
SpaceX Starship SN1 experiences an anomaly and explodes - SEJeff
https://twitter.com/erdayastronaut/status/1233605490732621826
======
StarDucks
What is the standard process for failure analysis for a company like SpaceX
and how do they likely integrate the lessons into the next iteration?

Do companies like this have some form of high level "failure procedure" they
go though?

~~~
101404
They are rapidly iterating through SN versions. This kind of thing is expected
to happen.

This one was SN1. SN2 already has "better welds" (Musk tweet from some days
ago). They built a welding system that better fits their needs and should
produce much stronger welds. So this explosion just shows that that was
probably a good idea.

See more rockets blow up over the next 20 iterations. Plan is SN1 to SN20.

~~~
refulgentis
It wasn't supposed to explode. The first one wasn't supposed to explode
either.

~~~
101404
It wasn't the plan, but it was always a possibility. That's why they changed
the welding equipment some days ago, because the current welds aren't good
enough.

At a US Air Force event yesterday, Musk said that currently they are focusing
primarily on production equipment and methods, not so much on the actual
rocket.

~~~
refulgentis
Ah Elon, you always have an excuse

------
101404
> We weren’t expecting to see SN-1 fly, and yet it did onto SN-2!

That's not good. Is SN2 fine?

~~~
StarDucks
It's bad wording. Pretty sure they mean that now SN-1 is destroyed it's time
to move on to SN-2.

~~~
101404
Re-reading the Tweet I just noticed, he didn't mean "onto SN2", he meant "on
to SN2".

Sometimes spaces can change the meaning, I guess.

