Watch - SpaceX Starship prototype explodes on landing

RandomGeek said:
...and who said you cannot learn anything from MyBroadBand. Thanks!
Click to expand...

RandomGeek said:
...and who said you cannot learn anything from MyBroadBand. Thanks!
Click to expand...

Haha I'm actually wrong. Starship uses a different system than falcon to relight.

Green flame came from copper burning as the engine was ripping itself apart because of the lack of fuel.
 
Vorastra said:
Yeah, I see now. Sigh. Overreaction to an obvious test.
Click to expand...
also a test, was it easy for the widow to see this?
I dont think so. also a prototype,


back to the drawing board, whether its a rocket or a space tourist bus,
stuff like that shouldn't be shown on live TV,

they go through Billions of R and D to prevent Just such a thing,
why is it suddenly acceptable?

I mean with computer modelling and all the rest of it, if it explodes is ISN'T acceptable,
back to the drawing board Jeeves, and do it right this time.
(why cant Trump help Elon out, with the firing that is, side hustle of note)

I wouldn't want to see my rocket of a few billions turned into a crater and scrap metal.
 
eg2505 said:
also a test, was it easy for the widow to see this?
I dont think so. also a prototype,


back to the drawing board, whether its a rocket or a space tourist bus,
stuff like that shouldn't be shown on live TV,

they go through Billions of R and D to prevent Just such a thing,
why is it suddenly acceptable?

I mean with computer modelling and all the rest of it, if it explodes is ISN'T acceptable,
back to the drawing board Jeeves, and do it right this time.
(why cant Trump help Elon out, with the firing that is, side hustle of note)

I wouldn't want to see my rocket of a few billions turned into a crater and scrap metal.
Click to expand...
Absolutely fscking clueless.
 
eg2505 said:
I mentioned spaceshiptwo,
that was manned, this luckily wasn't, but what if it had?

again, blowing up on live tv isn't pleasant. especially for those watching.
Click to expand...
What if engineers manned a craft that they themselves didn't know was safe? Would be pretty stupid. Hence it wasn't manned, so that they could test if it is safe first.

You're just chasing your tail now in creating a nice chicken and egg problem
 
Archer said:
What if engineers manned a craft that they themselves didn't know was safe? Would be pretty stupid. Hence it wasn't manned, so that they could test if it is safe first.

You're just chasing your tail now in creating a nice chicken and egg problem
Click to expand...
but they test before anything get built right?
they ran simulations correct? hours of simulations?
they did their homework, BEFORE anything was built, correct?

so why did it blow up?
I mean if Elon is in a meeting and he just saw his investment turn into a crater,
do you think he would be happy with its a test, nobody got hurt?
imagine trying to explain that to him?

no, he would want firings, he would say exactly what @ToxicBunny hates so much
back to the drawing board.
 
eg2505 said:
but they test before anything get built right?
they ran simulations correct? hours of simulations?
they did their homework, BEFORE anything was built, correct?

so why did it blow up?
I mean if Elon is in a meeting and he just saw his investment turn into a crater,
do you think he would be happy with its a test, nobody got hurt?
imagine trying to explain that to him?

no, he would want firings, he would say exactly what @ToxicBunny hates so much
back to the drawing board.
Click to expand...

Except he very publicly said completely the opposite.. He congratulated everyone and was very happy with the result.
 
eg2505 said:
but they test before anything get built right?
they ran simulations correct? hours of simulations?
they did their homework, BEFORE anything was built, correct?

so why did it blow up?
I mean if Elon is in a meeting and he just saw his investment turn into a crater,
do you think he would be happy with its a test, nobody got hurt?
imagine trying to explain that to him?

no, he would want firings, he would say exactly what @ToxicBunny hates so much
back to the drawing board.
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/x/status/1336809767574982658


He even joked about the explosion
Called it a RUD. Rapid unscheduled disassembly.
 
eg2505 said:
also a test, was it easy for the widow to see this?
I dont think so. also a prototype,


back to the drawing board, whether its a rocket or a space tourist bus,
stuff like that shouldn't be shown on live TV,

they go through Billions of R and D to prevent Just such a thing,
why is it suddenly acceptable?

I mean with computer modelling and all the rest of it, if it explodes is ISN'T acceptable,
back to the drawing board Jeeves, and do it right this time.
(why cant Trump help Elon out, with the firing that is, side hustle of note)

I wouldn't want to see my rocket of a few billions turned into a crater and scrap metal.
Click to expand...
Yeah but you are kinda overreacting to what's clearly meant to be an early unmanned prototype, yeah?
We're talking about SpaceX, not Virgin. SpaceX has always been transparent with testing like this. Mostly for PR no doubt, but still a transparency of sorts.
What was your reaction to the reusable boosters failing the first time they came down?
I think @ToxicBunny and I see it as an issue that will get buffed out iteratively, while you seem to take the position of a complete fundamental redesign.
That's my take on it anyway, I don't want to speak for ToxicBunny.
 
Vorastra said:
Yeah but you are kinda overreacting to what's clearly meant to be an early unmanned prototype, yeah?
We're talking about SpaceX, not Virgin. SpaceX has always been transparent with testing like this. Mostly for PR no doubt, but still a transparency of sorts.
What was your reaction to the reusable boosters failing the first time they came down?
I think @ToxicBunny and I see it as an issue that will get buffed out iteratively, while you seem to take the position of a complete fundamental redesign.
That's my take on it anyway, I don't want to speak for ToxicBunny.
Click to expand...

I'm 100% with you on this... its an iterative process. They know they will blow up prototypes, and many of them in the design phase as they iteratively get it right.. Fail fast, Fail forward (I hate the slogan, but SpaceX encapsulate it perfectly really)
 
ScottulusMaximus said:
Haha I'm actually wrong. Starship uses a different system than falcon to relight.

Green flame came from copper burning as the engine was ripping itself apart because of the lack of fuel.
Click to expand...
So BOTH of us learned something today :laugh: thanks for the update
 
ScottulusMaximus said:
That's the ignitor fluid trying to relight the engines after they lost fuel, it burns green
Click to expand...

ScottulusMaximus said:
garyc said:
That is from a hypergolic fuel, which spontaneously ignites when the two components are mixed. They carry a small amount onboard for engine relights, as mentioned by Scottulus.

More than you ever wanted to know at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergolic_propellant
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
The SpaceX Raptor engine used in SN8 does not use Hypergolic ignition.

Raptor uses a spark plug!

See Scott Maney explanation at 8:44

That whole video is worth a watch.
 
eg2505 said:
but they test before anything get built right?
they ran simulations correct? hours of simulations?
they did their homework, BEFORE anything was built, correct?

so why did it blow up?
I mean if Elon is in a meeting and he just saw his investment turn into a crater,
do you think he would be happy with its a test, nobody got hurt?
imagine trying to explain that to him?

no, he would want firings, he would say exactly what @ToxicBunny hates so much
back to the drawing board.
Click to expand...
Testing on prototypes allows ironing out the bugs that simulations don't account for. Have you ever built RC aircraft of your own design? I built a flying wing and used MatLab Mathworks to run simulations beforehand. Everything checked out and it was supposed to fly perfectly using ArduPilot which was perfectly tuned too. The first flight resulted in a spectacular crash into the local school's roof :ROFL: Analysed the ArduPilot data and noticed that the barometric pressure had dropped just before the flight making the altimeter think it was higher than it was. Didn't have to go back to the drawing board, just had to tweak a setting or check that the atmospheric pressure was the same as during the simulations.
 
eg2505 said:
but they test before anything get built right?
they ran simulations correct? hours of simulations?
they did their homework, BEFORE anything was built, correct?

so why did it blow up?
I mean if Elon is in a meeting and he just saw his investment turn into a crater,
do you think he would be happy with its a test, nobody got hurt?
imagine trying to explain that to him?

no, he would want firings, he would say exactly what @ToxicBunny hates so much
back to the drawing board.
Click to expand...
You've just descriibed how Boing, ULA, Blue Origin (aka old space) do things - spend years planing then back to the drawing board.

27 Aug 2019
1607592703142.png


A year later: 9 Dec 2020
1607592602805.png
 
Norrad said:
Didn't have to go back to the drawing board, just had to tweak a setting or check that the atmospheric pressure was the same as during the simulations.
Click to expand...
but isnt the common phrase used to describe tweaking a setting or something tiny to make the result completely different called,
"back to the drawing board"

I agree, one doesn't throw away billions redesigning an entire rocket because it blew up.
but I do agree it shouldn't happen so publicly,
at the risk of bringing something else into mind,

look at the 737 MAX, Dumpster fire,
incremental changes, to a proven design, worked brilliantly.
in testing, test flights were successful, everything including the kitchen sink was thrown at this Jet.

got certified, hooray.
next thing, nasty images are splashed all over the worlds media of your BRAND new Jet,
crashing because of a feature they conveniently forgot to emphasize.

and this wasn't an unmanned drone, this was a production Jet with passengers.

my point being, issues like this shouldn't happen publicly,
shareholders in spaceX wont like it, people that board a rocket wont like the fact this can happen.

what would probably help is the data or tests saying, yes its survivable,
so yes, it would turn into scrap metal, but you'll survive perfectly fine.

TLDR: dont release a rocket crashing so spectacularly on TV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X