SpaceX (general discussion)

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,198
Reaction score
22
Wow. Talk about a huge success: they recovered EVERYTHING. Three boosters plus the fairing (that had the nasty habit of scorning Mr Steven trying to catch it).

Kudos to them. It is kind of landmark for Falcon 9 and for SpaceX: they finally fully achieved what they intended to do since 2010-2011 (minus the second stage, admittedly !)
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,892
Reaction score
34
Archibald said:
Wow. Talk about a huge success: they recovered EVERYTHING. Three boosters plus the fairing (that had the nasty habit of scorning Mr Steven trying to catch it).

Kudos to them. It is kind of landmark for Falcon 9 and for SpaceX: they finally fully achieved what they intended to do since 2010-2011 (minus the second stage, admittedly !)
To be pedantic they didn’t recover everything as the second stage was expended.
 

Richard N

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
296
Reaction score
8
Pretty good work for handheld video from a rocking boat with a Nikon P1000.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLCXn445-eQ
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,198
Reaction score
22
Flyaway said:
Archibald said:
Wow. Talk about a huge success: they recovered EVERYTHING. Three boosters plus the fairing (that had the nasty habit of scorning Mr Steven trying to catch it).

Kudos to them. It is kind of landmark for Falcon 9 and for SpaceX: they finally fully achieved what they intended to do since 2010-2011 (minus the second stage, admittedly !)
To be pedantic they didn’t recover everything as the second stage was expended.
emphasis in bold. I especially mentionned they did not recovered the second stage. ???

Let'ssay they recovered everything... they hoped to recover.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,892
Reaction score
34
Archibald said:
Flyaway said:
Archibald said:
Wow. Talk about a huge success: they recovered EVERYTHING. Three boosters plus the fairing (that had the nasty habit of scorning Mr Steven trying to catch it).

Kudos to them. It is kind of landmark for Falcon 9 and for SpaceX: they finally fully achieved what they intended to do since 2010-2011 (minus the second stage, admittedly !)
To be pedantic they didn’t recover everything as the second stage was expended.
emphasis in bold. I especially mentionned they did not recovered the second stage. ???

Let'ssay they recovered everything... they hoped to recover.
This kind of partly points up the move to Starship the desire to recover everything they can.
 

Richard N

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
296
Reaction score
8
Consideration for recovering the second stage would be that the costs in manpower, equipment, time, and money justify doing it.

At payload deployment, the second stage will be much higher and farther downrange than the first stages. An autonomous barge would need to be farther downrange to retrieve it and would have a very long ride home at the mercy of variable weather and sea states. If it was too far downrange for that to be practical, it might have do a complete orbit to come down near the first stages’ recovery area.

The second stage would have its performance reduced because of the need to reserve fuel for its reentry burns from a much higher altitude than the first stages. There have been launches where first stages were not going to be recovered because of the need to get to a higher orbit and its performance could also be increased by removing the landing legs, grid fins, and other recovery equipment to reduce weight and further increase first stage performance.

SpaceX stands supremely alone in reusing rocket parts and are so far ahead of the likes of ULA that the second stage is peanuts compared to their big picture. I’m sure they have thought about second stage recovery and have already come up with a better solution than any of us peasants will.
 

Orionblamblam

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
7,229
Reaction score
68
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
If SpaceX is serious about space colonization, the thing to do isn't to bring stage 2 back down, but to leave it in orbit where it can be collected and either used to boost things further out, be rebuilt into bigger clustered stages, or recycled for the raw materials. Metals can obviously be melted down, but even carbon fiber can be burned to generate carbon dioxide, just the thing to help grow plants on asteroids and the like.
 

_Del_

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
351
Reaction score
0
I think we're pretty far away from that step yet, but I like where your head is at. The best "value" of the engines or material isn't as a recyclable here where such things are (relatively) abundant, but up "there" where you've already paid the bill to put it and such things are scarce.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,892
Reaction score
34
Via NSF.

SpaceX - Falcon Heavy - Arabsat 6A - 4K - High Fidelity - by Epic visual and sound production by Jay L. DeShetler for NSF. Headphones on and enjoy "tower clear" with the big rocket and her 27 Merlin 1D pals.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzCkQD9O7_s
 

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
1,384
Reaction score
22
From Musk Twitter:

Thinking about adding giant stainless steel dragon wings to Starship

Later quote said he was 6.5 out of 10 serious. As usual, we'll have to wait to figure out what he really means.
 

icyplanetnhc

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
95
Reaction score
0
Website
aiaa.seas.ucla.edu
fredymac said:
From Musk Twitter:

Thinking about adding giant stainless steel dragon wings to Starship

Later quote said he was 6.5 out of 10 serious. As usual, we'll have to wait to figure out what he really means.
And one minute later,

Winter is coming
Probably just a cheeky Game of Thrones reference, although you may never know.

And for some extra lulz, see below... ;)

 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,076
Reaction score
27
Oh, God, I'm never going to be able to unsee that picture...
 

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
1,384
Reaction score
22
With Musk its hard to tell when he's joking. He added this:

With steel membrane wings like a Dragon, we may be able to lower Starship’s orbital reentry temp to ~1000 degrees C, which would allow the whole surface to be uncooled bare metal

Offhand, I would not be surprised if there is another design update. Putting these comments into a Game Of Thrones thread really adds another layer of uncertainty.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
65
Not that I think he ever saw it but I DID tweet to him that he should name the first Starship, "Galileo". ;D

 

UpForce

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
129
Reaction score
0
TomS said:
Oh, God, I'm never going to be able to unsee that picture...
I think we need some kind of a protocol for such hazardous content.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,892
Reaction score
34
SpaceX loses the center core of its Falcon Heavy rocket due to choppy seas

“Over the weekend, due to rough sea conditions, SpaceX’s recovery team was unable to secure the center core booster for its return trip to Port Canaveral,” SpaceX said in a statement to The Verge. “As conditions worsened with eight to ten foot swells, the booster began to shift and ultimately was unable to remain upright. While we had hoped to bring the booster back intact, the safety of our team always takes precedence. We do not expect future missions to be impacted.”
 

martinbayer

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 6, 2009
Messages
477
Reaction score
10
Flyaway said:
SpaceX loses the center core of its Falcon Heavy rocket due to choppy seas

“Over the weekend, due to rough sea conditions, SpaceX’s recovery team was unable to secure the center core booster for its return trip to Port Canaveral,” SpaceX said in a statement to The Verge. “As conditions worsened with eight to ten foot swells, the booster began to shift and ultimately was unable to remain upright. While we had hoped to bring the booster back intact, the safety of our team always takes precedence. We do not expect future missions to be impacted.”
I understand that due to his ultimate goal to colonize Mars and avoid duplication of effort, Musk chose a VTVL architecture for all of his launch and space vehicles, but those are the perils of foregoing wings and landing strips on firm ground.
 

Hobbes

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
642
Reaction score
7
martinbayer said:
I understand that due to his ultimate goal to colonize Mars and avoid duplication of effort, Musk chose a VTVL architecture for all of his launch and space vehicles, but those are the perils of foregoing wings and landing strips on firm ground.
The landing was ~1000 miles out in the ocean. What do you get when you create a vehicle with a 30-ton payload and wings capable of 1000 miles of crossrange gliding? The Space Shuttle, and we all know how cheap that turned out to be.

SpaceX have a solution in place (the 'Roomba' robotic vehicle that parks under the landed stage and grabs it to stabilize it), but that vehicle wasn't yet modified to handle the FH center core.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
65
martinbayer said:
Flyaway said:
SpaceX loses the center core of its Falcon Heavy rocket due to choppy seas

“Over the weekend, due to rough sea conditions, SpaceX’s recovery team was unable to secure the center core booster for its return trip to Port Canaveral,” SpaceX said in a statement to The Verge. “As conditions worsened with eight to ten foot swells, the booster began to shift and ultimately was unable to remain upright. While we had hoped to bring the booster back intact, the safety of our team always takes precedence. We do not expect future missions to be impacted.”
I understand that due to his ultimate goal to colonize Mars and avoid duplication of effort, Musk chose a VTVL architecture for all of his launch and space vehicles, but those are the perils of foregoing wings and landing strips on firm ground.
Whereas the perils of going with wings and landing strips might mean not being able to do it at all.
 

martinbayer

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 6, 2009
Messages
477
Reaction score
10
sferrin said:
martinbayer said:
Flyaway said:
SpaceX loses the center core of its Falcon Heavy rocket due to choppy seas

“Over the weekend, due to rough sea conditions, SpaceX’s recovery team was unable to secure the center core booster for its return trip to Port Canaveral,” SpaceX said in a statement to The Verge. “As conditions worsened with eight to ten foot swells, the booster began to shift and ultimately was unable to remain upright. While we had hoped to bring the booster back intact, the safety of our team always takes precedence. We do not expect future missions to be impacted.”
I understand that due to his ultimate goal to colonize Mars and avoid duplication of effort, Musk chose a VTVL architecture for all of his launch and space vehicles, but those are the perils of foregoing wings and landing strips on firm ground.
Whereas the perils of going with wings and landing strips might mean not being able to do it at all.
Only one way to find out - one of the many reasons to mourn Paul Allen's passing.
 

martinbayer

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 6, 2009
Messages
477
Reaction score
10
Hobbes said:
martinbayer said:
I understand that due to his ultimate goal to colonize Mars and avoid duplication of effort, Musk chose a VTVL architecture for all of his launch and space vehicles, but those are the perils of foregoing wings and landing strips on firm ground.
The landing was ~1000 miles out in the ocean. What do you get when you create a vehicle with a 30-ton payload and wings capable of 1000 miles of crossrange gliding? The Space Shuttle, and we all know how cheap that turned out to be.
Four decades on, chances are the Shuttle would be significantly more efficient today, especially if it was designed as a fully reusable TSTO as was originally envisioned.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
65
martinbayer said:
sferrin said:
martinbayer said:
Flyaway said:
SpaceX loses the center core of its Falcon Heavy rocket due to choppy seas

“Over the weekend, due to rough sea conditions, SpaceX’s recovery team was unable to secure the center core booster for its return trip to Port Canaveral,” SpaceX said in a statement to The Verge. “As conditions worsened with eight to ten foot swells, the booster began to shift and ultimately was unable to remain upright. While we had hoped to bring the booster back intact, the safety of our team always takes precedence. We do not expect future missions to be impacted.”
I understand that due to his ultimate goal to colonize Mars and avoid duplication of effort, Musk chose a VTVL architecture for all of his launch and space vehicles, but those are the perils of foregoing wings and landing strips on firm ground.
Whereas the perils of going with wings and landing strips might mean not being able to do it at all.
Only one way to find out - one of the many reasons to mourn Paul Allen's passing.
There's a reason nobody was willing to build a rocket for that plane.
 

martinbayer

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 6, 2009
Messages
477
Reaction score
10
sferrin said:
martinbayer said:
sferrin said:
martinbayer said:
Flyaway said:
SpaceX loses the center core of its Falcon Heavy rocket due to choppy seas

“Over the weekend, due to rough sea conditions, SpaceX’s recovery team was unable to secure the center core booster for its return trip to Port Canaveral,” SpaceX said in a statement to The Verge. “As conditions worsened with eight to ten foot swells, the booster began to shift and ultimately was unable to remain upright. While we had hoped to bring the booster back intact, the safety of our team always takes precedence. We do not expect future missions to be impacted.”
I understand that due to his ultimate goal to colonize Mars and avoid duplication of effort, Musk chose a VTVL architecture for all of his launch and space vehicles, but those are the perils of foregoing wings and landing strips on firm ground.
Whereas the perils of going with wings and landing strips might mean not being able to do it at all.
Only one way to find out - one of the many reasons to mourn Paul Allen's passing.
There's a reason nobody was willing to build a rocket for that plane.
Assuming you are referring to expendable launch vehicles (which I completely agree would not make a lot of sense), that's why Allen had plans for a reusable winged orbiter named Black Ice to create a fully reusable TSTO system.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
65
martinbayer said:
Assuming you are referring to expendable launch vehicles (which I completely agree would not make a lot of sense), that's why Allen had plans for a reusable winged orbiter named Black Ice to create a fully reusable TSTO system.
And how big would your carrier plane have to be to give you SpaceX Starship capability?
 

martinbayer

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 6, 2009
Messages
477
Reaction score
10
sferrin said:
martinbayer said:
Assuming you are referring to expendable launch vehicles (which I completely agree would not make a lot of sense), that's why Allen had plans for a reusable winged orbiter named Black Ice to create a fully reusable TSTO system.
And how big would your carrier plane have to be to give you SpaceX Starship capability?
Way too big to be practical, obviously. But there's eighteen wheelers, and there's minivans. Once again, given Musk's ultimate goal, his design choices are understandable, but for different missions and in space architectures, other alternatives may be preferable. Let's see how Starship capabilities and costs ultimately turn out.
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
979
Reaction score
12
Crew Dragon experienced an anomaly during tests of its SuperDraco engines at the Cape. Twitter rumors running the gamut from "bad" to "very bad," the next demo flights are certain to be pushed back.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,892
Reaction score
34
This incident will probably delay the first manned mission by Space X until 2020. Report on the video below.



Space X’s Crew Dragon Capsule Destroyed In Engine Test



 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,892
Reaction score
34
Scott Manley has already indicated via Twitter that video is out of date.
 

FighterJock

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
957
Reaction score
4
Wonder what caused the anomaly that made the Crew dragon explode? No doubt we will get the answers soon.
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
979
Reaction score
12
Crew Dragon experienced an anomaly during tests of its SuperDraco engines
Nice Understatement
The Crew Dragon Capsule exploded during ignitions of SuperDraco
That‘s far serious problem as Starliner fuel leak
When I posted, and when NSF posted, the details weren't clear and the leaked video was not yet widely circulated. Pretty standard language in that sort of situation.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,892
Reaction score
34
Informed speculation on NSF seems to be pointing the finger at a possible COPV failure caused by a fault only exposed once the Dragon had gone through a full mission cycle.
 
Top