News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has exploded at Cape Canaveral by yawz on Thursday September 01, 2016 @10:50AM (#12405627)
That was my first reaction. I thought they could create a dummy payload with the same dimensions and weight. But, then... unless the weight distribution of the payload is important.
Re:A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has exploded at Cape Canaveral by Klathmon on Thursday September 01, 2016 @10:59AM (#12405690)
Loading the payload isn't a quick thing, it takes time and a lot of careful work to do. So doing it before the tests can save a lot of time and I'm guessing money.
Re:A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has exploded at Cape Canaveral by martindevans on Thursday September 01, 2016 @11:39AM (#12406141)
Loading the payload also requires a load of work moving the vehicle about etc. If you want to be certain you didn't damage the vehicle in any way during all of that then you need to test again once the payload is attached.

Of course normally a failure during a test would be something like minor thrust fluctuations - not a complete loss of vehicle and payload!

Re:A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has exploded at Cape Canaveral by fnj on Thursday September 01, 2016 @02:19PM (#12407640)
Understood that mating the payload is a lot of work, but it is one hell of a lot less work than building a complete new payload.