Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

We don't know all the things they did to the Booster, but among them were deliberately not igniting some engines as well as taking a more aggressive angle-of-attack on descent (the rocket is a fairly effective lifting body, as it turns out!).

There may be more things, but between those two I think the latter was a bigger problem. It would have gotten hotter and more physically stressed. And then weakened to the point to where re-igniting the engines caused it to fail.

They also used a new hot-staging maneuver, where the gases were directed out one side so that it flipped more rapidly in the other direction. It was a really fast flip! A rocket the size of a small skyscraper turning 90 degrees in just a few seconds. That could have jarred something loose, too.

Hopefully we find out in the post-mortem. SpaceX doesn't typically give the public as much detail as we'd like, but they're pretty good at sharing the high-level reasons why something failed.




>SpaceX doesn't typically give the public as much detail as we'd like

It gives magnitudes more details than anyone else.


ITAR unfortunately limits what can be publicly released.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: