5

SpaceX and the FAA have drawn a number of conclusions from the first two Starship launches, and would seem to be in the midst of analyzing the anomalous events of the third. Is that analysis based solely on telemetry/video evidence, or do they actually try to recover and inspect components "of interest" for a proper understanding of what happened? Obviously, each flight would have produced a rather large debris field over what could be very deep water, making recovery of anything an expensive and time-consuming endeavor, but has it been justified in the context of a test program?

Anthony X
  • 17,510
  • 1
  • 61
  • 99
  • I asked a related question: https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/65680/was-starship-28-equipped-with-a-black-box-designed-to-enable-the-recovery-of-f. There's no answer there yet but the comments might be informative. – phil1008 Mar 24 '24 at 17:56
  • @phil1008 I see your focus on a "black box" - some sort of data recorder. I was thinking more broadly about any sort of component which, under suitable analysis, might reveal evidence of what failed, when, and how - witness marks or scratches, fracture surfaces, scorch marks, etc. - evidence of events/conditions not monitored by a sensor (if indeed possible to measure). The same sort of thing air crash investigators look at - bits and pieces which have acquired damage unique to the in-flight failure as distinct from anything subsequent. – Anthony X Mar 24 '24 at 23:08
  • Yes, I realize that. I figure that if they were planning to search for wreckage, then the first thing they would want to recover is a data recorder - if they included one. – phil1008 Mar 25 '24 at 01:41
  • 1
    In the SpaceX stream of the 3rd starship launch, Dan Huot specifically mentioned that they weren't intending to recover any of the debris even if the test went completely as planned. – Darth Pseudonym Mar 25 '24 at 20:10

0 Answers0