Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
sean
@swabbie.eth
It appears that Starship did not terminate in the planned corridor, which is a major FAA violation and could cause a longer delay before Flight 8 (aircraft had to be diverted, etc) It's not just that ship 33 failed, it's the fact that the flight termination system didn't even do its job correctly :/ https://x.com/mcrs987/status/1880042280163373515
1 reply
0 recast
8 reactions
downshift
@downshift.eth
it should have detonated before this degree inclination change?
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
sean
@swabbie.eth
yea definitely. it couldn't have just been a quick rotation either, all that energy had to get going in the wrong direction, so it must have been off for a bit
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
downshift
@downshift.eth
they got this press release out QUICK "Starship flew within its designated launch corridor – as all U.S. launches do to safeguard the public both on the ground, on water and in the air. Any surviving pieces of debris would have fallen into the designated hazard area." https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-flight-7
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
sean
@swabbie.eth
will be interesting to see if it really did stay within the corridor, because the info that was gathered so far by outside experts initially appeared otherwise
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
downshift
@downshift.eth
yeah, i'm not drawing any conclusions until we hear from the FAA but my gut tells me winds couldn't have pushed the debris that far away from the corridor. i think your theory that the vehicle sustained propulsion off course for a non-negligible duration is likely...either that, or the explosion itself? if the tank(s) ruptured on the north side of the vehicle
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
