Northrop Grumman shows SpaceX doesn't have a monopoly on explosions
(2025/06/30)
- Reference: 1751302602
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2025/06/30/northrop_grumman_test_anomaly/
- Source link:
video 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 [1]test was the first demonstration test fire of NASA's Booster Obsolescence and Life Extension (BOLE) solid rocket booster, a five-segment booster intended for NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) once the US space agency exhausts its remaining inventory of parts from the Space Shuttle era.
The booster was secured to the ground at the Utah test site and fired for slightly more than two minutes. All went well for the first 100 seconds or so, until it appeared that the rocket's nozzle had failed, accompanied by an exclamation of "whoa!" and a gasp on the commentary audio. It happens at about 22:15 in the video below:
[2]
[3]Youtube Video
[4]
[5]
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.
A Northrop Grumman spokesperson told The Register : "We had a good test, pushing the boundaries of large solid rocket motor design to meet rigorous performance requirements. While the motor appeared to perform well through the most harsh environments of the test, we observed an apparent hardware anomaly near the end of the two-plus minute burn.
[6]
"As a new design, and the largest segmented solid rocket booster ever built, this test provides us with valuable data to iterate our design for future uses."
[7]There's no international protocol on what to do if an asteroid strikes Earth
[8]NICER science not so nice as ISS telescope pauses operations
[9]Don't look up: NASA is struggling to execute its planetary defense plan
[10]Axiom Mission 4 finally set for launch June 25
The updated design uses a new propellant formulation and enhanced components. The expectation is that performance will be increased by more than 10 percent, which, according to Northrop Grumman, would mean another five metric tons of payload could be transported to lunar orbit.
That is, assuming the update is ultimately adopted. NASA had planned to use up its existing stock of Shuttle-era solid rocket parts before moving to the BOLE design with Artemis 9 sometime in the 2030s. The solid rocket boosters from the Space Shuttle era were reusable, but are expended during an SLS launch.
However, the chances of NASA getting as far as Artemis 9 are looking increasingly uncertain at the moment. A [11]budget proposal that would result in the SLS being cancelled after Artemis 3 is currently under scrutiny, and [12]changes suggested by lawmakers would only restore funding as far as Artemis 5.
While the BOLE anomaly is not on the same scale as SpaceX's recent [13]Starship explosion , it highlights that the New Space companies, like SpaceX, don't have the explosion market to themselves. Old Space companies, like Northrop Grumman, can also blow up stuff when they put their minds to it. ®
Get our [14]Tech Resources
[1] https://news.northropgrumman.com/launch/Northrop-Grumman-Tests-Most-Powerful-Segmented-Solid-Rocket-Booster-Ever-Built
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aGMI92xZhRsPvfm7FMh5iQAAA0o&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3TfNZsCxDU
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aGMI92xZhRsPvfm7FMh5iQAAA0o&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aGMI92xZhRsPvfm7FMh5iQAAA0o&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aGMI92xZhRsPvfm7FMh5iQAAA0o&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/27/mps_space_asteroid_strike/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/26/nicer_science_not_so_nice/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/25/nasa_oig_planetary_defense_audit/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/24/axiom_mission_4_finally_set/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/02/nasa_isaacman_dropped/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/09/us_lawmakers_nasa_response/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/19/spacexs_starship_explodes_again/
[14] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
The [1]test was the first demonstration test fire of NASA's Booster Obsolescence and Life Extension (BOLE) solid rocket booster, a five-segment booster intended for NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) once the US space agency exhausts its remaining inventory of parts from the Space Shuttle era.
The booster was secured to the ground at the Utah test site and fired for slightly more than two minutes. All went well for the first 100 seconds or so, until it appeared that the rocket's nozzle had failed, accompanied by an exclamation of "whoa!" and a gasp on the commentary audio. It happens at about 22:15 in the video below:
[2]
[3]Youtube Video
[4]
[5]
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.
A Northrop Grumman spokesperson told The Register : "We had a good test, pushing the boundaries of large solid rocket motor design to meet rigorous performance requirements. While the motor appeared to perform well through the most harsh environments of the test, we observed an apparent hardware anomaly near the end of the two-plus minute burn.
[6]
"As a new design, and the largest segmented solid rocket booster ever built, this test provides us with valuable data to iterate our design for future uses."
[7]There's no international protocol on what to do if an asteroid strikes Earth
[8]NICER science not so nice as ISS telescope pauses operations
[9]Don't look up: NASA is struggling to execute its planetary defense plan
[10]Axiom Mission 4 finally set for launch June 25
The updated design uses a new propellant formulation and enhanced components. The expectation is that performance will be increased by more than 10 percent, which, according to Northrop Grumman, would mean another five metric tons of payload could be transported to lunar orbit.
That is, assuming the update is ultimately adopted. NASA had planned to use up its existing stock of Shuttle-era solid rocket parts before moving to the BOLE design with Artemis 9 sometime in the 2030s. The solid rocket boosters from the Space Shuttle era were reusable, but are expended during an SLS launch.
However, the chances of NASA getting as far as Artemis 9 are looking increasingly uncertain at the moment. A [11]budget proposal that would result in the SLS being cancelled after Artemis 3 is currently under scrutiny, and [12]changes suggested by lawmakers would only restore funding as far as Artemis 5.
While the BOLE anomaly is not on the same scale as SpaceX's recent [13]Starship explosion , it highlights that the New Space companies, like SpaceX, don't have the explosion market to themselves. Old Space companies, like Northrop Grumman, can also blow up stuff when they put their minds to it. ®
Get our [14]Tech Resources
[1] https://news.northropgrumman.com/launch/Northrop-Grumman-Tests-Most-Powerful-Segmented-Solid-Rocket-Booster-Ever-Built
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aGMI92xZhRsPvfm7FMh5iQAAA0o&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3TfNZsCxDU
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aGMI92xZhRsPvfm7FMh5iQAAA0o&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aGMI92xZhRsPvfm7FMh5iQAAA0o&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aGMI92xZhRsPvfm7FMh5iQAAA0o&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/27/mps_space_asteroid_strike/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/26/nicer_science_not_so_nice/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/25/nasa_oig_planetary_defense_audit/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/24/axiom_mission_4_finally_set/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/02/nasa_isaacman_dropped/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/09/us_lawmakers_nasa_response/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/19/spacexs_starship_explodes_again/
[14] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Careful
Baird34
"significant anomaly at the rear."
As a IBD sufferer I can vouch that anomalies at the rear are never fun and best avoided.
Re: Careful
Anonymous Coward
You made me think of this:
“Having recently discovered a lactose intolerance I found you can handle quite a high level of methane.
I mean, the budgie has died, but .. “ - Zoe Lyons
:)
Engine rich exhaust
Anonymous Coward
The problem is that all the design experience is gone.
They started designing the original SRBs in the early '70s. That's 55 years ago.
They're starting from scratch, with little to tell them "why does that intersegment nozzle swivel have a step in it?"
Zuagroasta
Shuttle - the endless cycle of overpromise, underdeliver, go crazy looking for pounds to shave to lift 2 more grams, BOOM! rinse, repeat. Since 1989 it's been the same shitshow.
Rocket science is trivially easy.
Rocket engineering, on the other hand.......