A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has exploded at Cape Canaveral • Hacker News Board

Re: A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has exploded at Cape Canaveral

#391

Post by TheGuyWhoCodes » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 8:30 PM UTC

objclxt wrote: post #347

TheGuyWhoCodes wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is something flying just above when the explosion starts, probably a bird, but how hard will it be to just fly a drone there with some kind of projectile? [Edit] Pre and Post explosion: http://imgur.com/a/IIzg2

> but how hard will it be to just fly a drone there with some kind of projectile? It's a massive long metal tube full of extremely flammable things...what seems more likely: drone with projectile entering a highly restricted piece of airspace, or as rockets are want to do, it blew up by itself.

Of course it's more likely that there was a malfunction, no one is saying otherwise, I was just wondering how SpaceX guards their lunch pad from aerial intrusions, hitting a small drone flying fast isn't an easy target and you'd have to have a constant watch for them.

Re: A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has exploded at Cape Canaveral

#392

Post by npiazza83 » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 8:30 PM UTC

dogma1138 wrote: post #383

cptskippy wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How was it racist?

Short answer: If this was a french payload no one would be talking about this, even tho the french intelligence services have considerably more resources and a longer operational history than the Israeli ones. Long Answer: How was that not racist? Anyone who cannot see the quite blatant racism (and just to be clear, racism does not universally entail malice) in this "idea" does not understand what racism, cultural bi…

Whether I agree with your viewpoint or find it controversial it was a perspective I hadn't been introduced to. Thanks for sharing.

Re: A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has exploded at Cape Canaveral

#393

Post by thesimon » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 8:31 PM UTC

X-Istence wrote: post #182

abduhl wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like SpaceX just killed multiple deals for this company. Could someone who knows about this kind of stuff (I assume this subset of the population is small) comment on whether there is recourse against SpaceX for losing the payload?

Unfortunately accidents happen, I have a feeling that some insurance company somewhere is going to end up paying for the damages...

Not covered by launch insurance (https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/771409425475174400), will be interesting to see if there is an insurance to cover that.

Re: A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has exploded at Cape Canaveral

#394

Post by zodPod » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 8:31 PM UTC

trothamel wrote: post #228

Here's good video of the test/failure: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BgJEXQkjNQ#t=1m10s

THANK YOU. The TC video has a giant stupid banner over it that blocks and distracts from the video.

This video is also insanely high quality. Thanks!

Re: A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has exploded at Cape Canaveral

#395

Post by tobz » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 8:34 PM UTC

jychang wrote: post #297

daeken wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's my thought. I counted about 12 seconds between initial explosion and the sound hitting the camera, which puts it at roughly 2.88km away. Edit: Helps if I multiply properly. 12 seconds * 340m/s == 4080m.

Ok, the Falcon 9 1.2 [1] is 70m tall [2], and the rocket fills up about 80% of the vertical frame [3]. Using the "Image = FL * Obj / distance" equation, we get: .8 * 24mm = x * 70m/4080m Where x is the focal length of the lens assuming a full frame camera. This comes out to a x = 1119mm equivalent focal length. If you have a crop sensor, this isn't too hard to obtain. I'd be amused if the video was taken with a Canon…

Could be a teleconverter in the mix... or a Coolpix P900. :P

Re: A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has exploded at Cape Canaveral

#396

Post by ygra » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 8:35 PM UTC

angryspacesheep wrote: post #343

Tuna-Fish wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They chill the fuel and oxidizer to slush, just above their freezing point, to fit more of it into the same volume and save on structure.

How many Falcon 9s have been launched using this fueling method?

As far as I know that was one of the defining changes of the Falcon 9 Full-Thrust, which flew first in December 2015 with Orbcomm OG2 M2. So, every Falcon 9 this year, plus one.

Re: A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has exploded at Cape Canaveral

#397

Post by mikeash » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 8:37 PM UTC

exDM69 wrote: post #371

Animats wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No sign of a fire extinguishing or pad deluge system, such as NASA had for the shuttle. Maybe Space-X needs that. Fire crews can't approach until the fire burns itself out - too toxic.

> Fire crews can't approach until the fire burns itself out - too toxic. You're thinking of hypergolic propellants like hydrazine and nitric acid. This is kerosene (RP-1) and liquid oxygen. Not particularly toxic, just hot as hell. The deluge system in shuttle launches was for the flame trench and sound dampening to avoid the air pressure from the noise damaging the vehicle, not fire extinguishing. You can see the la…

Although the satellite itself had a lot of hydrazine on board. That's probably what caused the smaller second explosion when the fairing fell off and hit the ground.

Re: A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has exploded at Cape Canaveral

#398

Post by pavelrub » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 8:38 PM UTC

thesimon wrote: post #393

X-Istence wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately accidents happen, I have a feeling that some insurance company somewhere is going to end up paying for the damages...

Not covered by launch insurance ( https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/771409425475174400 ), will be interesting to see if there is an insurance to cover that.

Of course it's not covered by launch insurance - it happened during the pre-launch stage. It was covered by marine cargo insurance.

Re: A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has exploded at Cape Canaveral

#399

Post by pavelrub » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 8:39 PM UTC

cm2012 wrote: post #303

anigbrowl wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For crying out loud, have you never heard of insurance? All satellite launches are insured and contingencies like this are allowed for in contracts because rocketry is an inherently risky endeavor. I know HN is a tech rather than a business community but the concept of insurance is an elementary one and something every literate adult should be aware of.

Insurance was only for post ignition, there will be no insurance payout for this accident.

This is false. Pre-launch accidents are covered by marine cargo insurance.

Re: A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has exploded at Cape Canaveral

#400

Post by dogma1138 » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 8:40 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #385

dogma1138 wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Short answer: If this was a french payload no one would be talking about this, even tho the french intelligence services have considerably more resources and a longer operational history than the Israeli ones. Long Answer: How was that not racist? Anyone who cannot see the quite blatant racism (and just to be clear, racism does not universally entail malice) in this "idea" does not understand what racism, cultural bi…

> Long Answer: How was that not racist? Belief that the Israeli intelligence services are, in the modern era, more likely to engage in certain types of action against particular targets than, say, their French counterparts need not be based in any anti-Jewish sentiment. It can be based, e.g., on the degree to which Israeli intelligence services have been found to be doing certain things (e.g., carrying out operations…

>Belief that the Israeli intelligence services are, in the modern era, more likely to engage in certain types of action against particular targets than, say, their French counterparts need not be based in any anti-Jewish sentiment.

You are either giving too much credit to the Israelis, or nearly not enough to the French.

>It can be based, e.g., on the degree to which Israeli intelligence services have been found to be doing certain things (e.g., carrying out operations targeting the US) compared to others.

This is a very flawed estimate, everyone spies.

>One can have an especial distrust of the Israeli government -- on reasonable or unreasonable grounds -- without being anti-Semitic, just as one can have an especial distrust of the US government without that being grounded in antipathy against the dominant racial group in the US.

Then again you do not understand what "anti semitism" is it is the cultural bias the fact that it has a name doesn't make it into something special.

The cultural bias towards constantly distrusting the Israeli government like there is some intrinsic reason to not trust them because they always have a hidden agenda (like every other government) is tied quite strongly to the cultural bias of distrusting the Jewish people at large.

The constant distrust of the US government is also heavily influenced in the cultural bias, much of it american in origin which was exported to the rest of the world via popular culture in the form of TV, movies, books and stories.