SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure • Hacker News Board

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#211

Post by hga » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 5:10 PM UTC

engi_nerd wrote: post #186

rorykoehler wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 com…

Indeed; I have an uncle who was on one of the 3 NASA Space Shuttle safety teams when the Challenger failed, although fortunately not the one who's remit included the SRBs. It triggered a stress related disability that seems to be a partly genetic thing, the same thing happened to me much more slowly a couple of decades later.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#212

Post by FeepingCreature » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 5:13 PM UTC

italophil wrote: post #202

aerovistae wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doubt it. If anything this is a PERFECT illustration of how well SpaceX is preparing. They know things like this can happen. Notice there was an extended period (multiple seconds) of the rocket smoking before it exploded. Everyone, automated systems included, KNEW something was wrong at that point, before it exploded. At which point dragon would have used its abort system to blast away from the first stage, and made…

Can Dragon abort and separate at Max Q? If I recall correctly the Space Shuttle had several flight periods at which it wouldn't have been able to separate from the boosters and / or tank.

To my knowledge, Dragon V2 can abort throughout the launch.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#213

Post by FeepingCreature » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 5:16 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…

Engines don't appear to have been the problem.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#214

Post by arjunnarayan » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 5:23 PM UTC

italophil wrote: post #202

aerovistae wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doubt it. If anything this is a PERFECT illustration of how well SpaceX is preparing. They know things like this can happen. Notice there was an extended period (multiple seconds) of the rocket smoking before it exploded. Everyone, automated systems included, KNEW something was wrong at that point, before it exploded. At which point dragon would have used its abort system to blast away from the first stage, and made…

Can Dragon abort and separate at Max Q? If I recall correctly the Space Shuttle had several flight periods at which it wouldn't have been able to separate from the boosters and / or tank.

Yes. Later this year they're doing an in-flight abort test not-quite-at-max-Q, but close enough. Source: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/01/spacex-ready-crewed-d...

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#215

Post by rzimmerman » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 5:24 PM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #195

bmiranda wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cargo dragon doesn't have a pad abort system. Dragon 2 would be able to escape just fine, though. Cargo dragon could _technically_ survive if didn't get blown up too much.

> Cargo dragon could _technically_ survive if didn't get blown up too much. It appears to be intact after the explosion. You can see it detach and drift back in the video at about 2:35. https://twitter.com/nextlaunch/status/615191061636481024 Unfortunately, parachutes on the cargo version aren't armed during launch (would be bad if they accidentally deployed) so it'll have smashed into the ocean and broken up.

Their COO mentioned in the press conference (just a few minutes ago) that they did receive telemetry from Dragon after the event.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#216

Post by myth_buster » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 5:29 PM UTC

51Cards wrote: post #179

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."

  Received telemetry from Dragon after the event - Gwynne (From Conference).

Bit of positive news to take from this sad day.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#217

Post by codeulike » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 5:31 PM UTC

Thorondor wrote: post #209

The press conference is being broadcast live now (1 PM ET). http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/

Just watched some of it. The SpaceX COO just said they're still analysing data s dont have anything to add to Elon's tweets yet. The rest of the conference is just reassuring everyone that the ISS is fine for the time being.

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#218

Post by codeulike » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 5:34 PM UTC

jpetersonmn wrote: post #205

toomuchfire wrote: post #198

So, we have explosive rockets, the burning teslas, and soon the batteries - how will they fare?

How many teslas started on fire? How many of them were not modified by their owners? How many have they sold in total?

Exactly. Over 67,000 Tesla Model S's have been delivered since 2012. Over a billion miles have been driven in them. I've heard of 3 or 4 fires.

(source for delivery stats: http://my.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/tesla-delivers-10030-... source for billion miles http://www.engadget.com/2015/06/23/tesla-model-s-owners-driv... )

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#219

Post by ceejayoz » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 5:34 PM UTC

jpetersonmn wrote: post #205

toomuchfire wrote: post #198

So, we have explosive rockets, the burning teslas, and soon the batteries - how will they fare?

How many teslas started on fire? How many of them were not modified by their owners? How many have they sold in total?

Also relevant: how many gasoline-powered cars catch fire every day (lots), and how many Tesla fires injured their occupants (zero)?

Re: SpaceX – Launch Vehicle Failure

#220

Post by david-given » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 5:35 PM UTC

engi_nerd wrote: post #186

rorykoehler wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 com…

It shouldn't be.

I mean, things go wrong. It's the one universal truth of any engineering process. Finding out why the thing that went wrong went wrong, and making sure that it doesn't go wrong in the future is just part of the job.

I work on an on-call rotation --- it's not as exciting as rocket science, which is both unfortunate and fortunate --- and yes, things go wrong; and one of the biggest rules of our process for when things do go wrong is 'Is it the end of your shift? Then hand off and go home. NO THIS IS NOT NEGOTIABLE.'

If the process itself is unable to cope smoothly with something going wrong, then the process has gone wrong. (And someone should find out why it went wrong, and make sure that it doesn't go wrong in the future.)