SpaceX lands rocket at sea second time after satellite launch

Post by agildehaus » Fri, May 06, 2016, 6:24 AM UTC

haser_au wrote: post #3

mulmen wrote: post #2

Looks like the landing was perfectly centered on the barge this time as well. Does anyone know when they plan on reusing one of these recovered first stages?

They said at the beginning of the live stream that they plan to do a test fire on the first recovered first stage "sometime soon".

Post by agildehaus » Fri, May 06, 2016, 6:54 AM UTC

CamperBob2 wrote: post #12

agildehaus wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first recovered stage, F9-021, has already been static fired and will likely end up as a monument outside of SpaceX HQ as they've filed an FAA request to do so. https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action... The second recovered rocket, F9-023, will be relaunched. It has already been static fired with no announced problems. Elon said it'd be a few months before a customer was announced, but the g…

Amusing... I was wondering why they needed to get FAA permission to park the rocket, but the application says it'll be 160 feet tall. So they're standing it up, as opposed to the NASA methodology of positioning their monuments horizontally.

Post by dsfuoi » Fri, May 06, 2016, 7:14 AM UTC

gpm wrote: post #10

kirrent wrote: post #7

For those wondering, this isn't a simple repeat of CRS8 which landed on a drone ship about a month ago. CRS8 was a mission to low earth orbit which left the first stage with plenty of fuel to effect a landing. The landing was made as slow as possible and limited only by how low a single engine could be throttled. The re-entry burn which slows the rocket down before the landing burn was also more agressive. This missi…

To expand on this slightly the CRS8 (and OG2, the land landing) landing was done using only 1 engine, which even then was presumably throttled. This landing burn was done using 3 engines so they spend less time below terminal velocity, and thus use less fuel. The total deceleration should be ~40 m/s during the burn.

Post by dba7dba » Fri, May 06, 2016, 7:24 AM UTC

agildehaus wrote: post #13

CamperBob2 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amusing... I was wondering why they needed to get FAA permission to park the rocket, but the application says it'll be 160 feet tall. So they're standing it up, as opposed to the NASA methodology of positioning their monuments horizontally.

Normally a 160 foot tall object wouldn't need FAA permission, but SpaceX is located right next to Hawthorne Municipal Airport.

Post by tigershark » Fri, May 06, 2016, 7:26 AM UTC

gpm wrote: post #10

kirrent wrote: post #7

For those wondering, this isn't a simple repeat of CRS8 which landed on a drone ship about a month ago. CRS8 was a mission to low earth orbit which left the first stage with plenty of fuel to effect a landing. The landing was made as slow as possible and limited only by how low a single engine could be throttled. The re-entry burn which slows the rocket down before the landing burn was also more agressive. This missi…

To expand on this slightly the CRS8 (and OG2, the land landing) landing was done using only 1 engine, which even then was presumably throttled. This landing burn was done using 3 engines so they spend less time below terminal velocity, and thus use less fuel. The total deceleration should be ~40 m/s during the burn.