SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure • Hacker News Board

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#171

Post by damoncali » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 3:39 PM UTC

amix wrote: post #76

My thoughts go out to the SpaceX team. Must be devastating to see your hard work blow up :-(

It's part of the job. I was working on a mission scheduled to be launched on Columbia when it blew up. Loss of life aside, that our vehicle blew up wasn't the end of the world. We just used another (which required some adjustment- orbiters weren't all the same).

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#172

Post by userbinator » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 3:45 PM UTC

benihana wrote: post #154

Crazy how little actual conflagration there is. I would have expected a big fireball when that much RP-1 and LOX explodes. I mean the entire second stage's fuel exploded. Edit: Here's a Titan 1, which was fueled with RP-1 and LOX exploding on the pad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBzigaTSPZY

It was 45km in the sky when it exploded. Not much oxygen up there to react with, and most of the fuel would've scattered quickly too due to the forces involved.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#173

Post by moioci » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 3:49 PM UTC

This is the natural consequence of testing being so expensive that you _have_ to test in production.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#174

Post by satyajeet23 » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 3:50 PM UTC

Elon Musk Tweeted: There was an overpressure event in the upper stage liquid oxygen tank. Data suggests counterintuitive cause.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#175

Post by cloudwalking » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 3:50 PM UTC

Elon: "There was an overpressure event in the upper stage liquid oxygen tank. Data suggests counterintuitive cause." https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/615185076813459456

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#176

Post by mikeash » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 3:51 PM UTC

patrickyeon wrote: post #170

logingone wrote: post #162

Why don't they eject the cargo as they've tested for crew?

I don't know for sure, but I suspect the (not very extensively tested) launch abort system wouldn't have actually been installed of this flight.

SpaceX's launch abort system is integral to the Dragon 2 capsule. It's not a bolt-on and couldn't be reasonably retrofitted to Dragon 1.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#177

Post by userbinator » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 3:52 PM UTC

TimWolla wrote: post #135

ash wrote: post #104

Video of explosion, from 23:40. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeiBFtkrZEw&t=23m40s

This one is blocked in Germany, here is another one that works: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9793679

It appears they have cameras on the outside and inside the rocket... I'd like to see what video they captured of the explosion.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#178

Post by lotu » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 3:53 PM UTC

benihana wrote: post #154

Crazy how little actual conflagration there is. I would have expected a big fireball when that much RP-1 and LOX explodes. I mean the entire second stage's fuel exploded. Edit: Here's a Titan 1, which was fueled with RP-1 and LOX exploding on the pad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBzigaTSPZY

There were pretty close to Main Engine Cutoff so there would have been relatively little fuel left.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#179

Post by 51Cards » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 3:53 PM UTC

From Elon just now via Twitter:

"There was an overpressure event in the upper stage liquid oxygen tank. Data suggests counterintuitive cause. That's all we can say with confidence right now. Will have more to say following a thorough fault tree analysis."

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#180

Post by UnoriginalGuy » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 3:54 PM UTC

I feel bad for the SpaceX team. No sympathy for Musk considering all the mean spirited and unfair things he's said publicly about Orbital Sciences' rockets (inc. "One of our competitors, Orbital Sciences, has a contract to resupply the International Space Station, and their rocket honestly sounds like the punch line to a joke. It uses Russian rocket engines that were made in the '60s. I don’t mean their design is from the '60s -- I mean they start with engines that were literally made in the '60s and, like, packed away in Siberia somewhere."). Which is an even more ironic quote if you knew that Musk tried to buy exactly those same rockets from Russia and was declined[0].

Hopefully Musk is learning some humility.

[0] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3082067/Russi...