SOLIDKREATE Posted October 31, 2014 Posted October 31, 2014 So, I log-in to Facebook and it is completely destroyed! Go look.
SYN_Blackrat Posted October 31, 2014 Posted October 31, 2014 ...are you just trying to cheer us up? 2
LLv34_Flanker Posted October 31, 2014 Posted October 31, 2014 S! It finally imploded and ceased to exist?
Feathered_IV Posted November 1, 2014 Posted November 1, 2014 I don't belong to Facebook. Can anyone throw a few more words at this topic?
Emgy Posted November 2, 2014 Posted November 2, 2014 (edited) More worried about SpaceShipTwo. RIP. All of the "underdog" space companies are cutting corners in dry testing and for some vehicles it really shows. (Falcon 1 failed first 3 launches, Minotaur-C has a 33% failure rate!). In the end, it works out for unmanned missions because their launch pricing is low, insurance covers the lost payloads and sats are replaceable. But when you want to send tourists to space... well, the prices of LockMart+Boeing and Airbus/Arianespace are high but their launch success records in the past two decades speak for themselves. Edited November 2, 2014 by Calvamos
MarcoRossolini Posted November 2, 2014 Posted November 2, 2014 Considering the attrition rate of Test pilots in the 50s and 60s, I think this crash doesn't look so bad all up... that's my impression at least...
Emgy Posted November 2, 2014 Posted November 2, 2014 (edited) Cold War attrition rates are completely unacceptable today. I'm just saying, don't be surprised that these companies can't match the safety record of the big boys. You cut costs in dry testing, you end up with more crashed vehicles and, unfortunately in this case, human casualties. And of course, in 2025, no one will care about this and Virgin Galactic will probably have many happy customers. Look at how the big companies are using unmanned test vehicles for this kind of thing. Expensive test programs. Safer. But maybe it doesn't matter for the final product. Edited November 2, 2014 by Calvamos
HeavyCavalrySgt Posted November 2, 2014 Posted November 2, 2014 I agree - it the broader scheme of things SS2's failure doesn't seem like a big deal, but it seems almost like the the general public has the expectation that doing risky things will always be inherently safe. Historically, testing new rocket fuels, new engines and pushing boundaries does not guarantee airframe or crew longevity. I have been surprised at those saying that this might spell the end of commercial space flight. I doubt they are right. It might delay it a bit, but there will always be people willing to push the limits
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now