Please see caption errata below. Photos: http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=clotho&w=44124348109%40N01 Mach 2.8, 650 pounds, 4 HD cams on board, biological sampling payload to see what microbes live up above the stratosphere, beyond the reach of balloons, at the edge of space... The upper stage is a P-motor, with 2x the thrust of a cruise missile booster. The booster stage has three of those P-motors in a cluster. The design goal with this launch was to reach 150K ft. Video Caption Errata: I pulled this video together soon after the launch, and the RocketMavericks team has performed a detailed post-mortem with more camera angles, and some of my preliminary assumptions in the video captions need updating. In short, nylon screws failed on the booster recovery bay hatch (premature chute deployment on both flights), and sustainer airframe elements drag separated. This builds confidence that with a few adjustments (no nylon screws), the airframe should fly as designed. I sure hope so! Specifically, in the video, the captions edits should be: • 1,100 lbs. should be 650 lbs. The heavier stat is for the Beagle V airframe with Q motors. • 1000 MPH should be 1500 MPH The earlier estimate is updated by the flight computer • "Stage Separation Buckles Over" Buckle is the wrong verb. The airframe did not fail structurally in any way; it suffered drag separation which is a premature separation at the place the airframe is meant to for parachute deployment. • "Upper Stage Snaps, while booster burns" Same verb issue. The upper stage separates while booster and sustainer tumble during booster burnout. • "The culprit: sustainer wall burnout" Sure seemed like it at the time, but the sidewall burn through was late in the burn, as the motor was depressurizing. The culprit there was a bubble in the center motor grain. An x-ray scan should help avoid bubbles in the future.