Soyuz rocket failed and two man crew bailed out safely

A Russian Soyuz rocket malfunctioned two minutes after liftoff Thursday on a mission to the International Space Station. The two-member crew — an American and a Russian parachute landed in their capsule, 200 miles from the launch site in the steppes of Kazakhstan.

American astronaut Nick Hague and Russian cosmonaut Alexey Ovchinin are resting comfortably in the city of Baikonur, Kazakhstan, after an anomaly occurred shortly after their launch.

The Soyuz MS-10 spacecraft launched from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan to the International Space Station at 4:40 a.m. EDT Thursday, October 11 (2:40 p.m. in Baikonur time) carrying Hague and Ovchinin. Shortly after launch, there was an anomaly with the booster, and the launch ascent was aborted, resulting in a ballistic landing of the spacecraft.

Search and rescue teams deployed to the landing site, arriving on location before the spacecraft landed. Hague and Ovchinin were recovered from the capsule and were in good condition.

NASA no longer has a method to get its astronauts to the space station, and the crew that is already on board the ISS has to come down eventually.

SpaceX could be ready to fly its Dragon capsule to the ISS in June, 2019. Boeing could be ready in August, 2019.

Right now, there are three people aboard the station: NASA astronaut Serena Auñón-Chancellor, Alexander Gerst of the European Space Agency, and Russian cosmonaut Sergey Prokopyev. These three crew members only have one way to get home: the Russian Soyuz capsule that brought them there in the first place.

Their Soyuz, MS-09, has been docked with the ISS since June 8th, when the crew first arrived. Soyuz capsules are only to remain in orbit for 200 days. The crew would need to come back in December or January.

Russia could launch another empty Soyuz capsule to dock with the International Space Station, helping to extend the time of the current crew on board by another 200 days. Russia is already going through the motions to prepare a Soyuz vehicle and rocket combo for a planned launch of three crew members on December 20th. That is still moving forward and could possibly fly. The Soyuz rocket may be grounded from sending crew to the ISS, but the vehicle might be able to launch a capsule without crew as a test. Then, it could dock with the ISS and provide another lifeboat for the crew on board.

90 thoughts on “Soyuz rocket failed and two man crew bailed out safely”

  1. Can’t wait to see the first BFR detonate” And a certain stoned CEO-Who-Tweets-Securities-Fraud wants to send the BFR on BALLISTIC paths towards cities on the other side of the globe as part of some commuting thing for the rich.

    Reply
  2. Can’t wait to see the first BFR detonate””And a certain stoned CEO-Who-Tweets-Securities-Fraud wants to send the BFR on BALLISTIC paths towards cities on the other side of the globe as part of some commuting thing for the rich.”””

    Reply
  3. So embarrassing. No, I am not talking about the Russians. They have old stuff, but they have incrementally improved upon it quite a lot to the point where even when something goes on, the rest is pretty reliable. Contrast that to the survival rate of Space Shuttle mishaps?

    Reply
  4. So embarrassing. No I am not talking about the Russians. They have old stuff but they have incrementally improved upon it quite a lot to the point where even when something goes on the rest is pretty reliable.Contrast that to the survival rate of Space Shuttle mishaps?

    Reply
  5. A BFR RUD would be…spectacular. Not that I want it to happen, but the idea of that much propellant all going ka-blooey is just…fascinating.

    Reply
  6. A BFR RUD would be…spectacular. Not that I want it to happen but the idea of that much propellant all going ka-blooey is just…fascinating.

    Reply
  7. I am happy they are safe! Я счастлив, что они в безопасности! I hope they learn from this so future flights safer. 50 years ago yesterday, Apollo 7 launched in USA.

    Reply
  8. I am happy they are safe! Я счастлив что они в безопасности! I hope they learn from this so future flights safer. 50 years ago yesterday Apollo 7 launched in USA.”

    Reply
  9. That’s rocketry for you, folks! ~2% chance you ain’t gonna make it. ba-dum ching [comedic drum/cymbal ‘sting’] Reality (sad face) Can’t wait to see the first BFR detonate. Hopefully it will only be carrying groceries. The cause will be that little piece part at the bottom of the Bill of Materials, you know… the one that was found to be satisfactory during dye-penetrant examination during re-qual… Got the paperwork right here…

    Reply
  10. That’s rocketry for you folks! ~2{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} chance you ain’t gonna make it.ba-dum ching [comedic drum/cymbal ‘sting’]Reality (sad face)Can’t wait to see the first BFR detonate. Hopefully it will only be carrying groceries. The cause will be that little piece part at the bottom of the Bill of Materials you know… the one that was found to be satisfactory during dye-penetrant examination during re-qual… Got the paperwork right here…

    Reply
  11. Although, the Rocket’s safety system worked and saved the astronauts realistically this is the last nail into Roscosmos’s coffin. RIP.

    Reply
  12. Although the Rocket’s safety system worked and saved the astronauts realistically this is the last nail into Roscosmos’s coffin. RIP.

    Reply
  13. I’m embarrassed to claim this without evidence but I’ve honestly no idea where it was sourced – copypasta was circulating of the flight records of Soyuz vs the Shuttle Program and the # of issues. The shuttle of course had 2 fatal crashes, Soyuz has had 2 different fatal accidents, but only a total of 4 fatalities as a result. Both had roughly 130-140 missions and both had a comparable # of non-fatal accidents/mishaps that were significant enough to be investigated. Probably the main reason the # of fatalities of Americans is so much higher is just because the Shuttle crew compliment was so much bigger.

    Reply
  14. Yes, the main issue I have with the design is no abort system. No it don’t have to work all the time but it should work during the first stage and beginning of second stage burn, not reentry but landing. Separation during reentry would be idiotic hard and last part of second stage is low chance for blowing up and you need an spacecraft with an heat shield to survive it.

    Reply
  15. I’m embarrassed to claim this without evidence but I’ve honestly no idea where it was sourced – copypasta was circulating of the flight records of Soyuz vs the Shuttle Program and the # of issues. The shuttle of course had 2 fatal crashes Soyuz has had 2 different fatal accidents but only a total of 4 fatalities as a result. Both had roughly 130-140 missions and both had a comparable # of non-fatal accidents/mishaps that were significant enough to be investigated. Probably the main reason the # of fatalities of Americans is so much higher is just because the Shuttle crew compliment was so much bigger.

    Reply
  16. Yes the main issue I have with the design is no abort system. No it don’t have to work all the time but it should work during the first stage and beginning of second stage burn not reentry but landing. Separation during reentry would be idiotic hard and last part of second stage is low chance for blowing up and you need an spacecraft with an heat shield to survive it.

    Reply
  17. So the REAL Story about why this launch failure will go down in History! It was a, er, Relief, flight, so to speak. From: https://www.unz.com/ishamir/toilet-wars/ One of many good parts “The story from Korolyev says the lady objected to their toilet arrangements as demeaning for her as a woman, and tried to readjust the equipment to fit her requirements. The men did their own readjustment and complained about the feminist. In a short while, the delicate toilet in the Western sector had been broken beyond repair, for nothing is simple in the space, not even going to loo. And the big grown men, ex-Navy and ex-Air Force captains and commanders, had been reduced to use diapers on the daily basis. It is not only unpleasant to use: the ISS has no storage for such a mass of used and stinking diapers. The Western sector began to stink like Paris streets or worse. By that time, the astronauts became mightily upset by the lady’s extravagant behaviour, and they complained: “Houston, we have a problem! Please take her home!” Houston, or NASA, had two objections to granting their wish. One, diversity and female equality had to be maintained at all costs. The second objection was money. The Russian toilet and shower worked fine, and the Americans at first tried to use it. But after a quarrel (and alas, people forced to live in close quarters are likely to quarrel), the Russians objected and barred the Western astronauts from their Soyuz. The lady’s mental health deteriorated, and stench and floating excrement made her miserable and vicious; and eventually her companions decided to implement a smart plan. When the two Russians went out to space for scheduled work, the Americans made their way to the Russian module (there are no locks in the ICC) and drilled a hole, sealing it with a sealant and covering with decorative fabric. It was a creative and working idea. The sealant held on for a while and didn’t burst immediately. The pressure in the station is quite low, only one

    Reply
  18. Shuttle crews never had a chance, despite the BS ‘escape mechanism’ that NASA had installed into the shuttles; everyone knew the crew would never be able to use them in time. Whereas like the Gemini and Apollo and upcoming Dragon capsules, the Soyuz ones would have a real chance at ejecting the crew from the exploding rocket, as was the case here.

    Reply
  19. So the REAL Story about why this launch failure will go down in History! It was a er Relief flight so to speak.From: https://www.unz.com/ishamir/toilet-wars/One of many good partsThe story from Korolyev says the lady objected to their toilet arrangements as demeaning for her as a woman” and tried to readjust the equipment to fit her requirements. The men did their own readjustment and complained about the feminist. In a short while the delicate toilet in the Western sector had been broken beyond repair for nothing is simple in the space not even going to loo.And the big grown men ex-Navy and ex-Air Force captains and commanders had been reduced to use diapers on the daily basis. It is not only unpleasant to use: the ISS has no storage for such a mass of used and stinking diapers. The Western sector began to stink like Paris streets or worse.By that time the astronauts became mightily upset by the lady’s extravagant behaviour and they complained: “Houston we have a problem! Please take her home!” Houston or NASA had two objections to granting their wish. One diversity and female equality had to be maintained at all costs. The second objection was money.The Russian toilet and shower worked fine and the Americans at first tried to use it. But after a quarrel (and alas people forced to live in close quarters are likely to quarrel) the Russians objected and barred the Western astronauts from their Soyuz. The lady’s mental health deteriorated and stench and floating excrement made her miserable and vicious; and eventually her companions decided to implement a smart plan. When the two Russians went out to space for scheduled work the Americans made their way to the Russian module (there are no locks in the ICC) and drilled a hole sealing it with a sealant and covering with decorative fabric.It was a creative and working idea. The sealant held on for a while and didn’t burst immediately. The pressure in the station is quite low only one atmosph

    Reply
  20. Shuttle crews never had a chance despite the BS ‘escape mechanism’ that NASA had installed into the shuttles; everyone knew the crew would never be able to use them in time.Whereas like the Gemini and Apollo and upcoming Dragon capsules the Soyuz ones would have a real chance at ejecting the crew from the exploding rocket as was the case here.

    Reply
  21. The shuttle was a disaster. Its what happens when you tell the smartest people in the room who actually do the job your talking about what to do when you have no idea. So the space Truck became the space bus/semi/laboratory/etc

    Reply
  22. The shuttle was a disaster. Its what happens when you tell the smartest people in the room who actually do the job your talking about what to do when you have no idea.So the space Truck became the space bus/semi/laboratory/etc

    Reply
  23. Both Soyuz fatal incidents occurred on the leg down and the one going up, they didn’t die due to the booster blowing up etc. The first was some valve malfunction leading to decompression of the capsule, the passengers were not wearing vacuum suits which would become mandatory after this event. The second fatal incident was a parachute failure during capsule landing, don’t recall what the fix was for this.

    Reply
  24. Both Soyuz fatal incidents occurred on the leg down and the one going up they didn’t die due to the booster blowing up etc. The first was some valve malfunction leading to decompression of the capsule the passengers were not wearing vacuum suits which would become mandatory after this event. The second fatal incident was a parachute failure during capsule landing don’t recall what the fix was for this.

    Reply
  25. Both Soyuz fatal incidents occurred on the leg down and the one going up, they didn’t die due to the booster blowing up etc. The first was some valve malfunction leading to decompression of the capsule, the passengers were not wearing vacuum suits which would become mandatory after this event. The second fatal incident was a parachute failure during capsule landing, don’t recall what the fix was for this.

    Reply
  26. Both Soyuz fatal incidents occurred on the leg down and the one going up they didn’t die due to the booster blowing up etc. The first was some valve malfunction leading to decompression of the capsule the passengers were not wearing vacuum suits which would become mandatory after this event. The second fatal incident was a parachute failure during capsule landing don’t recall what the fix was for this.

    Reply
  27. Both Soyuz fatal incidents occurred on the leg down and the one going up, they didn’t die due to the booster blowing up etc. The first was some valve malfunction leading to decompression of the capsule, the passengers were not wearing vacuum suits which would become mandatory after this event. The second fatal incident was a parachute failure during capsule landing, don’t recall what the fix was for this.

    Reply
  28. The shuttle was a disaster. Its what happens when you tell the smartest people in the room who actually do the job your talking about what to do when you have no idea. So the space Truck became the space bus/semi/laboratory/etc

    Reply
  29. The shuttle was a disaster. Its what happens when you tell the smartest people in the room who actually do the job your talking about what to do when you have no idea.So the space Truck became the space bus/semi/laboratory/etc

    Reply
  30. So the REAL Story about why this launch failure will go down in History! It was a, er, Relief, flight, so to speak. From: https://www.unz.com/ishamir/toilet-wars/ One of many good parts “The story from Korolyev says the lady objected to their toilet arrangements as demeaning for her as a woman, and tried to readjust the equipment to fit her requirements. The men did their own readjustment and complained about the feminist. In a short while, the delicate toilet in the Western sector had been broken beyond repair, for nothing is simple in the space, not even going to loo. And the big grown men, ex-Navy and ex-Air Force captains and commanders, had been reduced to use diapers on the daily basis. It is not only unpleasant to use: the ISS has no storage for such a mass of used and stinking diapers. The Western sector began to stink like Paris streets or worse. By that time, the astronauts became mightily upset by the lady’s extravagant behaviour, and they complained: “Houston, we have a problem! Please take her home!” Houston, or NASA, had two objections to granting their wish. One, diversity and female equality had to be maintained at all costs. The second objection was money. The Russian toilet and shower worked fine, and the Americans at first tried to use it. But after a quarrel (and alas, people forced to live in close quarters are likely to quarrel), the Russians objected and barred the Western astronauts from their Soyuz. The lady’s mental health deteriorated, and stench and floating excrement made her miserable and vicious; and eventually her companions decided to implement a smart plan. When the two Russians went out to space for scheduled work, the Americans made their way to the Russian module (there are no locks in the ICC) and drilled a hole, sealing it with a sealant and covering with decorative fabric. It was a creative and working idea. The sealant held on for a while and didn’t burst immediately. The pressure in the station is quite low, only one

    Reply
  31. So the REAL Story about why this launch failure will go down in History! It was a er Relief flight so to speak.From: https://www.unz.com/ishamir/toilet-wars/One of many good partsThe story from Korolyev says the lady objected to their toilet arrangements as demeaning for her as a woman” and tried to readjust the equipment to fit her requirements. The men did their own readjustment and complained about the feminist. In a short while the delicate toilet in the Western sector had been broken beyond repair for nothing is simple in the space not even going to loo.And the big grown men ex-Navy and ex-Air Force captains and commanders had been reduced to use diapers on the daily basis. It is not only unpleasant to use: the ISS has no storage for such a mass of used and stinking diapers. The Western sector began to stink like Paris streets or worse.By that time the astronauts became mightily upset by the lady’s extravagant behaviour and they complained: “Houston we have a problem! Please take her home!” Houston or NASA had two objections to granting their wish. One diversity and female equality had to be maintained at all costs. The second objection was money.The Russian toilet and shower worked fine and the Americans at first tried to use it. But after a quarrel (and alas people forced to live in close quarters are likely to quarrel) the Russians objected and barred the Western astronauts from their Soyuz. The lady’s mental health deteriorated and stench and floating excrement made her miserable and vicious; and eventually her companions decided to implement a smart plan. When the two Russians went out to space for scheduled work the Americans made their way to the Russian module (there are no locks in the ICC) and drilled a hole sealing it with a sealant and covering with decorative fabric.It was a creative and working idea. The sealant held on for a while and didn’t burst immediately. The pressure in the station is quite low only one atmosph

    Reply
  32. Shuttle crews never had a chance, despite the BS ‘escape mechanism’ that NASA had installed into the shuttles; everyone knew the crew would never be able to use them in time. Whereas like the Gemini and Apollo and upcoming Dragon capsules, the Soyuz ones would have a real chance at ejecting the crew from the exploding rocket, as was the case here.

    Reply
  33. Shuttle crews never had a chance despite the BS ‘escape mechanism’ that NASA had installed into the shuttles; everyone knew the crew would never be able to use them in time.Whereas like the Gemini and Apollo and upcoming Dragon capsules the Soyuz ones would have a real chance at ejecting the crew from the exploding rocket as was the case here.

    Reply
  34. I’m embarrassed to claim this without evidence but I’ve honestly no idea where it was sourced – copypasta was circulating of the flight records of Soyuz vs the Shuttle Program and the # of issues. The shuttle of course had 2 fatal crashes, Soyuz has had 2 different fatal accidents, but only a total of 4 fatalities as a result. Both had roughly 130-140 missions and both had a comparable # of non-fatal accidents/mishaps that were significant enough to be investigated. Probably the main reason the # of fatalities of Americans is so much higher is just because the Shuttle crew compliment was so much bigger.

    Reply
  35. I’m embarrassed to claim this without evidence but I’ve honestly no idea where it was sourced – copypasta was circulating of the flight records of Soyuz vs the Shuttle Program and the # of issues. The shuttle of course had 2 fatal crashes Soyuz has had 2 different fatal accidents but only a total of 4 fatalities as a result. Both had roughly 130-140 missions and both had a comparable # of non-fatal accidents/mishaps that were significant enough to be investigated. Probably the main reason the # of fatalities of Americans is so much higher is just because the Shuttle crew compliment was so much bigger.

    Reply
  36. Yes, the main issue I have with the design is no abort system. No it don’t have to work all the time but it should work during the first stage and beginning of second stage burn, not reentry but landing. Separation during reentry would be idiotic hard and last part of second stage is low chance for blowing up and you need an spacecraft with an heat shield to survive it.

    Reply
  37. Yes the main issue I have with the design is no abort system. No it don’t have to work all the time but it should work during the first stage and beginning of second stage burn not reentry but landing. Separation during reentry would be idiotic hard and last part of second stage is low chance for blowing up and you need an spacecraft with an heat shield to survive it.

    Reply
  38. Can’t wait to see the first BFR detonate” And a certain stoned CEO-Who-Tweets-Securities-Fraud wants to send the BFR on BALLISTIC paths towards cities on the other side of the globe as part of some commuting thing for the rich.

    Reply
  39. Can’t wait to see the first BFR detonate””And a certain stoned CEO-Who-Tweets-Securities-Fraud wants to send the BFR on BALLISTIC paths towards cities on the other side of the globe as part of some commuting thing for the rich.”””

    Reply
  40. So embarrassing. No, I am not talking about the Russians. They have old stuff, but they have incrementally improved upon it quite a lot to the point where even when something goes on, the rest is pretty reliable. Contrast that to the survival rate of Space Shuttle mishaps?

    Reply
  41. So embarrassing. No I am not talking about the Russians. They have old stuff but they have incrementally improved upon it quite a lot to the point where even when something goes on the rest is pretty reliable.Contrast that to the survival rate of Space Shuttle mishaps?

    Reply
  42. The shuttle was a disaster. Its what happens when you tell the smartest people in the room who actually do the job your talking about what to do when you have no idea.

    So the space Truck became the space bus/semi/laboratory/etc

    Reply
  43. A BFR RUD would be…spectacular. Not that I want it to happen, but the idea of that much propellant all going ka-blooey is just…fascinating.

    Reply
  44. A BFR RUD would be…spectacular. Not that I want it to happen but the idea of that much propellant all going ka-blooey is just…fascinating.

    Reply
  45. I am happy they are safe! Я счастлив, что они в безопасности! I hope they learn from this so future flights safer. 50 years ago yesterday, Apollo 7 launched in USA.

    Reply
  46. I am happy they are safe! Я счастлив что они в безопасности! I hope they learn from this so future flights safer. 50 years ago yesterday Apollo 7 launched in USA.”

    Reply
  47. That’s rocketry for you, folks! ~2% chance you ain’t gonna make it. ba-dum ching [comedic drum/cymbal ‘sting’] Reality (sad face) Can’t wait to see the first BFR detonate. Hopefully it will only be carrying groceries. The cause will be that little piece part at the bottom of the Bill of Materials, you know… the one that was found to be satisfactory during dye-penetrant examination during re-qual… Got the paperwork right here…

    Reply
  48. That’s rocketry for you folks! ~2{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} chance you ain’t gonna make it.ba-dum ching [comedic drum/cymbal ‘sting’]Reality (sad face)Can’t wait to see the first BFR detonate. Hopefully it will only be carrying groceries. The cause will be that little piece part at the bottom of the Bill of Materials you know… the one that was found to be satisfactory during dye-penetrant examination during re-qual… Got the paperwork right here…

    Reply
  49. So the REAL Story about why this launch failure will go down in History! It was a, er, Relief, flight, so to speak.

    From: https://www.unz.com/ishamir/toilet-wars/

    One of many good parts

    “The story from Korolyev says the lady objected to their toilet arrangements as demeaning for her as a woman, and tried to readjust the equipment to fit her requirements. The men did their own readjustment and complained about the feminist. In a short while, the delicate toilet in the Western sector had been broken beyond repair, for nothing is simple in the space, not even going to loo.

    And the big grown men, ex-Navy and ex-Air Force captains and commanders, had been reduced to use diapers on the daily basis. It is not only unpleasant to use: the ISS has no storage for such a mass of used and stinking diapers. The Western sector began to stink like Paris streets or worse.

    By that time, the astronauts became mightily upset by the lady’s extravagant behaviour, and they complained: “Houston, we have a problem! Please take her home!” Houston, or NASA, had two objections to granting their wish. One, diversity and female equality had to be maintained at all costs. The second objection was money.

    The Russian toilet and shower worked fine, and the Americans at first tried to use it. But after a quarrel (and alas, people forced to live in close quarters are likely to quarrel), the Russians objected and barred the Western astronauts from their Soyuz. The lady’s mental health deteriorated, and stench and floating excrement made her miserable and vicious; and eventually her companions decided to implement a smart plan. When the two Russians went out to space for scheduled work, the Americans made their way to the Russian module (there are no locks in the ICC) and drilled a hole, sealing it with a sealant and covering with decorative fabric.

    It was a creative and working idea. The sealant held on for a while and didn’t burst immediately. The pressure in the station is quite low, only one atmosphere, so the hole didn’t present a mortal danger for the team. If and when the leak were found, it would be possible to insist on emergency evacuation of the crew, thus getting rid of the troublesome virago and extricating themselves from the stinky hell while blaming the goofy Russians for the failure. And the best part of it: the hole is in the section of the Soyuz capsule that is jettisoned during its return to Earth, thus eliminating all evidence of the foul game.””

    That is only the beginning. Evidently the female is a real, well I will left you guys read the whole article, but it is more than funny.

    Reply
  50. Shuttle crews never had a chance, despite the BS ‘escape mechanism’ that NASA had installed into the shuttles; everyone knew the crew would never be able to use them in time.

    Whereas like the Gemini and Apollo and upcoming Dragon capsules, the Soyuz ones would have a real chance at ejecting the crew from the exploding rocket, as was the case here.

    Reply
  51. I’m embarrassed to claim this without evidence but I’ve honestly no idea where it was sourced – copypasta was circulating of the flight records of Soyuz vs the Shuttle Program and the # of issues. The shuttle of course had 2 fatal crashes, Soyuz has had 2 different fatal accidents, but only a total of 4 fatalities as a result. Both had roughly 130-140 missions and both had a comparable # of non-fatal accidents/mishaps that were significant enough to be investigated. Probably the main reason the # of fatalities of Americans is so much higher is just because the Shuttle crew compliment was so much bigger.

    Reply
  52. Yes, the main issue I have with the design is no abort system.
    No it don’t have to work all the time but it should work during the first stage and beginning of second stage burn, not reentry but landing.
    Separation during reentry would be idiotic hard and last part of second stage is low chance for blowing up and you need an spacecraft with an heat shield to survive it.

    Reply
  53. Although, the Rocket’s safety system worked and saved the astronauts realistically this is the last nail into Roscosmos’s coffin. RIP.

    Reply
  54. Although the Rocket’s safety system worked and saved the astronauts realistically this is the last nail into Roscosmos’s coffin. RIP.

    Reply
  55. “Can’t wait to see the first BFR detonate”

    And a certain stoned CEO-Who-Tweets-Securities-Fraud wants to send the BFR on BALLISTIC paths towards cities on the other side of the globe as part of some commuting thing for the rich.

    Reply
  56. So embarrassing. No, I am not talking about the Russians. They have old stuff, but they have incrementally improved upon it quite a lot to the point where even when something goes on, the rest is pretty reliable.

    Contrast that to the survival rate of Space Shuttle mishaps?

    Reply
  57. I am happy they are safe! Я счастлив, что они в безопасности!
    I hope they learn from this so future flights safer. 50 years ago yesterday, Apollo 7 launched in USA.

    Reply
  58. That’s rocketry for you, folks! ~2% chance you ain’t gonna make it.

    ba-dum ching [comedic drum/cymbal ‘sting’]

    Reality (sad face)

    Can’t wait to see the first BFR detonate. Hopefully it will only be carrying groceries. The cause will be that little piece part at the bottom of the Bill of Materials, you know… the one that was found to be satisfactory during dye-penetrant examination during re-qual… Got the paperwork right here…

    Reply

Leave a Comment