I guess now the question is whether they can do it the majority of the time.
Yup, that's what I'm wondering too. How much variance is there from launch to launch, and to what degree is this reproducible?
SpaceX launch webcast: Orbcomm-2 Mission [video]
271–280 of 444 posts
Re: SpaceX launch webcast: Orbcomm-2 Mission [video]
#272Awesome alternate angle: https://vine.co/v/iKPTghqF0LA
Re: SpaceX launch webcast: Orbcomm-2 Mission [video]
#273This makes no sense to me. If you want to recover the rockets why not use parachutes? Guiding a parachute down, maybe with the help of some propellers, has got to be easier and more reliable than this.
Extreme speeds and loads. Parachutes don't scale.
Re: SpaceX launch webcast: Orbcomm-2 Mission [video]
#274Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would make the rocket too heavy. To add another engine, they would have to make the rocket larger in diameter, increasing the weight by a fair amount (they currently have the 9th engine in the middle, so it would have to get moved to the ring with the rest). Reducing the power of the center engine would also reduce the amount of payload to orbit. Rockets that can reach orbit have very bad weight to payload ratios…
It's actually more about complexity. They could simply replace the center engine with a lower power design and still get plenty of mass to orbit. The issue then is that you have to design a completely new engine and have 2 different engines in your first stage. More complexity generally equals more risk, and historically SpaceX has sought to maximize simplicity for the sake of reliability and rapid iteration.
And besides, it would be a waste. Landing with the engines they have is "just" a software problem. (Technically a control system problem.) Assuming they can make it work consistently, the save the added cost and inefficiency of a separate landing engine for all future launches.
Re: SpaceX launch webcast: Orbcomm-2 Mission [video]
#275This makes no sense to me. If you want to recover the rockets why not use parachutes? Guiding a parachute down, maybe with the help of some propellers, has got to be easier and more reliable than this.
SpaceX tried using parachutes multiple times but they couldn't provide the necessary accuracy and velocity reduction.
Re: SpaceX launch webcast: Orbcomm-2 Mission [video]
#276Are they planning on using this recovered first stage for a reusability test, or are they going to destructively examine it to see how all the components held up?
First they get to recover all the video that they didn't get in the other stages :-) This one lands with its cameras and flash chips intact. If I were them I would tear it apart, learn from it, reassemble it, and then display it. Interest question about safeing it once it is landed. You can't just dump excess liquid oxygen are you'll end up starting fires. Fortunately it isn't like the shuttle which had Hydrazine in…
I think they just let the O2 boil off. But they do have some hypergolic ignition fluids to deal with.
Re: SpaceX launch webcast: Orbcomm-2 Mission [video]
#277Are they planning on using this recovered first stage for a reusability test, or are they going to destructively examine it to see how all the components held up?
First they get to recover all the video that they didn't get in the other stages :-) This one lands with its cameras and flash chips intact. If I were them I would tear it apart, learn from it, reassemble it, and then display it. Interest question about safeing it once it is landed. You can't just dump excess liquid oxygen are you'll end up starting fires. Fortunately it isn't like the shuttle which had Hydrazine in…
I think they just let the O2 boil off. But they do have some hypergolic ignition fluids to deal with.
Re: SpaceX launch webcast: Orbcomm-2 Mission [video]
#278SpaceX employee are allowed to comment on HN?
Re: SpaceX launch webcast: Orbcomm-2 Mission [video]
#279Prediction: this is the most important milestone in the development of the Earth's IP network since I was born in the early 80s. I can't wait for this to fuck over Comcast and every other last-mile monopoly acting like jerks to their customers.
I would love to see that happen. Low earth orbit solves the latency problem with satellites, and reusable first stages (as well as potentially piggy-backing on other launches) may solve the cost problem. What about space on the wireless spectrum though? My understanding is that it's pretty full. It seems like SpaceX will either need to use something completely different (like laser transmission) or make a deal for use of some of the spectrum.
Re: SpaceX launch webcast: Orbcomm-2 Mission [video]
#280Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is this downvoted? There is some serious tribalism going on in this thread. You all need to chill out and start thinking again. Who cares whether BO or SpaceX was first, or whether China or America was first? We should be happy that humanity is closer to Mars.
I for one think that giving credit where credit is due is an important thing.
Getting off this rock is probably the only thing that matters. Credit is irrelevant when Earth is no longer habitable and we never left.