Exploded SpaceX rocket devastated a town and a wildlife reserve • Hacker News Board

Re: Exploded SpaceX rocket devastated a town and a wildlife reserve

#21

Post by Zigurd » Sat, Apr 29, 2023, 10:05 PM UTC

wmf wrote: post #15

EMM_386 wrote: post #12

Can someone tell me why they didn't just build a flame diverter and/or a water supression system? From someone who knows nothing about this stuff, these seem like very simple things to solve given the vast complexity of the rest of the system. And they also don't seem like massively expensive investments. > In a tweet from October 2020, Musk wrote "Aspiring to have no flame diverter in Boca, but this could turn out t…

People have been saying that the permits to install a flame trench would have taken years.

This is a classic project management decision: You discover an expensive to fix issue late in the game. Do you:

a) Pick a cheap quick but possibly insufficient solution, or

b) Pick a reliable solution that costs so much more time that stuff downstream of your project (Artemis 3 in this case) can't use the results of your project anymore

If the quicker fix doesn't, then you are really screwed. You didn't start the slow expensive fix, you have less money, and you may be out of time.

Re: Exploded SpaceX rocket devastated a town and a wildlife reserve

#22

Post by Zigurd » Sat, Apr 29, 2023, 10:09 PM UTC

arretevad wrote: post #17

upwardbound wrote: post #2

Compared to making life multiplanetary, destroying one van seems inconsequential.

Isn’t life already multiplanetary? There’s no way we are the only planet with the only life. Seems like we are just destroying vans for no reason. Also seems like we are destroying this planet for no reason.

The lesson of attempting a Mars colony will likely be "life is a planetary system." and we will find out just how ill suited we are to being stripped of our environment for more than a few months at a time.

Re: Exploded SpaceX rocket devastated a town and a wildlife reserve

#23

Post by Zigurd » Sat, Apr 29, 2023, 10:15 PM UTC

JKCalhoun wrote: post #3

upwardbound wrote: post #2

Compared to making life multiplanetary, destroying one van seems inconsequential.

I think it's a little annoying how avoidable it was though. Aside: by chance I happened to be in the area so headed down and saw the launch. That was a trip. A guy I chatted with told me we were 5 miles from the launch. He said that 10 miles is the typical viewing distance for the Florida launches. NASA apparently, he said, has an observing facility that is 3.5 miles from the Florida tower but you pay dearly for a se…

It didn't just seem to struggle. Some of the YouTubers covering SpaceX calculated the acceleration curves. It was substantially under max power, in part due to failed engines.

Re: Exploded SpaceX rocket devastated a town and a wildlife reserve

#24

Post by wmf » Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 12:00 AM UTC

Zigurd wrote: post #21

wmf wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have been saying that the permits to install a flame trench would have taken years.

This is a classic project management decision: You discover an expensive to fix issue late in the game. Do you: a) Pick a cheap quick but possibly insufficient solution, or b) Pick a reliable solution that costs so much more time that stuff downstream of your project (Artemis 3 in this case) can't use the results of your project anymore If the quicker fix doesn't, then you are really screwed. You didn't start the slo…

There's evidence that SpaceX is pursuing multiple options in parallel. They already started on some kind of cooling plate before the recent test so now they will probably finish it and use it for the next launch.