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

Falcon Heavy core booster lost at sea

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 70 posts

Re: Falcon Heavy core booster lost at sea

#41

Post by sehugg »

mabbo wrote: post #31

SpaceX hasn't failed a landing of a booster in two years (correct me if I'm wrong). I hope a lot of data was collected as to why and how it failed. SpaceX's biggest advantage is that they iterate quickly. Hopefully next iteration fixes whatever problem they had today. Those boosters aren't cheap.

Musk attributed it to low levels of triethylborane—a hot-burning propellant that essentially acts as rocket engines' starter fluid—in the center booster.

The center core is a special structurally enhanced model, so I'll give them a pass since they're flying a new bird. I'm sure they'll get it right.

Re: Falcon Heavy core booster lost at sea

#42

Post by mannykannot »

craftyguy wrote: post #9
hodgesrm wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know why that happens? This is the first time I've seen it live.

According to the SpaceX media commentary folks that were talking as it was happening, it's because "intense vibrations are interfering with the antenna".

Meanwhile, in the background, a monitor appears to be showing smoke clearing from the deck of the barge, with no booster present.

https://twitter.com/Darkphibre/status/960990105581240321

Re: Falcon Heavy core booster lost at sea

#43

Post by larkeith »

quasse wrote: post #36
Eridrus wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't they say these boosters had already flown before? I'm also a bit surprised the grid find are so pricey, they seem pretty small? Not that I really know how much titanium costs to buy and machine.

They measure 4 by 5 feet, so we can estimate they are probably made from a solid chunk of titanium that was at least 20 cubic feet or almost 5,000 pounds. That would be nearly $150,000 in raw material and probably another 5x that in processing (guesstimating cost per cubic inch of titanium removal). Either that or they were specially made castings, which are similarly expensive in low volume, if not more.

Wouldn't you be able to recover most of the removed titanium, amortizing the majority of that guesstimated materials cost? Processing likely remains expensive, however.

Re: Falcon Heavy core booster lost at sea

#44

Post by gt_ »

>and in the live stream SpaceX provided of the launch, you could hear someone say “We’ve lost the core” but it wasn’t clear whether that indicated just the feed, or the booster itself.

That’s definitely not set-speak for ‘video feed’ but I wish it was.

Re: Falcon Heavy core booster lost at sea

#45

Post by alexeckermann »

sarreph wrote: post #25

I absolutely love the fact that SpaceX is so open and public about their rocket launches, however, I couldn't help but get the feeling that they were in full 'PR backlash' mode [over the core booster] when ending the live stream, and from skimming many of the instantaneous press releases. Does anyone else think that they were overly quiet on the core booster landing on purpose, in order to minimise negative PR on the…

They were prepared for it to RUD right there on the pad, losing one booster is pretty much one away from a flawless mission. I've been on previous live streams when an anomaly occurs, this was no different and what I come to expect — the moment they didn't cut back to a video feed it was very obvious what had happened and that they'd need time to figure it out.

Doubt any thought of 'Public Relations' went through the minds of any of the presenting engineers. Clearing the launch tower was a massive achievement, everything else was a bonus. Loved seeing the engineers all beaming at the end with John joining in — away from a desk!

Re: Falcon Heavy core booster lost at sea

#46

Post by Flemlord »

deadA1ias wrote: post #30
delaaxe wrote: post #24

> But the core, middle booster, which attempted to land aboard “Of Course I Still Love You,” a drone barge that SpaceX uses as a mobile, ocean-borne landing pad stationed in the Atlantic for its flights departing from Florida, wasn’t recovered. “Of Course I Still Love You” is the name of a spacecraft in The Culture, a series of novels that inspired Elon Musk when he was young.

For anyone who has not yet read of the books from The Culture series, I highly encourage you to do so. They are an amazing - agnostic - version of what our far future selves could be. Iain M. Banks had quite the mind (no pun intended).

Yes, great books! I recommend starting with 'The Player of Games', not the first book in the series but the best. They are only loosely connected, you won't miss anything.

Re: Falcon Heavy core booster lost at sea

#48

Post by godelmachine »

Yes, I remember this. Had stayed up all night to watch the launch. After the side cores landed (which was mind blowing honestly), the cameras switched to drone ship where the center booster was supposed to land. The only thing I could see was mist & fog, and they switched to their commentators 2 seconds after that. Thought I must have not noticed the successfully landed core, & went back to sleep dreaming of the cool life Musk lives.

Re: Falcon Heavy core booster lost at sea

#49

Post by godelmachine »

deadA1ias wrote: post #30
delaaxe wrote: post #24

> But the core, middle booster, which attempted to land aboard “Of Course I Still Love You,” a drone barge that SpaceX uses as a mobile, ocean-borne landing pad stationed in the Atlantic for its flights departing from Florida, wasn’t recovered. “Of Course I Still Love You” is the name of a spacecraft in The Culture, a series of novels that inspired Elon Musk when he was young.

For anyone who has not yet read of the books from The Culture series, I highly encourage you to do so. They are an amazing - agnostic - version of what our far future selves could be. Iain M. Banks had quite the mind (no pun intended).

I remember an articles from The Economist that said the same thing

Re: Falcon Heavy core booster lost at sea

#50

Post by wrigby »

hodgesrm wrote: post #8
Klathmon wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The video feed drops like that on every droneship landing.

Do you know why that happens? This is the first time I've seen it live.

The satellite antennas used to uplink a video feed like this have a very small beamwidth (around 1° depending on antenna size and the frequency they're using), so you need to keep them pointed precisely at a specific point in the sky. They rely on a sensitive IMU (accelerometers) and fast motors to actively track the satellite while the platform moves. They're quite impressive to watch in action[1], but I'm guessing they're no match for the shock and vibe of the rocket landing.

1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k79vfwUkeYk

Post reply on HN