Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 588 posts

Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test

#551

Post by Rebelgecko »

GMoromisato wrote: post #529
Rebelgecko wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It happened so fast that there were only a few bits of telemetry between "everything normal" and "no signal". SpaceX also had an architecture that added a lot of latency to their telemetry transmission (IIRC basically Ethernet bufferbloat)

This is a good article about Amos-6: https://www.americaspace.com/2017/01/02/spacex-closes-amos-6... "Investigators scoured more than 3,000 channels of video and telemetry data covering a very brief timeline of events – there were just 93 milliseconds from the first sign of anomalous data to the loss of the second stage, followed by loss of the vehicle." I haven't seen anything about latency--are you sure that's a pr…

It featured heavily in the CRS-7 anomaly investigation (https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/public_summa...).

> SpaceX’s new implementation (for Falcon 9 “Full Thrust” flights) of non- deterministic network packets in their flight telemetry increases latency, directly resulting in substantial portions of the anomaly data being lost due to network buffering in the Stage 2 flight computer.

However it looks that finding might've actually been corrected in the months before Amos-6, so moot point!

Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test

#552

Post by scarab92 »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #482
MPSimmons wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked at SpaceX at the time, and I cannot speak for the company, but I can tell you that approximately nobody inside SpaceX took the idea of a sniper seriously. There was a lot of internet talk about it, and it was one of hundreds of avenues that were explored, and ruled out basically as soon as it was explored. The very interesting part of the liquid oxygen failure (and this was published in the investigative fin…

> it was one of hundreds of avenues that were explored, and ruled out basically as soon as it was explored. Sounds like me during a troubleshooting call trying to think of the wildest crap possible based on current available information, even if I sound crazy, sometimes my crazy question hits the nail. Never shun someone for trying to think of any crazy thing, sometimes they hit the nail on the head.

Very rarely is it appropriate to brainstorm widely.

You want to start with a high level of discernment, focusing on the most plausible theories first, then broadening only if necessary.

If someone started out with crazy low-discernment ideas, I’d probably ask them to leave to stop distracting everyone else.

Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test

#553

Post by ezfe »

nickvec wrote: post #50
ezfe wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blue Origin is challenging SpaceX - they are not the incumbent. I'm not sure how you can say that SpaceX will increase dominance despite this.

One can be the dominant player in a field and still increase dominance.

The comment I'm replying to is saying that SpaceX will increase dominance despite this explosion which makes no sense.

Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test

#554

Post by ezfe »

0xffff2 wrote: post #62
ezfe wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blue Origin is challenging SpaceX - they are not the incumbent. I'm not sure how you can say that SpaceX will increase dominance despite this.

Unless the comment was edited, the person you replied to never said anything about "despite"?

They didn't say despite, they said "If anything" which reads the same to me:

> If anything, SpaceX will continue to increase its dominance.

Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test

#555

Post by ezfe »

testing22321 wrote: post #61
ezfe wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blue Origin is challenging SpaceX - they are not the incumbent. I'm not sure how you can say that SpaceX will increase dominance despite this.

Blue Origin are challenging SpaceX about as much as I’m challenging Michael Jordan. Sure we’re playing the same game, but the divide is enormous

What are you trying to accomplish with this comment? Did I say that they were on the same level?

Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test

#556

Post by ezfe »

Rover222 wrote: post #32
ezfe wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blue Origin is challenging SpaceX - they are not the incumbent. I'm not sure how you can say that SpaceX will increase dominance despite this.

Please look at total mass launched to space by SpaceX vs the rest of the world combined. They are the most incumbent launcher in history. Unless you're talking about moon landers specifically. Anyway, competition is good and this is a bummer.

What are you trying to accomplish with this comment? SpaceX is the incumbent that's what I said...

Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test

#559

Post by Markoff »

lukeschlather wrote: post #432
Markoff wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure whether you talk about those fireworks for few minutes/hours or these quite common rocket explosions + EV fires... Personally I don't even own a car, so don't go on me with some carbon emissions and polluting enviroment, 95% of year I use public transport (most of the time electric trams), only 1-2 a year a ride a car when visiting mother/father.

I've never been downwind of a rocket explosion or an EV fire, Fireworks are something that make me annoyed at the air quality degradation quite often.

1. once a year is quite often?

2. while on vacation last year I saw huge column of snooker and crazy sound only to find out two electric cars were burning at charging station right in next street, I was much more annoyed by fireworks I watch from window at midnight, if you don't want just keep your window closed which shouldn't be that much of a deal in freezing night in December/January

Re: Blue Origin's New Glenn blows up during static fire test

#560

Post by Voultapher »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #229
hgoel wrote: post #37

Ouch, losing the rocket is unfortunate, but the damage to the launch infrastructure is going to easily mean over a year of repairs. I hope they're going to take this as an opportunity to update the infrastructure from lessons learned from the flights so far, and to be able to support some of their future ambitions (e.g. Jarvis).

It's an understandable but wrong attitude. If you don't have high profile failures like this, you aren't taking enough R&D risk. It's a fiercely ambitious industry and these launch attempts amount to what literally are moon shots. The race is on between various companies and countries as to who gets there first. Boeing is pretty much out of the race at this point. Just too busy navel gazing and lobbying. There's a bi…

Based on operating experience and outlook, Rocketlab shouldn't be forgotten on that list. Launch cadence is the driving factor for revenue and profit for these companies' launch division.
Post reply on HN