integral part of the manned Dragon, yes. As this was a standard payload, it was not on Dragon, but in a fairing on the second stage. The cost/benefit probably doesn't make sense right now for a complex escape system for non-human payloads.
Not to mention would a satellite take being accelerated at high g, tossed around, somehow being lowered to the ground and probably tumbling over on impact and come out in a useable state? Extremely unlikely. We have to be careful shipping them on trucks and planes not to exceed shock limits.
The alternative would be to install the customer's payload to the top of a fully fueled vehicle. Since this would need personnel on-site, it's probably too risky for human lives.
In a fundamental sense this is what a static test fire is for. The sad thing is that the payload was lost along with the rocket.
It is incredibly hard to determine, but from watching the video in slow motion, it seemed to be something that began at the connection point. How flammable is supercooled LOX? Would a small spark have caused something like this or something larger? What would it take to get such a significant initial explosion?
It is incredibly hard to determine, but from watching the video in slow motion, it seemed to be something that began at the connection point. How flammable is supercooled LOX? Would a small spark have caused something like this or something larger? What would it take to get such a significant initial explosion?
As you are already aware. yes. I am curious to know how much this will affect their launch schedule. Since the problem seems to be external to the rocket would there need to be any significant delays? Certainly SLC-40 needs the damage repaired before a launch can happen out of that location. The next launch is scheduled out of Vandenberg. I suppose I'm hoping for something positive.
adiggs
Well-Known Member
I'll be interested to see if this has any affect on Vandenburg operations. I can make a case in my head either way. If they proceed more or less as planned, I wonder if part of their recovery, they can speed up the cadence at Vandenburg as a partial offset to the presumed delay on further launches in Florida.
Figuring out what happened to the rocket is one thing. Rebuilding SLC40 is another. If they can quickly figure out what happened to the rocket, they could proceed with the Iridium Next flight scheduled at Vandenburg. Does anybody know if the pad being prepared for Falcon Heavy is compatible with Falcon 9? Maybe finishing that one would be faster than rebuilding the damaged one.
AndreN
Member
Oxygen, liquid or gaseous, is not itself "flammable". Oxygen is what allows other things to be flammable (for combustion to occur). But yes, liquid oxygen can make anything flammable burn extremely quickly. Search YouTube for "barbecue liquid oxygen" (link). Someone pours liquid oxygen on a barbecue with already-lit charcoal briquettes in it, and the charcoal burns entirely in a few seconds.
LC-39A is designed for both FH and F9. It's probably going to take an equal time to finish LC-39A as it will be to repair SLC-40. What a tragedy...
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
You can see it enter the right side of the video and move towards the rocket before the explosion and it continues past the rocket after the explosion. The piece you're talking about comes after the explosion and moves vertically.
Agreed, it's very odd that a 1/4 Billion dollar payload was onboard during a static fire test.
Zuckerberg must not be very happy with Space X. His satellite didn't need to be present for the test.
VAFB and CCAFS launch to different orbits. They're for two completely separate and not interchangeable missions.
This will absolutely will stop vandenberg launches. They need to determine the root cause before doing anything, then implement a corrective action. Since this was clearly a rocket or a ground equipment problem, it affects both sites. Few if any causes coukd be site specific.
If it's a smoking gun problem with an obvious solution, vandenberg could come back online relatively soon. Unfortunately, there aren't many commercial customers that want to launch something on a heavy-ish launcher to a polar orbit, so for now even if they did try to shift focus to more vandenberg launches, there wouldn't be anyone to launch.
Similar threads
- Article
