3 ms·

Only because they were shaking it to bits while trying to light the emergency abort engines as a shakedown test for Nasa, reusing a capsule they had used before

Only because they were shaking it to bits while trying to light the emergency abort engines as a shakedown test for Nasa, reusing a capsule they had used before. So I don't think that's at all a fair comparison.

ceejayoz 7y ago
"Our emergency abort engines explode if you shake them a lot" is not a great feature in an emergency abort engine. That they wound up redesigned indicates NASA and SpaceX agree.
- taneq 7y ago
  This is why we test things.
  - ceejayoz 7y ago
    Sure, but that doesn't mean you don't hope to pass the test.
    - taneq 7y ago
      Well yeah, but at the same time, you want anything that could possibly go wrong to go wrong before you finish testing. A test that finds a design flaw is a successful test.
bumby 7y ago
Vibration testing is common practice on accepting a particular engine design. All engines will typically perform this type of test and be expected to pass.
- grey-area 7y ago
  I agree, but these are very different kinds of error.
  - bumby 7y ago
    I agree if you mean the difference between the MET error and the vibration failure. I tend to disagree if you mean the vibration failure mode in a test stand vs. a potential vibration failure mode on a mission.
    - grey-area 7y ago
      Yes that's what I mean.