/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8327195
>the helium tank supports were redesigned from the 1.1
No.
The first F9FT was built before the CRS-7 accident

>now it uses high-density subcooled propellant, a technology not only new to Falcon 9, but unprecedented in operational launch vehicles, which requires different tanking procedures
This is probably literally what caused the recent launch failure.

>seemingly initiated at the point where propellant was being loaded into the rocket
It's obvious at this point that the second stage suffered a structural failure of some sort, and that GSE was not involved
Spacex will not fly again this year.

>Reminder: this was a failure during a test
that destroyed the payload
And Apollo 1 was a failed test that killed the crew
What's your point?

>The payload being on the rocket for the test was a cost-saving option chosen by a customer who willingly accepted the known risk.
Patently false
The Spacecomm CEO just said this about it
>This was a decision made by IAI engineers. We were of course not just guests in the theater, but the front-line engineers were from IAI and SpaceX. I think they looked back on the latest launches to perform the engineering analysis.
>I learned one thing years ago: Engineering is not mathematics.It seemed a prudent decision, and I am not sure the decision would have been different even now.

Leave it to spacex nutters to try to downplay the latest failure

Go back to r.ddit m8
At least there you can ignore the facts in peace, and ban people who disagree with Musk worship.