Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, F* nationalists. Earth is too important to be left to the whims of crazies like you.
[deleted]
[deleted]
SpaceX Successfully Soft-Landed Booster Rocket in the Atlantic
51–60 of 147 posts
Re: SpaceX Successfully Soft-Landed Booster Rocket in the Atlantic
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I agree that it is definitely best to use domestic launchers and not have to rely on the Russians for engines or astronaut launch, I don't think that "Fuck the Russians" is really a great expression of that. Since Apollo-Soyuz, spaceflight has been something that our two countries can productively collaborate on, despite our (at times, vast) political differences. Maintaining good relations between NASA and the…
[deleted]
Calling for NASA to stop working with Roscosmos and the ISS over Putin is nuts. Space research and exploration is more than petty flag waving.
Re: SpaceX Successfully Soft-Landed Booster Rocket in the Atlantic
#53Is it SpaceX's intention at some point to forgo the launch tower and launch directly off of the landing legs grasshopper style? I realize it's not really necessary, but it might make it easier to get a rocket off of Mars instead of having to build a tower. Although, presumably if you can refine rocket fuel on Mars, maybe building a launch tower is no big deal. Anyways, kudos again to Musk and SpaceX.
I don't know about the need for a "tower", but the Falcon 9 launch sequence includes firing up all the engines and making sure they're running fine. Same too for the SSMEs as I recall. That's one of the great advantages of liquid fuel rockets, you can turn them off. Ditto the mighty Saturn V, they started "8.9 seconds" before launch, 300 milliseconds apart.
So you need some serious hardware to hold it down till release, and to deal with all that exhaust.
Re: SpaceX Successfully Soft-Landed Booster Rocket in the Atlantic
#54Re: SpaceX Successfully Soft-Landed Booster Rocket in the Atlantic
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
My jaw dropped reading that the rocket could be re-used the next day. That seems like an enormous leap forward for space flight.
Rockets are built to be pretty durable machines (obviously). The environment they operate in outside of the atmosphere is harsher in many ways. Two big issues with sea landing: transport (tug, crane, huge truck, etc.), and corrosion/contamination from saltwater. They'll still need to verify all systems and components before a second launch, but that's way easier to do when the vehicle is sitting empty on the pad next…
They'll still need to verify all systems and components before a second launch
That. You need to re-qualify the engine after each launch. The cost of labour far exceeds the cost of materials, you need to strip and re-build the thing, and you ask yourself just how much money you can save through re-using the first stage. I don't think it's much.
Re: SpaceX Successfully Soft-Landed Booster Rocket in the Atlantic
#56Re: SpaceX Successfully Soft-Landed Booster Rocket in the Atlantic
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
The mission was to launch the satellite they were being paid to launch. Recovery of the rocket was a test they were running on the side. The mission justifiably got priority.
It's strange how many people seem unable to understand this. SpaceX got a bunch of testing essentially for free. NASA was gracious to allow it. They could have easily said, "We're paying you to launch stuff to ISS, keep those crazy landing legs far away from our payload." Sea conditions were too rough for recovery. Their options were to wait for better weather, annoying the customer and possibly losing the launch (th…
NASA isn't stupid, they know that if SpaceX manages to get rocket reusability they'll save a lot of money which would otherwise be spent on rocket launches.
Re: SpaceX Successfully Soft-Landed Booster Rocket in the Atlantic
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is "the ocean was wavy" really a justifiable reason for losing the rocket? Surely sea conditions are something they'd take into account when planning and executing the mission.
hmm, an armchair rocket scientist... don't think i've seen that one before.
How many thousands (millions?) of people play Kerbal Space Program? Obviously that qualifies as a rocket scientist/
Re: SpaceX Successfully Soft-Landed Booster Rocket in the Atlantic
#59Equally large news from today's press conference at the National Press Club - SpaceX is taking on ULA (united launch alliance, a consortium of incumbent players in the market) and the "block buy" allocation of military / national-security launches to ULA. Here's their handout, from one of the reporters there: https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/459734785314013184 Playing politics a bit, Elon's claiming a ~ 75% redu…
It's not equally important news.
Suing the government for mismanagement of a procuration process is a short-term path to selling more of the same.
Demonstrating landing ability, then refueling and launching within a day is a medium-term path to completely changing space flight.
[added] When I say short-term vs medium-term, I mean it wrt strategy. I wouldn't bet on the short-term issue being solved first...
Re: SpaceX Successfully Soft-Landed Booster Rocket in the Atlantic
#60This may be a dumb question, but why are they test landing in the ocean instead of on land? Flight paths preclude it?