Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX nails triple booster landing after satellite delivery

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 128 posts

Re: SpaceX nails triple booster landing after satellite delivery

#31

Post by pedrocr »

qmarchi wrote: post #24
bbojan wrote: post #16

Not only that, but apparently they recovered both fairings: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:/... So 5 out of 5...

It's an interesting issue with the fairings, and I'm interested to see what (or if) they're going to solve the issue with the saltwater contaminated fairings. Being a SpaceX launcher, as the article indicates, means they can accept higher risks, but in turn has a greater financial risk to the company. It's times like this where I'm glad SpaceX is a private company.

According to a reddit thread they've saltwater hardened the fairings and now they can reuse them:

https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/bc8105/arabsat6a_el...

The first reuse mission seems to be an internal one though.

Re: SpaceX nails triple booster landing after satellite delivery

#32

Post by pedrocx486 »

qmarchi wrote: post #25
Joe-Z wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw the live stream yesterday and when the two side boosters landed side-by-side synchronously it was almost as if it was out of a movie. We are living in the future!

On this launch, it looks like they offset the timings to reduce the chance of tipping over. If you get time, go look for the first FH booster landings. The timing is almost perfect and the long exposure images looked beautiful.

>On this launch, it looks like they offset the timings to reduce the chance of tipping over.

On reddit a lot of people enphasised that it was to avoid interference. Which interference, no one knows.

Re: SpaceX nails triple booster landing after satellite delivery

#33

Post by Teknoman117 »

trollied wrote: post #3
raehik wrote: post #2

Big fan of making technical spacecraft manoeuvres sound like cool skateboard tricks.

I'm more impressed by the booster landings though :-) Seeing a launch/landing in-person is on my bucket list.

It's certainly very cool. I saw the night launch/landing of Falcon 9 out of Vandenberg a few months back. Certainly worth the overnight trip.

Most impressive part for me was that you see the booster make it's landing burn and touchdown BEFORE you hear the landing at the observation site.

Re: SpaceX nails triple booster landing after satellite delivery

#34

Post by ForHackernews »

inflatableDodo wrote: post #15
usermac wrote: post #5

I wonder what emergency procedure is in place in case the landing is off-course. Does it blow itself up?

As an addendum to that, if one accidentally lands in my back yard, can I keep it?

Probably: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/26/lens/space-rocket-parts-r...

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2018/06/07/in-russia-...

I don't know what the salvage rights in the US are.

Re: SpaceX nails triple booster landing after satellite delivery

#38

Post by DennisP »

This really looks good for launch costs long-term.

The Heavy costs $90 million per reusable launch with a 64,000 kg payload, or $1400 per kilogram.[1]

Current versions of the Falcon 9 and Heavy can fly ten times with virtually no refurbishment between flights.[2] The only part they throw away is the $7.5 million upper stage.[3] Their expendable cost is $150M and they haven't really started reusing yet, so if they actually reuse each rocket ten times, they have a lot of room to lower prices; ten launches would be $($150M - $7.5M) + ($7.5M * 10) = $21.75M per launch, or $334/kg for the rocket itself. Launch cost won't be quite that low because they also have labor, fuel, and so on, but it looks like they can get well under $1000/kg just with the Falcon Heavy.

The larger and fully-reusable BFR should do even better.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_Heavy

[2] https://www.space.com/spacex-falcon-heavy-triple-rocket-land...

[3] https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2019/04/spacex-recovered-6-mil...

Re: SpaceX nails triple booster landing after satellite delivery

#40

Post by gliptic »

DennisP wrote: post #38

This really looks good for launch costs long-term. The Heavy costs $90 million per reusable launch with a 64,000 kg payload, or $1400 per kilogram.[1] Current versions of the Falcon 9 and Heavy can fly ten times with virtually no refurbishment between flights.[2] The only part they throw away is the $7.5 million upper stage.[3] Their expendable cost is $150M and they haven't really started reusing yet, so if they act…

Note that a 64,000 kg payload LEO launch doesn't cost $90 million because it would have to fly expendable.
Post reply on HN