61–70 of 95 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interestingly the Russian space program never used range safety systems, but then they had an empty part of Kazakhstan to launch in.
Great video of an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zl12dXYcUTo Then imagine if it was headed for somebody's house (or a city). You'd want to blow it up in the air before it reached the ground.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great video of an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zl12dXYcUTo Then imagine if it was headed for somebody's house (or a city). You'd want to blow it up in the air before it reached the ground.
I absolutely love that video - it's pretty much Kerbal Space Program in real life!
My favorite part is at the end when the sound from the explosion arrives. Everything is calm, then suddenly KABOOM! Really drives home how far away the thing is (because it takes so long for the sound to arrive) and how big it is (because it's still a massive KABOOM even at that distance).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
please explain
As an experimental vehicle, you're generally supposed to be pushing the limits of what it can do to find those limits. Essentially, they're saying "no accidents means we aren't trying hard enough to break the thing".
But the point is, it's in benefit of everybody to get educated about engineering issues. I hope media outlets don't start going like "SpaceX: Too Dangerous? A rocket may land in your backyard". For me at least, it's interesting to learn that they WANT to break the thing to find the weak spots.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess, military personnel (that astronauts so far have basically been) are less skittish in that regard than civilians. Especially since it is understood that space travel is dangerous, while air travel is regarded as safe.
According to Neil Armstrong, Apollo 11 only had a "50–50 chance" of landing safely on the Moon's surface. They're willing to take enormous risks.
I'd love to think that I would be able to do it, and whenever I get the slightest skittish on a plane, I laugh that I don't think I would hack it.
>>The unmanned rocket was destroyed when its self-destruct system was triggered after an unexplained malfunction. It's interesting these rockets are equipped with self-destruct systems. What scenario would warrant a rocket purposely self-destruct?
Avoidance of cases like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelsat_708
Better video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Qv2VEX9iyI SpaceX Statement: https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/502976401729798144/photo/1
BBC Updated the video to the 'better video' in @spacefight's link (the original was taken from a more distant vantage point). SpaceX Statement in full (copied from facebook page): Earlier today, in McGregor, Texas, SpaceX conducted a test flight of a three engine version of the F9R test vehicle (successor to Grasshopper). During the flight, an anomaly was detected in the vehicle and the flight termination system auto…
Well thank goodness. I was so worried that a government agent was not present. All is well. Hail the FAA.
"the flight termination system automatically terminated the mission"... by blowing itself up?
How else would you terminate an active rocket flying through the air?
>>The unmanned rocket was destroyed when its self-destruct system was triggered after an unexplained malfunction. It's interesting these rockets are equipped with self-destruct systems. What scenario would warrant a rocket purposely self-destruct?
Honestly, play KSP. Once you flip a rocket, its nearly unrecoverable and it just accelerates into the ground.