1 Amateur Rocket Crashes, Another Explodes 292
prostoalex writes "A 23-foot-long space rocket carrying 3 dummies exploded in the Pacific Northwest after reaching about 200 feet. The team was competing for Ansari X Prize, offering $10 million to the team that successfully completes a low-budget private space rocket capable of carrying men into space. Google News offers more perspectives into the event, the team is saying the rocket, whose parachute malfunctioned, would have to be rebuilt." And AmiNTT writes "Everygeek's favorite rocketeers over at Armadillo Aerospace have suffered a fairly serious setback over the weekend - the crash of their 48-inch vehicle link in a test hop at their 100 acre test field. Of course there is video and pictures - 2 3...
This setback should keep them from flying for about five weeks, but will give them a chance to make some design changes. I'm sure they will be back better than ever.
(Armadillo have shown up on Slashdot many times in the past.)"
poor dummies (Score:5, Funny)
What kind of world are we living? I say it's end of the world when we stop carying for dummies.
Re:poor dummies (Score:5, Funny)
Re:poor dummies (Score:2)
Re:poor dummies (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:poor dummies (Score:5, Informative)
It's their own fault. (Score:5, Funny)
decapitated dummy pic (Score:5, Funny)
Poor, poor dummy.
Re:decapitated dummy pic (Score:2, Funny)
Re:decapitated dummy pic (Score:2)
free dummies (Score:3, Funny)
Because, hey... free dummies.
AH the power of the deep thought
doom3 (Score:5, Funny)
"Amazingly, even though the on-board camera was destroyed, the tape did survive with only some scuffed sections. It's a good thing Doom 3 is selling very well..."
Re:doom3 (Score:5, Funny)
Re:doom3 (Score:2)
Ah, and that's where we're all wrong... These are just real-time renders from the new game engine they are creating...
I'm particularly excited about the deformable/destroyable objects!
The physics model looks like it needs a little work though.
Re:doom3 (Score:5, Funny)
John Carmack
Re:doom3 (Score:2)
Originally it had a blend of peroxide and methanol.
Eventually they'll change their name... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Eventually they'll change their name... (Score:2)
"The Right Stuff", part 2? (Score:5, Interesting)
That didn't set them back, and somehow I don't think this will set back these private experimenters either.
Re:"The Right Stuff", part 2? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow... am I with you on this one. Remember people... these are ENGINEERS. They are developing something new...
Compare this engineering to software engineering.
1) A software engineer comes up with an idea.
2) A programmer writes a test case of the idea. Often, the programmer is the engineer in step 1.
3) Software is run. Program crashes, bombs, but does something resembling the goals in step 1.
4) Bugs are found, worked out, kinked, etc.
Repeat steps 3 and 4 until the program works as it should....
The ONLY difference between this and aeronautics is that when it crashes, you have to rebuild the rocket. (You have to rebuild the software, too, but that's assumed, automatic and usually done in 10 seconds)
So, I really don't get why the disconnect. It's engineering! Products are seldom viable in the first design attempt, but a basically workable design is tweaked until it's ready.
No different here.
Re:"The Right Stuff", part 2? (Score:2)
Compare this engineering to software engineering.
1) A software engineer comes up with an idea.
2) A programmer writes a test case of the idea. Often, the programmer is the engineer in step 1.
3) Software is run. Program crashes, bombs, but does something resembling the goals in step 1.
You forgot a step
3a} Bring product to market and hope it sells well.
4) Bugs are found, worked out, kinked, etc
Re:"The Right Stuff", part 2? (Score:2)
Ah Yes. Another dig at Microsoft. I am sure the Unix vendors and Apple haven't done the same. The only reason why I'm letting you get away with OSS, is because at least its free.
Re:"The Right Stuff", part 2? (Score:2)
The ONLY difference between this and aeronautics is that when it crashes, you have to rebuild the rocket.
Well, there's also the difference that many times, people will also die from these failures. SpaceShipOne's first test flight was manned; the da Vinci project is going to have their first flight (an attempt at the prize, not just a test flight) be manned as well. It's easy enough to shake something like this off, but if there is a well-publicised failure involving the death of the pilot, I think we'll
Re:"The Right Stuff", part 2? (Score:2)
Re:"The Right Stuff", part 2? (Score:3, Insightful)
You're right, but you shouldn't be. What business of the public is it if a fellow blows himself up in his rocketship? So long as he doesn't damage anything in the process, of course.
But you're completely correct: an accident and suddenly folks will demand regulation 'for the good of the pilots.' And another industry will be set back another half-century.
Re:"The Right Stuff", part 2? (Score:2)
Quite a few states and provinces, as well as countries, require all professional engineers to be licenced to provide a minimum level of competence and to avoid unprofessional conduct.
In software there is the luxury of solving some problems via this trial and error practice since the typical cost of failure i
Re:"The Right Stuff", part 2? (Score:2)
"So, I really don't get why the disconnect. It's engineering! Products are seldom viable in the first design attempt, but a basically workable design is tweaked until it's ready."
That is t
Re:"The Right Stuff", part 2? (Score:2)
Alright, who's been a naughty variable? Don't make me get out the ball gag and lash.
Re:"The Right Stuff", part 2? (Score:2)
Re:"The Right Stuff", part 2? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is extremely risky, and perhaps suicidal. Rockets do, as we've seen, notoriously tend to blow up and otherwise malfunction in their initial testing.
NASA got it right because they tested over and over again and had a big budget to do so.
With the deadline fast approaching, it seems that some teams, like Feeney's, will be tempted to cut corners in order to have a chance of winning the X Prize.
Cutting corners and sticking to a timetable is what caused the Challenger disaster. I hope we don't see other lives lost as a result of this X Prize deadline.
Re:"The Right Stuff", part 2? (Score:4, Interesting)
I do share your fear though, in Wild Fire's case the project leader, Brian Feeney, will be the pilot so I remain optimistic that adequate testing will be done. If not, at least he's not playing with other people's lives.
Standing Futher Away!! (Score:2)
I wish they'd stand further off; their rockets are good, they are cool, but they are also (provably) dangerous!
Makes me nervous every time they test something.
Re:Standing Futher Away!! (Score:2)
Re:Standing Futher Away!! (Score:2)
There is clearly more than a wireless antenna in line of sight with the rocket as part the 48inch video shows the rocket from an apparently manually tracked camera.
Armadillo Aerospace down for the count? (Score:3, Funny)
Ahh well, Armadillo Aerospace is down, but at least there is still Union Aerospace [ua-corp.com] to look at. Err... wait.
Re:Armadillo Aerospace down for the count? (Score:5, Funny)
ed2k link (Score:2)
As usual, you will need to manually remove the spaces that Slashcode adds.
It's a pity that there aren't second and third (Score:5, Insightful)
Armadillo aren't stopping... (Score:4, Informative)
More broadly, I believe there are plans for post X-Prize competitions in the future, where various teams would get together annually to compete for the highest launch, fastest turnaround, and so on.
Ultimately, it wouldn't surprise me, particularly if Scaled wins the X-Prize, if in a few years time we have the "Y-Prize" for orbital shots.
Re:Armadillo aren't stopping... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Armadillo aren't stopping... (Score:2)
Re:Armadillo aren't stopping... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Armadillo aren't stopping... (Score:2)
Re:Armadillo aren't stopping... (Score:3, Insightful)
By the time a satellite *needs* to be pulled out of orbit to be refueled/repaired, it is generally old technology worth less than the launch cost for a retrieval mission. This is why the shuttle's satellite repair function was basically unused, and why no one has bothered to even think of doing something like this.
There are rare exceptions, but not enough of them to justify designing something to do it.
Re:Armadillo aren't stopping... (Score:2)
Re:Armadillo aren't stopping... (Score:2)
But basically, those missions were subsidized by NASA to test the Shuttle's facility with such mission goals - no one was willing to pay for them.
Um no..... (Score:2)
Re:Um no..... (Score:2)
Re:Armadillo aren't stopping... (Score:2)
Re:Armadillo aren't stopping... (Score:2)
1) It was a joke.
2) Women have been pilots. Eileen Collins comes to mind (first female Shuttle pilot/commander), as does Jeana Yaeger (pilot on Voyager... which happened to be a Scaled product, and who makes SpaceShipOne?) Private industry has been *far* more accepting of female pilots than NASA, as NASA's pilot culture was initially dominated by, and remains affected by, military test/fighter pilot culture, whi
Re:It's a pity that there aren't second and third (Score:2)
Re:It's a pity that there aren't second and third (Score:2)
Prizes can also lead to shoddy engineering (Score:4, Interesting)
Looking at SpaceShipOne, I have to agree. But on the other hand, looking at Armadillo
This had also happened on the previous 12" engine after a few runs (you could see a couple red hot catalyst rings fly out in one of the static test videos). It didn't seem to be progressive last time, so we went ahead and left it alone, expecting the test run to squash the rings down into an interference fit again.
Rings fly out of the engine and they aren't too worried? They think rings may be loose but they expect them to squash down to interference fit again? Words fail me.
There's good engineering and there's also appalling engineering covered in wishful thinking and viewed through rose-tinted spectacles. The X-Prize has very worthy goals, but it's sad that by setting a date and making it a race, it necessarily attracts also those who are totally out of their depth in the kind of engineering discipline required for such an endeavour.
Re:Prizes can also lead to shoddy engineering (Score:2)
Re:Prizes can also lead to shoddy engineering (Score:2)
That depends on the degree to which you're out of your depth, and the risks involved.
When you're so out of your depth that you're not even aware that you should have run complete stress and temperature simulations first, and that you should be measuring how your equipment performs and comparing it against your simulation results to be sure that you're in control, that's when it gets worrying.
Technology is hard enough to get to work rel
FORTUNATELY FOR US... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:FORTUNATELY FOR US... (Score:2)
Quote from the log: "Good thing Doom 3 is selling" (Score:5, Insightful)
Good luck to John and the rest of the crew at Armadillo.
Make Improvements... (Score:4, Funny)
The private rocket project barely alive...
Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the technology.
We can make it better than it was before.
Better...
For the $10 million dollar X-PrizeWait a second... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Wait a second... (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm having a strange flashback to Zoolander right now...
Re:Wait a second... (Score:2)
You'd Think... (Score:5, Informative)
Sadly, it seems they have yet to learn from history. Or, perhaps, their bandwidth costs are being spent on new rocket parts.
Well, here's a copy of the news article from Armadillo, anyway.
Re:You'd Think... (Score:3, Funny)
Or perhaps (Score:3, Insightful)
Why a *sigh* for Scaled Composites? (Score:2)
Re:Why a *sigh* for Scaled Composites? (Score:2)
Then again, commercial aviation didn't come to the masses until some 30 years after it got started. I'm just not that patient
p
Re:You'd Think... (Score:2)
[SMACK!] His comment is to the effect that only his team was really in a position to beat Scaled Composites, and since he's on the ground for a month, he questions whether any other team is in a position to beat out Scaled Composites.
Pay attention.
Virg
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
And yet... (Score:2, Insightful)
Sounds like a lot of stupidity and/or hype.
No, they won't (Score:2)
Crash and learn (Score:5, Funny)
So you have a Loss Of Vehicle accident, and yet you are not convening an accident investigation board with six months of hearings leading to recommendations that require you to ground all flights for the next decade. You'll never become the next NASA with that attitude.
Consolation (Score:4, Funny)
slashdot fails journalism 101 again (Score:5, Informative)
Of course, 1000 ft isn't that impressive. However, they did produce the craft very cheaply. And, it surely could have travelled farther than 1000 ft, they were merely testing their initial design.
My advice for the team is to attempt to test their next rocket without their dummy payload. It would be best to successfully launch and land a test craft safely before attempting to gauge their capacity for load.
Torrent of the video (Score:5, Informative)
48InchCrash.mpg.torrent [66.11.160.110]
Please seed.
Re:Torrent of the video (Score:2)
Uhhh.....no shit. (Score:2)
Usually one DOES have to rebuild after it EXPLODES!
Re:Uhhh.....no shit. (Score:2)
Not always true -- the other alternatives are to give up trying altogether, or design an alternate rocket (which would be built, not rebuilt).
mirror of video (Score:5, Informative)
VIDEO [sbnsor.com]
(Thanks for the text-mirror earlier. It was nice to read about it, and see that they all kept their sense of humor about the situation.)
You can get your own genuine space rocket debris! (Score:2, Interesting)
Check the bottom for Armadillo Droppings.
Captain's announcement: (Score:3, Funny)
This is your captain speaking, please remain remain in a seated position.
-
Sweet justice.. (Score:4, Funny)
Other Contestants (Score:5, Funny)
This is sloppy work (Score:5, Interesting)
*battery connectors coming off
*no protection against inductive kickback(essential around any combination of electromechanical and electronic devices)
*not restricting allowable user inputs (ie joystick)
*underrated power transistors for drive unit (this is very basic stuff)
*finally, not setting minimum fuel level for takeoff
When you are dealing with a field as complex as this, you can't afford to make such stupid mistakes.
Re:This is sloppy work (Score:2, Flamebait)
OK, that was sloppy. Carmack isn't an electrical engineer. He's learnt the hard way that connectivity is important and unreliable.
*no protection against inductive kickback(essential around any combination of electromechanical and electronic devices)
Yup. Sloppy.
*not restricting allowable user inputs (ie joystick)
Borderline. They didn't expect the joystick to fail in that way, and it was the same joystick used on the simulation, which showed no problems.
*underrated powe
Re:This is sloppy work (Score:2, Insightful)
I was referring to another incident, although I should have pointed out that this didn't fail during flight. If I remember correctly, the output driving an optoisolator unit was sourcing way more current than it was rated for. Carmack was quite flippant about it afterwards, and it didn't seem to occur to him that even a cursory check would have uncovered that problem ahead of time.
Re:This is sloppy work (Score:2)
Re:This is sloppy work (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This is sloppy work (Score:3, Insightful)
As a programmer^W software engineer myself, I have to say that this design methodology looks verrrry familiar.
* Write code.
* Compile.
* Fix syntax errors.
* Compile.
* Declare v
Bah! Amateurs! (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe it's the fact they crashed?...
Re:Bah! Amateurs! (Score:3, Informative)
I think (Score:3, Insightful)
NASA spent such a rediculously large amount of money testing and building rockets, as did the russians. Some might say that's exactly the problem. But both agencies had a number of spectacular failures. To this day there is no rocket in existance that has a 100% success rate.
That should be an indication that it's extremely difficult to build and launch rockets. I'm just worried about when someone actually gets in one of their own personal roman candles, hoping to make it to the edge of space they will find themselves going home in a body bag.
I'd say in general that the X-Prize should have some rules around who and how people compete. The real key is having A) Money B) Talent. The foundation should at least provide talent, expert guidance and such. Money, can come from sponsors etc. I just think the foundation has an obligation to ensure the safety of the teams competing.
Hope and optimism can be very dangerous, especially in the context of engineering.
Re:I think (Score:2, Informative)
No Saturns went boom, and for those saying "what about them astronauts what got themselves fried", well however tragic it was, it's not really the rockets fault, that the capsule atop a nonfueled rocket decides to burn itself out.
I'm sure that if one takes a lot of time to search archives, there are other rocket types that have experienced no booms, but admittedly it seems to be qui
Re:I think (Score:2)
Umm... Unless you saw another crash other than the one I did, they'd be going home in a chinese take-out box, rather than a body bag...
Re:I think (Score:4, Insightful)
This doesn't concern me a bit. Everyone has the right to go out with a bang (literally, in this case) if they wish.
I am, however, concerned about the possibility that they take a non-consenting soul with them - crashing on someone's house would be a bad thing (for the owners of the house - the guy in the rocket knew what he was risking when he pushed the big red button).
Re:I think (Score:2)
Re:I think (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not like the fundamental concepts are top secret or anything. Hell, the patents on most of it have expired. It shouldn't be all that hard for a halfway competent engineer to get something working, given enough coin to make a reasonable effort (I'd have guessed 50M before SS1 flew. Now I'd have to put the floor down around the 20M SS1 actually cost).
Big problem with the Foundation
I'll never go into space in a $20K spaceship (Score:2)
38" diameter
23' length
3 dummies
The only thing I can picture is that they bought a big piece of metal conduit, stacked three dummies in it vertically, welded on a nosecone, and packed the bottom with solid fuel.
You dirt bag! (Score:3, Funny)
You sick 'dillo.
Re:October Sky (Score:3, Informative)
It may not have the best script, acting, etc. but it's very enjoyable.
Re:October Sky (Score:2)
Whoops, I mean anagram. A palindrome of October Sky would be Yks Rebotco.
(And a palindrome of Bolton would be Notlob.)