SpaceX's SN10 Completes a Successful Test Flight

[Pann]

SN10 has taken off and successfully landed.

https://twitter.com/DJSnM/status/1367253834653868034

- - - Updated - - -

Oh! It just exploded!

https://twitter.com/DJSnM/status/1367256222861197314

[Edge-]

That was a FANTASTIC boom.

[PACOX]

What an explosive result.

[PC2]

SN10 has taken off and successfully landed.

https://twitter.com/DJSnM/status/1367253834653868034

Nice, it looked futuristic so I thought it was fake for a second.

Oh! It just exploded!

Damn, I wonder why. It was leaning but the Tweet I saw didn't say if it fell over. Maybe the hard landing caused it to slowly leak some leftover fuel and it took a while to find a heat source.

[Nerraw]

That was exciting to watch!

Damn, I wonder why. It was leaning but they didn't actually say if it fell over. Maybe the hard landing caused it to leak some leftover fuel and it took a while to find a heat source.

Looking at the NASASpaceflight stream, it absolutely crushed those landing legs. The rocket was resting on it's own frame. The bottom fuel tank clearly did not seem to agree with that landing.

[Easo]

I cheered in front of computer. I think right now it is quite clear it absolutely can be done and will be done. Probably soft clear landing 2 attempts from now.

[Nerraw]

Landing legs need a redesign, but the concept clearly works. It's gonna be fun to see one of these on the Moon in 3-5 years.

[cubby]

SN10 has taken off and successfully landed.

https://twitter.com/DJSnM/status/1367253834653868034

- - - Updated - - -

Oh! It just exploded!

https://twitter.com/DJSnM/status/1367256222861197314

Holy shit that was amazing!

Landed...delay...BOOM! I saw some flames coming out of the lower end on one side, I wonder if that's what did it in at the end, after sticking the landing.

[PACOX]

Nice, it looked futuristic so I thought it was fake for a second.


Damn, I wonder why. It was leaning but the Tweet I saw didn't say if it fell over. Maybe the hard landing caused it to leak some leftover fuel and it took a while to find a heat source.

At this point its designed to land that hard. The other two also leaned. Early speculation is that there was an internal leak that ignited some methane.

[Pann]

Nice, it looked futuristic so I thought it was fake for a second.

Yeah, it looked like CGI at times. Although it is cutting edge technology for some reason it reminds me of really old black and white sci-fi.

- - - Updated - - -

Landing legs need a redesign, but the concept clearly works. It's gonna be fun to see one of these on the Moon in 3-5 years.

Yup. I think it is amazing to watch every attempt get that little bit better. I can't wait for more ambitious flights!

[PACOX]

Yup. I think it is amazing to watch every attempt get that little bit better. I can't wait for more ambitious flights!

What sets it apart from the Falcon is that it doesn't have legs (or won't) . Legs are expensive, heavy, and need to be replaced. One of their plans is to catch it...yup they want to catch a rocket. Will be neat to see if it's only a concept that never sees practical use.

[cubby]

Nice, it looked futuristic so I thought it was fake for a second.


Damn, I wonder why. It was leaning but the Tweet I saw didn't say if it fell over. Maybe the hard landing caused it to slowly leak some leftover fuel and it took a while to find a heat source.

That initial video did look fake for a second to me as well. So cool they stuck the landing (sucks it blew up though).

- - - Updated - - -

It sure didn't blow immediately though - several seconds before [what they are calling a methane leak] it went splewy.

[Nerraw]

What sets it apart from the Falcon is that it doesn't have legs (or won't) . Legs are expensive, heavy, and need to be replaced. One of their plans is to catch it...yup they want to catch a rocket. Will be neat to see if it's only a concept that never sees practical use.

It's the 70m tall super heavy booster they want to catch. Absolutely nuts.

[cubby]

It's the 70m tall super heavy booster they want to catch. Absolutely nuts.

FORE!

Seriously though - that would be interesting. Didn't they catch some Falcon's in their oceanic barge net? Or some fairings maybe.

[Nerraw]

FORE!

Seriously though - that would be interesting. Didn't they catch some Falcon's in their oceanic barge net? Or some fairings maybe.

They want to install arms on the launch mount, and have the booster come back to that and then rest on the arms with its grid fin mounts.

...Yeah. I'm gonna watch those tests.

[cubby]

They want to install arms on the launch mount, and have the booster come back to that and then rest on the arms with its grid fin mounts.

...Yeah. I'm gonna watch those tests.

I'll bring the popcorn.

I mean, given that SpaceX has a never ending streak of successes, they will probably pull it off. Still, I will be there with bells on.

[Easo]

It is quite funny reading various media sources about the landing. I mean some have blatant issues objectively reporting it (looking at "news" like RT), others cannot get past the word "explosion" or "failure" and only part have normal articles noting that this is overall sucess in terms of actually landing the damn thing (thus progress), but that it was not perfect (the boom).
Same shit was on the previous two launches.

[Nerraw]

It is quite funny reading various media sources about the landing. I mean some have blatant issues objectively reporting it (looking at "news" like RT), others cannot get past the word "explosion" or "failure" and only part have normal articles noting that this is overall sucess in terms of actually landing the damn thing (thus progress), but that it was not perfect (the boom).
Same shit was on the previous two launches.

There are a few outlets that have had the knives out for SpaceX for years. Anything that isn't 13/10 is jumped on immediately.

[cubby]

It is quite funny reading various media sources about the landing. I mean some have blatant issues objectively reporting it (looking at "news" like RT), others cannot get past the word "explosion" or "failure" and only part have normal articles noting that this is overall sucess in terms of actually landing the damn thing (thus progress), but that it was not perfect (the boom).
Same shit was on the previous two launches.

I'm seeing those articles as well. It's interesting seeing "scientific" "journalists" reporting on science and space, and not know anything about it. Like you pointed out, sticking the landing is HUGE - major milestone. The explosion is another issue entirely - leaked methane IIRC.

- - - Updated - - -

There are a few outlets that have had the knives out for SpaceX for years. Anything that isn't 13/10 is jumped on immediately.

Indeed - success breeds it's own haters.
(i don't understand the "13/10" reference)

[Othraerir]

Indeed - success breeds it's own haters.
(i don't understand the "13/10" reference)

I think they mean that unless it's perfect ++ they have a fit