Author Topic: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 23 : Discussion (Read 1337148 times)

Lars-J · « **Reply #1840 on:** 07/11/2022 09:55 pm »

Did someone pinky promise the NSF team that there would be no methane loaded? The commentary seems to be making a lot of assumptions based on (obvious) evidence to the contrary.

A bit embarrassing by the NSF commentary team IMO.

HVM · « **Reply #1841 on:** 07/11/2022 09:57 pm »

Do anyone actually really think there’s enough hydraulic oil for that, and it’s start to leak all center engines at the same time?

Lars-J · « **Reply #1842 on:** 07/11/2022 10:04 pm »

It certainly *looked* unplanned... But according to Elon, all part of the tests?

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1546607458461880321

Quote

@SirineAti
Was this planned @elonmusk

@elonmusk
Yes. Booster engine testing.

Robotbeat · « **Reply #1843 on:** 07/11/2022 10:07 pm »

He didn’t elaborate… Didn’t say it was 100% nominal (it clearly wasn’t). They were planning to do SOME kind of test…

Tywin · « **Reply #1844 on:** 07/11/2022 10:07 pm »

RIP B7?

Lars-J · « **Reply #1845 on:** 07/11/2022 10:09 pm »

Quote from: Robotbeat on 07/11/2022 10:07 pm

He didn’t elaborate… Didn’t say it was 100% nominal (it clearly wasn’t). They were planning to do SOME kind of test…

Right, might not has gone as 100% planned, but the embarrassing NSF commentary continues... Still talking about this as if the B7 blew up on the stand, and no methane was eeeeeverr supposed to be loaded today. Yikes.

Lee Jay · « **Reply #1846 on:** 07/11/2022 10:10 pm »

I suspect the ignition was intentional, the outcome was not. FYI, the test took place at almost exactly 4:20 local.

xvel · « **Reply #1847 on:** 07/11/2022 10:11 pm »

https://twitter.com/csi_starbase/status/1546610765511245828

I don't think Elon is aware whats going on, it was an explosion, this can't be nominal and it wasn't planned (no overpressure alert notice for today)

Pheogh · « **Reply #1848 on:** 07/11/2022 10:11 pm »

If you watch some of the streams from farther away at 1/4 speed there is a clear progression of fire from below the engines to the ground. Additionally the flame front is uniform along the base of the vehicle. With all due respect the NSF commentators are arm chairing a bit.

Robotbeat · « **Reply #1849 on:** 07/11/2022 10:12 pm »

Commentary is saying just liquid oxygen can explode. Definitely not true. Oxygen doesn’t burn by itself. There was a sharp explosion and a fireball. It wasn’t just oxygen!

Lars-J · « **Reply #1850 on:** 07/11/2022 10:15 pm »

At this point the NSF commentary should be labelled as misinformation, not commentary. Basic chemistry knowledge has also gone out the window.

They are really going to die on the "no methane hill", aren't they? Geez, have some humility, you don't have all the facts.

sanman · « **Reply #1851 on:** 07/11/2022 10:16 pm »

Quote from: Lee Jay on 07/11/2022 10:10 pm

I suspect the ignition was intentional, the outcome was not. FYI, the test took place at almost exactly 4:20 local.

They seem to show water deluge surge before the Raptors ignited -- so that makes the event look pre-planned. But then after initial ignition, there seemed to be an explosion (perhaps due to methane buildup?)

That white hose got shredded.

butters · « **Reply #1852 on:** 07/11/2022 10:17 pm »

It looked pretty much like a preburner test should look. Big impressive orange non-propulsive plume like we saw with SN series Starship testing. The thing that doesn't add up is the presumption that there would be an overpressure notice or other warning for a test of this type.

Robotbeat · « **Reply #1853 on:** 07/11/2022 10:20 pm »

There must have been some sort of flammable vapor present. Vaporized hydraulic fluid seems incredibly unlikely. I would bet money it was methane of some sort, even if it just came from some sort of header tank or a ground tank.

Pheogh · « **Reply #1854 on:** 07/11/2022 10:22 pm »

and it continues, facepalm.

Jarnis · « **Reply #1855 on:** 07/11/2022 10:30 pm »

Now something on fire at the base of the launch tower.... at least this part definitely not looking nominal.

sanman · « **Reply #1856 on:** 07/11/2022 10:30 pm »

Another small explosion just happened 17:28:00 CDT (according to LabPadre's video stream)

Herb Schaltegger · « **Reply #1857 on:** 07/11/2022 10:36 pm »

I wonder if they had some rental equipment parked over there behind the tower - cherry pickers, loaders, etc. That last dump (LOX?) may have inundated some organics that caught fire.

Lars-J · « **Reply #1858 on:** 07/11/2022 10:38 pm »

Quote from: Herb Schaltegger on 07/11/2022 10:36 pm

I wonder if they had some rental equipment parked over there behind the tower - cherry pickers, loaders, etc. That last dump (LOX?) may have inundated some organics that caught fire.

Yes, the side effects of that shockwave (certainly greater than they expected, if planned) could have damaged lots of non-hardened equipment nearby.

Lee Jay · « **Reply #1859 on:** 07/11/2022 10:41 pm »

Quote from: Lars-J on 07/11/2022 10:38 pm

Quote from: Herb Schaltegger on 07/11/2022 10:36 pm
I wonder if they had some rental equipment parked over there behind the tower - cherry pickers, loaders, etc. That last dump (LOX?) may have inundated some organics that caught fire.

Yes, the side effects of that shockwave (certainly greater than they expected, if planned) could have damaged lots of non-hardened equipment nearby.

And it looked like they dumped a bunch of LOX out of the bottom, that spread out, right before the small explosions started, and ultimately the fire.

Can't tell what's burning but it's not the tower. It's nearby.