EPT![[image loading]](https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1542/24038722499_102fd17970_k.jpg)
Jason-3 Rollout
NASA and the Private Sector - Page 75
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Keep debates civil. | ||
iHirO
United Kingdom1381 Posts
Jason-3 Rollout | ||
|
iHirO
United Kingdom1381 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17710 Posts
| ||
|
Yrr
Germany804 Posts
On January 18 2016 02:58 JimmyJRaynor wrote: are they re-using the rocket segment that landed a few weeks ago? No. But they want to reuse todays rocket if possible. | ||
|
iHirO
United Kingdom1381 Posts
On January 18 2016 02:58 JimmyJRaynor wrote: are they re-using the rocket segment that landed a few weeks ago? No, thats gonna go in a museum or something. I doubt they'll reuse a stage for a while, possibly 2017. | ||
|
Yrr
Germany804 Posts
| ||
|
iHirO
United Kingdom1381 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17710 Posts
On January 18 2016 03:12 iHirO wrote: No, thats gonna go in a museum or something. I doubt they'll reuse a stage for a while, possibly 2017. 1/4 in landings. i see Space Shuttle levels of re-usability in the Falcon9's future. maybe even less. so far its less. the sales job by the commentator guy was good though. SpaceX is good at PR. | ||
|
Yurie
12136 Posts
If that is the reason, why not use a stable platform instead of a ship? (Cost?) | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11945 Posts
And a stable platform is at exactly one place. You can put a ship where your trajectory will lead the rocket to land, and correct a bit if stuff doesn't go exactly as planned. | ||
|
iHirO
United Kingdom1381 Posts
On January 18 2016 04:41 Yurie wrote: Why are they doing an ocean landing when it is much harder due to waves? Safety concerns? If that is the reason, why not use a stable platform instead of a ship? (Cost?) Landing the 1st stage is only secondary to launching the payload successfully. For certain high orbits or heavy payloads, there's not enough fuel left to fly the stage back to the launch pad, which is where the barge comes in. The barge is over 90m long and 50m wide and basically ignores most waves. The really interesting launch will be the Falcon Heavy in a few months, when all three stages are gonna touch down (boat and pad). | ||
|
iHirO
United Kingdom1381 Posts
| ||
|
_vk_
219 Posts
On January 18 2016 04:17 JimmyJRaynor wrote: 1/4 in landings. i see Space Shuttle levels of re-usability in the Falcon9's future. maybe even less. so far its less. the sales job by the commentator guy was good though. SpaceX is good at PR. SpaceX is already the cheapest in the western world, without any reusability. 'Nuff said. | ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6233 Posts
Also On January 18 2016 04:41 Yurie wrote: Why are they doing an ocean landing when it is much harder due to waves? Safety concerns? If that is the reason, why not use a stable platform instead of a ship? (Cost?) | ||
|
iHirO
United Kingdom1381 Posts
(Crash video) | ||
|
oBlade
United States6342 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17710 Posts
On January 18 2016 07:16 _vk_ wrote: SpaceX is already the cheapest in the western world, without any reusability. 'Nuff said. nice to see everyone conceding on the re-usability issue after all the celebrating from 1 landing and the rocket never getting re-used. | ||
|
oBlade
United States6342 Posts
On January 18 2016 14:58 JimmyJRaynor wrote: nice to see everyone conceding on the re-usability issue after all the celebrating from 1 landing and the rocket never getting re-used. For whatever reason, it's considered prohibitively difficult to reuse something after it's exploded. | ||
|
misirlou
Portugal3308 Posts
On January 18 2016 14:58 JimmyJRaynor wrote: nice to see everyone conceding on the re-usability issue after all the celebrating from 1 landing and the rocket never getting re-used. they are 1/1 in RTLS attempts. They failed 3 barge landings and it was a huge achievement they even soft landed this one given the high waves (go watch the stream before it froze, watch the horizon and how much it changes, it's ridiculous). This was also the last f9v1.1 that flew and it was not going to be reused, ever. The newest version (the one that landed) already has better legs. As for "SHUTTLE LEVELS OF RE-USABILITY" stop taking a dump on the thread and follow up on all of the news, not just the ones that serve your point. They static fired the rocket that landed without any work done on it (it was still dirty even) and only one engine showed minor fluctuations. Out of 9. That is way beyond any re-usability shuttle has ever demonstrated, it was considered a miracle by some engineers that the shuttle turbo pumps never went kaboom on a flight and they had to be replaced after EVERY SINGLE flight because they couldn't possibly handle 2. e: AFAIK they landed on a barge on this flight because they didn't have permission to return to launch site. landing video: https://www.instagram.com/p/BAqirNbwEc0/ | ||
|
Ljas
Finland725 Posts
| ||
| ||
