Timeline for Why was Space X's Starship blown up?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 24, 2023 at 1:59 | comment | added | Austin Hemmelgarn | @ErinAnne I’ve actually had to discuss this type of thing with people before. Based on those experiences, most people who aren’t aerospace engineers (and even some aerospace engineers) tend to significantly underestimate the destructive power of the large pieces, and significantly overestimate the destructive power of the small pieces (essentially, they assume it’s going to be deadly and highly destructive either way), which usually leads to a strong fixation on the probability of being hit. | |
| Apr 22, 2023 at 3:55 | comment | added | Erin Anne | @stevec why? Dissipating all that chemical energy higher up, and mitigating the gravitational potential and the kinetic energy by scattering it across pieces with low terminal velocity and small mass, makes it much less likely to damage ANYTHING, even if some location in the debris field is more likely to be struck by something. A mostly-intact Starship + SuperHeavy stack obliterates whatever it hits and whatever is near where it hits. That isn't preferable. | |
| Apr 22, 2023 at 3:26 | comment | added | stevec | Ha. That was a great read. But in the case of a rocket, if I were on the ground within 100km of a rapid unscheduled disassembly, I'd feel better knowing two or three large pieces were coming down than tens of thousands of smaller pieces. | |
| Apr 22, 2023 at 3:14 | comment | added | Erin Anne | @stevec perhaps this xkcd will be illustrative as to why large pieces are less desirable than small ones, though the raindrop isn't also full of rocket fuel | |
| Apr 22, 2023 at 3:04 | comment | added | stevec | Maybe a stupid question; doesn't blowing it into many smaller pieces increase the chance of debris going places it wouldn't be welcome? (as opposed to if it fell as one or two very large pieces)? | |
| S Apr 21, 2023 at 21:25 | history | suggested | André LFS Bacci | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Duplicated word.
|
| Apr 21, 2023 at 18:29 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Apr 21, 2023 at 21:25 | |||||
| Apr 21, 2023 at 9:13 | history | answered | Erin Anne | CC BY-SA 4.0 |