The most impressive launch explosion, at least visually, was at Canaveral in 2009. Absolutely bonkers.
1 Like
[quote=âAaronGilliland, post:19, topic:2079â]
Are you talking about the exhaust plumes or the nozzles?[/quote]
Iâm referring to the plumes.
Indeed, this is the question. Presumably, if there is a problem with the engine, both of the hypergolic fuel inlets will have cutoff valves. And since the brown discharge appears to be diverted from the side, it may be that there was a failure upstream of one of the cutoff valves. Or a rupture occurred downstream -and- a cutoff valve failed. The latter seems the more unlikely, because, as you mentioned, there was no odd burn from the nozzle (though to be fair, if there was a double ended line shear, there would be no fuel getting to the nozzle).
Another final thing to consider is that the failure was in response to computer commands. What Iâm thinking of is a water hammer event when cutoff valves shut at full flow. Perhaps the engine wasnât operating so the computer shut it off, and the water hammer caused a rupture or damaged the cutoff valve.
1 Like
Well, baring lung damage, you are ok, unlike the fuel, which will give you leukemia in 5 years. Both are nasty as hell, but for different reasons.
Okay, which one of you jokers was playing Kerbal Space Program on the mission control computer?
Woah. Impressive. I canât believe I donât remember hearing about it at the time.
This happened in 1997 not in 2009.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
