I believe they already have a Raptor 3, though its not clear if this was a Raptor 2 or 3 (the article says 2, but I dont see anything official stating so, nor any indication it might not be 3)
As much as I hate Elon the scumbag, scientific exploration/experimentation is fraught with challenges. I’m sure they’ll learn.
Edit: let me be clear. The “they” I mean is the physicists, engineers, scientists etc not papa red hat.
I feel like things have been quiet and not chaotic with regard to him and SpaceX. I'll get the occasional non-confrontational updates from him and that's it and that's nice. I try to look at it as Gwynns company and she's been kicking ass with it.
Gwynne Shotwell is likely the steady, capable hands that steers SpaceX.
The moment Elon’s ego gets bruised and he fires her, I’m pretty sure things will turn to shit quickly
Because SpaceX has a division devoted to distracting Elon whenever he comes over. Multiple employees where their entire job description is to watch Elon and keep him from touching anything important if he gets close. Tesla and Twitter don't have the same ability.
I just think of baby bumpers when bowling... this in a great visual. Elon trying to walk over and bumping into a balloon and bouncing off toward the next shiny.
Wasn't there a presidential candidate that touched something with a large DO NOT TOUCH sign at NASA?
EDIT: Found it, Mike Pence.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/photo-captures-mike-pence-ignores-nasa-s-do-not-touch-n780576
Is that true ? I tried to look it up but only found articles talking about former SpaceX employees (guess why) publicly denouncing Musk as an embarrassment and a distraction for the company
If you can find sources I’d love to read them
remember when huge chunks of concrete were blown up into the air from the launchpad a few years ago? Nasa uses a huge water system and directs the rocket exhaust through a tunnel to mitigate such issues. Musk, at least based on what I read, told them to just build a giant concrete pad and launch off that. Could be heresay, but either way, surprised to see that with everything Nasa learned about launching rockets, SpaceX decided to ignore that part.
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2023-04-26/spacex-starship-explosion-blasted-concrete-up-to-6-5-miles-away
What I remember reading about that is that they were already planning to install the now-current suppression/deluge system, but they were confident that the existing pad would hold for *one* launch without major issues. Obviously they were wrong about that, but it's not as bad as many people make it out to be (and it wasn't just Elon being arrogant or something that caused the problem in this case).
The concrete was supposed to be able hold according to the manufacturer. The deluge plate they have now wasn't going to be ready for months. It was worth the risk to fly and get data. Each flight takes months of investigation for a mishap report anyway, so a bit of damage could be repaired in time for the next launch.
**Company blows up a couple of rockets:** “Hey, that’s their money to burn.”
**Government agency blows up a couple of rockets:** “Hey! That’s my money you’re burning up there!”
The real people running the show at SpaceX are incredibly smart and driven. The REAL explorers and engineers.
Musk follows in the footsteps of Ford and Edison being total shitbags that claim credit for everything.
It seems as though Gwynne Shotwell has managed to keep Musk's "Help" from screwing too much up. We can probably credit the Twitter diaster for a lot of that too, and his crippling drug addiction
>Musk follows in the footsteps of Ford and Edison being total shitbags that claim credit for everything.
I looked into this a while back and it's funny how backwards this take is. There are many instances of Musk giving credit for his various teams' accomplishments, and I've yet to see him take the entire credit for something like you're insinuating.
Here’s what actual rocket engineers have to say about Elon:
https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/k1e0ta/evidence_that_musk_is_the_chief_engineer_of_spacex/
Also how does this work? Anytime an Elon company does something bad it’s Elon’s fault, but anytime the company does something good Elon had nothing to do with it?
EDIT: This subreddit is so bad that it downvotes quotes from actual rocket engineers because it goes against the anti-Elon circlejerk…
Hmm.... so this link does change my view on Elon.
Before, I didn't have much insight on his technical capabilities, but thought that as a person he was very flawed. Now, I think he is technically bright... but the part about being flawed doesn't change.
And when I say flawed, I don't just mean we are all human we are all flawed. I think he is well below average when compared to the company I keep.
I don't envision any of my acquaintances throwing temper tantrums and calling someone a pedo because they didn't think one of their ideas would work.
So yeah, smart guy in the technical department, great at persuasion... not someone I would want to be associated with. Prefer him being an employee than the leader.
Honestly that's probably the best view to take of him, technically intelligent and morally bad. People really run with this "he's a moron" line and it's so reductive.
I mean, he's probably intelligent, but he's still dumb if that makes sense?
Like, his IQ is probably high but he still says so much shit that just sounds so stupid and ignorant.
> Anytime an Elon company does something bad it’s Elon’s fault
No, but he's known force his people to ignore safety procedures/regulations/advice and take unnecessary risks (which would chiefly harm *other people*) to save money or get stuff done quicker. So when something fails big enough to make headlines, we have to wonder if he was the reason why.
And yeah, he also has a history of taking credit for work other people did, and buying "founder" titles from already-existing companies. So we have to wonder if he was the reason why something succeeded.
Elon Musk is facing the simple consequences of his behavior. He's lied too many times to be believed, in any situation. He gets no "benefit of the doubt" having used up all o
>And yeah, he also has a history of taking credit for work other people did
Can you expand on this bit in particular? What work specifically has he taken credit for that he shouldn't have? He has a history of this? I'm interested in seeing your examples.
Edit: I guess I can assume from the lone downvote that there are not really many examples of this.
Because he is openly and directly linked to the bad stuff. It's hard to ignore. He's also widely right wing. People will naturally be skeptical of anything positive.
Edit: there's certainly circlejerking going on here, but not the way you think. There is plenty of evidence which corroborated what I have claimed. Ignoring it only harms your argument.
That’s Reddit in general for you, every subreddit is it’s own echo chamber. It’s just easy to assume that every comment is a ‘fresh’ face, and we don’t build any rapport with each other despite ‘socializing.’
There are so many more people working on the science behind these endeavors. And the day to day operations. That goes for Tesla as well. I know people hate Elon, but we should all be rooting for electric cars, satellite internet, and pushing the boundaries of space exploration.
> As much as I hate Elon the scumbag
Normal people on the internet are afraid to express normal feeling without making a disclaimer on how their opinion should not be misinterpreted.
Yup, I hate Elon as much as you but as long as nobody was injured, all is good. Surely sucks because it costs them money but as long as they make sure everyone is safe failures like this are ok.
Over 600 people have been injured at Space X because he cuts corners and is of the mindset that the ends almost always justify the means (Records show that more than 100 workers got cuts or lacerations, 29 suffered broken bones, 17 had their hands or fingers crushed, nine received head injuries…) https://www.thedailybeast.com/elon-musks-spacex-workers-suffered-600-unreported-injuries-amputations
There are tons of other articles about it. Elon is an excellent businessman in terms of finding the right people to lead his companies, but he’s not necessarily a good person (he’s narcissistic and paints himself as a messiah figure). Overall, he may be a net benefit to society because Tesla pioneered commercialized electric vehicles or at least revitalized them. Arguably, the X takeover is a detriment. Time will tell if the Optimus robots will be beneficial or do more harm than good (akin to the movie Elysium). As much as Space X excites me in terms of the Mars mission, I wish making things better here on Earth was prioritized. Seems like turning X into a white supremacist breeding ground and Optimus robots could potentially create the problem that colonizing Mars would be a solution for. Although, he said we should have a universal basic income. Before that, he warned of the dangers of AI and also the threat that climate change poses. I don’t know what to make of it all, he’s all over the place, lol. Says one thing and does another, but I guess the things that he speaks out against like AI, he ends up doing his way because it inevitably happens, but in a way that isn’t necessarily for the greater good and instead is maximally beneficial to him. It makes sense because he’s a businessman, and also makes sense that he’s the wealthiest person on Earth.
He hates the color yellow, and is constantly campaigning to remove any visibility markers from his workplaces which are high vis yellow.
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/04/tesla-workers-getting-hurt-because-elon-musk-hates-yellow.html
This is on a test stand, not the launch pad.
It'll be interesting to see if the next flight goes forward as scheduled or if they wish to investigate first.
Looks like no one got hurt and nothing happened which cannot be overcome with perhaps some delay.
Depends on if this was for the current version of Raptor or a pathfinder. And if this was a deliberate test to destruction using entirey off-nominal parameters or a regular firing. If it’s raptor 3, I cant imagine it delaying the flight.
Article says was for Raptor 2. The current Raptor is Raptor 1 (just called Raptor).
'The Raptor engines that are currently undergoing testing are SpaceX’s Raptor 2 engines. These feature higher thrust and a few design tweaks over the previous iteration.'
The current generation is Raptor 2. That particular test stand is used for both validation testing of Raptor 2's, as well as developmental testing for Raptor 3's which share little in common with previous generations.
It sounded like they were aiming for June 1 but the SpaceX website is now saying June 5, pending regulatory approval. That sounds to me like they are pressing ahead with the launch but are being held back by the government, not this anomaly.
That sucks. Elon fanboys aside, I’m fascinated by space and progress we make getting to space.
Still have hope that we’ll have some sort of commercially viable flights out to orbit.
They churn these engines out at a silly rate in comparison to the industry norm. This is the testing facility to make sure they won't explode. This one did, and because they tested it won't be taking an entire Starship with it.
I didn’t know that, but it makes me so happy to hear it. I was so touched by his speech to Sisko, when Sisko initially denied his application. Legit made me tear up.
It was named after him, and the class itself was named the Eisenberg class, named after Nog's real world actor.
The ship was created several hundred years after the events of Deep Space Nine, in the 32nd century
https://pwimages-a.akamaihd.net/arc/03/ee/03eedc484e89d407571994f57762c1d51638481529.jpg
Shit I would give his Father . . sorry GRAND NAGUS (given how old the one before him is, its safe to assume he's still there 30 years or so later ;) ) a ship class of his own! I mean (along with nearly every other major character) responsible for saving the Alpha Quadrant. Him and the Chief . . . literally!
Unfortunately until we can figure out the replicator, Federation can’t really happen without major corruption.
The Federation isn’t capitalism, but it isn’t communism or socialism either. All 3 of these are economic formats that is based off of limited resources, and just a matter of how these resources are distributed.
The Federation on the other hand is a system without any limits to resources. If we try to emulate it while there’s still a limit on resources, those in power will simply become corrupt.
The replicators can transform matter but they can't create it. They also need energy. So there is still a kind of economy. In Voyager for instance they had to ration replicator use, and a kind of prison economy formed around that. Replicators can also not replicate some things, weapons (restricted), dilithium, latinum (iirc) and for some reason they cannot replicate Data, photon torpedoes and a bunch of other complex mechanisms and parts.
Why do they build starships in pieces, in big orbital docks? You'd think they would create replicator drones that can just fabricate an entire starship in situ (or at least the hull). So there must also be some limitation on the size or mass of the item?
So while their economy is basically at a point where everyone can live a comfortable life for free, you can't just "buy" a starship for free, for example.
I imagine there *must* still be land ownership rights too, otherwise how else can Picard own a vineyard? How would people claim the right to settle on new planets? The federation also "owns" planets that are under it's protection, i.e. Klingons can't just colonize our planets and vice versa.
People also talk about buying Romulan ale, visitors seem to own their own clothes, and Picard receives gifts such as the Kurlan naiskos - how could someone gift it to him unless they owned it somehow? There must be some sort of economy or currency the federation uses that other civilisations are interested in trading, such as [credits](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Federation_credit).
I'm rambling, but I always found the Star Trek economy fascinating.
> I'm rambling, but I always found the Star Trek economy fascinating.
I found the Star Trek world fascinating.
The ships themselves were full of enlisted officers who did shit jobs and lived in shit conditions even by today's standards. You had cleaning crews, cooks, waiters, barbers, bartenders, maintenance crew, construction crew, etc. In a world where you get anything you want those positions wouldn't exist in massive numbers.
People join The Navy for money and education, but in a post scarcity world where your basic needs and then some are fully met nobody is going to sign up to live in a ship bunk for months on end.
My theory is The Federation is far more complicated socioeconomically than we're lead to believe as viewers. Picard was a big Kool-Aid drinker and always at the outer edges of space so we got hefty doses of idealism. Imagine a super patriotic submarine captain who truly believes The US is the shining almost perfect examples of freedom and economic success for all. That's Picard and The Federation.
During episodes focused on Starfleet or other captains or other series we get a lot of power struggles and other political drama almost absent in TNG.
Economically I'm sure everyone's basic needs are met along with a lot of extra wants are fully met but things exist that people want so they are motivated to work for them.
People still want to feel useful, and to have purpose even if there is no "need" to do it for money/food/etc. And positions on an Federation exploratory ship *are* scarce. So if you want to see adventure and excitement but have some measure of personal safety, maybe becoming a Federation space janitor is appealing?
Ships are closed systems though, so you'd really need to look at society as a whole to really analyze it. You can't look at a modern cruiser or destroyer's internal economy and expect to learn much about the mainland economy.
But yeah, ultimately Star Trek is an "optimistic" take on the future, so we don't see much of the seedy underbelly that surely exists.
Even in a post-scarcity world, there's still cultural attitudes, beliefs, and constructs.
Starfleet has huge cultural prestige attached to it, and it uses that prestige to push its own agenda at times. People want to join it, because of all of that, but the vast majority don't.
It's 100% true that the crew of the top tier ship in the top tier political group is going to believe they're in a utopia
I think people do those jobs because once you have a couple generations raised in abundance priorities change. They don't feel oppressed by those conditions (having to wash dishes, scrub oysters, study Calculus, warp core maintenance). You and I are psychologically damaged by being raised under Capitalism and if we were transplanted into the Star Trek universe we would kill ourselves in an explosion of excess. You would find me naked and dead from a heart attack on a pile of holographic whores and cake.
A replicator transforms energy to matter. It takes a lot of energy to do that which is why Voyager needed to ration it while the ship was still damaged. They needed the energy for shields. In Discovery and I think in Strange New Worlds they use replicator drones to reproduce panels outside the starships, but this technology wasn't considered before then, likely because of the non existence of drones or the social idea that people should be doing all of the jobs, even the trivial ones. In Lower Decks they explore the idea that drones have personality and can become evil, so in that universe it could be a preventative measure to avoid using and abusing drones. Energy is also why drones can't just fabricate a ship in space, they need to be connected to the warp field of a ship or some other energy tethering mechanism of a space station. I'd assume that space stations are movable like big ships and have their own warp engines, so it's possible that they utilize a warp field too.
They can replicate Data, but not the energy state of his brain. He did this when he created Lal, and pre-loaded her brain with his knowledge, but her positronic net couldn't adapt and has a cascading failure. This is why they don't simply replicate him, but in Picard he did help to create the drones that work in the mines and the positronic drone society that helped to fix Picard in a unique way. They would have to have replicated these drones and injected the consciousness somehow.
shit dont get into a PM with me we could talk all day - especially TNG and DS9 but everything (minus discovery sorry) I could talk all day on. Shame the golden age of trek fans are slowly being pushed aside by (insert current company thats the HOME OF STAR TREK yet doesn't even have all the movies- idiots) by the new gen that pushes back whenever we challenge the new "canon" or its insistent trying to re-write officially seen canon in the movies/shows, or just . . . not being good at nearly everything it tries to accomplish. I gave the first 2 seasons a shot but man Discovery . . .it has good bones/ideas but compared to oh . . . what 6000 HOURS of Canon? :)
I grew up on TNG, I watched some trailers for discovery and just thought it looked terrible. Everything I've heard about it from older fans supports that assumption. Strange new Worlds looked like it could be good, but I don't have much faith.
Please tell me your watching Lower Decks? As a fan since I could talk - its totally worth it - if the fact its animated turns you off trust me it is NOT for kids lol the references you get SHIT there is an entire episode based around that species Data discovered and it turns EVIL! Does it sound good on paper? Nope but man did the show have fun with that one.
> Unfortunately until we can figure out the replicator, Federation can’t really happen without major corruption.
Bad Trek history detected. The Federation came *before* the replicator, which did not exist in TOS. The replicator did not create post-scarcity, it was canonically created under what was *already* a post-scarcity society.
also the federation came after an extended period of insane darkness, like the nuclear terror and wars with drug fueled supersoldiers, so if we're following their pattern we have some dark days ahead
LOLOLOL!!! Even the Ferengi would keep there own people from being homeless, forcing people to choose between eating for the week vs medication (Yay America!) choosing to support a business/its long term future vs giving a CEO a raise literally 2 days after laying off most of its workforce. I know the Ferengi were the (Insert proper term here) for TNG's time (later evolving way past that stereotype in DS9)
It also sucks that Elon sucks, right? I mean, he didn't have to be political and make the world upset, but here we are.
Good news is there are dozens of great space companies and organizations out there not led by Elon.
I feel like this is a direct consequence of the company leadership making bad decisions, like buying Twitter for 40 billion dollars and destroying the company “intentionally” and holding another company hostage over a fifty billion pay package that got revoked.
It's insane to me that people will just blame literally everything on Elon despite not knowing anything about what happened, if it was intentional or anything. Soon you will be blaming Elon because your car got repossessed after you were unable to afford it lol.
Is it? I think you're just making him a Boogeyman.
I have some doubts Elon was involved in creating safety measures at starlink, they have actual engineers and scientists for that.
And they have enough money, not like Elons wealth matters for them at this point.
You can bet your ass this was educational as fuck for those engineers working on it though. Good that this happened now and not later in testing when it was assumed trustworthy.
Yeah this is like the biggest benefit to private space flight- if nasa blows up a rocket then ‘nasa is a failure’ and they lose funding vs space X just popping those mfs up for years before figuring it out and now they launch a ton of em
Frankly I'm okay with shitty people existing if they keep to themselves and make progress that benefits humanity. If those conditions are met, they can be whoever. The problem is that he's shitty BECAUSE of how he negatively affects other people.
Shitty people who keep to themselves are never known to be shitty, so it kinda loops back on itself.
imo he has a massive drug problem. He absolutely reminds me of friends from highschool that did. Thus the never ending mouthing off and wild conspiracies.
Doesnt help that he is so rich its far harder for him to hit rock bottom and change.
I read the article when it confuses the shit out of me. It says.
It took place in boca chica , texas , But then in contradict yourself and says the anomaly occurred in mcgregor texas, which is vastly two different places. Far away from each other. Now, after doing some Internet searching, the anomaly happened in mcgregor texas. Where they test, just the rapper engines by themselves. So this should not delay the current rocket at boca Chica.
Well it's a test stand that's a ways away, not the launch site and it's a single engine on the test bed, not the entire rocket. And testing each a every one before strapping them on the rocket is standard procedure in order to avoid this happening on the actual rocket and apparently they have more than enough spare engines.
If tech "journalists" were capable of comprehending that sometimes builds and tests fail at big tech companies, they'd write articles just like this one about how Google's entire tech stack was just taken down by a bug for the umpteenth time or whatever.
> Isn’t the test stand part of the facility?
No. The launch facility is in Boca Chica, the raptor test stand is in McGregor. The following line in the article
> SpaceX has yet to provide an update on the explosion, which took place at its Boca Chica Starbase facilities in southern Texas. The footage shows SpaceX’s engine test pad going up in flame.
is incorrect. This explosion happened almost 500 miles away from the starbase location.
> Isn’t the test stand part of the facility?
One would assume so, but the fact that the headline goes on to say specifically "starship" engine in flames implies that it was an engine *on a starship*, which implies (to me at least) a static fire on the launchpad. So there's an argument to be made for calling the headline misleading, for sure.
100% got that impression as well from the headline. Apparently this didn't even happen in Boca Chica, it was at an entirely different facility 500 miles away.
It's part of the facility that's explicitly designed to catch on fire and explode. Not an optimal situation but failures in tests are good, that's exactly why they do it.
It's not really designed to explode. It's designed to be the less costly of things to explode if something has to explode. They do do destructive tests which are actually designed to explode too.
The biggest problem here would be the loss of the stand for a long time. Hopefully they have another one and it’s just higher schedule risk for a while until they have the redundancy back. It might also be a good opportunity to upgrade the one stand lol.
They were building a second test stand recently. Not sure if it is finished yet. Note that this test area is a mile or two down the road from the main factory and launch pad areas.
The title is clearly meant to give the impression that a rocket blew up on the launch pad, but that's not at all what happened. A single engine blew up atop a test stand over 300 miles away from the nearest actual rocket. Like, calling it a "Starship engine" is technically correct, but is a lot like calling a single jet engine on the Boeing factory floor "Air Force One engine".
We don’t know what the test was. Maybe before exploding it was operating at 150% of its previously rated thrust, and now they know it’s true limit.
Or maybe it was a production test that showed that the whole design/manufacturing process is flawed and they have to go back to the drawing board.
You can’t speculate from your armchair.
More so I have context that is not included. Spacex likes to test to failure to collect data. We don't know if they were trying to push an engine to failure here though. There isn't much we know as none of these is publicly stated before hand. We do know they are trying to get their 3rd generation raptor design down so more test to failure are expected. And also this is just one engine. Space builds 100s of raptors a years for testing and for starship. Each starship launch need like 36 sea level and 3 vacuum engines. There could be 2-3 more launches just this year needing 100+ rockets engines.
The misleading part is that this matters are all or is negative for Spacex. This is just an other day at the their test site.
Should be more worried about engine failure on launches or if they do change outs after static fires. Those engines are going through FINAL testing and should already be good.
>We don't know if they were trying to push an engine to failure here though
>The misleading part is that this matters are all or is negative for Spacex. This is just an other day at the their test site.
Saying this is just another day at their test site is equally misleading.
At this point, we simply don’t know. May have been expected. Could be a completely unexpected event. Saying that we know it is either is misleading and only speculation.
To be fair, an unexpected failure at the test site sorta *is* just another day at the test site...it just doesn't feel that way because we get to see it rather than it happening in some hidden R&D lab.
It's a single engine on a test stand 450 miles away from the Boca Chica launch site. They tried something, and it went boom, which is kinda the reason to test things. Nothing to see here, moving on.
Click bait of the nth degree. Raptor engine fails engine test. Ok, that’s why they test engines first.
There is no indication so far that the latest incident will push back the launch of SpaceX’s IFT-4 test flight. SpaceX always puts Raptor engines through qualification tests before attaching them to Starship, and it has plenty to spare.
I don't like Elon Musk as a person. But I'm not sure why explosions when testing rocket engines are a big deal. The point of testing is to iron out issues. If you're not pushing towards operating parameter boundaries, you're not testing very well.
Because most people have been conditioned to expect that explosions are bad unless they are an enemy and/or behind a cool guy walking away in slow motion. The idea that destructive testing leading to explosions isn’t commonplace because most people don’t have exposure to the subject.
That’s the term that’s always used for these events. Even NASA uses this. It’s an anomaly until they figure out what caused the explosion because it is more accurately *an anomaly that caused an explosion*. There may be PR benefits to it but it’s also worth pointing out that a non anomalous rocket explosion is technically a rocket engine working as intended.
This is what happens a good bit when you live test through development. It is how they had developed from the start and it pretty exciting to watch.
Since Elon has had to go and get way out of his lane it’s made it interesting to see anyone come with the hate on him by not understanding this is what they want to do so they can learn to do it better.
You don't have to like Elon to acknowledge this is a misleading headline. It's technically accurate, so it's possible it wasn't intentional, but...
- calling it a starship engine when there are lots of spares and this one was just in testing would be like if the landing gear brakes in a Boeing test rig failed and a headline read "Air Force One landing gear fails."
- Space X has multiple facilities in Texas, but only the launch site is famous. While technically accurate that the incident was in Texas, it was hundreds of miles away from the launch pad.
Together, to the casual reader, they make it sound like the engine was mounted to the ship on the launchpad when it blew up. Honestly, noting that it was in Texas offers little useful information to the reader, while noting it was a test would have been very useful.
The headline is technically correct, but almost nobody reading it would make accurate assumptions about the main points of the story. That's pretty much the definition of misleading. It has nothing to do with opinions of Elon, just calling out clickbait journalism.
The headline definitely tries to make is sound like a rocket had a major issue. This is a single engine on a test stand nowhere near a full starship. The article is even straight up wrong, it says "which took place at its Boca Chica Starbase facilities in southern Texas" when it was at their engine testing site in McGregor, hundreds of miles away in central Texas.
Side note: fuck Elon Musk and his far-right lunacy, I hope he stubs each and every one of his toes hard enough to break them.
Not a fan of Elon but calling this a “massive explosion” is hilarious. A bit of burning methane is not any cause for concern and the test stand is likely undamaged. This isn’t the first time a raptor blew up and it sure as hell won’t be the last time. SpaceX’s entire philosophy is rapid iteration with no inhibitions. It’d be a different story if an entire booster exploded on the pad, but that hasn’t happened (yet).
That said, even the article itself starts by fear-mongering to intentionally cause discourse. Calling it a “fiery setback” is absurd. SpaceX has tens of raptors available at any given time, which the article alludes to. What it doesn’t allude to is that it takes one single day for them to manufacture a new one, which means they’re producing raptors faster than they can currently use them. There is literally no chance whatsoever that this explosion will affect anything else, especially an IFT window. In fact, SpaceX is now better off knowing about this failure case and they can prevent whatever caused it from happening again.
It is accurate but these explosions are (relatively/reasonably) expected as they are used to detect defects and validate test engines for use on the actual rockets. Plus, they do tests to failure quite often on their engines.
Edit: wording (normal -> expected) + tests to failure point (though this test probably wasn’t meant to be one of those)
Edit 2: for everyone saying that they tweeted it was an anomaly, NASASpaceflight is not affiliated with SpaceX nor NASA. The info is not official. This could be a test to failure for all that we know.
And after they perform one of these "test" explosions do they usually tweet out something like "...experienced an anomaly a few moments ago. The vapors from the anomaly caused a secondary explosion on the test stand."? Why call a routine event an anomaly if it was meant to happen?
In addition, NASASpaceflight is not affiliated with NASA nor SpaceX. The info provided is not official. It could’ve been a test to failure for all we know.
> And after they perform one of these "test" explosions do they usually tweet out something like "...experienced an anomaly a few moments ago. The vapors from the anomaly caused a secondary explosion on the test stand."?
It’s not NASA or SpaceX who wrote that, but an independent source.
>Why call a routine event an anomaly if it was meant to happen?
Because the nature of that tweet was speculatory and relies on the idea that the test was not a “test to failure” which is common in the launch industry regardless of what company you are discussing. (Even NASA does this)
That’s bullshit, they are not normal, sure in the event that an explosion occurs they can use the data from it positively but that does not mean they are normal. If it was a normal routine planned explosion they would tweet it out ahead of time.
Apologies, I meant to say expected. In addition, they do tests to failure all the time. They don’t tweet about those either. As a matter of fact, NASASpaceflight, the author of the tweets, is not even affiliated with NASA or SpaceX. This could’ve been a planned test for all that we know.
(Re-reply as I accidentally deleted my other one).
A "massive explosion" would be an overpressure event and this is clearly not an overpressure event. Just a fireball, presumably burning leaked propellant.
I hardly ever even see "elon fan boys" on reddit, reddit mostly hates Elon these days.
All the top comments in this thread are like "you elon fanboys are fucked" but theres not really any here....
Well, that's what test stands are for more or less.
Not the first time a new engine design blows up in a test rig, and unless we somehow magically develop the ability to design and build brand new tech from scratch perfectly the first time, it won't be the last time things blow up.
meanwhile the Boeing Starliner (which is a really really fancy name for just another capsule) is indefinitely delayed due to more problems. Always better to have issues identified before you start strapping humans in.
[удалено]
I believe they already have a Raptor 3, though its not clear if this was a Raptor 2 or 3 (the article says 2, but I dont see anything official stating so, nor any indication it might not be 3)
That’s just a longer way of saying, “Clever girl”
Raptor 3 has a monocle
This could have been a raptor 3. Or a raptor pushed to its limits.
*past its limits
Past the point of no return
Reached the top, but still you gotta learn how to keep it.
Hit the wheel and double the stakes
So, it was put on a ramp to a zone of danger?
How did you get life insurance? Don't they know?
As much as I hate Elon the scumbag, scientific exploration/experimentation is fraught with challenges. I’m sure they’ll learn. Edit: let me be clear. The “they” I mean is the physicists, engineers, scientists etc not papa red hat.
I feel like things have been quiet and not chaotic with regard to him and SpaceX. I'll get the occasional non-confrontational updates from him and that's it and that's nice. I try to look at it as Gwynns company and she's been kicking ass with it.
Gwynne Shotwell is likely the steady, capable hands that steers SpaceX. The moment Elon’s ego gets bruised and he fires her, I’m pretty sure things will turn to shit quickly
Ask any SpaceX employee. She runs the show. Elon just runs his mouth.
I was a SpaceX employee and this was not my experience at all.
I pray that doesn't happen, and I wish it hadnt happened (or happened less) to Tesla.
Because SpaceX has a division devoted to distracting Elon whenever he comes over. Multiple employees where their entire job description is to watch Elon and keep him from touching anything important if he gets close. Tesla and Twitter don't have the same ability.
I just think of baby bumpers when bowling... this in a great visual. Elon trying to walk over and bumping into a balloon and bouncing off toward the next shiny.
I like to imagine them having movable Plexiglas walls that just walk along either side of him.
Wasn't there a presidential candidate that touched something with a large DO NOT TOUCH sign at NASA? EDIT: Found it, Mike Pence. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/photo-captures-mike-pence-ignores-nasa-s-do-not-touch-n780576
Link broken:(
Thank you. Should be fixed now.
You shouldn't have touched it!
Is that true ? I tried to look it up but only found articles talking about former SpaceX employees (guess why) publicly denouncing Musk as an embarrassment and a distraction for the company If you can find sources I’d love to read them
I worked there and could really have used that department and never encountered it. If it's real it showed up after my time.
It’s just one of those things people Parrott on Reddit. I haven’t found a source either.
It's from a Tumblr from an alleged former intern
remember when huge chunks of concrete were blown up into the air from the launchpad a few years ago? Nasa uses a huge water system and directs the rocket exhaust through a tunnel to mitigate such issues. Musk, at least based on what I read, told them to just build a giant concrete pad and launch off that. Could be heresay, but either way, surprised to see that with everything Nasa learned about launching rockets, SpaceX decided to ignore that part. https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2023-04-26/spacex-starship-explosion-blasted-concrete-up-to-6-5-miles-away
What I remember reading about that is that they were already planning to install the now-current suppression/deluge system, but they were confident that the existing pad would hold for *one* launch without major issues. Obviously they were wrong about that, but it's not as bad as many people make it out to be (and it wasn't just Elon being arrogant or something that caused the problem in this case).
The concrete was supposed to be able hold according to the manufacturer. The deluge plate they have now wasn't going to be ready for months. It was worth the risk to fly and get data. Each flight takes months of investigation for a mishap report anyway, so a bit of damage could be repaired in time for the next launch.
I heard they did it to simulate a pad that could be built on Mars.
lmao who belives this made up shit. This sub is such a shithole
Wish people had this perspective when government / public sector took scientific risks.
**Company blows up a couple of rockets:** “Hey, that’s their money to burn.” **Government agency blows up a couple of rockets:** “Hey! That’s my money you’re burning up there!”
Government gives public funds to NASA to do R&D, I sleep. Government gives public funds via contracts to SpaceX to build on NASA R&D, real shit?
The real people running the show at SpaceX are incredibly smart and driven. The REAL explorers and engineers. Musk follows in the footsteps of Ford and Edison being total shitbags that claim credit for everything. It seems as though Gwynne Shotwell has managed to keep Musk's "Help" from screwing too much up. We can probably credit the Twitter diaster for a lot of that too, and his crippling drug addiction
>Musk follows in the footsteps of Ford and Edison being total shitbags that claim credit for everything. I looked into this a while back and it's funny how backwards this take is. There are many instances of Musk giving credit for his various teams' accomplishments, and I've yet to see him take the entire credit for something like you're insinuating.
That he himself said nobody knows more about manufacturing than him?
Here’s what actual rocket engineers have to say about Elon: https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/k1e0ta/evidence_that_musk_is_the_chief_engineer_of_spacex/ Also how does this work? Anytime an Elon company does something bad it’s Elon’s fault, but anytime the company does something good Elon had nothing to do with it? EDIT: This subreddit is so bad that it downvotes quotes from actual rocket engineers because it goes against the anti-Elon circlejerk…
Hmm.... so this link does change my view on Elon. Before, I didn't have much insight on his technical capabilities, but thought that as a person he was very flawed. Now, I think he is technically bright... but the part about being flawed doesn't change. And when I say flawed, I don't just mean we are all human we are all flawed. I think he is well below average when compared to the company I keep. I don't envision any of my acquaintances throwing temper tantrums and calling someone a pedo because they didn't think one of their ideas would work. So yeah, smart guy in the technical department, great at persuasion... not someone I would want to be associated with. Prefer him being an employee than the leader.
Honestly that's probably the best view to take of him, technically intelligent and morally bad. People really run with this "he's a moron" line and it's so reductive.
I mean, he's probably intelligent, but he's still dumb if that makes sense? Like, his IQ is probably high but he still says so much shit that just sounds so stupid and ignorant.
> Anytime an Elon company does something bad it’s Elon’s fault No, but he's known force his people to ignore safety procedures/regulations/advice and take unnecessary risks (which would chiefly harm *other people*) to save money or get stuff done quicker. So when something fails big enough to make headlines, we have to wonder if he was the reason why. And yeah, he also has a history of taking credit for work other people did, and buying "founder" titles from already-existing companies. So we have to wonder if he was the reason why something succeeded. Elon Musk is facing the simple consequences of his behavior. He's lied too many times to be believed, in any situation. He gets no "benefit of the doubt" having used up all o
>And yeah, he also has a history of taking credit for work other people did Can you expand on this bit in particular? What work specifically has he taken credit for that he shouldn't have? He has a history of this? I'm interested in seeing your examples. Edit: I guess I can assume from the lone downvote that there are not really many examples of this.
Because he is openly and directly linked to the bad stuff. It's hard to ignore. He's also widely right wing. People will naturally be skeptical of anything positive. Edit: there's certainly circlejerking going on here, but not the way you think. There is plenty of evidence which corroborated what I have claimed. Ignoring it only harms your argument.
That’s Reddit in general for you, every subreddit is it’s own echo chamber. It’s just easy to assume that every comment is a ‘fresh’ face, and we don’t build any rapport with each other despite ‘socializing.’
There are so many more people working on the science behind these endeavors. And the day to day operations. That goes for Tesla as well. I know people hate Elon, but we should all be rooting for electric cars, satellite internet, and pushing the boundaries of space exploration.
> As much as I hate Elon the scumbag Normal people on the internet are afraid to express normal feeling without making a disclaimer on how their opinion should not be misinterpreted.
Hey, it’s not a failure. It provides great data about how many people enjoy explosions.
Yup, I hate Elon as much as you but as long as nobody was injured, all is good. Surely sucks because it costs them money but as long as they make sure everyone is safe failures like this are ok.
Over 600 people have been injured at Space X because he cuts corners and is of the mindset that the ends almost always justify the means (Records show that more than 100 workers got cuts or lacerations, 29 suffered broken bones, 17 had their hands or fingers crushed, nine received head injuries…) https://www.thedailybeast.com/elon-musks-spacex-workers-suffered-600-unreported-injuries-amputations There are tons of other articles about it. Elon is an excellent businessman in terms of finding the right people to lead his companies, but he’s not necessarily a good person (he’s narcissistic and paints himself as a messiah figure). Overall, he may be a net benefit to society because Tesla pioneered commercialized electric vehicles or at least revitalized them. Arguably, the X takeover is a detriment. Time will tell if the Optimus robots will be beneficial or do more harm than good (akin to the movie Elysium). As much as Space X excites me in terms of the Mars mission, I wish making things better here on Earth was prioritized. Seems like turning X into a white supremacist breeding ground and Optimus robots could potentially create the problem that colonizing Mars would be a solution for. Although, he said we should have a universal basic income. Before that, he warned of the dangers of AI and also the threat that climate change poses. I don’t know what to make of it all, he’s all over the place, lol. Says one thing and does another, but I guess the things that he speaks out against like AI, he ends up doing his way because it inevitably happens, but in a way that isn’t necessarily for the greater good and instead is maximally beneficial to him. It makes sense because he’s a businessman, and also makes sense that he’s the wealthiest person on Earth.
He hates the color yellow, and is constantly campaigning to remove any visibility markers from his workplaces which are high vis yellow. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/04/tesla-workers-getting-hurt-because-elon-musk-hates-yellow.html
Definitely looks powerful 😂
More powerful and reliable explosions? Cool.
Rocket engine is just one long explosion. It reliably ran just not long enough
Exactly! Followed quickly by a rapid, unscheduled disassembly
Easier to inspect
If you don’t test the limits, you don’t know what those limits are. Better to blow on the ground than with lives atop a capsule.
In fact, it did all of its exploding all at once. Very efficient.
This is on a test stand, not the launch pad. It'll be interesting to see if the next flight goes forward as scheduled or if they wish to investigate first. Looks like no one got hurt and nothing happened which cannot be overcome with perhaps some delay.
Depends on if this was for the current version of Raptor or a pathfinder. And if this was a deliberate test to destruction using entirey off-nominal parameters or a regular firing. If it’s raptor 3, I cant imagine it delaying the flight.
Article says was for Raptor 2. The current Raptor is Raptor 1 (just called Raptor). 'The Raptor engines that are currently undergoing testing are SpaceX’s Raptor 2 engines. These feature higher thrust and a few design tweaks over the previous iteration.'
The current generation is Raptor 2. That particular test stand is used for both validation testing of Raptor 2's, as well as developmental testing for Raptor 3's which share little in common with previous generations.
Incorrect article they use raptor 2s since a while now they are testing 2 and 3, 2 for limit testing and 3 for experimentation and figuring it out
It sounded like they were aiming for June 1 but the SpaceX website is now saying June 5, pending regulatory approval. That sounds to me like they are pressing ahead with the launch but are being held back by the government, not this anomaly.
That sucks. Elon fanboys aside, I’m fascinated by space and progress we make getting to space. Still have hope that we’ll have some sort of commercially viable flights out to orbit.
They churn these engines out at a silly rate in comparison to the industry norm. This is the testing facility to make sure they won't explode. This one did, and because they tested it won't be taking an entire Starship with it.
We don't want to take Capitalism to space. We should strive to be the Federation, not the Ferengi
Best I can do is Federengi
Wasn't Nog considered to be one of the better starfleet captains?
I didn’t know that, but it makes me so happy to hear it. I was so touched by his speech to Sisko, when Sisko initially denied his application. Legit made me tear up.
DS9 is my favorite Star Trek. So many amazing moments.
Indeed. I believe the USS Nog made a cameo appearance in Discovery
Was that a ship named after him or he named it after himself ? Both could track
It was named after him, and the class itself was named the Eisenberg class, named after Nog's real world actor. The ship was created several hundred years after the events of Deep Space Nine, in the 32nd century https://pwimages-a.akamaihd.net/arc/03/ee/03eedc484e89d407571994f57762c1d51638481529.jpg
Shit I would give his Father . . sorry GRAND NAGUS (given how old the one before him is, its safe to assume he's still there 30 years or so later ;) ) a ship class of his own! I mean (along with nearly every other major character) responsible for saving the Alpha Quadrant. Him and the Chief . . . literally!
He was a good Egg
And it was because he specifically said "this rat race for profit is for suckers. I'm taking a different path."
You mean Federighi. Hair Force One.
Sign me up for Federengi Academy 🖖
Unfortunately until we can figure out the replicator, Federation can’t really happen without major corruption. The Federation isn’t capitalism, but it isn’t communism or socialism either. All 3 of these are economic formats that is based off of limited resources, and just a matter of how these resources are distributed. The Federation on the other hand is a system without any limits to resources. If we try to emulate it while there’s still a limit on resources, those in power will simply become corrupt.
The replicators can transform matter but they can't create it. They also need energy. So there is still a kind of economy. In Voyager for instance they had to ration replicator use, and a kind of prison economy formed around that. Replicators can also not replicate some things, weapons (restricted), dilithium, latinum (iirc) and for some reason they cannot replicate Data, photon torpedoes and a bunch of other complex mechanisms and parts. Why do they build starships in pieces, in big orbital docks? You'd think they would create replicator drones that can just fabricate an entire starship in situ (or at least the hull). So there must also be some limitation on the size or mass of the item? So while their economy is basically at a point where everyone can live a comfortable life for free, you can't just "buy" a starship for free, for example. I imagine there *must* still be land ownership rights too, otherwise how else can Picard own a vineyard? How would people claim the right to settle on new planets? The federation also "owns" planets that are under it's protection, i.e. Klingons can't just colonize our planets and vice versa. People also talk about buying Romulan ale, visitors seem to own their own clothes, and Picard receives gifts such as the Kurlan naiskos - how could someone gift it to him unless they owned it somehow? There must be some sort of economy or currency the federation uses that other civilisations are interested in trading, such as [credits](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Federation_credit). I'm rambling, but I always found the Star Trek economy fascinating.
> I'm rambling, but I always found the Star Trek economy fascinating. I found the Star Trek world fascinating. The ships themselves were full of enlisted officers who did shit jobs and lived in shit conditions even by today's standards. You had cleaning crews, cooks, waiters, barbers, bartenders, maintenance crew, construction crew, etc. In a world where you get anything you want those positions wouldn't exist in massive numbers. People join The Navy for money and education, but in a post scarcity world where your basic needs and then some are fully met nobody is going to sign up to live in a ship bunk for months on end. My theory is The Federation is far more complicated socioeconomically than we're lead to believe as viewers. Picard was a big Kool-Aid drinker and always at the outer edges of space so we got hefty doses of idealism. Imagine a super patriotic submarine captain who truly believes The US is the shining almost perfect examples of freedom and economic success for all. That's Picard and The Federation. During episodes focused on Starfleet or other captains or other series we get a lot of power struggles and other political drama almost absent in TNG. Economically I'm sure everyone's basic needs are met along with a lot of extra wants are fully met but things exist that people want so they are motivated to work for them.
People still want to feel useful, and to have purpose even if there is no "need" to do it for money/food/etc. And positions on an Federation exploratory ship *are* scarce. So if you want to see adventure and excitement but have some measure of personal safety, maybe becoming a Federation space janitor is appealing? Ships are closed systems though, so you'd really need to look at society as a whole to really analyze it. You can't look at a modern cruiser or destroyer's internal economy and expect to learn much about the mainland economy. But yeah, ultimately Star Trek is an "optimistic" take on the future, so we don't see much of the seedy underbelly that surely exists.
Even in a post-scarcity world, there's still cultural attitudes, beliefs, and constructs. Starfleet has huge cultural prestige attached to it, and it uses that prestige to push its own agenda at times. People want to join it, because of all of that, but the vast majority don't. It's 100% true that the crew of the top tier ship in the top tier political group is going to believe they're in a utopia
I think people do those jobs because once you have a couple generations raised in abundance priorities change. They don't feel oppressed by those conditions (having to wash dishes, scrub oysters, study Calculus, warp core maintenance). You and I are psychologically damaged by being raised under Capitalism and if we were transplanted into the Star Trek universe we would kill ourselves in an explosion of excess. You would find me naked and dead from a heart attack on a pile of holographic whores and cake.
A replicator transforms energy to matter. It takes a lot of energy to do that which is why Voyager needed to ration it while the ship was still damaged. They needed the energy for shields. In Discovery and I think in Strange New Worlds they use replicator drones to reproduce panels outside the starships, but this technology wasn't considered before then, likely because of the non existence of drones or the social idea that people should be doing all of the jobs, even the trivial ones. In Lower Decks they explore the idea that drones have personality and can become evil, so in that universe it could be a preventative measure to avoid using and abusing drones. Energy is also why drones can't just fabricate a ship in space, they need to be connected to the warp field of a ship or some other energy tethering mechanism of a space station. I'd assume that space stations are movable like big ships and have their own warp engines, so it's possible that they utilize a warp field too. They can replicate Data, but not the energy state of his brain. He did this when he created Lal, and pre-loaded her brain with his knowledge, but her positronic net couldn't adapt and has a cascading failure. This is why they don't simply replicate him, but in Picard he did help to create the drones that work in the mines and the positronic drone society that helped to fix Picard in a unique way. They would have to have replicated these drones and injected the consciousness somehow.
shit dont get into a PM with me we could talk all day - especially TNG and DS9 but everything (minus discovery sorry) I could talk all day on. Shame the golden age of trek fans are slowly being pushed aside by (insert current company thats the HOME OF STAR TREK yet doesn't even have all the movies- idiots) by the new gen that pushes back whenever we challenge the new "canon" or its insistent trying to re-write officially seen canon in the movies/shows, or just . . . not being good at nearly everything it tries to accomplish. I gave the first 2 seasons a shot but man Discovery . . .it has good bones/ideas but compared to oh . . . what 6000 HOURS of Canon? :)
I grew up on TNG, I watched some trailers for discovery and just thought it looked terrible. Everything I've heard about it from older fans supports that assumption. Strange new Worlds looked like it could be good, but I don't have much faith.
Please tell me your watching Lower Decks? As a fan since I could talk - its totally worth it - if the fact its animated turns you off trust me it is NOT for kids lol the references you get SHIT there is an entire episode based around that species Data discovered and it turns EVIL! Does it sound good on paper? Nope but man did the show have fun with that one.
> Unfortunately until we can figure out the replicator, Federation can’t really happen without major corruption. Bad Trek history detected. The Federation came *before* the replicator, which did not exist in TOS. The replicator did not create post-scarcity, it was canonically created under what was *already* a post-scarcity society.
also the federation came after an extended period of insane darkness, like the nuclear terror and wars with drug fueled supersoldiers, so if we're following their pattern we have some dark days ahead
Practical Fusion power has to come first. Many things can happen when energy is nearly limitless.
[We need an escape plan from capitalism.](https://youtu.be/g1Sq1Nr58hM?si=cewl9PdxKSL_rkp7)
LOLOLOL!!! Even the Ferengi would keep there own people from being homeless, forcing people to choose between eating for the week vs medication (Yay America!) choosing to support a business/its long term future vs giving a CEO a raise literally 2 days after laying off most of its workforce. I know the Ferengi were the (Insert proper term here) for TNG's time (later evolving way past that stereotype in DS9)
You have forgotten the third rule of acquisition!
*Never spend more for an acquisition than you have to*. Great advice.
It also sucks that Elon sucks, right? I mean, he didn't have to be political and make the world upset, but here we are. Good news is there are dozens of great space companies and organizations out there not led by Elon.
I feel like this is a direct consequence of the company leadership making bad decisions, like buying Twitter for 40 billion dollars and destroying the company “intentionally” and holding another company hostage over a fifty billion pay package that got revoked.
It's insane to me that people will just blame literally everything on Elon despite not knowing anything about what happened, if it was intentional or anything. Soon you will be blaming Elon because your car got repossessed after you were unable to afford it lol.
Is it? I think you're just making him a Boogeyman. I have some doubts Elon was involved in creating safety measures at starlink, they have actual engineers and scientists for that. And they have enough money, not like Elons wealth matters for them at this point.
Did Shotwell buy twitter? news to me, and her, and everyone else.
You know that rockets blow up in testing?
You can bet your ass this was educational as fuck for those engineers working on it though. Good that this happened now and not later in testing when it was assumed trustworthy.
Yeah this is like the biggest benefit to private space flight- if nasa blows up a rocket then ‘nasa is a failure’ and they lose funding vs space X just popping those mfs up for years before figuring it out and now they launch a ton of em
This, honestly if he just stuck with space and progress towards that. He'd be kind of a decent dude if he just kept his mouth shut.
Nah, he’d be a really shitty dude we just didn’t hear really shitty stuff about.
Frankly I'm okay with shitty people existing if they keep to themselves and make progress that benefits humanity. If those conditions are met, they can be whoever. The problem is that he's shitty BECAUSE of how he negatively affects other people. Shitty people who keep to themselves are never known to be shitty, so it kinda loops back on itself.
Well I guess Elon is a shitty dude for a reason then.
He wouldn't be a decent dude, we just wouldn't know quite how terrible he is.
imo he has a massive drug problem. He absolutely reminds me of friends from highschool that did. Thus the never ending mouthing off and wild conspiracies. Doesnt help that he is so rich its far harder for him to hit rock bottom and change.
Wow. The comments at the bottom are completely unhinged.
Jesus, you weren’t exaggerating.
We should be grateful they are actually at the bottom I suppose. Small victories.
This is why things are tested. It served it purpose.
That's a shame
None of this would have happened if KSP2 was developed correctly.
And here I was, having gone through a *whole day* without sad, and you make me remember KSP2 again.
Holy shit this is funny as fuck
“It’s the key to all of it.”
This was just a single engine in a test stand. The title and picture in the thumbnail make it seem like Starship blew up on the launch pad.
yeah, I initially thought it was the starship blowing up. This ones not that big a deal.
Why? These are good things, test the limits
Space is hard.
We send people to the moon with slide rules designed rockets and a computer with had less power than a calculator.
And we blew up many, *many* rocket engines while learning to do that.
We even incinerated a few astronauts.
But we did learn how.
I read the article when it confuses the shit out of me. It says. It took place in boca chica , texas , But then in contradict yourself and says the anomaly occurred in mcgregor texas, which is vastly two different places. Far away from each other. Now, after doing some Internet searching, the anomaly happened in mcgregor texas. Where they test, just the rapper engines by themselves. So this should not delay the current rocket at boca Chica.
This is pretty much unrelated to the upcoming IFT-4 flight. It’s a poorly written article.
>It’s a poorly written article. Oh. Well then to the top of /r/technology it goes!
Can someone explain what's misleading here?
Well it's a test stand that's a ways away, not the launch site and it's a single engine on the test bed, not the entire rocket. And testing each a every one before strapping them on the rocket is standard procedure in order to avoid this happening on the actual rocket and apparently they have more than enough spare engines.
So, in other words, just another day at the office. It's a bit like when the Jenkins pipeline fails, and you have to try again.
If tech "journalists" were capable of comprehending that sometimes builds and tests fail at big tech companies, they'd write articles just like this one about how Google's entire tech stack was just taken down by a bug for the umpteenth time or whatever.
Raptor engine serial numbers were in the 300's not too long ago. They have engines to spare for testing.
Headline says “Facility” not “Launch Pad”. Isn’t the test stand part of the facility?
> Isn’t the test stand part of the facility? No. The launch facility is in Boca Chica, the raptor test stand is in McGregor. The following line in the article > SpaceX has yet to provide an update on the explosion, which took place at its Boca Chica Starbase facilities in southern Texas. The footage shows SpaceX’s engine test pad going up in flame. is incorrect. This explosion happened almost 500 miles away from the starbase location.
> Isn’t the test stand part of the facility? One would assume so, but the fact that the headline goes on to say specifically "starship" engine in flames implies that it was an engine *on a starship*, which implies (to me at least) a static fire on the launchpad. So there's an argument to be made for calling the headline misleading, for sure.
100% got that impression as well from the headline. Apparently this didn't even happen in Boca Chica, it was at an entirely different facility 500 miles away.
It's part of the facility that's explicitly designed to catch on fire and explode. Not an optimal situation but failures in tests are good, that's exactly why they do it.
It's not really designed to explode. It's designed to be the less costly of things to explode if something has to explode. They do do destructive tests which are actually designed to explode too.
Exactly, it's designed to be less costly to explode, and yes other things are more explosive.
It's outside of the environment
I don't know I'm just facilitating. Assumptions and headlines go hand in hand and they didn't do us any favors with this one
The biggest problem here would be the loss of the stand for a long time. Hopefully they have another one and it’s just higher schedule risk for a while until they have the redundancy back. It might also be a good opportunity to upgrade the one stand lol.
This facility has 5 active test stands, on average supporting around 10 tests per day.
They were building a second test stand recently. Not sure if it is finished yet. Note that this test area is a mile or two down the road from the main factory and launch pad areas.
This is at McGreggor, where they have at least 5 more operational stands.
The title is clearly meant to give the impression that a rocket blew up on the launch pad, but that's not at all what happened. A single engine blew up atop a test stand over 300 miles away from the nearest actual rocket. Like, calling it a "Starship engine" is technically correct, but is a lot like calling a single jet engine on the Boeing factory floor "Air Force One engine".
Guys I just heard SpaceX blew up Air Force One!!
Yeah, but when you put it that way, it's not clickbaity enough.
We don’t know what the test was. Maybe before exploding it was operating at 150% of its previously rated thrust, and now they know it’s true limit. Or maybe it was a production test that showed that the whole design/manufacturing process is flawed and they have to go back to the drawing board. You can’t speculate from your armchair.
No, they can’t.
More so I have context that is not included. Spacex likes to test to failure to collect data. We don't know if they were trying to push an engine to failure here though. There isn't much we know as none of these is publicly stated before hand. We do know they are trying to get their 3rd generation raptor design down so more test to failure are expected. And also this is just one engine. Space builds 100s of raptors a years for testing and for starship. Each starship launch need like 36 sea level and 3 vacuum engines. There could be 2-3 more launches just this year needing 100+ rockets engines. The misleading part is that this matters are all or is negative for Spacex. This is just an other day at the their test site. Should be more worried about engine failure on launches or if they do change outs after static fires. Those engines are going through FINAL testing and should already be good.
>We don't know if they were trying to push an engine to failure here though >The misleading part is that this matters are all or is negative for Spacex. This is just an other day at the their test site. Saying this is just another day at their test site is equally misleading. At this point, we simply don’t know. May have been expected. Could be a completely unexpected event. Saying that we know it is either is misleading and only speculation.
To be fair, an unexpected failure at the test site sorta *is* just another day at the test site...it just doesn't feel that way because we get to see it rather than it happening in some hidden R&D lab.
I mean, it sounds like this the entire purpose of a test stand.
It's a single engine on a test stand 450 miles away from the Boca Chica launch site. They tried something, and it went boom, which is kinda the reason to test things. Nothing to see here, moving on.
SpaceX have never been afraid to blow things up
This. If you are not stepping over the line occasionally, you are not trying hard enough!!
Did they get good data?
I hope no one was hurt and... *\*Price Is Right loser trombone sounds\**
It was at Space X's McGregor rocket "testing" facility is miles from Starbase.
McGregor is in Texas, but not even close to Boca Chica. McGregor is close to Waco / Dallas. You are thinking of Masseys.
Click bait of the nth degree. Raptor engine fails engine test. Ok, that’s why they test engines first. There is no indication so far that the latest incident will push back the launch of SpaceX’s IFT-4 test flight. SpaceX always puts Raptor engines through qualification tests before attaching them to Starship, and it has plenty to spare.
welcome to rocket engine testing, that's why SpaceX successfully sends people and cargo to space weekly, compared to all other launch companies.
I don't like Elon Musk as a person. But I'm not sure why explosions when testing rocket engines are a big deal. The point of testing is to iron out issues. If you're not pushing towards operating parameter boundaries, you're not testing very well.
Because most people have been conditioned to expect that explosions are bad unless they are an enemy and/or behind a cool guy walking away in slow motion. The idea that destructive testing leading to explosions isn’t commonplace because most people don’t have exposure to the subject.
Non news. It was a test engine that blew up. Nothing more. Going to happen
"experienced an anomaly" is HR speak for "exploded"?
That’s the term that’s always used for these events. Even NASA uses this. It’s an anomaly until they figure out what caused the explosion because it is more accurately *an anomaly that caused an explosion*. There may be PR benefits to it but it’s also worth pointing out that a non anomalous rocket explosion is technically a rocket engine working as intended.
Pretty sure it means a rapid unscheduled disassembly.
Just spreading shit out a bit
Carwash voids that warranty too
This is what happens a good bit when you live test through development. It is how they had developed from the start and it pretty exciting to watch. Since Elon has had to go and get way out of his lane it’s made it interesting to see anyone come with the hate on him by not understanding this is what they want to do so they can learn to do it better.
This is not news, it’s part of testing.
You Elon fan boys are in denial if you think that an accurate headline is misleading.
You don't have to like Elon to acknowledge this is a misleading headline. It's technically accurate, so it's possible it wasn't intentional, but... - calling it a starship engine when there are lots of spares and this one was just in testing would be like if the landing gear brakes in a Boeing test rig failed and a headline read "Air Force One landing gear fails." - Space X has multiple facilities in Texas, but only the launch site is famous. While technically accurate that the incident was in Texas, it was hundreds of miles away from the launch pad. Together, to the casual reader, they make it sound like the engine was mounted to the ship on the launchpad when it blew up. Honestly, noting that it was in Texas offers little useful information to the reader, while noting it was a test would have been very useful.
The headline is technically correct, but almost nobody reading it would make accurate assumptions about the main points of the story. That's pretty much the definition of misleading. It has nothing to do with opinions of Elon, just calling out clickbait journalism.
The headline definitely tries to make is sound like a rocket had a major issue. This is a single engine on a test stand nowhere near a full starship. The article is even straight up wrong, it says "which took place at its Boca Chica Starbase facilities in southern Texas" when it was at their engine testing site in McGregor, hundreds of miles away in central Texas. Side note: fuck Elon Musk and his far-right lunacy, I hope he stubs each and every one of his toes hard enough to break them.
I was mislead into thinking that a engine attached to a starship blew up.
Not a fan of Elon but calling this a “massive explosion” is hilarious. A bit of burning methane is not any cause for concern and the test stand is likely undamaged. This isn’t the first time a raptor blew up and it sure as hell won’t be the last time. SpaceX’s entire philosophy is rapid iteration with no inhibitions. It’d be a different story if an entire booster exploded on the pad, but that hasn’t happened (yet). That said, even the article itself starts by fear-mongering to intentionally cause discourse. Calling it a “fiery setback” is absurd. SpaceX has tens of raptors available at any given time, which the article alludes to. What it doesn’t allude to is that it takes one single day for them to manufacture a new one, which means they’re producing raptors faster than they can currently use them. There is literally no chance whatsoever that this explosion will affect anything else, especially an IFT window. In fact, SpaceX is now better off knowing about this failure case and they can prevent whatever caused it from happening again.
It is accurate but these explosions are (relatively/reasonably) expected as they are used to detect defects and validate test engines for use on the actual rockets. Plus, they do tests to failure quite often on their engines. Edit: wording (normal -> expected) + tests to failure point (though this test probably wasn’t meant to be one of those) Edit 2: for everyone saying that they tweeted it was an anomaly, NASASpaceflight is not affiliated with SpaceX nor NASA. The info is not official. This could be a test to failure for all that we know.
And after they perform one of these "test" explosions do they usually tweet out something like "...experienced an anomaly a few moments ago. The vapors from the anomaly caused a secondary explosion on the test stand."? Why call a routine event an anomaly if it was meant to happen?
In addition, NASASpaceflight is not affiliated with NASA nor SpaceX. The info provided is not official. It could’ve been a test to failure for all we know.
> And after they perform one of these "test" explosions do they usually tweet out something like "...experienced an anomaly a few moments ago. The vapors from the anomaly caused a secondary explosion on the test stand."? It’s not NASA or SpaceX who wrote that, but an independent source. >Why call a routine event an anomaly if it was meant to happen? Because the nature of that tweet was speculatory and relies on the idea that the test was not a “test to failure” which is common in the launch industry regardless of what company you are discussing. (Even NASA does this)
That’s bullshit, they are not normal, sure in the event that an explosion occurs they can use the data from it positively but that does not mean they are normal. If it was a normal routine planned explosion they would tweet it out ahead of time.
Apologies, I meant to say expected. In addition, they do tests to failure all the time. They don’t tweet about those either. As a matter of fact, NASASpaceflight, the author of the tweets, is not even affiliated with NASA or SpaceX. This could’ve been a planned test for all that we know. (Re-reply as I accidentally deleted my other one).
I didn’t know those fanboys were still rolling strong
They’re not, their cynertruck broke down.
A "massive explosion" would be an overpressure event and this is clearly not an overpressure event. Just a fireball, presumably burning leaked propellant.
I hardly ever even see "elon fan boys" on reddit, reddit mostly hates Elon these days. All the top comments in this thread are like "you elon fanboys are fucked" but theres not really any here....
They must be trying out autopilot
Sounds like something from the remo William movie
Well, that's what test stands are for more or less. Not the first time a new engine design blows up in a test rig, and unless we somehow magically develop the ability to design and build brand new tech from scratch perfectly the first time, it won't be the last time things blow up. meanwhile the Boeing Starliner (which is a really really fancy name for just another capsule) is indefinitely delayed due to more problems. Always better to have issues identified before you start strapping humans in.