It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Explosion at Space X Facility, Cape Canaveral

page: 1
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 09:24 AM
link   
cnn


An explosion rocked Cape Canaveral Thursday morning


There has been an eplosion at Space Launch Complex 40 this morning. It is the complex Space X uses to transport marerials to the ISS.


Response teams at the base were working to confirm if there were any injuries, said Brian Purtell, the public information officer for the 45th Space Wings.


Thee were no scheduled launches today.


(Stephanie) Martin (Public Affairs, Kennedy Space Center) referred further questions on the explosion to SpaceX Public Affairs. CNN has not heard back from SpaceX.


This is a developing story.
edit on 1-9-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 09:38 AM
link   
I guess, one can't make an omelette without breaking eggs...


Sh*t happens, that´s life.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 09:42 AM
link   
According to my local news outlet, it was the Falcon 9 Rocket which was undergoing a test.KHOU

The rocket was believed to be performing a test-firing of its nine Merlin main engines as a standard check of their readiness for launch, and so the area probably was cleared for that hazardous operation.

edit on 9/1/2016 by Neysa because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 09:44 AM
link   

originally posted byreldra
Response teams at the base were working to confirm if there were any injuries, said Brian Purtell, the public information officer for the 45th Space Wings.


Related but sort of off-topic, but how do unit-designations get the number? Meaning, this person belongs to "45th Space Wings" (whatever the hell that is). Does this mean there were 44 units prior?

TIA for any clarification
edit on 1-9-2016 by TXRabbit because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Neysa

Ty for the link. So, an entire Falcon 9 rocket exploded. It was set to carry an Amos 6 satellite for an Israeli company on Saturday morning, part of the satellite's capacity was to be used to expand Facebook's Africa internet initiative.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Glad no one was hurt.

Looks like they lost the Sat as well.


“SpaceX can confirm that in preparation for today's static fire, there was an anomaly on the pad resulting in the loss of the vehicle and its payload,



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: TXRabbit

No, it's kind of confusing, but the 45th Space Wing, may have been something like the 45th Fighter Squadron in a previous incarnation, and was hit by a BRAC. It could even have been disbanded and stood up again as the Space Wing. Many times they reactivate previous units and keep their number intact.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Static test failure. Thats where they pull the ground plugs and power on the internal systems to see if there is any static buildup. Its not supposed to result in an explosion.

Unless arcing started a small fire that compromised the fuel.

Remember the challenger explosion? Always wondered why nobody was watching the many monitors to see that torch like burn through occurring on the side of the booster as it climbed skyward.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 10:36 AM
link   
I dont know what to think of this.
I hope no one got hurt.
Theres almost no coverage on msm.

I dont want to make allegations against what SpaceX wants to do, and the money and contracts involved, or their endeavors to cut costs to ferry crew and cargo into space.

-maybe musk isnt just a purist radical entrepreneur, maybe its $ sign as opposed to revolutionary ideas which drives him. Trying to beat every one else to the post comes at a cost. I hope its a long way before they put human lives in their rockets.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 10:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Zarniwoop

That makes me wonder. If it was a static test, why include the payload?

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Don't they need the full load to determine if the first stage has enough umph to get the sucker in the air.

That's my extremely non scientific guess



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

When your space program consists of a series of essentially gigantic bombs, there will be explosions occasionally.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Zarniwoop

They can't test that without it getting in the air. Once that happens, it's a launch.

Usually an engine test is just to make sure they fire off instead of going boom. Maybe they needed the weight to ensure they didn't clear the ground?

I'm just guessing here, too, but every full-scale test I have seen assumes the worst and doesn't include expensive equipment not necessary for the test.

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

No, it's not that kind of static. It's a static test in that at least one engine is fired but the rocket doesn't move, and they abort the rocket firing after it ignites. It's to test all the pad systems, as well as the rocket itself prior to launch.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Zarniwoop

That makes me wonder. If it was a static test, why include the payload?

TheRedneck

Payloads are put on board when the rocket is assembled before roll out, not after its on the pad. Static test is part of final checks prior to launch.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Oh, thanks. So the rocket exploded during test firing the engines, that static test.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Most of their tests they rolled out, did the test, then mated the payload after they went back to the hangar. There must have been some reason this one was mated before. Maybe their hangar was occupied or something.



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Bwwahahahahah!
It had a Facebook satellite for a payload!

www.thesun.co.uk...


How will Jesus and politicians get by without Facebook? Oh the humanity!



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Wasn't this supposed to be the one that re-used a first stage?



posted on Sep, 1 2016 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Africans are in desperate need of facebook.
But disaster has struck once again in a heartbreaking tragedy.
Won't you help?
Your gift of just $20 a month - the cost of a cup of starbucks a week can make a difference in an African child's life.
How can they keep up with all the great works the Clinton Global Initiative is doing without it?
What about the looks of disappointment when they learn they won't be able to play Candy Crush?
Can you look an African child in the eyes and tell them no?
With your gift you will receive special access to Mark Zuckerburg's very own FB account.
Don't delay, there's a child in need waiting for you.




top topics



 
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join