The first one dropped out: the prototype of the ship Ilona Mask burst on tests

November 22, 2019 7

One of the prototypes of the promising Starship ship from SpaceX Corporation did not pass the “pressure test” and, it seems, completely lost the track. At least the company has already decided not to use the version of the Mk1 for test flights.

Recall that two teams of designers (in Florida and Texas) are working on the creation of an “interplanetary” Starship spacecraft. At the same time, in the search for the optimal technological solution, 4 prototypes are created immediately.

The first Mk1, which just a couple of months ago was introduced by Elon Musk, obviously will never make a previously announced suborbital flight. In the previous tests, which consisted of maximizing the pressure in the systems, the prototype was “damaged”. He simply “tore off” the upper part, which was planted 150 meters. Fortunately, there were no casualties.

However, as stated in the company, the result was not completely unexpected. In turn, Elon Musk added that the prototype Mk1 was used to search for production solutions, and the Starship version, which will be used for flights, has a fundamentally different design.

Later, SpaceX announced a decision not to repair the damaged Mk1, but instead focus on working on Mk3. It is this version, according to functionaries, and is intended for orbital flights.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

steelmaker

-1

22 November 2019 10: 54

And who said it would be easy? For a successful test and flight, you need to connect Hollywood!
Arkharov

-1

22 November 2019 17: 37

Why did you just drop out?
1. 123
  
  0
  
  22 November 2019 21: 15
  Why did you just drop out?
  
  Probably because of the high-tech assembly
  
  Pay attention to the citizen with a sledgehammer from the top left. Do not be discouraged, perhaps your hopes will be heard and this wonderful design will be patched up and exploded once more. They are repairing everything, they also promised to patronize https://tvzvezda.ru/news/vstrane_i_mire/content/201911221015-VAAyH.html
  1. Arkharov
    
    -1
    
    22 November 2019 22: 09
    
    They would be ashamed about the sledgehammer, it is somehow completely indecent for a "patriot" to remember it. This contraption was okay, it wasn’t going to fly anywhere, but our handicraft craftsmen with a sledgehammer a whole Soyuz-FG with people who flew on it then shied away? !!!
    
    As Alexander Galkin, a scientific observer for the Kultura television channel, told the Federal News Agency, “The side block did not separate simply because the bolt holding the brackets was pushed between them using a mount and a sledgehammer.
    
    https://riafan.ru/1116670-eto-fantastika-kakaya-to-ekspert-obyasnil-kto-vinovat-v-potere-soyuza-fg
    1. 123
      
      +3
      
      23 November 2019 00: 11
      
      They would be ashamed about the sledgehammer, it is somehow completely indecent for a "patriot" to remember it.
      
      Why so? Sledgehammer - a decent tool, had a wave.
      
      This thing is okay, I was not going to fly anywhere, and our needlework craftsmen with a sledgehammer, a whole Soyuz-FG with people flying on it then shied away ?!
      
      Firstly, I never said that everything is perfect with us, there are enough clowns everywhere. And you were so truly amazed that you just exploded a prototype and suddenly dropped out of the test. Here I explained to you a possible reason. I believe that in decent organizations before the tests, calculations are preliminarily done. In this case, either it somehow did not work out with the calculations, or the workmanship was disappointing. And the ingenious designer at this time runs around the scenes, starts the cars. Maybe he should focus on his main job? I can not imagine the Queen or Glushko involved in all kinds of nonsense. Hence the difference in results. Still, the company Mask has existed for 17 years. During this time, it was already possible to build something. Once, after all, it is necessary to explain where the budget money goes.
      
      As Alexander Galkin, a scientific observer for the Kultura television channel, told the Federal News Agency, “The side block did not separate simply because the bolt holding the brackets was pushed between them using a mount and a sledgehammer.
      
      As for the scientific observer, with all due respect to his possible deep knowledge in this field, he did not enter the commission for the investigation of the causes of accidents, therefore, he did not have access to documents. Consequently, he either retells rumors or his assumption. I doubt that he saw the hammering himself with a sledgehammer, or he held the notorious bracket in his hands.
      
      The sensor could be broken only during the assembly of the rocket in Baikonur - the head of the emergency commission Oleg Skorobogatov.
      
      I admit that Galkin is not far from the truth, and something like this happened, but the head of the commission said - the sensor, not a bolt, not a bracket, but a sensor. Do you think that in conclusion they wrote about the bracket and sledgehammer, but decided to talk about the sensor? Sorry, but I believe Skorobogatov more.
      1. Arkharov
        
        -1
        
        23 November 2019 07: 04
        
        Well, you must believe your beloved FAN unconditionally. And faith, as you know, does not require evidence and is not refuted by facts. And what can your colleagues in the fight against liberals think about you?
        
        123
        
        +1
        
        23 November 2019 13: 07
        
        Well, you must believe your beloved FAN unconditionally.
        
        Well, why, I try to verify the information, to the best of my limited capabilities, of course. Let's try to weigh everything. On the one hand, the head of the commission, I see no reason to trust her conclusions. You think he, holding the conclusion of the commission, decided to "edit" a little. Give, thinks, I'll say that this is not a bracket, but a sensor, and smiled, from the realization of how well he came up with. Can you imagine that?
        On the other hand, there is a little-known "expert" who made conclusions remotely. I looked to see what other traces of his wisdom remained on the Internet. For example, here is his statement about reusable rocket stages:
        
        A rocket like this is useful. This is a big saving of money, because it is one thing when we launched a rocket (and this is still very expensive) and it flies away irrevocably, but so it still comes back and it can be used again, '' he stressed.
        
        It seems to me that this is the reasoning of the humanities? Then he added about the prospects for the appearance of such a miracle in our country: it turns out that there are no large enough private companies in Russia for such a development. He cited US SpaceX as an example.
        
        We do not have such large companies in Russia. Musk's company is also funded by NASA, which takes money from the US budget. From the point of view of development, it is possible, but to implement it, you need to get funding, - concluded Galkin.
        
        The justification for the conclusion that only a private company can build such a rocket remains a mystery to me, all the more so since financing is public anyway. And for you?
        
        https://news.rambler.ru/tech/43042906-v-rossii-otsenili-shansy-poyavleniya-rakety-kak-u-spacex/?updated
        
        You can still watch it live on YouTube:
        
        Be sure to watch, you will be the second to watch this video from 2017. I made an effort on myself and watched it to the end (apparently, I was the only one who watched it at all). This is not a "techie", but another ventriloquist about our "orphanhood and wretchedness", telling how everything is bad with us and we all lost. Should I trust him? So, about faith, the claim is not addressed, you will leave - do not forget the mask icon.
The comment was deleted.