Re:SpaceX Falcon 9 booster lost in landing failure
by jfengel on Wednesday August 28, 2024 @10:31AM
(#41379940)
Yeah, though it's a little weird that two failures should happen in relatively short order.
Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. But they definitely want to be alert, because a third time would suggest that something else is going on. Perhaps a slip in manufacturing standards.
I wouldn't get too worked up, given that 23 launches is utterly unprecedented. Still, it's odd.
Re:SpaceX Falcon 9 booster lost in landing failure
by throwaway48540 on Wednesday August 28, 2024 @12:27PM
(#41381265)
Is it really weird that two very overworked boosters fail after they both get overworked around the same time? The only odd thing is that they have multiple very overworked boosters.
Re:SpaceX Falcon 9 booster lost in landing failure
by pieix on Wednesday August 28, 2024 @06:59PM
(#41385353)
The first failure wasn’t an overworked booster, it was a second stage which are always new off of the factory floor as they aren’t recovered.
Re:SpaceX Falcon 9 booster lost in landing failure
by manuelmoreale on Wednesday August 28, 2024 @04:42PM
(#41384129)
The two failures aren’t related though if I’m not mistaken. This is an issue on a first stage on landing while the other was an issue on a second stage engine.
I think it’s just a weird coincidence. But they’re also launching so often that it was bound to happen.
I think they also had some 200+ consecutive successful landings which is wildly impressive.
Re:SpaceX Falcon 9 booster lost in landing failure
by lostemptations5 on Wednesday August 28, 2024 @01:44PM
(#41382081)
> Falcon 9 booster landings became such a normal event that it's only news when it fails.
A bit like the airplane industry they are trying to copy -- make these things routine....
In any case, SpaceX was on a streak for so long but these past few months they got a failure (-ish?) on their second stage and now this. With so many launches every week it's bound to happen sometime, I guess.