Preferences

Important to note that it exploded "prior" to the planned test. That seems really really bad to me, and potentially even dangerous. It's one thing if a test fails -- tests are somewhat expected to fail occasionally. It's very very bad if it catastrophically fails before the test even starts.

The whole thing is a test. The risk of huge explosions starts when they load it with fuel, not when they fire the engines. There are risks even before that, like electrical fires or structural failures.
aqme28 OP
[flagged]
It's easy to make structures that don't fail: just make them 5x stronger than anticipated max loads.

Sadly, this would make a rocket too heavy to reach orbit. So they end up being 1.1x stronger than anticipated loads. And it's hard to exactly anticipate loads. Vibration can add to a peak load, and it's notoriously hard to model how much vibration might happen. SpaceX rockets are filled with cryogenic methane at -160C, which causes everything it touches to shrink which creates forces between the parts that get cold and the parts that don't. A rocket-sized tank contracts by inches, but has to be supported by the structure around it. A single support member that doesn't move the right way can cause a fracture. So it's actually a hard problem.

m4rtink
There are is a way[1] how to gate a spacecraft 5x stronger (basically on the level of battleship style steel plate) to orbit - and then to Titan and back. The propulsion method just has some unfortunate side effect when launching from earths surface. Still it should work just fine & might come in as a handy option handy in an emergency.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propuls...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footfall

Gareth321
It's clearly not the only way they know how to conduct tests, or none of their rockets would have ever left the pad.
nialv7
Something like this has also happened to Falcon 9 before.

This item has no comments currently.