• Dashi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    "A loss of communication with ground control occurred as the engines shut down, leading to the rocket’s self-destruction sequence.

    The incident highlights significant operational failures, as engine shutdowns should not cause communication loss, indicating a lack of redundancy in systems."

    For the communication redundancy part: This is just my interpretation of what I’m reading and it could be 100% wrong.

    The communications need a redundant power supply/ connection not associated with the engine. Because they didn’t have the communication connection and the engines were on fire the self destruct was initiated. Where if they had communications maybe they could have done something else? Turn off fuel, changed location of impact, changed location of self destruct to not be where it was.

    I could be wrong, Iam in fact not a rocket scientist

    • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Two engines exploded, blowing the back of the ship up, causing the ship to tumble, which lead to loss of communication a few minutes later. Abort was absolutely the right call. Saying communications need to be better is like saying you need a better bandaid for your stump of an arm after you blew it off with a grenade.

      The communications failed because the ship was spinning faster and faster, and eventually the antenna tracking couldn’t keep up.

      As soon as the engines exploded, the mission was dead, so the best thing is to abort, which is what they did.

      Scott Manley analysis, shows the pic of the missing engines. https://youtu.be/kJCjGt7jUkU

      • anomnom@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        If they had control when the first 3, then 4 engines failed, why didn’t they shut off the remaining 2 engines that would go on to spin the rocket?

        According to Manley, the remaining engines were non-vectoring, so there was never a way to keep flying straight with lopsided thrust. Shutting down would have kept it from spinning and allowed more data acquisition before aborting.

        • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          You saying shut down the engines from the ground? The vehicle computer would have a much better understanding of the system than the people on the ground during those first minutes. I’m guessing they just needed to trust their programming at that point.