5 ms·

So, SpaceX figured that the booster was actually a hazard and asked the Air Force to fix the problem. The Air Force is referring all questions to SpaceX and we

So, SpaceX figured that the booster was actually a hazard and asked the Air Force to fix the problem. The Air Force is referring all questions to SpaceX and we really don't know what happened since there is no video or photographs of the strike.

Kelbit 9y ago
More likely it was a floating ITAR export risk than a major threat to marine safety.
- IntronExon 9y ago
  Large pressure vessels are essentially bombs; in this case a very large bomb.
  - michaelt 9y ago
    Hasn't most of the energy been spent at that point? I was under the impression space launches were miserly with fuel for weight reasons?
    - IntronExon 9y ago
      You’re right, but it’s still under incredible pressure. You’re talking about liquified cryogenic fuels, so the remainder has greatly expanded over time. Even a small amount of remaining fuel must be vented to render it safe. Volumetric expansion is a bitch!
    - Kubuxu 9y ago
      Fuel in SpaceX rockets (and other working gases) are cryo-cooled, after tanks warm up, even small amount of liquid gas stored in a tank evaporates into a lot of gas which can create very high pressure.
      - akira2501 9y ago
        Cryogenic oxygen has something like a 700:1 expansion ratio when it is warmed into a gas.
    - vvanders 9y ago
      Take a look at all of the failed landings[1], even after they land on the barge they still go boom(or RUD if you prefer that term) when the structural integrity is lost. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvim4rsNHkQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvim4rsNHkQ
- JackFr 9y ago
  > More likely it was a floating ITAR export risk Indeed. Literally an ICBM.
IntronExon 9y ago
They would have understood that it was a hazard from the get-go, but presumably believed that they could render it safe, destroy it themselves, or tow it back intact. It would seem that they realized how unfeasible civilian EOD would be, and that necessarily ruled out any option save destruction.
- biesnecker 9y ago
  According to Musk, "This rocket was meant to test very high retrothrust landing in water so it didn’t hurt the droneship, but amazingly it has survived." I suspect they never really thought about what it would take to tow it back, and when they did realized they didn't really want to.
  - IntronExon 9y ago
    That sounds very likely, and having the USAF do the job right, while a bit of negative PR, is better than losing lives. Edit: Good points about PR, I missed that.
    - rocky1138 9y ago
      I don't think it's negative PR at all. Blowing stuff up is cool as long as nobody gets hurt. Also, people understand that bits and pieces of rockets need recovering or destroying. There's a lot of precedence for this.
    - navaati 9y ago
      And, all in all, which negative PR ? This is more positive in the "wicked cool" sense, isn't it ?
  - miketery 9y ago
    Wait, are you saying the core wasn't intending to land on the barge? Why have the barge out there to begin with then?
    - plopz 9y ago

Kelbit 9y ago

More likely it was a floating ITAR export risk than a major threat to marine safety.

IntronExon 9y ago
Large pressure vessels are essentially bombs; in this case a very large bomb.
- michaelt 9y ago
  Hasn't most of the energy been spent at that point? I was under the impression space launches were miserly with fuel for weight reasons?
  - IntronExon 9y ago
    You’re right, but it’s still under incredible pressure. You’re talking about liquified cryogenic fuels, so the remainder has greatly expanded over time. Even a small amount of remaining fuel must be vented to render it safe. Volumetric expansion is a bitch!
  - Kubuxu 9y ago
    Fuel in SpaceX rockets (and other working gases) are cryo-cooled, after tanks warm up, even small amount of liquid gas stored in a tank evaporates into a lot of gas which can create very high pressure.
    - akira2501 9y ago
      Cryogenic oxygen has something like a 700:1 expansion ratio when it is warmed into a gas.
  - vvanders 9y ago
    Take a look at all of the failed landings[1], even after they land on the barge they still go boom(or RUD if you prefer that term) when the structural integrity is lost. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvim4rsNHkQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvim4rsNHkQ
JackFr 9y ago
> More likely it was a floating ITAR export risk Indeed. Literally an ICBM.

IntronExon 9y ago

They would have understood that it was a hazard from the get-go, but presumably believed that they could render it safe, destroy it themselves, or tow it back intact. It would seem that they realized how unfeasible civilian EOD would be, and that necessarily ruled out any option save destruction.

biesnecker 9y ago
According to Musk, "This rocket was meant to test very high retrothrust landing in water so it didn’t hurt the droneship, but amazingly it has survived." I suspect they never really thought about what it would take to tow it back, and when they did realized they didn't really want to.
- IntronExon 9y ago
  That sounds very likely, and having the USAF do the job right, while a bit of negative PR, is better than losing lives. Edit: Good points about PR, I missed that.
  - rocky1138 9y ago
    I don't think it's negative PR at all. Blowing stuff up is cool as long as nobody gets hurt. Also, people understand that bits and pieces of rockets need recovering or destroying. There's a lot of precedence for this.
  - navaati 9y ago
    And, all in all, which negative PR ? This is more positive in the "wicked cool" sense, isn't it ?
- miketery 9y ago
  Wait, are you saying the core wasn't intending to land on the barge? Why have the barge out there to begin with then?
  - plopz 9y ago