Video: https://xcancel.com/nasaspaceflight/status/20601649284728548... Another angle: https://xcancel.com/SawyerMerritt/status/2060174287563116696...
[flagged]
Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test
71–80 of 588 posts
Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test
#72Ouch, losing the rocket is unfortunate, but the damage to the launch infrastructure is going to easily mean over a year of repairs. I hope they're going to take this as an opportunity to update the infrastructure from lessons learned from the flights so far, and to be able to support some of their future ambitions (e.g. Jarvis).
Eric Berger of Ars Technica: > I'm hearing that it is possible that Blue Origin decides to go directly to the larger 9x4 variant of New Glenn after this failure. Obviously no decisions like that will be made without more data review. https://xcancel.com/SciGuySpace/status/2060190522539401631#m
Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
Surely not as favorable for the IPO as SpaceX’s own recent explosion and multiple engine failures?
Blowing up on the pad is incredibly worse from a design data collection perspective, a risk to life perspective, and a downstream impact to future launches perspective (nobody can use that site for a couple of months).
To be fair the last Starship to blowup on launchpad/ground was less than a year ago. It is a set back but it appears nobody has avoided this issue yet.
https://www.livescience.com/space/space-exploration/spacexs-...
Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test
#74Blew Origin
B.O.N.G goes up in smoke.
As an aside, that acronym is something you would expect out of Musk and yet Blue Origin sort of accidentally got it themselves.
Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test
#75It is not clear what "full duration static fire" means, but if the stage was fully fueled, the fuel tank would have contained 1000 tons of methane. The heat of combustion of methane is 55 MJ/kg. TNT equivalent is defined as 4.2 MJ/kg. In terms of heat output (not blast or other effects) this would have been equivalent to 13 kilotons of TNT. The first atomic bomb had yield of 20 kt TNT, of which about half was in heat…
> not clear what "full duration static fire" means
You fire the rocket as if it’s going to space, but you keep it on the pad. (From the engine’s perspective, it did a full launch.)
Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test
#76Would be really curious to learn more about how rocket scientists are using (or not using) LLMs.
This is a fair question on its own. It comes across as pretty disrespectful within the context of the thread.
no one died, relax
OP, one must show respect to the scattered remnants of rocket debris.
Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test
#77Ouch, losing the rocket is unfortunate, but the damage to the launch infrastructure is going to easily mean over a year of repairs. I hope they're going to take this as an opportunity to update the infrastructure from lessons learned from the flights so far, and to be able to support some of their future ambitions (e.g. Jarvis).
That is a very fair point. While I have no skin in the game, it is fascinating to see if the Us with Artemus or China with Chang'e will be the first to make it back to the Moon manned. At this point is is looking like the winners will merely be those that have the least loses and launch pad loses can take a long time to recover from. Credit to Space X, they have become very good and fixing launch pads with Starship.…
> the winners will merely be those
The best outcome is we get two Moon bases. I say this as someone who remains a fairly patriotic American. But we need competition and, more darkly, we need a backup.
Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test
#78It is not clear what "full duration static fire" means, but if the stage was fully fueled, the fuel tank would have contained 1000 tons of methane. The heat of combustion of methane is 55 MJ/kg. TNT equivalent is defined as 4.2 MJ/kg. In terms of heat output (not blast or other effects) this would have been equivalent to 13 kilotons of TNT. The first atomic bomb had yield of 20 kt TNT, of which about half was in heat…
> not clear what "full duration static fire" means You fire the rocket as if it’s going to space, but you keep it on the pad. (From the engine’s perspective, it did a full launch.)
[dead]
Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a fair question on its own. It comes across as pretty disrespectful within the context of the thread.
no one died, relax OP, one must show respect to the scattered remnants of rocket debris.
> no one died, relax
Sorry, hadn’t seen that confirmed yet.
Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test
#80Static fire more like dynamic fire