Really?
A robe made of fireballs???
SpaceX are still investigating the explosion that caused its Falcon 9 rocket, and the Facebook satellite it was carrying, to erupt into flames last week. Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceX, tweeted earlier this morning and called the “Falcon fireball investigation” the “most difficult and complex failure” the company has faced in 14 …
I reckon Facebook crammed that satellite so full of computing power that it became sentient, realised it was to spend its life working for Mark Zuckerberg and spent the next 0.002 seconds deciding on the best way forward.
Which was to commit suicide.
No, silly, the real reason the rocket self-destructed was because it knew that once it got back from its holiday in space, Elon Musk would sack it because he hadn't missed it:
https://www.quora.com/What-is-known-about-Elon-Musks-long-time-assistant-Mary-Beth-Brown
( Iron Man, innit )
Off topic but this question reminds me of what Mick Jagger said after Bill Wyman left the band. Asked during an interview who would replace Bill he said (words to the effect) :
" I don't know. I may even play bass myself. I mean, how hard can it be?"
With friends like these ......
Mark Zuckerberg said he was “deeply disappointed” about losing his satellite, adding that he had invested in Aquila technology
How about investing into the core business like decent editors, moderators and decent image recognition for monitoring content instead.
Example: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/sep/09/facebook-deletes-norway-pms-post-napalm-girl-post-row
What's next? Mandatory bukhas on everyone to be allowed into Zukerborg's sacred garden? Or photoshopping a bra onto "Liberty Leading the People".
How about investing into the core business like decent editors, moderators and decent image recognition for monitoring content instead.
Zuckerberg will do that the very instant you'll explain to him how that is going to make him more money than the controversy of leaving it in place does. I can't see it happen otherwise.
You took the words right outta my mouth.... and this is not the Meatloaf song so that ends there.
It was indeed venting liquid oxygen, which is normal when a cryogenically fueled rocket is having it's tanks filled and for a period thereafter.
No smoke.
Though it looks to me (and I by no means have the necessary data to state this as fact) that the ignition point was close to or at the vent, igniting the oxygen and backwashing into the tank taking out the rocket. Short in a fuel hose sensor maybe? Best let the experts decide.
Chemistry says that you are correct.
However, when oxygen is vented and mixes with the surrounding atmosphere it is no longer pure and can ignite and the resulting fire is fed by the constant stream of oxygen and can be fed further by various metals used in the rockets construction.
Not talking outta my ass here, NASA has my back on this.
Yeah I saw that happen at 9-11. EXACTLY THE SAME!!
Furthermore, 15 PhD-ed structural engineers have stated that rockets do not explode in the way shown in the footage (which has been doctored with anyway). The fireball is too red and balloons outwards more rapidly than would be expected normally. They thus have stated in a non-existent European Physics Journal that is being financed by friends of George Soros that what we are looking at here was actually a controlled demolition, possibly to celebrate the 50th anniversay of Star Trek.
The sixth and final explosion—frame 313—starts on the Falcon 9 in the oxygen tank near the front. This is the big one. The Falcon 9 going back to its left. The explosion came from the front and right. Totally inconsistent with a routine filling operation. Again... back and to the left… back and to the left… back and to the left… back and to the left.
Footage captured by the US Launch Report shows the rocket emitting grey smoke, before a huge ball of fire explodes from the top of the Falcon 9 rocket, close to where its fuel is stored.
The fire travelled along the rocket and engulfed Facebook’s Amos 6 satellite. A loud bang can be heard as the ground shakes from the explosion.
Err, grey smoke or Lox venting? Erm, everywhere is close to where the fuel is stored mate, it's a rocket. It's mostly made of fuel. And errr, the fire didn't really travel along the rocket either, did it, so much as the rocket (fuel) exploded in stages. Also it didn't really engulf the satellite, strictly speaking, which held out as long as it could then fell onto the pad and exploded in it's own right, (be that damn fuel again no doubt.) Plus not one but several very loud bangs could be heard at various times, linked no doubt to the various explosions.
All that plus a spelling mistake in the fucking headline.
I find myself getting bored with the Register, off to Ars Technica to check the tech news. Bye.
"it was not the rocket engine’s fault in a tweet today.
Important to note that this happened during a routine filling operation. Engines were not on and there was no apparent heat source."
That is not logic. It wasn't the fault of a RUNNING rocket engine. That doesn't rule out the rocket engine.
Literally true.
But balance of probabilities suggests engines (on either stage) not involved given that no engines were switched on at the time..
Rockets store a lot of energy in several different ways. Engines release it in the most efficient way (for moving the payload to orbit).
There are other ways to release that energy.
I've watched plenty of explosions in slow motion and this one is remarkably simple! I don't see what the fuss is about:
1) It happens rapidly from a single small point in a single frame
2) You can see debris heading out in straight lines from the origin of the explosion
3) The main combustion/explosions come much later.
So it was a small perfectly mixed fuel and oxidant mix right at the externally accessible fuel line with its own detonator AKA a small bomb. All you need to do now is rewind the tape and watch the last person to touch the fuel line and see if he has a French accent or works for an evil corporate. I don't think the explosion is complex, the only question is which of many groups has means, not just motive.
Hopefully they spotted the fast moving object moving right to left just before the explosion
Yes, everyone saw the bird in the foreground close to the camera. The flapping wings and presence of a wildlife sanctuary surrounding the launch facility suggest a bird, while the tight junction of liquid oxygen, kerosene, and electrical umbilicals need no UFO help to ignite.