Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

SpaceX Starship Test Rocket Was Knocked Over By High Winds (popularmechanics.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the adverse-weather-conditions dept.

Strong Texas winds managed to knock over SpaceX's prototype of its next-generation Starship rocket. In a tweet, CEO Elon Musk tweeted yesterday: "50 mph winds broke the mooring blocks late last night & fairing was blown over. Will take a few weeks to repair." He added: "Actual [fuel] tanks are fine." Popular Mechanics reports: The hopper, based out of the company's launch site in Boca Chica, Texas, is not meant for the stars: It is a test machine meant to show that the Starship's fundamentals can work in terms of launching and landing. SpaceX wants the rocket to go 16,400 feet into the air (a hop, so to speak) and land again. The wind, sadly, had other plans and knocked the hopper's nosecone around.

The accident appears to have first reached the public through eagle-eyed SpaceX aficionados on a message board which updates with even the smallest changes in anything related to the company's plans. Their methods include everything from drone flyovers to driving by the site. It's hard to tell what damage has precisely happened to the hopper in its fall, but it appears to be more complex than simply righting back up again.

66 comments

  1. Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's more of a water tower than a rocket, but this just goes to show why having a real production environment is better than doing things outside or in a tent.

    1. Re:Well by BeauHD++(3492052) · · Score: -1

      How dare you make such sarcastic remarks? Musk is a true pioneer in their space and time and goes unappreciated by the world. Do you understand how hard it is to "get it up" these days? From business to going KiloMeters high in the air this is basicly something nobody else has done with the exception of Nasa which was destroyed by President Bush thank you very much. Donald Trump is a genione fool that will end funding for all things science & progress. Where do we as humankind go to Mars and beyond (or "infinity and beyond" for us sci fi fans) when humanbeings like Elon Musk are being ostrasized?

    2. Re: Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps a mere 50 mph wind toppling the thing just shows that it was nothing but am empty shiny shell

    3. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are drugs to "get it up" these days.
      Maybe you should get some so you can "get it up", also get some for Musk too.

    4. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Donald Trump is a genione fool that will end funding for all things science & progress.

      Dude, didn't you read the story about Trump wanting to provide NASA with "unlimited funding" to get a man on Mars before the end of his presidency?

      So much Trump Derangement Syndrome...

    5. Re: Well by Rei · · Score: 1

      What was knocked over was an empty, shiny shell. It was the fairing that was knocked over (read: "giant nosecone"). Not the tanks / plumbing / engines / etc (the business end). This is amplified by the fact that unlike with the actual Starship, this hopper's fairing will never face meaningful stress or heating. They could outright launch without it (although it'll be good to explore how it affects the vehicle's handling dynamics).

      When initial construction started, people presumed SpaceX was building a water tower. That portion is the "business end", the actual rocket. Because when you build a rocket (aka, a device that's mostly tankage for holding liquids) the size of a water tower, out of steel, it's inherently going to resemble a water tower until you start sticking engines and a fairing on it ;) SpaceX started building two other pieces (which were eventually joined together) under the the tent, which are just tacked sheet steel on a frame; their shape was peoples' first clue that there was a rocket being built (although it took a while for people to put two and two together and realize that the "water tower" was the base). It's this fairing that fell over.

      --
      "Are you hungry? I haven't eaten since later this afternoon." -- Primer
    6. Re:Well by r1348 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but only if they can get a man on the moon by the end of his term, which is ludicrous.

    7. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, what is ludicrous is spending money on projects that never achieve any significant results, like the decades long war in Afghanistan.

      Trump is simply shopping to find someone who can actually get the job done instead of someone who soaks up funds forever without delivering anything.

      Of course, the timing of our planets' orbits may make it impossible during Trump's term...

    8. Re:Well by cellocgw · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but only if they can get a man on the moon by the end of his term, which is ludicrous.

      So you're saying NASA needs to incorporate a P100D into their Mars rocket?

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
  2. The hand of God by jfdavis668 · · Score: 2

    came down and smited thee.

    1. Re:The hand of God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wasn't that thing at Burning Man a couple of years ago?

    2. Re:The hand of God by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

      Who can remember what happened at Burning Man?

    3. Re: The hand of God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idiot straightedge morons

    4. Re:The hand of God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      smote

  3. Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't mess with Texas winds

    1. Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Steers and queers blow hard.

    2. Re:Obligatory by Thud457 · · Score: 1

      When I first came here, this was all swamp. Everyone said I was daft to build a rocket on a swamp, but I built in all the same, just to show them. It blew over. So I built a second one. And that one sank into the swamp. So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, and then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up. And that's what you'e going to get, Son, the strongest rocket in all of Texas.

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  4. This almost happened to Rotary Rocket by PhantomHarlock · · Score: 1

    Back in the 90s during the first wave of NewSpace companies, the Rotary Rocket Roton ATV (Atmopsheric Test Vehicle - similar mission plan as this one) had a grand unveiling on a very typically windy Mojave day. Had the tanks not been ballasted with water it would have toppled over. Was an interesting day for many reasons.

    1. Re:This almost happened to Rotary Rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Imagine if this had happened with astronauts aboard. So risky. This is why SX shouldn't be trusted with human spaceflight. They play footloose and fancy-free with too many sound engineering practices. Not to mention the CEO smoking dope and working the hours of a meth head.

    2. Re:This almost happened to Rotary Rocket by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2

      I went inside of the Rotron one day in Mojave about 10 years ago. It was standing on display next to a video kiosk, and they put the PC controlling the kiosk in the rotron, and that day the PC guy had left the door on the bottom of the Rotron unlocked. Of course some things could have been removed from the Rotron by then, but the inside was hollow. A few small tanks, and the control cab way up where I couldn't reach it. Birds were nesting in it.

      --
      Bruce Perens.
    3. Re:This almost happened to Rotary Rocket by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 3, Informative

      So far, SpaceX are the only folks we can trust to even have manned flights. Orion is an albatross about NASA's neck and needs to be cancelled ASAP. NASA should no longer make its own rockets. Takes 10 times as long and 100 times as expensive, and they killed their share of astronauts with really stupid stuff. Every time was "go fever" and acceptance of known problems with the craft that should have stopped flight. Did you know the tank stirrer that blew up the SM in Apollo 13 was already scheduled to be removed from future vehicles? Boeing may get their stuff together eventually with CST-100. Blue Origin is still suborbital-only for years. Sierra Nevada is going really slowly. I don't think you can judge SpaceX's preparation for mann

      --
      Bruce Perens.
    4. Re:This almost happened to Rotary Rocket by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 3, Informative

      Oops. That should say: I don't think you can judge SpaceX's preparation for manned flights by this sort of demo.

      --
      Bruce Perens.
    5. Re: This almost happened to Rotary Rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      You k ow that Bruce? Fuck you. NASA did all the hard work while you are still in diapers. The men that died wee heroes and so were the people who worked on the project. So fuck you. You are a leech of the open source community anyway and deserve zero respect.

    6. Re:This almost happened to Rotary Rocket by Rei · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are you for real? This is a test article. The sort of thing you normally paint in yellow-and-black crosshatched crash testing paint. It'll be a miracle if this thing survives to the end of the testing period, by design. Its only purpose is to be something quickly and cheaply built to collect data for the actual rocket.

      And what was destroyed was simply the fairing (read: nosecone), not the actual rocket part (tankage, plumbing, engines, etc). The fairing is far lighter (just very thin sheet steel tacked onto a lightweight frame), and thus vulnerable to winds. The base, while it has the same sheet steel tacked on, is built around a heavy steel framework designed for holding liquids. They may look aesthetically similar, but they're very different.

      Remember that everything you're seeing here only started being built in December. This is not some sort of two-year setback.

      --
      "Are you hungry? I haven't eaten since later this afternoon." -- Primer
    7. Re: This almost happened to Rotary Rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you are an AC.

    8. Re: This almost happened to Rotary Rocket by r1348 · · Score: 0

      Stop eating crayons.

    9. Re: This almost happened to Rotary Rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Answer me this Bruce, has nasa sent a man to the moon and back? They have, ok, good.

      Now answer this, has spaceX? They haven't? How close? They haven't even tried?

      Fuck off with this commercial space exploration shit. If NASA wants to spend money then let them. You just want spaceX to build the parts because you have a vested interested in them doing so.

      Just admit what side you play for Bruce. Something you weren't and still aren't very good at doing.

    10. Re: This almost happened to Rotary Rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because spaceX serves one purpose Bruce. To suck money from tax payers and live off the government tit. You just admitted it. You visited this site 10 years ago, in those 10 years,'shit hasn't changed. It's still empty and birds are still nesting in it.

    11. Re: This almost happened to Rotary Rocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, for starters, a good portion of those men who died were, in fact, women. Also, Bruce is quite right that NASA killed some astronauts doing some pretty reckless stuff. For example, locking live people inside a capsule filled with oxygen and more than three times its normal atmospheric partial pressure. Who could have predicted that would turn into a fireball? How about anyone with basic knowledge of chemistry/combustion.

  5. Stock pump con by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Musk is such a fraud. From his "definitely not photoshopped" photoshopped picture of that heap to the clumsy way it was assembled. How can anyone take him seriously?

    1. Re:Stock pump con by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      IDK. Maybe because he can land a rocket when the rest of us can't even do a water bottle flip.

    2. Re:Stock pump con by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      IDK. Maybe because he can land a rocket when the rest of us can't even do a water bottle flip.

      I still need to go see a launch and landing. I know for a fact that no matter how prepared I make myself, the sheer amount of energy released for the take off, the noise and rumbling still felt a mile away, that I will still be in complete awe.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    3. Re:Stock pump con by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      IDK. Maybe because he can land a rocket when the rest of us can't even do a water bottle flip.

      I still need to go see a launch and landing. I know for a fact that no matter how prepared I make myself, the sheer amount of energy released for the take off, the noise and rumbling still felt a mile away, that I will still be in complete awe.

      They are awesome indeed. The delay between the start of the launch and the arrival of the sound is cool too. The first launch I saw was at around 0300, and even that has cool stuff like the mini-fireworks display when the first stage separates. That should be on everyone's bucket list.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    4. Re:Stock pump con by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Sad that so many believe Musk invented that or had any input in its design.

    5. Re:Stock pump con by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      Launch viewing is a frustrating hobby. I drove 5 hours to Vandenberg for the last launch, it scrubbed in the last seconds of the countdown due to a hydrogen leak. Drove 5 hours back home. For one SpaceX launch there, it was so foggy that I only heard it. Expect to see one for every three that you go to.

      It looks like the first Crew Dragon demo is on the 9th, during Orlando Hamcation, so I'll be in Florida. Hope that works out. I saw the Falcon Heavy launch that way last year.

      --
      Bruce Perens.
    6. Re:Stock pump con by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Launch viewing is a frustrating hobby. I drove 5 hours to Vandenberg for the last launch, it scrubbed in the last seconds of the countdown due to a hydrogen leak. Drove 5 hours back home. For one SpaceX launch there, it was so foggy that I only heard it. Expect to see one for every three that you go to.

      It looks like the first Crew Dragon demo is on the 9th, during Orlando Hamcation, so I'll be in Florida. Hope that works out. I saw the Falcon Heavy launch that way last year.

      Hi Bruce, yes indeed frustrating. A couple years back, the Wife and I were in Florida for winter vacation. The F9 launch was delayed, I think three times, and since it was going to the Space Station, the launch time window was moved back by around two hours each time. I didn't get much sleep that week.

      Have fun at Hamcation - I like it much better than Dayton, now Xenia.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    7. Re:Stock pump con by Rei · · Score: 0

      Love conspiracy theorists ;). Are you saying that the hopper, one of the most obsessively-monitored-by-amateur-spy-shots things on the planet right now, isn't real and was just photoshopped? You do realize that there are frequent drone flyovers of the thing, right?

      Since I've seen this notion going around the TSLAQ circles before, I'm going to guess that you're part of that bubble who retweets people like Mark Spiegel and the like, since I've seen this conspiracy theory pop up there. It goes like this: "Look, the positioning of the american flag is all wrong! And the things in the background don't match some other pictures I saw! Fake!".

      Hint: There's two American Flags on it, one on each side.

      Just letting you know: you're not the plucky hero of this story.

      --
      "Are you hungry? I haven't eaten since later this afternoon." -- Primer
    8. Re: Stock pump con by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Personally I'm waiting for the first flight of the BFG (or whatever they are calling it these days). Figure I'll take a 2 week holiday, drive down, and get a hotel somewhere in the area. If they scrub enough times to outlast my 2 week stay, they've got some serious problems.

    9. Re:Stock pump con by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, it was obviously photoshopped to look better. You can compare photos taken by independent people from the official ones sent out, and the official ones were obviously altered to make the hull look smoother and less shitty.

      Making things look unrealistically good is typical for marketing.

  6. Duh by Ecuador · · Score: 2

    Well, duh, it wasn't built to withstand winds - there's no air in space! :-O

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    1. Re:Duh by mentil · · Score: 1

      But there are solar winds.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    2. Re:Duh by 4im · · Score: 1

      There may not be air / wind in space, but what about the one destination for BFR that's being talked about so much - i.e. Mars? There's an atmosphere (thin maybe), there's wind, there are sandstorms. What will those do to a freshly landed BFR not weighted down with loads of fuel?

      While it may not be like in "The Martian", some calculations are warrented to be on the safe side.

    3. Re: Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tut Tut, we'll deal with that when we get there

    4. Re:Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, duh, it wasn't built to withstand winds - there's no WIND in space! :-O

      Tell that to UrAnus!

    5. Re:Duh by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      The harshest winds Mars can offer wouldn't tip over an empty hopper faring. You'd barely feel it. A 100 MPH wind on Mars feels nothing like a 100 MPH wind on Earth because there's only 1/100th of the air blowing.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
  7. Let's be clear about this: it's half-assed by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    I am a big fan of Elon Musk, Tesla, and SpaceX. That said, this is the most half-assed project I've seen them do, and that includes the Monty-Python-esque brick tower constructed for Boring company for which they advertised a position for someone to be at the top and yell abuse in an outrageous french accent. I assume this person was in the Tesla lay-offs.

    Its construction was like that of a film set, and like a film set it got blown over in the first high wind. Inside there is a triangular truss structure like that on one of those overhead signs that spans a wide highway. This is the only structural component. Hung off of that is crinkly thin stainless steel skin attached to a structure made out of rebar. I kid you not. So, the skin has the approximate wind profile that it should (oops!) and most importantly, it looks cool!

    Well, not as cool as a real space rocket.

    Now, I know the job of this other than looking cool is to allow them to test the landing guidance software with the approximately right sized object, and these things tend to blow up and crash so it's OK to make it to be disposable. But they have now learned that you need a hurricane-proof building if you are going to do this on the extreme south coast of Texas right on the water! Or at least guy wires.

    I'm sure they'll have another one in less than two months. It'll be interesting seeing it "hop".

    --
    Bruce Perens.
    1. Re:Let's be clear about this: it's half-assed by Strider- · · Score: 1

      An least according to one tweet, the thing broke loose from its anchor blocks. So it looks like they did secure it, it's just that it overwhelmed the anchoring system.

      --
      ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
    2. Re:Let's be clear about this: it's half-assed by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2

      It wasn't attached to the bottom of the rocket, though, which is bolted to concrete. I'm not sure it was even standing, it might have been already on its side for installation of the tank bulkheads, which had been seen there recently. That would have been a really weak position to be in the wind.

      --
      Bruce Perens.
    3. Re:Let's be clear about this: it's half-assed by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      Thanks Bruce. About the only non-troll to respond. Trolls can be fun, but most fail at it nowadays.

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    4. Re:Let's be clear about this: it's half-assed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Bruce Perens sucks Elon cock

      Windbourne

    5. Re:Let's be clear about this: it's half-assed by argee · · Score: 1

      Indeed, guy wires. Or, even guy ropes. On my self supporting ham radio tower, it used to sway 3 ft at the top. Alarming. So I put in a set of 3 ropes,
      just 3/8 diameter. I used non-stretch rope. Sway now only 12" of less. And less jerky. About $50.

      I envision 3 ropes on that rocket. When its time to launch, just cut them off at ground level and let them dangle. They will vaporize in no time. Of course,
      rocket scientists are going to have apoplexy over this suggestion.

    6. Re:Let's be clear about this: it's half-assed by argee · · Score: 1

      Your comment, sir, is rude and inappropriate.

    7. Re:Let's be clear about this: it's half-assed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An least according to one tweet, the thing broke loose from its anchor blocks. So it looks like they did secure it, it's just that it overwhelmed the anchoring system.

      Sounds like a basic engineering fail. Not good when you're doing rocketry.

    8. Re:Let's be clear about this: it's half-assed by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      SpaceX actually has a high-load cable system that can hold down the rocket with all engines firing. This is in a lot of photos of static fire tests at their engine test site in Macgregor, Texas. They put it on and take it off with a crane.

      --
      Bruce Perens.
    9. Re:Let's be clear about this: it's half-assed by Rei · · Score: 1

      You seem to be confused.

      1) You could never put this thing on its side; it's not designed to bear loads like that. At least not without building some sort of temporary internal scaffolding first.
      2) The part that fell over is the fairing. You don't install bulkheads in a fairing. It's just thin tacked stainless sheet - you can't support liquid with that.
      3) They're already installing the bulkheads in the actual tankage section (the bottom part). Top bulkhead just went on.

      The simple matter is, they're doing everything here at a crazy pace. Could they have slowed down everything to reduce the risk of unanticipated events like this? Sure. They could crawl along like NASA does and not even make a tack until it's been signed off in triplicate by half a dozen managers. But this is a test article, something designed to be cheap and disposable. Delays just aren't worthwhile. They only started building this thing a month and a half ago. Even if the entire thing had been razed to the ground, they'd have only lost a month and a half of work.

      The only thing I fault SpaceX for here is not painting it in a yellow-and-black crosshatched crash testing paint scheme so that the general public realizes, "We expect this thing not to survive our testing". ;) When people see a shiny rocket-shaped thing, they expect it to be an actual finished rocket.

      --
      "Are you hungry? I haven't eaten since later this afternoon." -- Primer
    10. Re:Let's be clear about this: it's half-assed by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      The cost of fixing the damage is likely far less than the cost of a hurricane-proof building.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    11. Re:Let's be clear about this: it's half-assed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      You seem to be confused. felon musk is a conman. He’s a low intelligence moron with a huge ego that cons other low intelligence morons like yourself. Due to his gross missmanagement, he’s running everyone of his companies out of business. Tesla has failed to ever turn a profit and their sales have tanked so bad that had to cut production. Plus their massive debt payment is due this quarter. Space ex has been selling their launches at a massive loss. They have started the mass layoffs of a company circling the drain. Plus moron musk added an albatross around their neck with his boring company venture. That has so far shown they will build a half assed tunnel at a rate that is slower and a cost that is higher than competent boring contractors.

    12. Re:Let's be clear about this: it's half-assed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the nose cone was real aerospace engineering and/or rocketry component you might have a point, luckily it's not. Virtually everything points to this "rocket" being a PR mockup for the most part. It'll actually fly (or blow up at the very least), but only because of the actual rocket components slotted into this showy facade.

  8. But but but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    space is like this safety backup in case an asteroid wipes out the Earth?

    Oh, except when it's a bit breezy?

  9. Hey, I saw that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    on a 1936 Flash Gordon serial titled, "SpaceX, and Its Owner, Ming the Merciless, Looking to Make Extra Bucks For Its Weebly Rocket by Selling Doobies and Booze in Outer Space!"

    1. Re:Hey, I saw that by argee · · Score: 1

      I used to watch Flash Gordon as a kid! Rockets looked like V2's. And as they went thru space, the sparks out the back would drop down, and the
      smoke would go up! I bet the NASA scientists cannot duplicate that yet!

  10. Mental picture by DaMattster · · Score: 1

    I had the mental picture of Wil E. Coyote all frustrated that his Acme-brand super duper rocket got blown over.

  11. Shiny by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    So Shiny

    1. Re:Shiny by Rei · · Score: 4, Interesting

      On purpose. The reentry system being tested for Starship is very different from any other ever used. Normally the goal is to radiate heat, so you want a high emissivity (generally black) material. Starship (the actual vehicle, not this test hopper) on the other hand is designed to never get excessively hot in the first place - a double-layer skin with liquid between the layers and the outer layer perforated by tiny holes, through which heated coolant can vaporize out (creating a protective boundary layer while simultaneously removing heat). So the goal is to reject heat rather than absorb-then-radiate it. This means a low emissivity material, which generally means "shiny". :)

      It's still going to get tremendously hot, of course - the craft is being designed for direct aerocapture from MTO. So alumium is right out. But stainless is such a great material for so many reasons... most of which is its resilience. Something which carbon fibre isn't, and a big reason I was very apprehensive about SpaceX's original BFR design. It's also 1/50th the cost, comparably easy to work with, and people who know how to do so are a dime a dozen. It's strong, very inert (even in hostile environments), and with the right alloy retains its resilience even at cryogenic temperatures, while its tensile strength only grows. I'm very happy with the switch. Heck, it's even higher-Z, meaning it'll be more effective at blocking solar radiation (won't do much against GCR except kick off secondary radiation, but GCR is a far lower flux).

      --
      "Are you hungry? I haven't eaten since later this afternoon." -- Primer
    2. Re: Shiny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      None of this has anything to do with the rocket being shiny. They photoshopped the pictures to make it look better. The pictures that actual people took make it look different.

      Marketing 101. Ask McDonald's and Burger King why their burgers look so good in TV.

  12. D'oh by White+Yeti · · Score: 1

    "But there's an Air in Space Museum" -- Homer