Rocket science is trivially easy.
Rocket engineering, on the other hand.......
Old Space has shown itself to be just as adept at explosive malfunctions as New Space, with Northrop Grumman encountering an anomaly during a static fire test of an updated solid rocket booster design. The test was the first demonstration test fire of NASA's Booster Obsolescence and Life Extension (BOLE) solid rocket booster, …
Pretty much every missile made since Vietnam are SRM's.
The problem is this particular one is segmented so it can be shipped around before final assembly, and the nozzle is not fixed - it's a new class of thrust vectoring nozzle for SRM's.
The other problem is these SRM's make missile boosters look like firecrackers.
Aren't there quite a lot of solid rocket motors in missiles?
No. Missiles only have 1 solid rocket motor in their booster. Just like this one - it's 1 rocket motor, just scaled up from a missile.
>> Aren't there quite a lot of solid rocket motors in missiles?
> No. Missiles only have 1 solid rocket motor in their booster
Whoosh.
Whoosh. Whoosh.
Whoosh whoosh whoosh whoosh whoosh whoosh whoosh whoosh whoosh whoosh.
(SRBs, lots and lots of them, in various shapes and sizes, one per missile on average, whooshing overhead)
The 2011 promise was to spend $10B on SLS, $6B on Orion and $2B on launch facilities and launch every 12 months for $500M starting in 2016. The SLS team have comfortably doubled every one of these important specifications. Launch cost is over eight times what was promised. Congress has been ecstatic about this superlative success and are keen to continue the project at higher levels of funding.
"The rocket continued firing – once a solid rocket booster is lit, stopping it is challenging – but it was clear there had been a significant anomaly at the rear.”
Is there actually any way of shutting off a SRB once lit? I suppose if you blow the top off, you basically balance out the thrust, (someone more knowledgable than I please correct me if if wrong, but they don’t burn the fuel from the bottom up, but rather from the inside out), or have detonation cord running the length of the booster, just open it up.
Neither really stopping the burn though, just preventing the booster from going much further and coming down where you would rather it didn’t.
"I suppose if you blow the top off, you basically balance out the thrust"
The propellant needs to be under pressure to burn vigorously so blowing the top off would turn it into a really hot fire rather than lots of propulsion going on from either end.
I'm glad work continues on the SRB's even though an Artemis 9 mission doesn't seem likely at this point. They are a good brute force, low-tech way to shift payloads. If there will be more work done on the moon, there will need to be cargo flights of supplies and SRB's will allow heavier shipments. It also means that a core liquid fueled rocket can be augmented so that core can be sized more optimally and see better economic build quantities. Need more umph, add more SRB's. Once you get past a full set of boosters, you'd go to the next size of liquid fuel rocket.