Oh Dear! SpaceX rocket explodes after launch

[smartcooky]

http://www.3news.co.nz/world/spacex-rocket-explodes-after-launch-2015062905

[Sus_pilot]

I'm probably wrong, but it looked to me like it failed at the nose and flew into itself.

[Echnaton]

It sure looked that way in the video. 

[Echnaton]

"There was an overpressure event in the upper stage liquid oxygen tank,"  the occurred about 20 seconds before main engine cutoff.

[Glom]

What I've heard discussed is that the payload came loose and at 3G smashed through the propellant tank in this upper stage.

Not sure how informed that was. Apparently, Musk is saying their still going over the data with a hex editor.

[gwiz]

The one fact we've got so far is that there was an "overpressure event" in the second stage liquid oxygen tank while the first stage was still operating.  I can't recall a previous launch with a structural failure upwards of the operating stage since the first Atlas-Centaur test in 1962.

[Zakalwe]

The one fact we've got so far is that there was an "overpressure event" in the second stage liquid oxygen tank while the first stage was still operating.  I can't recall a previous launch with a structural failure upwards of the operating stage since the first Atlas-Centaur test in 1962.

Maybe it over-pressurised when the payload came crashing through it? 

A different field completely, but in motorcycle racing the post-engine grenading event is typically followed by a press-release that ALWAYS says the problem was electrical. Which usually provokes some wag to quip that the source of the electrical problems were the sparkplugs getting smashed by the piston and con-rod on their way out of the engine. 

[darren r]

Isn't this the third one to blow up on launch? Obviously, this is proof that Apollo was fake, because no Saturn V's ever blew up...

On that topic - I know that several of the Apollo launches suffered near-catastrophic failures on launch. How many of them would have been actually catastrophic if there had been no crew aboard to fix the problem. Does anyone know?

[Glom]

Also the quality of the footage of the Saturn launches was terrible compared to the footage of yesterday's launch.

[Zakalwe]

On that topic - I know that several of the Apollo launches suffered near-catastrophic failures on launch. How many of them would have been actually catastrophic if there had been no crew aboard to fix the problem. Does anyone know?

Good question. The only one that I can think of (off the top of my head) was Apollo 12- the famous "SCE to Aux" incident. Even that would probably have made it to orbit (assuming the Flight Director didn't call an abort) as the Instrument Unit ring wasn't compromised by the lightening strike.
Things happen too fast (generally) on a booster for human beings to be able to react in time. The IU was one of the real unsung heroes of the program.

[smartcooky]

On that topic - I know that several of the Apollo launches suffered near-catastrophic failures on launch. How many of them would have been actually catastrophic if there had been no crew aboard to fix the problem. Does anyone know?

Good question. The only one that I can think of (off the top of my head) was Apollo 12- the famous "SCE to Aux" incident. Even that would probably have made it to orbit (assuming the Flight Director didn't call an abort) as the Instrument Unit ring wasn't compromised by the lightening strike.
Things happen too fast (generally) on a booster for human beings to be able to react in time. The IU was one of the real unsung heroes of the program.

Apollo 13 had an engine failure during launch (the centre one?) but that wasn't really a problem unless one of the others failed too. They still went into orbit.

[Allan F]

Yes, on the second stage.

And Apollo 10 had a problem in lunar orbit, where the control of the LM was lost. And just recovered in time.

[smartcooky]

Yes, on the second stage.

Which brings up a question for me.

AIUI, after the TLI burn, the third stage and everything forward of it is heading for the moon on a free return trajectory. Shortly after leaving the earth the crew translates the CSM and extracts the LEM from the LEM Adaptor, and when the CSM+LM nears the moon, they execute a LOI burn to go into orbit.

What happened to the third stage with the instrument ring and the loose panels of the LEM Adaptor? Were they still on a free return back to earth or do they crash into the moon

 

[Northern Lurker]

Which brings up a question for me.

AIUI, after the TLI burn, the third stage and everything forward of it is heading for the moon on a free return trajectory. Shortly after leaving the earth the crew translates the CSM and extracts the LEM from the LEM Adaptor, and when the CSM+LM nears the moon, they execute a LOI burn to go into orbit.

What happened to the third stage with the instrument ring and the loose panels of the LEM Adaptor? Were they still on a free return back to earth or do they crash into the moon

 

AFAIK unspent fuel and oxidiser were vented to change trajectory to solar orbit. From Apollo 13 onward S-IVBs were directed to hit Moon to give ALSEP seismometers something to measure. I have no idea about SLA panels but if they were on free return trajectory I'd guess they reentered and burned in atmosphere.

Lurky

[Zakalwe]

AFAIK unspent fuel and oxidiser were vented to change trajectory to solar orbit. From Apollo 13 onward S-IVBs were directed to hit Moon to give ALSEP seismometers something to measure. I have no idea about SLA panels but if they were on free return trajectory I'd guess they reentered and burned in atmosphere.

Lurky

J0023 was the designation given to an unknown object discovered by an amaetur over a decade ago. That's now thought to be the S-IVB off Apollo 12
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J002E3

They did think that another object, GP59, was one of the A13 panels, but this has now been IIRC disproved.
http://www.universetoday.com/85116/is-winking-near-earth-asteroid-gp59-really-the-missing-apollo-13-panel/