Quote from: Rocket Science on 09/12/2016 10:28 pmI thought we pretty much flogged the thread on possible causes, so what if we are left with no direct cause for the failure and only a suspected probable cause as was in CRS-7? How will it impact, if any on the upcoming Commercial Crew flights?Obvious question how many launch failures (in the last say 30 years) have ended up this way?I'm not sure that has ever happened but assuming it did to a design did they retire the design? Fix highest probability root causes and RTF? Increase instrumentation on pad? On LV?Normally when an LV explodes it's in flight and over the ocean. In this case it was right on the pad. SX have the ability to identify and recover nearly (because I'm sure some parts will still be missing) all of the vehicle and where those parts came down. They should have excellent telemetry from the vehicle and lots of on site video from various angles, most of which I doubt they will ever release.
I thought we pretty much flogged the thread on possible causes, so what if we are left with no direct cause for the failure and only a suspected probable cause as was in CRS-7? How will it impact, if any on the upcoming Commercial Crew flights?
"Well. It looks that they don't have that."What leads you to that conclusion?
Quote from: whitelancer64 on 09/13/2016 04:19 pm"Well. It looks that they don't have that."What leads you to that conclusion? They must have, here is a sampling that SpaceX provide a while ago from apparently their own High Speed cameras:
Quote from: catdlr on 09/13/2016 06:25 pmQuote from: whitelancer64 on 09/13/2016 04:19 pm"Well. It looks that they don't have that."What leads you to that conclusion? They must have, here is a sampling that SpaceX provide a while ago from apparently their own High Speed cameras:All of those clips are from flights. Is it possible they don't bother with cams on static fires?Matthew
Quite. Static fires have no real PR value, so no real need for those sorts of cameras. Maybe that will change now. Do ULA have high speed camera watching every dress rehearsal they do? I know they don;t do static fires, but they must have some sort of testing prior to launch.
Quote from: JamesH65 on 09/13/2016 08:25 pmQuite. Static fires have no real PR value, so no real need for those sorts of cameras. Maybe that will change now. Do ULA have high speed camera watching every dress rehearsal they do? I know they don;t do static fires, but they must have some sort of testing prior to launch.Also launch vehicles aren't expected to fail catastrophically 8 minutes before engine start (or 3 days before launch). Its 2016 not 1956.
Quote from: JebK on 09/14/2016 05:54 pmQuote from: JamesH65 on 09/13/2016 08:25 pmQuite. Static fires have no real PR value, so no real need for those sorts of cameras. Maybe that will change now. Do ULA have high speed camera watching every dress rehearsal they do? I know they don;t do static fires, but they must have some sort of testing prior to launch.Also launch vehicles aren't expected to fail catastrophically 8 minutes before engine start (or 3 days before launch). Its 2016 not 1956.Indeed. But you know, sometimes, s**t happens, despite every effort to ensure it doesn't. And in those cases, you suck it up, try and figure it out, and keep on pushing. You don't give up.The rocket industry and satellite industry are always having failures. Antares, that Israel satellite, are both very recent. Hopefully, by 2050, failures will be a thing of the past, but when you work on the bleeding edge, sometimes, bad stuff happens.
Could they build a stropped down launch system in New Mexico or Texas and test fueling operations with one of the used Rockets? (...)
Quote from: JamesH65 on 09/15/2016 07:53 amQuote from: JebK on 09/14/2016 05:54 pmQuote from: JamesH65 on 09/13/2016 08:25 pmQuite. Static fires have no real PR value, so no real need for those sorts of cameras. Maybe that will change now. Do ULA have high speed camera watching every dress rehearsal they do? I know they don;t do static fires, but they must have some sort of testing prior to launch.Also launch vehicles aren't expected to fail catastrophically 8 minutes before engine start (or 3 days before launch). Its 2016 not 1956.Indeed. But you know, sometimes, s**t happens, despite every effort to ensure it doesn't. And in those cases, you suck it up, try and figure it out, and keep on pushing. You don't give up.The rocket industry and satellite industry are always having failures. Antares, that Israel satellite, are both very recent. Hopefully, by 2050, failures will be a thing of the past, but when you work on the bleeding edge, sometimes, bad stuff happens.No, there is no such thing as sucking it up. You find the cause or probable causes and fix them
I know this is a "what if" thread but as someone who has worked flight vehicle failure analysis in the past, the chance of them not having an assignable cause at some point is slim to none. There is a lot of data available and a lot of smart people working the problem.
Quote from: PhotoEngineer on 09/15/2016 08:35 pmI know this is a "what if" thread but as someone who has worked flight vehicle failure analysis in the past, the chance of them not having an assignable cause at some point is slim to none. There is a lot of data available and a lot of smart people working the problem.I know what you are saying however; keep in mind that you are asking the same "smart people" to find the cause are the same "smart people" who allowed the problem to occur in the first place...
Quote from: Rocket Science on 09/16/2016 12:27 amQuote from: PhotoEngineer on 09/15/2016 08:35 pmI know this is a "what if" thread but as someone who has worked flight vehicle failure analysis in the past, the chance of them not having an assignable cause at some point is slim to none. There is a lot of data available and a lot of smart people working the problem.I know what you are saying however; keep in mind that you are asking the same "smart people" to find the cause are the same "smart people" who allowed the problem to occur in the first place...True, but on the other hand 20/20 hindsight is much stronger than foresight. They will find it.