SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure • Hacker News Board

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#181

Post by engi_nerd » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 3:55 PM UTC

bendtheblock wrote: post #166

A complete coincidence, I was just watching these worst rocket malfunctions [1] then flicked over to HN and this was #1 story. Initial thoughts are that the main difference is now we have HD video and for some reason the controllers remain silent after the explosion... Why the silence? There used to be at least some reaction from the controllers. From an "oh no" to "obviously a major malfunction"... no sh*t Sherlock.…

> Initial thoughts are that the main difference is now we have HD video and for some reason the controllers remain silent after the explosion

When something like this happens, all the conversations about what happened are being held on comm nets that aren't broadcast. Believe me, the controllers are talking to each other, gathering and sequestering data, etc. But they aren't doing it on the net that's broadcast to the public.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#182

Post by dabockster » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 3:55 PM UTC

mtreis86 wrote: post #33

NamTaf wrote: post #24

Well, that was an unexpected and uncontrolled structural disintegration. e: On the upside, happy birthday Elon, I hope you enjoyed your really awesome fireworks!

"Confirmed we have had a non-nominal flight"

"Lock the doors"

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#183

Post by mitchty » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 3:58 PM UTC

orian wrote: post #152

calin2k wrote: post #46

"Non nominal flight"

What does it mean?

Rapid unplanned disassembly.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#184

Post by adanto6840 » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 4:00 PM UTC

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #180

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 fro…

Interesting, I didn't know that. I was intrigued enough that I had to look up the original quote[0] as I had my doubts. I was able to easily find it though, is from a 10/12/2012 interview with Wired.

Perhaps he's gained some humility since then; I'm still very inspired by him regardless...

[0] http://www.wired.com/2012/10/ff-elon-musk-qa/

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#185

Post by transfire » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 4:00 PM UTC

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5rRZdiu1UE

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#186

Post by engi_nerd » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 4:14 PM UTC

rorykoehler wrote: post #134

mikeash wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the One True Reliable Source of All Knowledge ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Resupply_Services ), SpaceX got $1.6 billion for 12 resupply missions, so that's about $133 million for the Falcon 9, the Dragon, and all the work involved in shooting them into space. I have no clue what their profit margin would be on that, but that at least gives us an upper limit.

Every failed launch must be very painful. There doesn't seem to be much margin for error at those figures.

Launch failures are absolutely AGONIZING.

I was only an engineer on the sounding rocket program for a little under two years. Fortunately the two rockets I assisted with were successful, but there were payload failures while I was there that had to be investigated. The long days and nights some of my coworkers put in to investigate anomalies took a harsh toll on them.

A month or so after I left, the program had a complete launch vehicle failure (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dL9HEYuOWDU#t33m25s). The stress of investigating that caused four of the telemetry/power engineers working on that mission to quit within the several months following.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#187

Post by userbinator » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 4:17 PM UTC

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #180

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 fro…

"They don't build them like they used to."

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#188

Post by satai » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 4:20 PM UTC

AFAIK only three launch vehicles have better count of starts before the first big acident: Space Shuttle, Soyuz and Delta II.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#189

Post by 001sky » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 4:21 PM UTC

sambe wrote: post #161

kid0m4n wrote: post #32

Yep... just saw... hate the silence on the stream Update: Looks like the explosion was triggered by Range Control in response to non nominal flight

Definitely not an expert but to me it looked like initial, unexpected explosion/break-up then a second which could have been in response to the first.

The lack of fragmentation from the first event suggests event #2 would have been range control.

23:44

23:52

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeiBFtkrZEw&t=23m38s

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#190

Post by solomatov » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 4:28 PM UTC

It's absolutely ok to have failures during rocket development. See statistics of American and Russian rockets at the dawn of space race. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spaceflight-related_ac...

I wish the best SpaceX and hope they will make space flight affordable for many commercial and consumer applications.