SpaceX Starship prototype exploded during testing


The American company SpaceX conducted another test of the prototype rocket Starship. They were held at the company's training ground near the village of Boca Chica (Texas). Like the previous similar cryo-test, these tests culminated in an explosion.


It should be noted that prototype testing began on February 28, 2020 at 22:00 local time (February 29, 2020 at 07:00 Moscow time). The video shows how when filling a tank (tank, tank) with liquid nitrogen, it scatters to pieces.

It is specified that during the specified cryo-test (maximum filling of fuel tanks with cryogenic liquid) no one was hurt. It is explained that this prototype was specially created for testing, i.e. its destruction (destruction) was planned. Moreover, a decent amount of different tests and tests are planned in SpaceX.

Do not worry about it. Testing, crashing, fixing, testing, crashing, fixing is SpaceX's tactic. They will learn from this and do everything right.

- Michael Baylor, creator of Next Spaceflight, wrote on his Twitter account.


Despite the fact that I was hoping for a successful test, I have to admit that it was pretty epic, but SN2 will definitely be better

- wrote user Christopher Campfield under the video.

By the way, the head of SpaceX, Elon Musk, promised that the orbital flight of the Starship prototype will take place in 2020.

It should be added that on January 29, 2020, SpaceX already conducted a similar test. Then also tested the capacity (tank, tank) for Starship. The overpressure was 8,5 bar.


Necessary to remindthat flight tests of the Russian Angara-A5 heavy carrier rocket (LV) will be substantially reduced. Moreover, test launches will be reduced from ten to six at the Plesetsk cosmodrome, and there may be even fewer test launches at the Vostochny cosmodrome.
16 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.
I have an account? Sign in
  1. steelmaker Offline steelmaker
    steelmaker 29 February 2020 17: 27
    0
    Americans can’t do without Russia for another 15-20 years. They are in words and on the ISS, and on the Moon, and on Mars already, just about. The bad news is that this also awaits us if Rogozins rule in the space industry.
  2. Observer2014 Offline Observer2014
    Observer2014 29 February 2020 17: 31
    0
    SpaceX Starship prototype exploded during testing

    It happens. Only those who do not do new things do not explode and do not fall. And only the frills in the "tyrnete" sharpen. laughing
    1. Regis Offline Regis
      Regis (Sergey Kopan) 29 February 2020 18: 51
      +3
      It happens in different ways. Only all this dvizhuha Mask looks like a big hoax .....
      1. Observer2014 Offline Observer2014
        Observer2014 29 February 2020 19: 08
        0
        Quote: Regis
        It happens in different ways. Only all this dvizhuha Mask looks like a big hoax .....

        Yes, even so. What is this to us? We won’t be able to eat directly, I guess. Mask is a hoax or not. They are building a new one! NEW! Manned vehicles. And not only do they build it. And they are experiencing. In this economic situation and the system, we can not afford such an abundance of projects as they have. And as they have there - successfully or not successfully - not for us to criticize them.
        1. 123 Online 123
          123 (123) 29 February 2020 20: 17
          0
          They are building a new one! NEW! manned equipment. And not only do they build it. And they are experiencing. In this economic situation and the system, we can’t afford such an abundance of projects as theirs.

          I will answer with your words. hi

          Yes, even so. What is this to us?

          And as they have there - successfully or not successfully - not for us to criticize them.

          Maybe you can’t be criticized, but you don’t need to speak for us, we will decide for ourselves. yes Seriously, for me, not everything is clear yet. A little weird saying ... maybe it's a poor translation?

          Do not worry about it. Testing, crashing, fixing, testing, crashing, fixing is SpaceX's tactic. They will learn from this and do everything right.

          Strange tactics. winked And the meaning of the test is not clear what they wanted to test: how much can be poured into a rocket until it bursts? belay Even when cars crash on the crash tests, inside the dummy, there are sensors around, the meaning is clear. They don’t know what pressure the rocket is designed for? What lesson can be learned from this test? Is the pressure too big or is the rocket too fragile? And what will they do right now? Will the walls thicken? Or pour less?
          Here, too, smart people are engaged in scientific experiments, probably also scientists: smile



          The phrase sounds all the more strange:

          Despite the fact that I was hoping for a successful test, I have to admit that it was pretty epic, but SN2 will definitely be better

          What is that supposed to mean? I hoped that it would not burst, but it was so good, it turned out beautifully, the spray flew apart. fellow Everyone liked it. good So what? belay
          1. cmonman Offline cmonman
            cmonman (Garik Mokin) 1 March 2020 01: 51
            0
            What is that supposed to mean? I hoped that she would not burst ...

            The answer is below:

            SpaceX's prototype spacecraft failed a pressure test in Texas. Failure is part of the company's philosophy “Test-failure-correction” ”

            https://www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2020/02/29/spacex-starship-prototype-fails-pressure-test-in-texas-sending-vehicle-flying/

            During a live video shot by a resident of Boca Chica near SpaceX's workplace, the Starship version, known as SN1, could be seen during the leak test at around 10 p.m. Friday. But before this could be completed, the prototype could not contain liquid nitrogen, which led to the cylinder taking off from its stand and collapsed, leaving behind a twisted pile of stainless steel.

            Failure, although a failure for SpaceX, is part of the company's philosophy Test-crash-fix. This version of the prototype starship was supposed to fly from the Texas training ground, but only for a short suborbital flight.

            Russia can not afford the philosophy of “test-failure-correction” - expensive, there will not be enough grandmas. Therefore, we must develop everything for sure and rely on the famous “maybe” ...
            1. 123 Online 123
              123 (123) 1 March 2020 13: 25
              +1
              SpaceX's prototype spacecraft failed a pressure test in Texas. Failure is part of the test-fail-fix philosophy of the company. ”

              Don't you think that philosophy is outdated and needs correction? For example, "engineering calculation - computer simulation" - laboratory tests - test " winked

              ..... could be seen during the leak test at about 10 p.m. But before this could be completed, the prototype could not contain liquid nitrogen, which led to the cylinder taking off from its stand and collapsed, leaving behind a twisted pile of stainless steel.

              As far as I understood, these were full-scale tests, judging by the results, the work of the engineers was unsatisfactory. Either the calculations turned out to be wrong, or the crooked masters "embodied in iron". It looks pretty stupid, that's why we scoff. laughing

              Russia can not afford the philosophy of “test-failure-correction” - expensive, there will not be enough grandmas. Therefore, we must develop everything for sure and rely on the famous “maybe” ...

              Yes, it is really expensive, to ruin "samples" in order to understand whether it will work out will not work. It is also true that budgets are not comparable.
              Roskosmos has a different philosophy

              Roscosmos will replace part of missile tests with computer simulation

              https://planet-today.ru/novosti/tekhnologii/item/115907-roskosmos-zamenit-chast-ispytanij-raket-kompyuternym-modelirovaniem

              If we take the issue seriously, both approaches have advantages and disadvantages. In my opinion, mathematical modeling is necessary at the initial stage, this significantly reduces the cost of the process and reduces the time spent on development, in general, greatly simplifies life. Full-scale tests are necessary at the final stage, they confirm the correctness of the calculations, insure against possible mistakes made during the design and construction, you can say, give a guarantee that everything is done correctly and works in the real world.
              As for Boeing, such work is a thing of the past. Designed - built - does not work, and so on in a circle until it works. We would unequivocally say that this is a "cut", they say, we have a budget and we master it, envy in silence. winked
              It turns out that both companies have problems, Roscosmos has financing, Boeing has introduced new technologies. hi
            2. 123 Online 123
              123 (123) 2 March 2020 13: 06
              0
              If you will allow me, I’ll add a little, perhaps you are hurt by a similar attitude, probably somewhat biased, to American space programs, but they have a basis. For you, this is space exploration and progress, for us it is also a threat, not to mention competition. As for me, the more problems Boeing and Mask have, the better for us.
              For a better understanding of this position, I recommend that you familiarize yourself with the information presented in this article:

              https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32346/the-air-force-and-spacex-are-teaming-up-for-a-massive-live-fire-exercise
              1. cmonman Offline cmonman
                cmonman (Garik Mokin) 3 March 2020 03: 23
                0
                For you, this is space exploration and progress, for us it is also a threat, not to mention competition.

                Honestly, I expected the Pentagon to “make friends” with companies that will launch dozens and often. An article appeared on my one of my favorite SpaceNews.com sites a couple of days ago, where Musk offers his hand and heart to new Cosmic forces:

                https://spacenews.com/elon-musk-calls-on-u-s-space-force-to-embrace-fully-reusable-rockets-make-starfleet-happen/

                I don’t see any threats for you - after all, this technology provides the convenience of communication for all Amer military branches, this is not a weapon. Competition? No, too, because customer is one.

                As for me, the more problems Boeing and Mask have, the better for us.

                And here envy :–) may be present, but I can’t do anything here.
                When you change the proportion of state. and private enterprises in the country, the economy will rise and envy will disappear)).

                You are offended by a similar attitude, probably somewhat biased, to American space programs, but they have a basis.

                Honestly, I am not complex about the “biased attitude” to anything amersky, because already accustomed in this country to the fact that any opinion has the right to be expressed. Even Cons, therefore, I never put, only Pros. I looked at the article, thanks, but its content echoes my link above. The idea is the same - successful and frequent (and cheap) launches will attract the attention of the military, such a game of any state.
                1. 123 Online 123
                  123 (123) 3 March 2020 10: 46
                  +1
                  Honestly, I expected the Pentagon to “make friends” with companies that will launch dozens and often. An article appeared on my one of my favorite SpaceNews.com sites a couple of days ago, where Musk offers his hand and heart to new Cosmic forces:

                  It's pretty predictable, aren't Mask designs funded from the budget? I believe this system was originally planned as a dual purpose.

                  I don’t see any threats for you - after all, this technology provides the convenience of communication for all Amer military branches, this is not a weapon.

                  As I say, we have too different views on the problem, for you this is nothing bad, just "convenience of communication", from here everything looks a little different. You can even draw certain conclusions without reading the text of the article. And what kind of airplanes and boats and boats are drawn? Are you going to establish communication with them? what


                  GMTI [ground moving target indicator]

                  Do you think this is a new opportunity to take a photo from a new angle? Even you, I’m not even talking about officials, talk about the convenience of communication, but we are talking about a guidance system. Satellites are integrated into the combat system. This approach is partly justified, we are full of idiots who believe that Musk is trying exclusively for them, wants to provide them with convenient Internet and give them the opportunity to fly into orbit. After all, no one will write on the Space website that the satellites provide guidance for the missiles on them, and no one will tell them about the launch of Zuma either.

                  Competition? No, too, because customer is one.

                  I meant competition in a broader sense, space exploration, and not a specific program.

                  And here envy :–) may be present, but I can’t do anything here.

                  With what fright did you decide that this envy is not clear request Moreover, the subject of envy is not clear, what exactly is envy?

                  When you change the proportion of state. and private enterprises in the country, the economy will rise and envy will disappear)).

                  Oh yeah good these recipes were very popular 30 years ago laughing the main thing is to privatize everything and life will be beautiful and amazing fellow Practice shows that the reality is somewhat different, the process is rather moving in the opposite direction, and oddly enough, it works repeat

                  Honestly, I am not complex about the “biased attitude” to anything amersky, because already accustomed in this country to the fact that any opinion has the right to be expressed.

                  For some reason, I immediately remembered how on my channel on the Air Force in 2008, mother and daughter said that Georgia and not Russia attacked them in Ossetia, and suddenly there was a need for an advertising break winked (if you do not understand what is at stake, write, I will try to find this fragment). Opportunity to express an opinion is everywhere. Do you think in Russia differently and in each gateway there is a couple of gloomy guys in worn leather and a Mauser in a holster? The question is what happens to the person who expresses this opinion.
                  Here on the site recently wrote about the views of a judge of the Constitutional Court, you can follow his further fate. I think nothing will happen to him (he spoke in November).

                  Even Cons, therefore, I never put, only Pros. I looked at the article, thanks, but its content echoes my link above. The idea is the same - successful and frequent (and cheap) launches will attract the attention of the military, such a game of any state.

                  What kind of world are you, I remember, don’t worry about the cons, there will always be caring people, they will put as much as they can winked
        2. Regis Offline Regis
          Regis (Sergey Kopan) 1 March 2020 10: 06
          +1
          And who criticizes? No one criticizes. They have no problems with cut green pieces of paper. How much is needed, so much will be printed ....
  3. Arkharov Offline Arkharov
    Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 29 February 2020 20: 21
    -1
    And there was no headline that corresponds to the truth: deliberately blown up during tests? Or is it "more pleasant" for the ear?
    1. 123 Online 123
      123 (123) 29 February 2020 21: 28
      -1
      And there was no headline that corresponds to the truth: deliberately blown up during tests? Or is it "more pleasant" for the ear?

      It’s better to put the phrase in the heading:

      Testing, crashing, fixing, testing, crashing, fixing are tactics
  4. boriz Offline boriz
    boriz (boriz) 29 February 2020 23: 15
    +1
    Just a good mine with a bad game. Poker faces.
    Either forgot how to do strength calculations, or the technology does not provide strength. Changed technology, or what? Or capacity material?
    And after all, the tanks collapsed without take-off loads! What did they even experience?
  5. Come on Offline Come on
    Come on 3 March 2020 00: 11
    0
    Quote: Observer2014
    SpaceX Starship prototype exploded during testing

    It happens. Only those who do not do new things do not explode and do not fall. And only the frills in the "tyrnete" sharpen. laughing

    I agree ... but not everyone is so frankly trying that this is PLANNED:)) ... Well, something like that, before the fig they have explosions for 0 successful launches.
  6. albor.ru Offline albor.ru
    albor.ru (Alexander) 30 March 2020 20: 56
    -1
    It is difficult to say anything specifically on the test result, since the very meaning of this experience is incomprehensible. Maybe that's the way it is ...
    But in this news I liked one thing - the area ... Boca Chica! It sounds mischievous and profitable!