On Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 8:18:18 PM UTC+13, Rob wrote:
William Mook wrote:
On Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 12:30:13 AM UTC+13, Rob wrote:
William Mook wrote:
Well, I didn't read the conclusions you refer to, from the 'Youtube expert' you cite, so I don't know why this person you mention said what they did. I can only say why I said what I did.

I would expect that, when you are so interested in finding the cause
of the mishap, you would follow other people's attempts as well.

I have followed SpaceX's efforts quite closely and Scott Manley. I don't know this person you cite. You didn't name them nor give any links. Their idea must have been eliminated by the logic of my search algorithms - since I eliminated anything outside the body of the rocket as the cause.

I am surprised that you are not able to find this person yourself,

Why? I haven't looked.

given your acclaimed analytic capacity.

Who acclaims that? My ability to analyse is totally independent of knowing abut the person you are speaking of but not naming specifically.

Anyway, he is not Scott Manley

I didn't say he was. I said I like Scott Manley's review of events.

(who mainly describes what he sees and does not draw many conclusions),

Interesting judgement.

but he is active on the Youtube channel TechX.

So?

The helium sphere and detcord were early suspects for the reasons I've already stated. If it wasn't the FTS then its a big mystery as to why a helium sphere would fail like that. When the S-IVB-503 test detonated in 1967 due to helium sphere failure, it was due to poor welds. A composite over-wrapped helium tank doesn't have welds like that. So, the failure mode is unknown at the present time. Though the microscopic examination of the parts pretty much points to the helium spheres failing.

TechX shows that the center of the initial explosion was in the tower
(or strongback as they apparently call it at SpaceX)

That's not what the lens flare in the video of the explosion pointed to. Now, this may not be the originating event, only those with access to all the data are in a position to work that out.

and it was shrapnel
from the tower structure that pierced the tanks, maybe also the helium
tanks, leading to the major fuel explosion. Initial direction of the
explosion and shrapnel is not consistent with an explosion originating
inside the second stage.

I haven't seen that analysis

Musk himself hasn't ruled out sabotage.

http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-new...losion-n658821

So, its an ongoing investigation.

Sure it is.

Agreed.

But there are many people investigating and it seems like
a good idea to look at eachothers findings at least to get other ideas,
even if not agreeing with them.

Sure, but I haven't seen the analysis you're referring to so I can't comment on it.