Static Fire Anomaly

A “Static Fire Anomaly”. That’s what they called it. Technically, I have no doubt that they are absolutely 100% correct. Technically correct is generally what rocket scientists do best. But as a way of describing what happens in the video below, “Static Fire Anomaly” would come some way down my list of options.

No, there are “tr”uckload of better candidates ahead of it.


But then understatement seemed to be the order of the day, as this tweet from SpaceX boss, Elon Musk, indicates:

Fullscreen capture 2016-09-02 092112 AM.bmp

If they’re really unsure what caused the loss of the Falcon vehicle, might I be the one to suggest that it was the multiple massive explosions and the big fire?

I’m quite interested to discover what caused the multiple massive explosions and the big fire, though.

In the meantime – knowing that no-one was injured in this incident, and that Elon Musk has enough money not to be troubled too much by the loss of a rocket – I can’t stop watching this amazing video.

3 thoughts on “Static Fire Anomaly

  1. This is one of my favourite internet explosions. I like those Chinese factory ones too but people died in those. So this one probably tops the list because of lack of guilt.

  2. biobot > I do agree. And the near 10 second gap twixt explosion and sound/shock wave tells you how far away the camera must have been. Epic stuff indeed. [hits repeat]

    Leave a Reply