# real life examples of self-destruction?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/real-life-examples-of-self-destruction/692174>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [July 2, 2014, 7:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/real-life-examples-of-self-destruction/692174 "2014-07-02T07:46:55Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 4

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Dr.Strangelove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr.strangelove/32/6613_2.png) [@Dr.Strangelove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Strangelove)\
**Post date:** [August 12, 2014, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/real-life-examples-of-self-destruction/692174/61 "2014-08-12T21:10:45Z")

</div>

> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#):
>
> The flight termination system isn’t designed to mix propellants. It is designed to terminate thrust. The reason would prefer the now ballistic, uncontrolled vehicle come down in as few pieces and in the smallest target area as possible so as to minimize both hazard and environmental mediation.

Maybe it’s a moot point since the Russians don’t care and the Americans no longer use these fuels for booster stages, but I do see this this line in [14 CFR PART 417, APPENDIX D](http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/part-417/appendix-D):  
_(4) Disperse any liquid propellant, whether by rupturing the propellant tank or other equivalent method, and initiate burning of any toxic liquid propellant._

Clearly this is more of a wish list than a list of hard requirements, but nevertheless it seems that, as much as is reasonably possible, you would want your FTS to mix any hypergolic propellants.

> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#):
>
> In general, it is desired that E[SUB]c[/SUB] \< 10[SUP]-5[/SUP] per launch, or in other words, the expectation that there is a single ground casualty on average 1:100,000 flights.

Thanks for the good info.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/real-life-examples-of-self-destruction/692174.md?page=3)