Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX Starship rocket explodes minutes after launch from Texas

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

821–830 of 1001 posts

Re: SpaceX Starship rocket explodes minutes after launch from Texas

#821

Post by greedo »

hindsightbias wrote: post #420
gvb wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as the trajectory of the vehicle stays within the "safe trajectory box", the range safety officer has no reason to blow the rocket up. SpaceX acquired a huge amount of data that would have otherwise been lost if the RSO was "quick on the trigger." Example of a different rocket failure where the range safety officer let the rocket survive until it exceeded the safe trajectory box: "Astra Rocket 3 LV0006 drifti…

You can’t assume you can trigger a system after it has undergone extreme structural loads or failure. So waiting until that happens while rocket is, charitably, careening does not ensure staying in any box. I doubt they had any uplink or downlink during that mode so there’s no data to be had. Prediction: the FAA will come down hard on them.

So if you "can't assume you can trigger a system" in this situation, you rely upon an automatic system, not a RSO. Which is exactly what SpaceX did. I'm sure this was fully documented in the approval process.

Re: SpaceX Starship rocket explodes minutes after launch from Texas

#822

Post by baq »

rob74 wrote: post #787
AceJohnny2 wrote: post #757

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think it's unlikely that SpaceX wasn't aware of the damage that would be caused. "SpaceX" isn't a unified mind. It's not even a hivemind, no company is. We keep saying "company knew about X", but it's a such a mischaracterization of how companies, or any group of humans, work. Yes, some people in the company might have known it, but for various reasons, be it poor communication, mistaken assumptions, willful igno…

Or maybe they estimated the chances of the launch pad being entirely obliterated during the launch attempt as pretty high and didn't want to invest more money into it than absolutely necessary?

Turns out they were indeed right! The hole is Boring Company-worthy.

Joking aside, the test was successful, but the missing concrete and what seems to be 50 meters of sand below it is a problem for the next test launch schedule. The pad they’ll need for reusability will be as impressive as the rocket itself.

Re: SpaceX Starship rocket explodes minutes after launch from Texas

#823

Post by cwillu »

shadowgovt wrote: post #194
panki27 wrote: post #11

It looked just like a regular launch in Kerbal Space Program at the end.

Complete with "Why the hell are you tiling over I'm holding down the turn key as hard as I can", yeah. :)

Some day I want a keyboard with pressure sensitive keys :)

Re: SpaceX Starship rocket explodes minutes after launch from Texas

#824

Post by ordu »

hackernewds wrote: post #640
supportlocal4h wrote: post #501

Somewhere there is a team that is over the top happy about an incredibly successful explosion. Their job was to make sure that if flight path deviated beyond some threshhold that the whole vehicle would be blown into tiny parts that would become ballistically safe. They were on the edge of their seats on how well that would work. They saw the lift off team celebrate their success. They saw the booster team fist pumpi…

This reads strangely like a PR damage control post

Is it possible to say "succesful failure" without sounding like a PR person doing a damage control?

I mean, lets imagine that "test early, test often" is a good engineering practice (it probably is, but lets do not discuss it here, just assume it as a premise instead). Lets imagine that SpaceX blowed up its rocket to gather more data. Is it possible to say "it was a succesful failure" without it looking as a rationalization?

It is an important question, because if the answer is "no" then your observation is not informative.

Re: SpaceX Starship rocket explodes minutes after launch from Texas

#825

Post by chasd00 »

physicles wrote: post #628
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I'm tasked with recording test data for x, y, and z and I only record x, is that a success? Now I need to launch another to try for the y, and z. Edit: What would an unsuccessful test look like then?

If the rocket had exploded on the pad, that would’ve been an unsuccessful test. The launch pad and tower are way more expensive than the rockets and take much more time to replace. They call it “stage 0.” Btw this isn’t moving the goalposts. Clearing the launch tower was always the success criterion; the rest is gravy.

yeah I think many people saw the launch as the launch of the finished Starship+booster when what was really happening was a test of maybe v0.0.2 if not pre-alpha. It's not done yet, there's a long ways to go before the expectation becomes 100% success.

Re: SpaceX Starship rocket explodes minutes after launch from Texas

#826

Post by xnx »

mabbo wrote: post #231
sandworm101 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> People want to see 100% success in all things. But that isn't very economical. That sounds logical, but isn't really a thing in aerospace/space. Complicated high-energy systems have thousands of failure points. So to have any chance of success each failure point needs to be engineered below, by way of example, a 0.0001% chance of failure. That costs lots of money. But say one decides to accept more risk for less c…

I'm not proposing something, I'm describing it. This is what SpaceX is doing , and it's quite successful. And you can look all the way back to their little hopper version of the Falcon 9 and see that this strategy has been the key to them undercutting the launch market significantly. My prediction: SpaceX will have a 5th 100% successful launch of Starship before the SLS has a 5th successful launch. They'll just have…

To me, this comment implies that SpaceX is better/smarter than NASA, Northrop, Boeing, et. al. That may be true, but it's worth remembering that the goals are very different. Because of congressional oversight, SLS is largely a jobs/pork program. Spaceflight is incidental.

Re: SpaceX Starship rocket explodes minutes after launch from Texas

#827

Post by panick21_ »

szoszon wrote: post #441
fastball wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From watching the launch, my absolutely pulled from my butt guess is that something went wrong with the stage separation system, and that the explosion was deliberately triggered by the SpaceX team / triggered by automated guardrails when the mission didn't go according to parameters. If that's true, then they can just fix whatever is wrong with the stage separation. And if it's something else, they can probably fix…

There was a lot of wrong with the launch from the start - failed engines, destroyed pad, parts of the rocket flying off during the start. Yes, it's amazing that it went for as far as it did, but there is no way they can fix all of it quickly.

I not sure if the engines failed or the inlet system had issues with pressure and couldn't feed the engines properly.

Re: SpaceX Starship rocket explodes minutes after launch from Texas

#828

Post by baq »

kortex wrote: post #702
sandworm101 wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> the intention of the flight was to test the vehicle at max Q, then the rest of the plan is almost a contingency. We don't know what the intention or internal expectation was. What we have are public statements, which are generally more conservative in order that every success be an amazing surprise, every failure an expected event. What SpaceX was internally hoping for, what they were aiming for, and the details o…

I don't need to know the internal - it's pretty obvious. When you are test launching a rocket, MaxQ is the moment to test (aside from ignition, which you can test with static fire, so not really "test launching a rocket"). So SpaceX wants to test the booster launch; they have tested everything else on the ground that they realistically can at this point. That means ignition, get off the pad, MaxQ. Everything after th…

They’re also testing the GSE and let’s say the pad failed today’s test scenario

Re: SpaceX Starship rocket explodes minutes after launch from Texas

#829

Post by panick21_ »

mempko wrote: post #298
nomilk wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The height difference is not huge, but Starship is twice the weight and 1/10th the cost ($50b vs $5bn in 2022 USD)!

Starship at this point is mostly a shell. Internal human grade components aren't there yet. We have no idea what the final cost will be. But doesn't matter since NASA is the one paying.

Actually we do know what NASA will be paying. Its all in the public contract. And its fixed cost, so it will not cost NASA more, no matter how often it blows up.

That doesn't give us details about how much it will cost SpaceX but its good information.

Re: SpaceX Starship rocket explodes minutes after launch from Texas

#830

Post by throwaway4aday »

tetris11 wrote: post #747
pclmulqdq wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some Tesla events have been shown to have artificially-inserted cheers to show more enthusiasm than the crowd actually had. I wouldn't be surprised if they are doing that for SpaceX, too, but I also wouldn't be surprised if SpaceX launches had a lot of enthusiastic people in whatever crowd watched them. It was pretty telling that we didn't hear the roar of the engines on the "cheering" track, which would have happene…

Hell, listening to the commentator describe the rocket's ascent like a giddy sports commentator really reminded me that this is just another corporate event with people paid to shape narratives of what you see. I really miss NASA launches in this respect. Less hyped, but you had the solemn sense that something special was happening without anyone yammering in your ear with nonsense patter.

and then everyone lost interest in NASA moon missions and we scrapped the program early. A little bit of hype goes a long way.
Post reply on HN