News Changes to the SpaceX BFR rocket.

[steph]

I guess they're taking side-jobs from Micheal Bay now... ?

Oh well, can't have failed launches if it blows up before that

 

[Sunhillow]

 

[Thunder Chicken]

Never mind the fantasy of going to Mars, the hallucination of putting boots on the Moon again relies on on this thing not exploding. Artemis is dead dead dead.

 

[Urwumpe]

Never mind the fantasy of going to Mars, the hallucination of putting boots on the Moon again relies on on this thing not exploding. Artemis is dead dead dead.

Just give the Orion blueprints to Airbus Space....

 

[Thunder Chicken]

These reminds me of the AMOS-6 incident. I wonder if a header tank or line failed.

 

[Urwumpe]

These reminds me of the AMOS-6 incident. I wonder if a header tank or line failed.

Most likely since the origin is the nose cone. This was sure no Mossad action.

 

[GLS]

Never mind the fantasy of going to Mars, the hallucination of putting boots on the Moon again relies on on this thing not exploding. Artemis is dead dead dead.

Even if/when this thing goes up and comes back intact, the orbital refueling part is going to be... hmm, interesting, needing proximity ops and docking of 2 vessels with big, partially filled tanks. A thruster fires, propellant sloshes and changes the rotation of the vessel, which requires more thruster firings, causing more sloshing... and then the live video stops.

Turn this thing into a "regular" 2º stage, allowing this launch vehicle to put stuff into orbit. Replace the ISS and launch Gateway to LLO, make a refuel-able lunar lander (with a low c.g, not a building like this) to connect the Gateway to the surface, and refuel all this with a specifically-designed refueling vessel, that docks with full tanks, so no sloshing. Then, go to Mars, with a similar architecture and Aldrin cyclers.

 

[GLS]

Most likely since the origin is the nose cone. This was sure no Mossad action.

There is another set of tanks in there, used for the landing.

 

[Thunder Chicken]

Most likely since the origin is the nose cone. This was sure no Mossad action.

That's exactly what Mossad would want you to think.

 

[Urwumpe]

There is another set of tanks in there, used for the landing.

I know. Also there should be pressurization bottles near by, if I am not mistaken.

 

[diogom]

 

[Thunder Chicken]

View attachment 43872

It sounds like they just re-discovered stress rupture in COPVs.

 

[N_Molson]

N-1 style. A bit early for the 4th of July

 

[diogom]

It sounds like they just re-discovered stress rupture in COPVs.

Manufacturing fault that slipped maybe? Though this is also feeling a bit prescient:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1922148207242666266

 

[Thunder Chicken]

Manufacturing fault that slipped maybe?

Maybe. Any damage it ever suffered in its lifetime, whether pressurized or not, could also lead to an eventual failure. Composites don't fail like homogeneous materials do. Proofing the COPV once is not a guarantee that it won't ever fail at that load or less. They require regular hydraulic testing. I wonder if we're seeing the experimental determination of a failure tail in COPVs brought to light to SpaceXs utilization of lots of these types of tanks. I remember that they were worried about COPVs on the shuttle because they didn't have a reliable lifetime model for static burst failure. On the STS they basically concluded that since they didn't see any of the COPVs explode in practice, that that proved that the existing models were too conservative, and so they kept flying them.

 

[Frilock]

 

[diogom]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1935786283667771533

 

[Urwumpe]

Just needs a bit of paint.

 

[kuddel]

Yeah, that paint with a bit of concrete- and steel-structure beneath might be needed

 

[Thunder Chicken]

I'm not sure what they were testing but they probably shouldn't do that on the next mission.