Jump to content

Blue Origin Thread (merged)


Aethon

Recommended Posts

Am I the only one slightly puzzled by Elon's previous tweet? He seemed to imply that he knew the cause("counterintuitive cause"), but then we have Shotwell the same day saying that no one knows, and she refuses to speculate. Then we have to wait two weeks for just 'preliminary' causes, as well as the SpaceX team having to break down the info all the way down to Hex-data or whatever. Is this just a case of Elon's genus, or was he speaking out the bum?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure 'counterintuitive cause' is a statement that the cause is nothing immediately obvious-which, given this was immediately afterwards, means unknown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He probably meant that the apparent cause could not, so far as they could work out, lead to what actually happened. Like: there was a slight overpressure; a relief valve opened to bleed O2 off; pressure soared and continued to soar even though the valve was wide open and there was nothing that could generate that sort of pressure. That would be counterintuitive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was an intuitive cause, they probably would have had a sensor and or a data pattern among sensors that could detect it. The helium tank rupturing inside one of the other tanks is a very intuitive cause for sudden overpressure. They probably had ways to detect that in telemetry.

The statement that the cause was counter intuitive doesn't actually say anything, as has been pointed out, but it does make it easy for one to speculate all sorts of things that are not/were not said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:rolleyes: It was his diplomatic, lawyer-approved way of saying "all we know at this point is that it was going well, until it exploded."

That is exactly what I think, and I think people read too deeply into what Elon said. There are just certain things you're not supposed to say to your superiors or, in this case, the public/ customers. For example, you don't have a "problem", you have a "challenge". Likewise, there is never an "explosion", but there is an "overpressure".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but they're going to send lives (more importantly, human lives) on it,how much do you value human lives ?

As unethical as it may seem, human lives do have their 'price'. We are not going to invest 5B USD to try to save a single human being, sorry. Public risk management projects do take that into account. E.g., a Dutch life was valued in 2008 at €2.2 million with regards to the Delta Works

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this talk about human lives and their value is male bovine doo-doo. Mars One proves that people are ready to go on a risky (and certainly one way) missions, provided that the mission is interesting enough.

Every astronaut and every candidate who ever enrolled in the training process knew perfectly well that there is a non-negligible chance that they will not survive the mission.

There are more than enough volunteers that would be willing to risk their lives for a chance to hitch a ride on an orbital vehicle, me included, and I don't ask for millions of euros.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a difference, too, between reasonable and unreasonable risk. The D2 (and Apollo, Soyuz, etc) has abort capability all the way to orbit. By design it can mitigate and survive 99% of what could possibly go wrong. There's always that last 1%, but nothing worth doing is without risk. And most things not worth doing too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter if there are volunteers that consider themselves expendable. There is a difference between people volunteering to go on a suicide mission and the government or a corporation sending people on a suicide mission. One can be considered heroism (or stupidity). The other would be unethical and criminal. It's a political non-starter.

- - - Updated - - -

That sounds better

What difference does it make?

These are highly automated vehicles. They can fly unmanned if necessary. NASA crew rotations don't need a cab driver to take them to the ISS and back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

are you sure we can see it there ? On this website i see no indication of any webcast even though it should be starting in a few minutes...

Sorry, I mistake, I enter to the spacex site webcast section and I read that the talk would be at 12:30 pm (noon as was mentioned in the twitter) but I dint notice that it was a 22 days old news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The telecon is at 3pm EDT. So, not in a few minutes.

Oh i thought it was at noon like elon musk tweeted. I guess i'll wait a bit then :) anyway, it wo 't be live, will it ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...