20 ms·
Smoke seen for miles as SpaceX Crew Dragon suffers anomaly at Cape Canaveral
- f2f 7y agoI don't like setbacks, but I fully endorse rigorous testing.
- joeyrideout 7y agoIt is important to note that "Crew Dragon" is the name of the capsule. No people were on board. It was a test.
- hinkley 7y agoMaybe the PR department should have more say in the naming process.
- zlsa 7y agoThey did. It used to be called Dragon V2.
- hinkley 7y agoTime for a new hire in the PR Dept :)
- zoeysaurusrex 7y agoThey’ll take advice from us when we stop naming things like BouncyCastle[1] 1. https://www.bouncycastle.org/java.html https://www.bouncycastle.org/java.html
- foobar1962 7y agoWhenever naming comes up, I can only ever think of "Boaty McBoatface."
- mrec 7y agoOr Hamcrest (http://hamcrest.org/ http://hamcrest.org/) Still have no idea what they were thinking with that one. Apparently it's an anagram of "matchers". Ooooookay.
- ehcache 7y agoehcache Worst. Palindrome. Ever.
- jbigelow76 7y agoSo naming is hard outside of software development too.
- benj111 7y agoStrapline: Netherlands to London in 5 and a half minutes
- amelius 7y agoPerhaps HN could change the title too.
- webbrahmin 7y agoTalk about a wrong name.
- Waterluvian 7y ago"The initial tests completed successfully but the final test resulted in an anomaly on the test stand." I'm not saying this is spin, but it sounds like how you'd spin something like this. Basically, the tests worked until they didn't. And that one therefore became the final test.
- craftyguy 7y agoIt could also be that the last test they planned to execute resulted in the 'anomaly'.. Not every public communication is subterfuge even though the armchair detectives in the HN comment section always seems to think it is.
- colechristensen 7y ago"Anomaly" implies this is not the case.
- craftyguy 7y agoNo, anomaly means there was an outcome which was not expected. It says nothing about how many tests they were going to execute (if any), what the unexpected outcome was, or what the lead test engineer ate for breakfast that morning.
- usrusr 7y agoThat's the dictionary definition of "anomaly". But that's not the interesting part, what's tickling us armchair detectives is how it got into the press release: "anomaly" is a bit of an anomaly itself, most people would never use that term unless specifically to play something down. That surely is no proof, enough to inspire speculation.
- xattt 7y agoSpeaking of speculation, there could be quite a few speculators in this thread that are invested in SpaceX. The downplaying of the actual event could be their own way to shape the stock price.
- speeq 7y agoAs much as I hate seeing setbacks and delays to commercial crew, it's best to have these failures early on in the program before they risk the life of astronauts and personnel.
- falcor84 7y agoAfter watching the Apollo 1 disaster scene in First Man, I'm very glad to read that they're now doing this extensive testing without humans on board.
- craftyguy 7y agoWell, not pumping the capsule with 100% oxygen definitely helps too.
- andy_ppp 7y agoDoes it have to be 100% oxygen due to pressure or?
- ls612 7y agoThat’s slightly misleading. Originally they put 1 atmosphere of pure O2 in the Apollo capsule. This proved to be a great environment for fires. After that they pressurized the capsule with 5 psi of pure O2, which is about 1/3 atmospheric pressure.
- andy_ppp 7y agoWhat’s wrong with air is what I’m asking? Are the pressures in the cabin too extreme?
- empyrical 7y agoIf you're wondering why there wasn't nitrogen mixed in, it's because the additional systems+tanks for handling nitrogen would've added more weight to the spacecraft. This video goes in to a bit more detail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvA7N_j_8os https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvA7N_j_8os
- jimbosis 7y agoThese two articles talk about this question: https://www.popsci.com/why-did-nasa-still-use-pure-oxygen-after-apollo-1-fire https://www.popsci.com/why-did-nasa-still-use-pure-oxygen-af... https://www.space.com/17338-apollo-1.html https://www.space.com/17338-apollo-1.html
- TallGuyShort 7y agoIn spaceflight, does 'anomaly' ever refer to something other than an explosive fireball? Because I've heard that term used for rocket explosions and I get that vibe from this announcement, but... But could it be that the computer just tanked and now they're going through a core dump? Would that be an 'anomaly'?
- tyingq 7y agoHere is one that just pushed a launch out: https://www.rferl.org/a/soyuz-rocket-anomaly-to-delay-u-s-satellite-launch/29743665.html https://www.rferl.org/a/soyuz-rocket-anomaly-to-delay-u-s-sa...
- Ankaios 7y agoAbsolutely. Those sorts of anomalies happen routinely. They just tend to get less public attention than anomalies that involve fire and loud noises.
- gmueckl 7y agoIdeally, computers inside rockets don't crash. The software should be that good when you're letting it handle tons of explosive fuel. Then again, Ariane 5 did happen...
- jakeinspace 7y agoThat's the idea. I'm working on flight software for Orion, and there are many levels of redundancy, both in design and process, that are put into the software architecture. It's extremely expensive, but flight software is still a drop in the bucket compared to mechanical, propulsion, and electrical systems. It should have an expected failure rate much lower than the physical systems, and should never be on the critical path. We're not doing fancy stuff, it's just gotta be robust and fault tolerant.
- jacquesm 7y ago> just The deadpan delivery really does it.
- keyle 7y agoThis is why you have tests. So overall, if it saved a real loss in the future, it's a win.
- lchengify 7y agoSome thoughts on the initial images from /r/spacex (great community): 1. The orange smoke [1] is the color of Nitrogen Tetroxide, which is the hypergolic fuel that Crew Dragon uses. The normal reaction in the Draco engines in the Crew Dragon is Nitrogen Tetroxide (N2O4) and methyl hydrazine (CH3(NH)NH2) [2] 2. The prior grey smoke might mean the engines were already firing for the test, which would rule out something like a tank loading error or something else with the ground crew. 3. Boeing had a hypergolics + Launch Escape System anomaly and it pushed their program schedule back 6 months. [3] 4. Eric Berger (Reporter for Ars Technica) indicating it may have been a serious incident. [4] /r/spacex thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/bfhm2c/on_april_20_an_anomaly_occurred_at_cape_canaveral/ https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/bfhm2c/on_april_20_... [1] https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D4oMNJmXsAAv_7B.jpg:orig https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D4oMNJmXsAAv_7B.jpg:orig [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draco_(rocket_engine_family) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draco_(rocket_engine_family) [3] https://spacenews.com/boeings-starliner-launch-abort-engine-suffers-problem-during-testing/ https://spacenews.com/boeings-starliner-launch-abort-engine-... [4] https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1119730184544976897 https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1119730184544976897
- yread 7y agoFrom the Ars article > Boeing had intended to complete the test of its abort system last summer but has yet to reschedule the flight 10 months later, apparently due to complications from this accident. So it's probably more than 6 months
- trevyn 7y agoAre Boeing and SpaceX complication rescheduling timelines usually comparable? (Serious question)
- alexnewman 7y agoBoeing is less homogenous than spacex, so it might make sense to reframe that question
- 7y ago
- CaliforniaKarl 7y agoIn case it's relevant, here's a 1958 NASA film on the hazards of the propellants (various hydrazines) and the oxidizer (nitrogen tetroxide) that were used at the time. As mentioned in another top-level comment, the Crew Dragon uses nitrogen tetroxide as an oxidizer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zha9DyS-PPA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zha9DyS-PPA
- xattt 7y agoThank you for this. It gives a tangible sense of the waiting and venting that followed a space shuttle landing.
- hobs 7y agoIf you enjoy this type of stuff, a great read is: IGNITION! An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants https://library.sciencemadness.org/library/books/ignition.pdf https://library.sciencemadness.org/library/books/ignition.pd...
- sitharus 7y agoThey’ve recently done a second paperback edition so you can even get a physical copy! It’s a great read for anyone, and shows the crazy risks taken in the early rocket programs.
- jakeinspace 7y ago*1966, NASA was founded in 1958.
- ddmma 7y agoActually there is an Anomaly Detection Cognitive Service in Azure currently in Preview Mode for whom wants to retry experiments before real buttons push https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/cognitive-services/anomaly-detector/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/cognitive-service...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- fao_ 7y agoI've spent a few hours reading SCPs so now I really have no idea what the hell an anomaly would mean in this context. Just a small computer glitch or, things firing/smoking when they shouldn't, or something more drastic?
- plttn 7y agoGenerally anomaly when referring to rocket test fires/launches is an unplanned/unexpected big boom of something that isn't supposed to go boom.
- tedivm 7y agoThis seems like a containment breach to me.
- krisoft 7y agoComputer glitch? That's an anomaly. Things firing/smoking when they shouldn't? That's an anomaly too. Pressure reading slightly out of predicted range? Also anomaly. Everything went kaboom? That is also an anomaly, as long as that wasn't the plan. Basically everything where expectation and reality do not meet.
- bfung 7y agoyay for testing!
- Mizza 7y agoDoes this release a huge carcinogenic cloud over Florida?
- MertsA 7y agoNo, it'll form nitric acid as it reacts with moisture in the air and be neutralized as it reacts with the environment. Nitrogen tetroxide is used as a hypergolic oxidizer because it's very reactive. It'll react with basically most anything that can be oxidized so it's not going to hang around for too long.
- Mizza 7y agoWhat about the methyl hydrazine?
- MertsA 7y agoThere was no or very little monomethylhydrazine released. If there was, it would have reacted with the nitrogen tetroxide. Since it's hypergolic, it doesn't need to be under high temperatures or pressures to react. Just the two substances coming into contact will cause them to react.
- Someone 7y agoExplosions tend to disperse material in uncontrolled ways, so I doubt the two substances got mixed perfectly. Chances are not all monomethylhydrazine reacted with the nitrogen tetroxide.
- sebringj 7y ago"SpaceX Crew Dragon pad testing finds anomaly delaying launch" sounds more accurate and less distressing.
- sebringj 7y agoHmm I just saw the video and the test was distressing as it completely blew up on the pad but without crew of course.
- gingernaut 7y agoHere is an alleged video of the event, there's a large explosion: https://twitter.com/Astronut099/status/1119825093742530560 https://twitter.com/Astronut099/status/1119825093742530560
- lchengify 7y agoInteresting. The voice in the video is mid countdown when it happens ("Ten, Nine....expletive") which implies the Super Draco engines hadn't fired yet. If it's something like a pressure issue, it could be similar to what happened to AMOS-6, where there was buckled liner in a COPV [1] tank that caused a liquid oxygen buildup [2] Someone on reddit captured the frames before and after, it looks like it's originating from just near one of the Super Dracos [3]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_overwrapped_pressure_vessel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_overwrapped_pressure... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amos-6 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amos-6 [3] https://imgur.com/G0iE6Rr https://imgur.com/G0iE6Rr
- walkingolof 7y agoAlso, this CrewDragon have flown before, it has been in space and landed in saltwater, those are factors that could have contributed to this.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- _Microft 7y agoAMOS-6 suffered from a problem with a Helium Composite over-wrapped pressured vessel (COPV) that most likely had a liquid oxygen intrusion into the composite layer which due to the cold temperature of the helium created oxygen ice that violently reacted with the composite when friction ignited the combination. (Fun fact: as far as I know a liquid-oxygen drenched cigarette basically explodes when lit). Afaik there is no Helium COPV on Crew Dragon. Edit: after checking because of Someones comment, it turned out that cigarettes do not explode when drenched with LOX, they just burn brightly not unlike a flare.
- disillusioned 7y agoWell, it sure LOOKS like a total loss based on this video: https://twitter.com/Astronut099/status/1119825093742530560 https://twitter.com/Astronut099/status/1119825093742530560 (Can confirm that this Twitter account is a real person who works at KSC.)
- MarcysVonEylau 7y agoThis reminds me of the Apollo 1 incident [1], happily without any casualties. If it turns out to be a design fault, I'm glad they caught it now. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_1
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- tibbydudeza 7y agoElon Musk tweeted that an over the air update will resolve the issue in time for the next test firing. Rockets are dangerous esp when you try out new designs , things blew up rather spectacularly during the early days of the space race.
- konschubert 7y ago> over the air update Is this a joke?
- milankragujevic 7y agoyes
- abledon 7y agoAfter the success of the Falcon Heavy a couple days ago, I'm actually surprised there weren't more hiccups in SpaceX activity. They are pushing the limits of spaceflight technology, there are _bound_ to be setbacks like this. A roadmap with no errors like this is highly improbable. Amen for rigorous testing.
- mabbo 7y agoThere's a line from Bezo's annual shareholder letter a few weeks ago that this brings to mind: "As a company grows, everything needs to scale, including the size of your failed experiments. If the size of your failures isn't growing, you're not going to be inventing at a size that can actually move the needle." https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/11/jeff-bezos-annual-shareholder-letter.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/11/jeff-bezos-annual-shareholde...
- rayiner 7y agoI think SpaceX is great. But how are they “pushing the limits of spaceflight technology?” The SpaceX Merlin engine uses the same basic RP-1/LOX cycle as the Saturn V’s first stage engine, which is more than half a century old now. Rocketdyne’s engine produced about 7-8 times as much thrust (which is why SpaceX needs 27 engines on three boosters for a Falcon 9 Heavy, versus 5 for a Saturn V.) (Here is the computing equivalent of what SpaceX is doing: creating a PDP-11 with modern technology, that’s maybe 75% as fast, but at a fifth to a tenth of the cost.) A more accurate summary is SpaceX is retreading well-worm ground that was trod before many of us reading this article were born, bringing modern materials and manufacturing capabilities to bear improving the same basic designs. That’s cool. But that’s not pushing the boundaries of space flight technology.
- dsfyu404ed 7y agoDoing things at a Harbor Freight price point that have never been done at that price point before basically always winds up being uncharted engineering territory. Anyone can build something that works when you don't care about cost.
- 7y ago
- setquk 7y agoThis is why we have tests. This is the same as a unit test failure. Except it costs a lot more when something goes red in the launch sector.
- netsharc 7y agoCalling it anomaly smells of corporate newspeak to me, also it makes me think of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM Call it "malfunction discovered during testing", could you not?
- FredFS456 7y agoIt's standard speak in the space industry, not marketing.
- _Microft 7y agoNot at all. It is neutrally called anomaly, so that there's no premature explanation out there that would be difficult to correct later if proven wrong. NASA had that problem once and that's why it is done like that today. Edit: Here's an example search (excluding SpaceX): https://www.google.de/search?q=anomaly+rocket+launch+-spacex https://www.google.de/search?q=anomaly+rocket+launch+-spacex
- kbutler 7y agoJust space flight technical jargon: Nominal - as expected (no more than nominal deviations from expected parameters) Anomaly - something unexpected
- interestica 7y agoPerformed nominally. Performance anomaly. Not sure which I overheard.
- grkvlt 7y agoYou would never say 'nominally', rather just 'nominal' to avoid confusion on noisy radio nets.
- Iwan-Zotow 7y agoWhy a red smoke? Melange?