..to this?
Various physical forces
>>8701617
by testing it at an underwater explosives test range?
Test till failure.
>>8702210
Maybe they got a new tank made for the next tests
Can't say that without a statement
>>8702210
>It wasn't supposed to fail
It has to fail. When you test stuff you test it to fail so you know how much it can take. Not doing that is extremely foolish.
Wow, it's almost as if you test the engineering of your product to see what tolerances it can take, and then improve the design after the results come in.
Every time something happens with Space X the anti-Musk force on /sci/ comes out the woodwork to shitpost, hilarious.
>>8702731
It's because they don't like the fact that while they sit here and argue about who's a brainlet and so forth SpaceX is actually doing things in real life with real hardware.
>>8702259
>It has to fail. When you test stuff you test it to fail so you know how much it can take. Not doing that is extremely foolish.
But that also wasn't the objective of the test. Testing to failure should be done after testing to specification, to make sure the test article can do the job it was designed for. In this case, it seems they still have ways to go to engineer a viable carbon fiber LOX tank.
>>8702883
To be fair that is exactly what Elon said during the conference. More specifically, that the LOx tank on the upper stage/spaceship was the hardest part of the entire system, harder than the engines or the massive first stage booster.
>>8702910
>what Elon said during the conference
Which conference?
>>8702978
The conference where he revealed the ITS architecture, Raptor engine test photos, and the large LOx carbon composite tank seen in the OP. Can't remember the actual location of the conference at the moment but it was in early September of 2016.