This test was the logical first flight test of the crew escape system.
Blowing up the booster would introduce so many more variables that if it
didn't work, they would have to do this test anyway to find out why.
A terminal disassembly as the initiating event seems to me to asking for
trouble, and for a benefit that is difficult to quantify. Inducing an
engine out failure or a max deflection gimbal failure would be much more
controllable, at least as valid a test, and possibly recoverable for the
booster.
If one still wanted to do a splodey-booster test after those, one could. It
would be a useful confirmation of the full envelope of the escape system.
-R
On Wednesday, October 5, 2016, <qbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
While I agree that was one for the books, cost aside, I'm thinking the
test would have
much more validity had the booster suffered a terminal disassembly with
the pod
escaping the subsequent explosion and flying debris.
Robert
At 09:53 AM 10/5/2016, you wrote:
On 10/05/2016 10:24 AM, Philip Hahn wrote:
Streaming on YouTube begins at T-15:Thanks, Phil.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqUIX3Z4r3k
Philip
That was well worth the wait.
Looking at the escape system flight stability, it looks like it would be
a diaper-filling kind of ride for a few seconds until it settles down into
a more stable configuration.
