This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.
Important notes on articles:
- Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
- Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
- If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.
Post being replied to
They haven't lost any due to engine failure by Tommy Baseball
The previous three were tank failures. This one appears to be a failure with the Ground Support Equipment. Speculation is that the hoses that feed liquid methane to the rocket separated after the engine fire. All that free propellant caught fire and destroyed the vehicle.
The important part of the failures is that they've had three failures in four months. The rate of improvement is impressive. They just destroyed SN4 and SN5 is already ready to put on the test stand (thought the test stand will need to be rebuilt). The failures are setting them back weeks rather than years.