SpaceX Starship Test Rocket Was Knocked Over By High Winds (popularmechanics.com) 66
Strong Texas winds managed to knock over SpaceX's prototype of its next-generation Starship rocket. In a tweet, CEO Elon Musk tweeted yesterday: "50 mph winds broke the mooring blocks late last night & fairing was blown over. Will take a few weeks to repair." He added: "Actual [fuel] tanks are fine." Popular Mechanics reports: The hopper, based out of the company's launch site in Boca Chica, Texas, is not meant for the stars: It is a test machine meant to show that the Starship's fundamentals can work in terms of launching and landing. SpaceX wants the rocket to go 16,400 feet into the air (a hop, so to speak) and land again. The wind, sadly, had other plans and knocked the hopper's nosecone around.
The accident appears to have first reached the public through eagle-eyed SpaceX aficionados on a message board which updates with even the smallest changes in anything related to the company's plans. Their methods include everything from drone flyovers to driving by the site. It's hard to tell what damage has precisely happened to the hopper in its fall, but it appears to be more complex than simply righting back up again.
The accident appears to have first reached the public through eagle-eyed SpaceX aficionados on a message board which updates with even the smallest changes in anything related to the company's plans. Their methods include everything from drone flyovers to driving by the site. It's hard to tell what damage has precisely happened to the hopper in its fall, but it appears to be more complex than simply righting back up again.
Re: (Score:1)
Donald Trump is a genione fool that will end funding for all things science & progress.
Dude, didn't you read the story about Trump wanting to provide NASA with "unlimited funding" to get a man on Mars [nymag.com] before the end of his presidency?
So much Trump Derangement Syndrome...
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but only if they can get a man on the moon by the end of his term, which is ludicrous.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but only if they can get a man on the moon by the end of his term, which is ludicrous.
So you're saying NASA needs to incorporate a P100D into their Mars rocket?
Re: (Score:2)
What was knocked over was an empty, shiny shell. It was the fairing that was knocked over (read: "giant nosecone"). Not the tanks / plumbing / engines / etc (the business end). This is amplified by the fact that unlike with the actual Starship, this hopper's fairing will never face meaningful stress or heating. They could outright launch without it (although it'll be good to explore how it affects the vehicle's handling dynamics).
When initial construction started, people presumed SpaceX was building a w
The hand of God (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Wasn't that thing at Burning Man a couple of years ago?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
smote
Re: (Score:2)
This almost happened to Rotary Rocket (Score:2)
Back in the 90s during the first wave of NewSpace companies, the Rotary Rocket Roton ATV (Atmopsheric Test Vehicle - similar mission plan as this one) had a grand unveiling on a very typically windy Mojave day. Had the tanks not been ballasted with water it would have toppled over. Was an interesting day for many reasons.
Re:This almost happened to Rotary Rocket (Score:4, Informative)
So far, SpaceX are the only folks we can trust to even have manned flights. Orion is an albatross about NASA's neck and needs to be cancelled ASAP. NASA should no longer make its own rockets. Takes 10 times as long and 100 times as expensive, and they killed their share of astronauts with really stupid stuff. Every time was "go fever" and acceptance of known problems with the craft that should have stopped flight. Did you know the tank stirrer that blew up the SM in Apollo 13 was already scheduled to be removed from future vehicles? Boeing may get their stuff together eventually with CST-100. Blue Origin is still suborbital-only for years. Sierra Nevada is going really slowly. I don't think you can judge SpaceX's preparation for mann
Re:This almost happened to Rotary Rocket (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Stop eating crayons.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you for real? This is a test article. The sort of thing you normally paint in yellow-and-black crosshatched crash testing paint. It'll be a miracle if this thing survives to the end of the testing period, by design. Its only purpose is to be something quickly and cheaply built to collect data for the actual rocket.
And what was destroyed was simply the fairing (read: nosecone), not the actual rocket part (tankage, plumbing, engines, etc). The fairing is far lighter (just very thin sheet steel tacked
Re: (Score:3)
I went inside of the Rotron one day in Mojave about 10 years ago. It was standing on display next to a video kiosk, and they put the PC controlling the kiosk in the rotron, and that day the PC guy had left the door on the bottom of the Rotron unlocked. Of course some things could have been removed from the Rotron by then, but the inside was hollow. A few small tanks, and the control cab way up where I couldn't reach it. Birds were nesting in it.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
IDK. Maybe because he can land a rocket when the rest of us can't even do a water bottle flip.
Re: (Score:2)
IDK. Maybe because he can land a rocket when the rest of us can't even do a water bottle flip.
I still need to go see a launch and landing. I know for a fact that no matter how prepared I make myself, the sheer amount of energy released for the take off, the noise and rumbling still felt a mile away, that I will still be in complete awe.
Re: (Score:2)
IDK. Maybe because he can land a rocket when the rest of us can't even do a water bottle flip.
I still need to go see a launch and landing. I know for a fact that no matter how prepared I make myself, the sheer amount of energy released for the take off, the noise and rumbling still felt a mile away, that I will still be in complete awe.
They are awesome indeed. The delay between the start of the launch and the arrival of the sound is cool too. The first launch I saw was at around 0300, and even that has cool stuff like the mini-fireworks display when the first stage separates. That should be on everyone's bucket list.
Re: (Score:2)
Launch viewing is a frustrating hobby. I drove 5 hours to Vandenberg for the last launch, it scrubbed in the last seconds of the countdown due to a hydrogen leak. Drove 5 hours back home. For one SpaceX launch there, it was so foggy that I only heard it. Expect to see one for every three that you go to.
It looks like the first Crew Dragon demo is on the 9th, during Orlando Hamcation, so I'll be in Florida. Hope that works out. I saw the Falcon Heavy launch that way last year.
Re: (Score:2)
Launch viewing is a frustrating hobby. I drove 5 hours to Vandenberg for the last launch, it scrubbed in the last seconds of the countdown due to a hydrogen leak. Drove 5 hours back home. For one SpaceX launch there, it was so foggy that I only heard it. Expect to see one for every three that you go to.
It looks like the first Crew Dragon demo is on the 9th, during Orlando Hamcation, so I'll be in Florida. Hope that works out. I saw the Falcon Heavy launch that way last year.
Hi Bruce, yes indeed frustrating. A couple years back, the Wife and I were in Florida for winter vacation. The F9 launch was delayed, I think three times, and since it was going to the Space Station, the launch time window was moved back by around two hours each time. I didn't get much sleep that week.
Have fun at Hamcation - I like it much better than Dayton, now Xenia.
Re: Stock pump con (Score:2)
Personally I'm waiting for the first flight of the BFG (or whatever they are calling it these days). Figure I'll take a 2 week holiday, drive down, and get a hotel somewhere in the area. If they scrub enough times to outlast my 2 week stay, they've got some serious problems.
Re: (Score:1)
Love conspiracy theorists ;). Are you saying that the hopper, one of the most obsessively-monitored-by-amateur-spy-shots things on the planet right now, isn't real and was just photoshopped? You do realize that there are frequent drone flyovers of the thing, right?
Since I've seen this notion going around the TSLAQ circles before, I'm going to guess that you're part of that bubble who retweets people like Mark Spiegel and the like, since I've seen this conspiracy theory pop up there. It goes like this: "Lo
Duh (Score:3)
Well, duh, it wasn't built to withstand winds - there's no air in space! :-O
Re: (Score:2)
But there are solar winds.
Re: (Score:2)
There may not be air / wind in space, but what about the one destination for BFR that's being talked about so much - i.e. Mars? There's an atmosphere (thin maybe), there's wind, there are sandstorms. What will those do to a freshly landed BFR not weighted down with loads of fuel?
While it may not be like in "The Martian", some calculations are warrented to be on the safe side.
Re: (Score:2)
The harshest winds Mars can offer wouldn't tip over an empty hopper faring. You'd barely feel it. A 100 MPH wind on Mars feels nothing like a 100 MPH wind on Earth because there's only 1/100th of the air blowing.
D'oh (Score:2)
Let's be clear about this: it's half-assed (Score:2, Flamebait)
I am a big fan of Elon Musk, Tesla, and SpaceX. That said, this is the most half-assed project I've seen them do, and that includes the Monty-Python-esque brick tower constructed for Boring company for which they advertised a position for someone to be at the top and yell abuse in an outrageous french accent [montypython.net]. I assume this person was in the Tesla lay-offs.
Its construction was like that of a film set, and like a film set it got blown over in the first high wind. Inside there is a triangular truss structure l
Re: (Score:2)
An least according to one tweet, the thing broke loose from its anchor blocks. So it looks like they did secure it, it's just that it overwhelmed the anchoring system.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks Bruce. About the only non-troll to respond. Trolls can be fun, but most fail at it nowadays.
Re: (Score:2)
Your comment, sir, is rude and inappropriate.
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to be confused.
1) You could never put this thing on its side; it's not designed to bear loads like that. At least not without building some sort of temporary internal scaffolding first.
2) The part that fell over is the fairing. You don't install bulkheads in a fairing. It's just thin tacked stainless sheet - you can't support liquid with that.
3) They're already installing the bulkheads in the actual tankage section (the bottom part). Top bulkhead just went on.
The simple matter is, they're doing
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, guy wires. Or, even guy ropes. On my self supporting ham radio tower, it used to sway 3 ft at the top. Alarming. So I put in a set of 3 ropes,
just 3/8 diameter. I used non-stretch rope. Sway now only 12" of less. And less jerky. About $50.
I envision 3 ropes on that rocket. When its time to launch, just cut them off at ground level and let them dangle. They will vaporize in no time. Of course,
rocket scientists are going to have apoplexy over this suggestion.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The cost of fixing the damage is likely far less than the cost of a hurricane-proof building.
Re: (Score:2)
I used to watch Flash Gordon as a kid! Rockets looked like V2's. And as they went thru space, the sparks out the back would drop down, and the
smoke would go up! I bet the NASA scientists cannot duplicate that yet!
Mental picture (Score:2)
Shiny (Score:2)
Re:Shiny (Score:5, Interesting)
On purpose. The reentry system being tested for Starship is very different from any other ever used. Normally the goal is to radiate heat, so you want a high emissivity (generally black) material. Starship (the actual vehicle, not this test hopper) on the other hand is designed to never get excessively hot in the first place - a double-layer skin with liquid between the layers and the outer layer perforated by tiny holes, through which heated coolant can vaporize out (creating a protective boundary layer while simultaneously removing heat). So the goal is to reject heat rather than absorb-then-radiate it. This means a low emissivity material, which generally means "shiny". :)
It's still going to get tremendously hot, of course - the craft is being designed for direct aerocapture from MTO. So alumium is right out. But stainless is such a great material for so many reasons... most of which is its resilience. Something which carbon fibre isn't, and a big reason I was very apprehensive about SpaceX's original BFR design. It's also 1/50th the cost, comparably easy to work with, and people who know how to do so are a dime a dozen. It's strong, very inert (even in hostile environments), and with the right alloy retains its resilience even at cryogenic temperatures, while its tensile strength only grows. I'm very happy with the switch. Heck, it's even higher-Z, meaning it'll be more effective at blocking solar radiation (won't do much against GCR except kick off secondary radiation, but GCR is a far lower flux).