3 ms·

Clearly are going to need to fix the debris issue with a flame diverter or aggressive suppression. Obviously they didn't anticipate the booster eating through

Clearly are going to need to fix the debris issue with a flame diverter or aggressive suppression. Obviously they didn't anticipate the booster eating through the entire concrete pad and boosting the beach into the atmosphere.

fatboy 4y ago
That's a bit I find surprising. I would have thought that working out if the pad was up to the job would be one of the easier rocket-science tasks they were faced with.
- sinuhe69 4y ago
  Was well not the most critical part, though.
  - a3n 4y ago
    I'm guessing that undiverted flame and related debris could ricochet up to the rocket and cause problems.
    - infogulch 4y ago
      Which could have been the cause of the dead engines during flight, which could have been the reason why it didn't make altitude and didn't separate.
  - simonh 4y ago
    You can see huge chunks of debris flying into the air on launch, and half a dozen engines were out by the time they were visible. The discolourations and asymmetry in the plume indicates damaged engines. The term of art is engine rich exhaust. It looks like debris tore up the engines, which progressively lost more thrust and control authority as more engines failed, leading to the loss of the vehicle.
qayxc 4y ago
> Obviously they didn't anticipate the booster eating through the entire concrete pad and boosting the beach into the atmosphere. I'm pretty sure there were voices at SpaceX who predicted this outcome. We've been launching orbital rockets for over 65 years now, and every single launch facility for heavy lift vehicles uses flame diverters and water deluge systems. It baffles me how anyone could even think that the most powerful rocket in history could do without these systems in place.
- Fatnino 4y ago
  They were using some new blast resistant concrete (not sure on the details, maybe not so new). The expectation was that it would ablate somewhat this time and they could resurface it and install deluge system for next time. Turns out instead of ablating a little is shattered and left the area in chunks exposing the sand underneath to be blown away as well. I can see why the idea of no flame trench is alluring. Imagine the capability to land a rocket on essentially a parking lot, refueling and taking off again. You could land and take off on the moon or Mars like that too. But that's outdated by now. There's an orbital launch mount and once you need that you might as well have a trench too.

fatboy 4y ago

That's a bit I find surprising. I would have thought that working out if the pad was up to the job would be one of the easier rocket-science tasks they were faced with.

sinuhe69 4y ago
Was well not the most critical part, though.
- a3n 4y ago
  I'm guessing that undiverted flame and related debris could ricochet up to the rocket and cause problems.
  - infogulch 4y ago
    Which could have been the cause of the dead engines during flight, which could have been the reason why it didn't make altitude and didn't separate.
- simonh 4y ago
  You can see huge chunks of debris flying into the air on launch, and half a dozen engines were out by the time they were visible. The discolourations and asymmetry in the plume indicates damaged engines. The term of art is engine rich exhaust. It looks like debris tore up the engines, which progressively lost more thrust and control authority as more engines failed, leading to the loss of the vehicle.

qayxc 4y ago

> Obviously they didn't anticipate the booster eating through the entire concrete pad and boosting the beach into the atmosphere. I'm pretty sure there were voices at SpaceX who predicted this outcome. We've been launching orbital rockets for over 65 years now, and every single launch facility for heavy lift vehicles uses flame diverters and water deluge systems. It baffles me how anyone could even think that the most powerful rocket in history could do without these systems in place.

Fatnino 4y ago
They were using some new blast resistant concrete (not sure on the details, maybe not so new). The expectation was that it would ablate somewhat this time and they could resurface it and install deluge system for next time. Turns out instead of ablating a little is shattered and left the area in chunks exposing the sand underneath to be blown away as well. I can see why the idea of no flame trench is alluring. Imagine the capability to land a rocket on essentially a parking lot, refueling and taking off again. You could land and take off on the moon or Mars like that too. But that's outdated by now. There's an orbital launch mount and once you need that you might as well have a trench too.