A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

SpaceX failure cause latest



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 23rd 15, 10:47 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,307
Default SpaceX failure cause latest

This week, SpaceX announced that the recent launch failure was most
likely caused by a failed strut holding the (a?) helium tank down. The
helium tanks are submerged inside the oxygen tanks on Falcon 9, so they
are actually buoyant. It failed at just over 3 g's, so it was actually
three times as buoyant as it was when sitting on the ground. SpaceX
reached the conclusion that a strut failed after testing thousands of
them.

http://nasawatch.com/archives/2015/0...-releases.html

From above:

There was no evidence of damage prior to launch from close-out
photos. The struts are not made in-house. The supplier was not
named. Musk said that they were able to replicate failure with
1000's of struts and they found a few that did not meet
specifications.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer
  #2  
Old July 23rd 15, 12:42 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Greg \(Strider\) Moore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 752
Default SpaceX failure cause latest

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

This week, SpaceX announced that the recent launch failure was most
likely caused by a failed strut holding the (a?) helium tank down. The
helium tanks are submerged inside the oxygen tanks on Falcon 9, so they
are actually buoyant. It failed at just over 3 g's, so it was actually
three times as buoyant as it was when sitting on the ground. SpaceX
reached the conclusion that a strut failed after testing thousands of
them.

http://nasawatch.com/archives/2015/0...-releases.html

From above:

There was no evidence of damage prior to launch from close-out
photos. The struts are not made in-house. The supplier was not
named. Musk said that they were able to replicate failure with
1000's of struts and they found a few that did not meet
specifications.


I had heard this, though not as much detail.

I've got to say such a failure is actually rather disturbing. I have to
wonder how many "a few" is.

If 3 out of 3000 failed, that's a .3% failure. That's surprisingly high in
my mind.



--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SpaceX and NASA Host Teleconference Today on SpaceX 2 Mission to Space Station Jeff Findley[_2_] Policy 5 March 4th 13 09:40 PM
Test Failure of SpaceX Merlin VTS1-221Engine [email protected] Policy 57 September 18th 05 11:14 PM
Failure ... Jon Berndt Space Shuttle 19 September 16th 03 06:10 AM
Another Failure bwhiting Amateur Astronomy 28 September 7th 03 09:58 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.