Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
“The Falcon 9 second stage from the Mar 4 Starlink launch failed to make a deorbit burn and is now reentering after 22 days in orbit. Its reentry was observed from the Seattle area at about 0400 UTC Mar 26.”
I look at this explanation and I consider the heat tiles and everything necessary to stop heat getting to space reentry vehicles. Knowing how hot we are told reentry friction (1000's degrees) causes heating of the spacecraft coming back into Earth orbit.
For those who say that we need to be more careful to prevent heat reaching something which needs to carry humans to Earth, I agree, however we are told how large meteors start outside the atmosphere and they end up as tiny meteors falling to Earth. Their very solid composition (rock/iron) compared with a metal tube which was a second-stage space craft fuel canister, I am not sure I can accept this rather convenient explanation. But..what else could it be?
Officially:
I look at this explanation and I consider the heat tiles and everything necessary to stop heat getting to space reentry vehicles. Knowing how hot we are told reentry friction (1000's degrees) causes heating of the spacecraft coming back into Earth orbit.
For those who say that we need to be more careful to prevent heat reaching something which needs to carry humans to Earth, I agree, however we are told how large meteors start outside the atmosphere and they end up as tiny meteors falling to Earth. Their very solid composition (rock/iron) compared with a metal tube which was a second-stage space craft fuel canister, I am not sure I can accept this rather convenient explanation. But..what else could it be?
The speed of reentry and the way it broke up should be enough but combine that with the known trajectory and location of the SpaceX 2nd stage and there is no room for other speculation.
The speed of reentry and the way it broke up should be enough but combine that with the known trajectory and location of the SpaceX 2nd stage and there is no room for other speculation.
^^THIS^^ all day long.
ocpaul20 let's hear what you think it is or could be in our real life world.
However, can you explain to me why something so (relatively) light and fragile does NOT burn up high above the height where it can be seen and photographed by those on Earth?. The friction from the atmosphere starts at the edge of space when the object starts to enter the atmosphere. It is mainly at night that most of the burn-ups are seen. Generally meteors start out at a fairly large size if they are reported as being seen from Earth streaking across the sky and they are much, much smaller when they have arrived at the ground.
However, can you explain to me why something so (relatively) light and fragile does NOT burn up high above the height where it can be seen and photographed by those on Earth?. The friction from the atmosphere starts at the edge of space when the object starts to enter the atmosphere. It is mainly at night that most of the burn-ups are seen. Generally meteors start out at a fairly large size if they are reported as being seen from Earth streaking across the sky and they are much, much smaller when they have arrived at the ground.
On a controlled accent or descent the angle of trajectory is carefully controlled as to minimize the friction. Uncontrolled accents and descents will expose areas of the spacecraft that have not been designed to take the heat of reentry.
In the higher altitudes the air is also thinner and gets heavier as you approach the ground. It is the reason that jet liners provide emergency oxygen to passengers should there be a malfunction.
At the lower altitudes air is the thickest. Even a bullet traveling at over 3,000 fps can have a surface temperature of 1,000° F. Of course the bullets are only in the air for a short period of time. But the softer lead bullets can start to melt at 3,500 fps.
On a controlled accent or descent the angle of trajectory is carefully controlled as to minimize the friction. Uncontrolled accents and descents will expose areas of the spacecraft that have not been designed to take the heat of reentry.
In the higher altitudes the air is also thinner and gets heavier as you approach the ground. It is the reason that jet liners provide emergency oxygen to passengers should there be a malfunction.
At the lower altitudes air is the thickest. Even a bullet traveling at over 3,000 fps can have a surface temperature of 1,000° F. Of course the bullets are only in the air for a short period of time. But the softer lead bullets can start to melt at 3,500 fps.
This is exactly what I meant. On a stage two rocket booster there is no heat tiles to keep the heat away, so it would burn up very quickly and would not last very long at all when it started to enter the atmosphere. Most of a meteor burns up through the friction of reentry and it lasts so long for us to see because it is solid, but that is not so for the rocket booster stage.
What I see suggests to me something more substantial and appears to be a satellite or some craft which is more solid than a tube of metal which is all a booster stage is. We only have the word and opinion of one guy and everyone has jumped on that and not thought more about it.
Even if it was NOT a booster stage, I dont know what that means...except that some 'expert' was wrong about his opinion - so what? Even experts are allowed to be wrong and who made him the 'expert' we should listen to anyway? Some news channel I suppose.
This is exactly what I meant. On a stage two rocket booster there is no heat tiles to keep the heat away, so it would burn up very quickly and would not last very long at all when it started to enter the atmosphere. Most of a meteor burns up through the friction of reentry and it lasts so long for us to see because it is solid, but that is not so for the rocket booster stage.
What I see suggests to me something more substantial and appears to be a satellite or some craft which is more solid than a tube of metal which is all a booster stage is. We only have the word and opinion of one guy and everyone has jumped on that and not thought more about it.
Even if it was NOT a booster stage, I dont know what that means...except that some 'expert' was wrong about his opinion - so what? Even experts are allowed to be wrong and who made him the 'expert' we should listen to anyway? Some news channel I suppose.
We really do not have enough information from the orginal link you posted. It states: “The widely reported bright objects in the sky were debris from a Falcon 9 rocket 2nd stage that did not successfully have a deorbit burn,”
Did it have a partially successful burn before it exploded? Also the ground observers would have a hard time figuring out the distance to the burning debris.
This is exactly what I meant. On a stage two rocket booster there is no heat tiles to keep the heat away, so it would burn up very quickly and would not last very long at all when it started to enter the atmosphere. Most of a meteor burns up through the friction of reentry and it lasts so long for us to see because it is solid, but that is not so for the rocket booster stage.
What I see suggests to me something more substantial and appears to be a satellite or some craft which is more solid than a tube of metal which is all a booster stage is. We only have the word and opinion of one guy and everyone has jumped on that and not thought more about it.
Even if it was NOT a booster stage, I dont know what that means...except that some 'expert' was wrong about his opinion - so what? Even experts are allowed to be wrong and who made him the 'expert' we should listen to anyway? Some news channel I suppose.
Again, it was on the same trajectory and at the same location as the known rocket stage so the ID is solid. Because it was just falling from a suborbital speed rather than a deliberate reentry it hit the atmosphere at a very shallow angle which prolonged the breakup and burn creating the spectacular light show.
We have verification that it was the Falcon rocket stage. An intact piece of it landed in eastern Washington state.
"After the March 25 event, a farmer discovered a nearly intact piece of rocket in a private field, The Tri-City Herald reported.
The approximately 5-foot composite-overwrapped pressure vessel used for storing helium left a nearly 4-inch dent in the ground, Grant County sheriff's spokesman, Kyle Foreman, said. No one was hurt, he added."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
