SpaceX Tuesday...
Discussion
Looks like the gimballing system for the rocket motors did not function in line with the desired range of movements. The motors gimbal (swivel) to keep the rocket on course and stable during launch. The gimbal system on the 1st stage will also be crucial to keep the 1st stage pointing in the right direction when descending towards that barge.
Edit - turns out it was a problem with the second stage, not the first.
Edit - turns out it was a problem with the second stage, not the first.
Edited by Eric Mc on Tuesday 6th January 11:34
The recovery point is 200 miles offshore. It's quite a bit North East of Cape Canaveral and opposite the cost of Virginia. That's because the launch track is aiming for the orbital path of the ISS, which has a high inclination.
I think the 1st stage drops off at an altitude of about 30 miles but will continue on up in a parabolic arc until it starts descending again. It's also travelling supersonic for a good part of its fall.
I think the 1st stage drops off at an altitude of about 30 miles but will continue on up in a parabolic arc until it starts descending again. It's also travelling supersonic for a good part of its fall.
It's joining the whole set of events into one smooth operation that is the hard part.
The SpaceX spokesman at the press conference last night was very entertaining.
When he was asked various questions along the lines of "What happens if.....", the answer was on every occasion - "We crash" - which he said with a smile.
The recovery process has to work 100% perfectly, or they will lose the booster.
The SpaceX spokesman at the press conference last night was very entertaining.
When he was asked various questions along the lines of "What happens if.....", the answer was on every occasion - "We crash" - which he said with a smile.
The recovery process has to work 100% perfectly, or they will lose the booster.
There's not much to see to be honest.
The first thing they have to do is make sure that everything is "safed" i.e. all pyrotechnics and other armed devices are turned off and made safe.
Once that is all done, the next step is start detanking the fuel and oxidiser from the rocket. Most of this is done remotely because getting too close to a fully fueled rocket that was seconds ago primed to unleash 1.3 million lbs of thrust is not advisable.
As a result, there is nothing visibly happening in and around the rocket for a few hours. About the only evidence of action you see is the return of the "strong back" support to its pre-launch position and the gradual disappearance of the wisps of venting liquid oxygen as the tanks empty.
The first thing they have to do is make sure that everything is "safed" i.e. all pyrotechnics and other armed devices are turned off and made safe.
Once that is all done, the next step is start detanking the fuel and oxidiser from the rocket. Most of this is done remotely because getting too close to a fully fueled rocket that was seconds ago primed to unleash 1.3 million lbs of thrust is not advisable.
As a result, there is nothing visibly happening in and around the rocket for a few hours. About the only evidence of action you see is the return of the "strong back" support to its pre-launch position and the gradual disappearance of the wisps of venting liquid oxygen as the tanks empty.
Eric Mc said:
I think you might be interpreting their site name a bit too literally.
Maybe they should a number of sub-sites called -
Spaceflight Then
Spaceflight Now
Spaceflight Next
and perhaps
Spaceflight Maybe But Not Likely
That should cover all bases.
Oh yeah, I just realised that's the name of the site...Maybe they should a number of sub-sites called -
Spaceflight Then
Spaceflight Now
Spaceflight Next
and perhaps
Spaceflight Maybe But Not Likely
That should cover all bases.
Well it's a jolly silly name for a site that doesn't always cover something flying in space. Bah.
Not that you can really 'fly' in space anyway, you just get punted along by exhaust gas.
'Exhaust Gassing Maybe But Not Likely' dot com. There you go, nice and accurate
Eric Mc said:
What is the problem with gentle plop into the ocean?
I am sure they could get the accuracy to within a couple of hundred yards of a recovery vessel. If the vessel had a bespoke lifting device on it, they could have it out of the water in less than an hour.
I expect they are probably concerned about the issue of the effect of salt water on the rocket motors - and to be honest - that was the main reason why NASA
a) gave up on the idea of recovering the 1st stages of Saturn IBs and Saturn Vs
b) chose Solid Rockets for the Shuttle programme
Musk has said many times a core objective of SpaceX is to develop the tech to get to & from Mars, the Moon, etc. There is no water to plop down on if you're going anywhere other than Earth so accurate propulsive landing is essential.I am sure they could get the accuracy to within a couple of hundred yards of a recovery vessel. If the vessel had a bespoke lifting device on it, they could have it out of the water in less than an hour.
I expect they are probably concerned about the issue of the effect of salt water on the rocket motors - and to be honest - that was the main reason why NASA
a) gave up on the idea of recovering the 1st stages of Saturn IBs and Saturn Vs
b) chose Solid Rockets for the Shuttle programme
I also suspect that when you're talking about a sophisticated object taller than a 12 story building no 'plop' is gentle enough. This isn't a simple solid fuel canister, its high pressure liquid fuel storage plus the engines and all the supporting systems.
Perhaps it could be done at the cost of ??? added weight for strengthening etc but even if successful its still a long long way from the complete & rapid reuse goal. I can't imagine flying it again without a lot of work to check, clean, refurb, & probably replace a *lot* of the bits.
Their goal is to be able do not much more than just refuel & then fly again.
From what we've seen so far I really think they're going to get there. SpaceX is already massively undercutting the cost of other systems, imagine when they start recovering the 70% vehicle cost that the first stage represents.
Total game changer.
I agree.
As mentioned, soft landing using braking rockets on the moon and Mars has been done quite a few times. The problem is that it hasn't been done with a tall thin object on earth before and I think the dynamics are quite different.
However, I think they will get there in the end and I am looking forward to Friday.
As mentioned, soft landing using braking rockets on the moon and Mars has been done quite a few times. The problem is that it hasn't been done with a tall thin object on earth before and I think the dynamics are quite different.
However, I think they will get there in the end and I am looking forward to Friday.
MartG said:
A couple of infographics
The graphic gives the impression the legs are deployed quite late and essentially just for the touchdown. Actually they're an important part of the aero braking solution and cut the terminal velocity of the falling vehicle in half.Anyone know what altitude they deploy?
"SpaceX has chosen Saturday, Jan. 10 to launch its next commercial resupply services mission to the International Space Station. Launch of the Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon spacecraft is targeted for 4:47 a.m. EST from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. The previous launch attempt on Tuesday was halted with one minute, 21 seconds left on the countdown clock. Engineers observed drift on one of two thrust vector control actuators for the Falcon 9’s second stage and stopped the countdown.
For a launch on Saturday, NASA Television coverage will begin at 3:30 a.m. A Saturday launch will result in the Dragon spacecraft arriving at the space station on Monday, Jan. 12."
For a launch on Saturday, NASA Television coverage will begin at 3:30 a.m. A Saturday launch will result in the Dragon spacecraft arriving at the space station on Monday, Jan. 12."
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff