Hacker News Reader

That's multiple complete losses now that have been caused by issues with COPVs. I remember reading some discussion on /r/spacex about SpaceX going with really aggressive COPV technologies to shave as much weight as possible, but they're definitely paying for it in reliability. Hopefully they can iron it out, and maybe they'll switch to less aggressive COPV designs soon?

View on HN

The previous loss was, as far as they can tell, related to a strut that broke under strain and released an otherwise-fine COPV into the oxygen tank. As far as they can tell it didn't have anything to do with aggressive design, just a part failing under its rated strength.

I don't think it even failed under it's rated strength, it was that their supplier for the struts provided sub-par/faulty struts and they couldn't handle the pressure they were supposed to be rated for

That's what I meant. It was rated for a certain load, but there was a faulty strut in the batch, and it failed well under that rated load.

Isn't that what 'failed under its rated strength' means?

"Multiple complete losses" is quite a misleading statement, in my opinion.

It's been exactly two.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com