Posted on 10/03/2016 7:55:41 AM PDT by justlurking
An element of intrigue has been added to the investigation of the explosion of SpaceX rocket on the launch pad at Cape Canaveral last month. The Washington Post, quoting unnamed sources, says SpaceX is investigating the possibility of sabotage in the mishap, which destroyed the rocket and its payload, an internet-beaming satellite being deployed by Facebook. According to the story, SpaceX sent investigators to a building owned by competitor United Launch Alliance about a mile from the launch pad because it noted something odd on the roof of the building in still images taken from video shot at the time of the blast. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has also spoken about the investigation taking some strange turns, particularly where it concerns a mysterious noise heard just before the rocket blows up. “Particularly trying to understand the quieter bang sound a few seconds before the fireball goes off,” he wrote on Twitter. “May come from rocket or something else.”
(Excerpt) Read more at avweb.com ...
We should all be outraged because even though it’s not NASA it’s still our money...
This is BALONEY! Elon you are such a drama queen! Check your weld schedules and weld x-rays in the area of the explosion before you start with the drama. It looks like they unzipped the tank on the pad to me. Probably due to bad welds (expulsions or cryogenic cracking) or just a weak welding schedule to begin with. Do your proper Failure Analysis before you start shooting your mouth off.
One of the best videos ever. Great spoof of those 70s detective shows.
I wouldn't characterize a 1700 yard shot as nothing, but the target is much larger than a human. However, if you want enough energy left to do any damage, you're going to be shooting either a .50 BMG or a .338 Lapua.
Ditto. SpaceX have a so-so safety record. Their last one blew because of a faulty strut. And NASA and others ripped them a new one during the safety investigation for doing a piss poor investigation. Sabotage? Grow up Elon.
A mile of lost velocity . . Nope. If you’re going to do it why wouldn’t you have a .50 cal?
Yes. Construction fault becomes apparent during loading of fuel (or helium?) at high pressure.
So first you’re saying that NASA thought they did a ‘piss poor investigation’, and then now when they’re looking at all possibilities, you don’t like that either?
FWIW, initially NASA had serious concerns that the Apollo 1 fire was sabotage and that was heavily investigated also.
And it’s not like NASA has all that great a safety record either.
I was thinking the same thing.
Occam’s razor.
What you guys fail to understand is that a rocket booster is NOT armored. The entire structure has been pared down to minimize weight. The whole development effort is to find out where things can be "lightened" safely, and what things cannot. NONE of it is designed to withstand a bullet impact. This is a fragile mechanism, upon which one does not need to impact with massive kinetic energy to cause catastrophic damage, you just need to weaken something to the point where the high stresses of takeoff will start a chain reaction of breakage. So no, you do NOT need a 0.50BMG or Lapua to "take it down".
A .308 Winchester has 2700 ft-lbs of energy at the muzzle, and 270 ft-lbs of energy at 1700 yds.
Worse, if your rifle is zeroed at 250 yards, the bullet will drop a staggering 2,000 inches at 1700 yards.
If you want to make a 1700 yard shot, you will use a .50 BMG or a .338 Lapua.
Did Bezos contract any work to Samsung? That could explain an explosion. :-)
Static electricity imo. That day had winds from different directions at different altitudes due to a passing tropical depression. I was quite surprised when I heard they were going to launch. I was not surprised when it blew.
The detonation point looks to be next to an umbilical connection. Opposite this connection is a vent port which was venting rather strongly. This may indicates a gas collection cavity in that area with the cabling running through it.
Yup, just 270 ft-lbs. Concentrated into an area probably no more than 0.3" dia. Think about a pin punch and a 5 pound hammer stroked through a distance of a foot. Then multiply that by fifty. How big a hole do you think that would punch into a fiberglass tank, or instrument junction?? And if you were going to make a shot at 1700 yards, I suspect one would re-zero for that distance, don't you.
The .308 is not a 1700 yard cartridge, no matter how you slice it. It loses too much velocity.
I focus on energy. because energy is what causes damage, "low terminal velocity" or not. Read up a bit on Civil War snipers and see what kinds of holdovers and windages they had to contend with. The target is both big and fragile. A hit almost anywhere with 270 ft-pounds concentrated in that small area is very likely to cause non-survivable damage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.