User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:25:01 AM EDT
[#1]
Rattled the windows at the Station. We all went " WTF was THAT!" My medic went outside to look around, but it was across the lagoon....
My regular Firefighter was on a tractor on the Space Center mowing, his part time job. He got rocked.... 
Well, that's going to set them back a day or two.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:25:15 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:  Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I wonder what kind of dirt that rocket had on HRC.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:25:27 AM EDT
[#3]
"SpaceX can confirm that in preparation for today's static fire, there
was an anomaly on the pad resulting in the loss of the vehicle and its payload. Per standard procedure, the pad was clear and there were no injuries." |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:25:29 AM EDT
[#4]
Damn, I'm really rooting for SpaceX. This will really put a question mark on the viability of re-use rockets. However, without failure, exceptional gains in knowledge can't be gained.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:25:36 AM EDT
[#5]
Do we know for sure what pad this was on? I'm assuming LC40 not LC39A?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:27:05 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryChallenge for you. Located video of the first stage a short period before and after the explosion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:27:31 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Isn't this a re-use? If so, that really sucks. Even more, I mean. Nope, don't believe this was the re-fly mission. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:29:22 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"SpaceX can confirm that in preparation for today's static fire, there was an anomaly on the pad resulting in the loss of the vehicle and its payload. Per standard procedure, the pad was clear and there were no injuries." I will await secondary confirmation that the payload was attached. My thought was that the payload and possibly second stage were attached after the first stage test firing. Yes I could be wrong. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:29:35 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Do we know for sure what pad this was on? I'm assuming LC40 not LC39A? SLC-40 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:30:10 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"SpaceX can confirm that in preparation for today's static fire, there was an anomaly on the pad resulting in the loss of the vehicle and its payload. Per standard procedure, the pad was clear and there were no injuries." And it's payload? Well shit, so much for the early reports, lost entire rocket, playload and damaged pad. Not good, the rocket alone is over 60 million, the satellites are usually in the same ballpark, the launch pad may be cheaper though, I'm guessing 150-200 million in losses. Glad I'm not their insurer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:31:10 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: SLC-40 Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Do we know for sure what pad this was on? I'm assuming LC40 not LC39A? SLC-40 Thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:32:39 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1. AMOS and second stage were NOT integrated2. Explosion occurred at T-3 minutes3. T/E is still standing4. Explosion appears fairly localized5. No reported casualties T-3min means it probably wasn't a rocket issue but a fueling issue. Source: I am a 1995 Space Camp graduate |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:32:58 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And it's payload? Well shit, so much for the early reports, lost entire rocket, playload and damaged pad. Not good, the rocket alone is over 60 million, the satellites are usually in the same ballpark, the launch pad may be cheaper though, I'm guessing 150-200 million in losses. Glad I'm not their insurer. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
"SpaceX can confirm that in preparation for today's static fire, there was an anomaly on the pad resulting in the loss of the vehicle and its payload. Per standard procedure, the pad was clear and there were no injuries." And it's payload? Well shit, so much for the early reports, lost entire rocket, playload and damaged pad. Not good, the rocket alone is over 60 million, the satellites are usually in the same ballpark, the launch pad may be cheaper though, I'm guessing 150-200 million in losses. Glad I'm not their insurer. I doubt any company would write policy would they? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:33:21 AM EDT
[#14]
I bet somebody left it in Luducius Mode during the test and a Merlin got stuck in a hyper loop. This lead to this rocket not loving the barge.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:33:36 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryDamn they blew up half of Florida. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:34:07 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do we know for sure what pad this was on? I'm assuming LC40 not LC39A? Launch window: 0700-0900 GMT (3:00-5:00 a.m. EDT) Launch site: SLC-40, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the Amos 6 communications satellite for Spacecom of Israel. Amos 6 will provide communications and broadcast services over a coverage area stretching from the U.S. Coast to Europe, Africa and the Middle East. Amos 6 will also support the Israeli government’s satellite communications needs. Source Why are people thinking it was a Facebook payload. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:34:22 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I doubt any company would write policy would they? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: "SpaceX can confirm that in preparation for today's static fire, there was an anomaly on the pad resulting in the loss of the vehicle and its payload. Per standard procedure, the pad was clear and there were no injuries." And it's payload? Well shit, so much for the early reports, lost entire rocket, playload and damaged pad. Not good, the rocket alone is over 60 million, the satellites are usually in the same ballpark, the launch pad may be cheaper though, I'm guessing 150-200 million in losses. Glad I'm not their insurer. I doubt any company would write policy would they? All of these launches are insured and are a big part of the launch cost. There has been a lot of debate on how reused boosters will be insured because it had never been done before. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:34:24 AM EDT
[#18]
PIXELS or Contact ?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:35:01 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I doubt any company would write policy would they? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
"SpaceX can confirm that in preparation for today's static fire, there was an anomaly on the pad resulting in the loss of the vehicle and its payload. Per standard procedure, the pad was clear and there were no injuries." And it's payload? Well shit, so much for the early reports, lost entire rocket, playload and damaged pad. Not good, the rocket alone is over 60 million, the satellites are usually in the same ballpark, the launch pad may be cheaper though, I'm guessing 150-200 million in losses. Glad I'm not their insurer. I doubt any company would write policy would they? it is a real thing |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:35:09 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Damn they blew up half of Florida. Quote HistoryDoes this mean I'm haunting GD? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:38:23 AM EDT
[#21]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:43:01 AM EDT
[#22]
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:43:59 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sad for SpaceX, but fuck Facebook. +1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:44:14 AM EDT
[#24]
SpaceX has confirmed the loss of both the Falcon 9 rocket and its $200 million payload in today’s explosion at the launch pad. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:45:26 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote Historysnippage
Without getting into why I know its a reuse, lets just go ahead and agree with me for the time being. Information coming in right now is that its a reuse. My SWAG is you may be part of some security somewhere in Florida <cough> Canaveral <cough> As an aside, I have to wonder: who's Zuckerberg's target market for Book of Faces in sub-Saharan Africa? South Africa and Nigeria? I can't see a lot of demand for the Zuck in Burkina Faso or Swaziland. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:45:32 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I will await secondary confirmation that the payload was attached. My thought was that the payload and possibly second stage were attached after the first stage test firing. Yes I could be wrong. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: "SpaceX can confirm that in preparation for today's static fire, there was an anomaly on the pad resulting in the loss of the vehicle and its payload. Per standard procedure, the pad was clear and there were no injuries." I will await secondary confirmation that the payload was attached. My thought was that the payload and possibly second stage were attached after the first stage test firing. Yes I could be wrong. Peter B. de Selding ?@pbdes 13 minutes ago Spacecom of Israel confirms its Amos-6 satellite was in fact on board the Falcon 9 that exploded during static test today. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:45:43 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistorySpaceX has confirmed the loss of both the Falcon 9 rocket and its $200 million payload in today’s explosion at the launch pad. Ouch. That'll cause premiums to go up a bit. Hopefully we can see a quick return to flight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:46:44 AM EDT
[#28]
lol
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:46:48 AM EDT
[#29]
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:47:06 AM EDT
[#30]
Per radio chatter: large debris on pad A road. EOD called to check and remove.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:47:30 AM EDT
[#31]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:47:46 AM EDT
[#32]
Good point, how much does it cost to hang a bird and just to service that part of the world, hmmm, NSA?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:48:03 AM EDT
[#33]
So something happened that popped the rocket with the Israeli satcom payload on it? I get that rockets are finicky creatures, but that seems a little fucky.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:50:29 AM EDT
[#34]
Shit, I was hoping to go to Mars this year for vacay
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:50:31 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryThat was some interval after the first explosion. I wonder if that was an explosion of storage tanks. Or maybe the second stage if the first stage was involved in the first explosion. At this point, I have no idea what blew up first if it happened at T-3 minutes. Are they still loading propellants then? During the static fire, do the loading hoses remain attached? When do those hoses disconnect from the first and second stages? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:52:11 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Damn, I'm really rooting for SpaceX. This will really put a question mark on the viability of re-use rockets. However, without failure, exceptional gains in knowledge can't be gained. This was a new rocket and the rocket didn't cause the explosion, the pad did. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:52:25 AM EDT
[#37]
Eric Berger
? @SciGuySpace So per @SpaceX, the issue was not with the rocket itself, but a pad anomaly. Bad news is that the payload (Amos 6 satellite) was lost. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:54:02 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Damn, I'm really rooting for SpaceX. This will really put a question mark on the viability of re-use rockets. However, without failure, exceptional gains in knowledge can't be gained. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:54:44 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Check the SpaceX twitter account which confirms what I said. Is SpaceX lying? Twitter account SpaceX "First launch of flight-proven first stage will use CRS-8 booster that delivered Dragon to @Space_Station in April" Musk "Thanks for the longstanding faith in SpaceX. We very much look forward to doing this milestone flight with you." SES "SES-10 will #launch on @SpaceX flight-proven Falcon-9 rocket http://ow.ly/rKO7303Ivkj #BeamsOnLATAM" Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Without getting into why I know its a reuse, lets just go ahead and agree with me for the time being. Information coming in right now is that its a reuse. I posted a thread recently where it was reported (as noted above) that SES 10 would be the first payload launch on a reused first stage. I'd guess someone on the ground now would know more than a report on the web. Check the SpaceX twitter account which confirms what I said. Is SpaceX lying? Twitter account SpaceX "First launch of flight-proven first stage will use CRS-8 booster that delivered Dragon to @Space_Station in April" Musk "Thanks for the longstanding faith in SpaceX. We very much look forward to doing this milestone flight with you." SES "SES-10 will #launch on @SpaceX flight-proven Falcon-9 rocket http://ow.ly/rKO7303Ivkj #BeamsOnLATAM" LOL |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:55:49 AM EDT
[#40]
OCISLY and companion craft appear to be heading back to Port Canaveral. http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/shipid:76547322145/zoom:8
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:56:12 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Eric Berger ? @SciGuySpace So per @SpaceX, the issue was not with the rocket itself, but a pad anomaly. Bad news is that the payload (Amos 6 satellite) was lost. I hope that this is the case and return to flight will be quick. I wonder if they have another pad for the Falcon Heavy and if it can be used to launch the Falcon 9. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:56:39 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That was some interval after the first explosion. I wonder if that was an explosion of storage tanks. Or maybe the second stage if the first stage was involved in the first explosion. At this point, I have no idea what blew up first if it happened at T-3 minutes. Are they still loading propellants then? During the static fire, do the loading hoses remain attached? When do those hoses disconnect from the first and second stages? Quote HistoryQuoted: That was some interval after the first explosion. I wonder if that was an explosion of storage tanks. Or maybe the second stage if the first stage was involved in the first explosion. At this point, I have no idea what blew up first if it happened at T-3 minutes. Are they still loading propellants then? During the static fire, do the loading hoses remain attached? When do those hoses disconnect from the first and second stages? T-3 propellant should be done loading and should be getting close to engine chill. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:57:16 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Eric Berger ? @SciGuySpace So per @SpaceX, the issue was not with the rocket itself, but a pad anomaly. Bad news is that the payload (Amos 6 satellite) was lost. Now the question is can they finish pad 39A or fix pad 40 first? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:57:50 AM EDT
[#44]
Theres been some secondaries exploding on the pad that's inhibiting responders.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:58:42 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Pretty sure the Space Shuttle program reused rocket parts all the time, even aside from the shuttle. Weren't the solid rocket boosters always recovered and refurbished? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Damn, I'm really rooting for SpaceX. This will really put a question mark on the viability of re-use rockets. However, without failure, exceptional gains in knowledge can't be gained. Yes. But not refurbished as a "whole". The case segments would be refurbed and then flew with other case segments from various other shuttle flights. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:59:15 AM EDT
[#46]
Poor Mark Z 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:59:35 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Eric Berger ? @SciGuySpace So per @SpaceX, the issue was not with the rocket itself, but a pad anomaly. Bad news is that the payload (Amos 6 satellite) was lost. BOOM called it! |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:59:44 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It was supposed to launch Facebooks satellite Sunday. hopefully the satellite was not aboard. I am guessing it was not. it was... https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/01/a-spacex-falcon-9-rocket-just-exploded-at-cape-canaveral/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 10:59:52 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
"SpaceX can confirm that in preparation for today's static fire, there was an anomaly on the pad resulting in the loss of the vehicle and its payload. Per standard procedure, the pad was clear and there were no injuries." And it's payload? Well shit, so much for the early reports, lost entire rocket, playload and damaged pad. Not good, the rocket alone is over 60 million, the satellites are usually in the same ballpark, the launch pad may be cheaper though, I'm guessing 150-200 million in losses. Glad I'm not their insurer. I doubt any company would write policy would they? it is a real thing That seems like a sucker bet for a insurance company to take
nationwide is on your side
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 11:00:17 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Poor Mark Z
My info states that it was an Israeli payload. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
