3 ms·

It "responded" immediately to the "command" (an onboard automatic trigger) and the explosive charges ruptured the tanks instantly. However, the explosive charge

It "responded" immediately to the "command" (an onboard automatic trigger) and the explosive charges ruptured the tanks instantly. However, the explosive charges which ruptured the tanks didn't cause the vehicle to disintegrate immediately, as it was stronger than anticipated and at a high altitude with lower wind force. (No one has flown a rocket of this construction and size before.) The flight was, however, pretty well terminated at that point (the FT in FTS). They will be adding more explosives for the future to ensure structural failure.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
That isn't what Elon stated in the interview (but you may still be correct). [Edit: You are correct] "The longest lead we dont have is probably requalification of the FTS. Um, Because we did initiate the FTS, but it was not enough to.. it took way too long to rupture the tanks. We need.. basically we need more detonation cord to unzip the tanks at altitude and ensure the rocket explodes immediately."
- ortusdux 3y ago
  It sounds like the FTS worked as intended, but the holes created in the fuel tank were undersized, allowing the tank to maintain enough pressure to remain structurally sound. You can see 4 plumes of gas venting from the 4 locations of the FTS boxes while it tumbles. I would expect them to switch to long shaped charges, possibly radial in orientation. It sounds to me that the FTS was triggered automatically by the onboard computer, but that Musk concedes that it possibly should have triggered (or been triggered) sooner: Musk: Time for AFTS to kick in "was pretty long," about "40 seconds-ish." On the other hand, rockets have blown up on the pad due to over-aggressive AFTS, so I would imagine the bounds were pretty loose for an initial test flight.