5 ms·

Seems like fts failed and the booster is still floating in the sea right now.

skissane 2y ago
> Seems like fts failed and the booster is still floating in the sea right now. FTS is designed for flight termination, not sinking the booster after ocean soft touchdown. So if FTS detonation fails to terminate the flight sufficiently quickly, that counts as an FTS failure which FAA will require to be investigated as a safety mishap, grounding the launch vehicle in the meantime. But if FTS fails to sink the booster after ocean soft touchdown, it wasn’t designed to do that anyway, so I don’t think the FAA will consider it a “failure”. If the flight plan lists this outcome as a possibility, and SpaceX has a backup plan to respond to it, it isn’t a failure as far as the FAA is concerned.
- andrewflnr 2y ago
  Did they want to sink it? I'd think they want to recover it for investigation purposes.
  - AgentK20 2y ago
    There's likely minimal value to recovering it given how much telemetry they already have, plus having launched very similar boosters (test flights 5 and below, plus Starhopper) for a similar launch profile. Additionally, based on previous comments SpaceX engineers have made when towing an in-the-water booster back to land, making it safe for transport to active commercial waterways is a huge pain in the ass. There's also considerations to be made for protection of intellectual property: much harder for other companies to steal your trade secrets from the bottom of the gulf of mexico.
    - andrewflnr 2y ago
      Sad, but makes sense I guess.
    - adolph 2y ago
      They recovered the underwater remains of IFT4’s booster, or at least the business end. As I understand it, IFT4 landed in a relatively shallow area unlike IFT3, which was also in smaller pieces. https://spaceexplored.com/2024/09/23/spacex-recovers-flight-4-starship-booster-from-gulf-of-mexico/ https://spaceexplored.com/2024/09/23/spacex-recovers-flight-...
    - madaxe_again 2y ago
      I dunno, I’d be hauling them out and laying them on the beach next to boca chica like dead whales. We’ve gotta start our first spaceship graveyard somewhere.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > think they want to recover it for investigation purposes These are V1s. Not worth the effort.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
chasd00 2y ago
FTS wouldn’t have done much anyway. It basically cuts a slit down the length of the rocket and aerodynamics does the rest. FTS at splashdown would just cut it open, it would still be sitting there floating around albeit opened up like a butterflied pork chop.
fixprix 2y ago
Soft landings on the ocean never activated FTS. Same for Falcon. Better to sink big pieces than to spread a million little pieces in the ocean.

> Seems like fts failed and the booster is still floating in the sea right now. FTS is designed for flight termination, not sinking the booster after ocean soft touchdown. So if FTS detonation fails to terminate the flight sufficiently quickly, that counts as an FTS failure which FAA will require to be investigated as a safety mishap, grounding the launch vehicle in the meantime. But if FTS fails to sink the booster after ocean soft touchdown, it wasn’t designed to do that anyway, so I don’t think the FAA will consider it a “failure”. If the flight plan lists this outcome as a possibility, and SpaceX has a backup plan to respond to it, it isn’t a failure as far as the FAA is concerned.

andrewflnr 2y ago
Did they want to sink it? I'd think they want to recover it for investigation purposes.
- AgentK20 2y ago
  There's likely minimal value to recovering it given how much telemetry they already have, plus having launched very similar boosters (test flights 5 and below, plus Starhopper) for a similar launch profile. Additionally, based on previous comments SpaceX engineers have made when towing an in-the-water booster back to land, making it safe for transport to active commercial waterways is a huge pain in the ass. There's also considerations to be made for protection of intellectual property: much harder for other companies to steal your trade secrets from the bottom of the gulf of mexico.
  - andrewflnr 2y ago
    Sad, but makes sense I guess.
  - adolph 2y ago
    They recovered the underwater remains of IFT4’s booster, or at least the business end. As I understand it, IFT4 landed in a relatively shallow area unlike IFT3, which was also in smaller pieces. https://spaceexplored.com/2024/09/23/spacex-recovers-flight-4-starship-booster-from-gulf-of-mexico/ https://spaceexplored.com/2024/09/23/spacex-recovers-flight-...
  - madaxe_again 2y ago
    I dunno, I’d be hauling them out and laying them on the beach next to boca chica like dead whales. We’ve gotta start our first spaceship graveyard somewhere.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > think they want to recover it for investigation purposes These are V1s. Not worth the effort.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

chasd00 2y ago

FTS wouldn’t have done much anyway. It basically cuts a slit down the length of the rocket and aerodynamics does the rest. FTS at splashdown would just cut it open, it would still be sitting there floating around albeit opened up like a butterflied pork chop.

fixprix 2y ago

Soft landings on the ocean never activated FTS. Same for Falcon. Better to sink big pieces than to spread a million little pieces in the ocean.