Can Elon recover? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Bg JEXQkjNQ

GET THE WATER, ELON!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3Z7WmSSRX0&feature=youtu.be

File: Screenshot 2016-09-02 at 00.12.04.png (409KB, 1351x645px) Image search: [Google]

409KB, 1351x645px

earliest frame of the initial explosion I could get.

>>8315311
From this picture it is clear that the reason for the rocket's demise was due to a flaw in the construction of the launch pad, not due to the rocket itself. Whoever assembled that flawed launch station is to blame. Bot the people eho designed the rocket.

>>8315316
why do you say that? because the explosion started from the top?

>>8315327
It should be obvious from the picture that it was not the rocket that was flawed. If a car gets destroyed in a flood or a tornado that doesnt mean the car was flawed, even though it was destroyed.

>Musk's bad day: Explosion + stock drops by Tesla, SolarCity = $390 million loss

Musk is done

>>8315358
Can you explain exactly what in the picture makes it obvious that it's the fault of the launch pad?

>>8315358
Pls explain, I'm curious.

>>8315358
Considering even SpaceX says the fault lay somewhere in the second stage LOX tank, i dont really believe you

>>8315409
>>8315418
He's being sarcastic.

File: 1472073688448.jpg (100KB, 1023x682px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 1023x682px

>>8315277
>Can Elon recover?
Let's hope not! Fuck that guy and his bullshit companies.

>>8315442
Now I see it. That went right over my head.

>>8315409

> inb4 he says something about natural disasters

>>8315277
Insurance will cover it, only thing is it'll cause delays for the reusable + Falcon Heavy.

Dicks out for Elon

>>8315378
>>8315476
Hi Bezos

>>8315277
His success/failure rate is pretty good I thought? What's the standard here?

File: 1449528762029.jpg (71KB, 540x359px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 540x359px

>>8315476
>this angry over someone else's success

Your post reads like every angry poorfag post ever. Just swap out the name for anyone making money.

>>8315358

What the fuck are you on about you massive cunt

File: esa_ariane_5.jpg (467KB, 2879x1619px) Image search: [Google]

467KB, 2879x1619px

>>8315690
>success/failure rate
This is not really the most relevant metric. The thing to look at is consecutive successes. When a rocket blows up, the one that flies next will hopefully have the previous flaws fixed, and it is in fine a different rocket that flies. You have two types of rockets basically: the ones that blow up a few times at the beginning then never fail again, and those who would periodically blow up once in a while. Which one would you feel safer flying your satellite in? Yup, consecutive successes is what matters to insurance companies, too.

>What's the standard here?
Pic related is generally considered the most reliable rocket in the world with more than 70 (or something) consecutive successes.

>>8315668

Insurance will not cover this, actually

>>8315725
And why is that?

>>8315981

The payload owner didn't have pre-launch insurance.

I expect SpaceX is trying to experiment with their rockets

It's not about "just get something that works" to them...

>>8315311
Clearly it was the tiny UFO with laser weapons that caused structural failure.

>and it's payload

File: 38054204d850d6593aa4822dfc612da119772bc8_full.jpg (9KB, 184x184px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 184x184px

>>8315277
>When you learn the payload was a satellite for Israel.

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

>>8316066
>No wonder mark (((zuckerburg))) made such a butthurt post. He went jewmode and fucked himself over.
le source?

I thinkt he unofficial consensus is that the explosion happened at the interface of the LOX tube and the rocket, which likely means that some stupid cunt didn't degrease both parts of the fitting properly.

Gunshot at around 1:18

US government didn't want the Israeli spy satellite going up, so they sent some poor DEVGRU bastard out into the Florida heat in a ghillie suit to sabotage the rocket before the static fire.

Poor guy's going to be sitting out there for a few days, eating protein bars and covered in leeches.

Ya know, a good sniper, hidden a mile away can do severe damage to a rocket or company stock when it is space transportation. Could be a reason for severe failures globally over decades.

>>8315983
sauce?

>>8316182
https://twitter.com/pbdes

>>8315277
When on earth will people try to make rockets minimalize air friction?

>>8316189
>"Spacecom insured Amos-6 for $285M in marine cargo market, not space insurance market. Launch +1 yr policy would kick in at rocket ignition"
>policy would kick in at rocket ignition
AHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA oh man thats funny. Well, technically there was some kind of ignition...

>>8316202
it was still insured

>>8315277
I bet the fanboys at TMRO are crying right now.

>>8316202
Not only was it insured (duh), but it was cheaper that way.

He is forced to buy space insurance instead of marine insurance at rocket ignition, because rockets are inherently high risk.

Understand how it all works now, son?

>>8316017
If they're experimenting with fueling the things and it blew up then they're fucking retarded. How long until the SpaceX investors remove Musk as a liability?

>>8315476
Tesla is most definitely not bullshit.... have you driven one?

>>8315277
>>8315304
>>8315311
>>8315358
>>8315378
>>8315409
>>8315418
>>8315438
>>8315442
>>8315476
>>8315656
>>8315668
>>8315669
>>8315685
>>8315690
>>8315694
>>8315706
>>8315725
>>8315981
>>8315983
>>8316196
>>8316202
>>8316208
>>8316209
>>8316216
>>8316216
>>8316233
>>8316238
>how can elon recover?
>trying to privatize space with NASA in the way
>dream-on.mp3

its always under government oversight for a reason.

let your dreams be dreams in that case:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2FTZhyuJy8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG7HjyuDP9w

Hope not. This US American meme rockets are quite a problem

>>8316338

I haven't been following SpaceX all that much

I'm guessing it's a newly designed rocket they're using?

That often has problems, really. It's easy to design one and run math, but it's another to put them in practice and successfully fix problem you run into.

>>8316348
It's not newly design, the same has been used on several launches.

We know that it happened before the engine test fire, during propellant load. Maybe because SpaceX chill their propellant massively, maybe not. Now it's time to wait for months unit the investigation finishes.

These faggots are even calling it an "anomaly". As if they high lord musk with space x isnt capable of an accident.

>>8316361

I'm assuming the rockets themselves, not just this launch, are newly designed. Yes?

>>8316450
If you mean desgined as in built/constructed, then yes, these are new builds flying for the first time. None of the previously landed Falcon 9s have flown again yet.

If not, then I'm lost.

File: 1472802459159.png (70KB, 904x448px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 904x448px

>>8316091

>>8316453

Yep

That's what I mean

>>8316390
>"t-the rocket didn't really explode! Go Elon, I still love you!"

>>8316238
He did, but he died when he used the autopilot because Tesla tampered with its security features instead of sticking to the original software they bough from some external contractor. And that was after surviving a battery fire and a road rage caused by the poor build quality.

>>8315277
Spayce Sex will always find a way to shill its "rokkets". They are liars and scam artists

>>8315706
>Ariane
Sieg Heil!

>>8315983
It was insured as maritime cargo, actually. So they will get some compensation at least.

File: 37CDAE8900000578-3769059-image-m-42_1472756960902[1].jpg (28KB, 470x519px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 470x519px

Talking about CO2 emmission...

>>8315304
>oh Jeezis

File: letter-to-facebook-540x334.jpg (42KB, 540x334px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 540x334px

>>8316066
>>8316461
You know how many people who worked on his project just strait up and quit because they had moral objections? I wouldn't be surprised if it was some sort of sabotage. Doubtful but not surprising.

>>8316691
>Talking about CO2 emmission...
What are you on about?

>>8316691
It's not that much. If you look at a busy highway filled with cars. That's something emitting CO2 constantly, nonstop, all the time.

>>8316736

>thousands of tons of fuel
>not much

>>8316736
This thing burned for an hour with producing a huge thick dense mass of smoke that all went to the atmosphere. If you'd combine a highway air pollution it would barely make any dense smoke. And this is not the first time Elon blew up a rocket that caused the same amount of CO2.

Elon must be stopped so we can save our environment and prevent it to contribute to global warming.

>>8315304
SpaceX should hire that guy to do the commentary for all their launches

>>8316760
And just how many tons of fuel are burned by cars every day?

Are you too stupid to realize you'd need to include that number if you want to compare these?

>>8316760
>thousands of tons of fuel
It's not even one thousand.
And no, that's really not very much fuel at all.

>>8316763
Waving your hands in the air and shouting isn't a substitute for actually making an argument. Rocketry is a completely insignificant fraction of global emissions.

Also, why focus on the times the rocket blows up? The fuel gets burnt either way.

>>8315304
What the fuck is wrong with Americans when rockets blow up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZ0SgAU9LXI

>>8316912
>What the fuck is wrong with Americans
ftfy

>>8315304
can you do the aluackbar+ISIS theme

>muskfags have deserted /sci/
priceless

>>8316760
>thousands of tons of fuel
>versus trillions of tons of fuel

Hmm....

>>8316691
>>8316763
>This thing burned for an hour with producing a huge thick dense mass of smoke
Oh wow everyone, please take a moment to look at this genius who thinks thickness of smoke=amount of CO2 released.
You do realise that CO2 is colorless, right? Smoke is made up of particles that did not burn in the fire and water vapor.