Blue Origin Thread (merged)

[Mitchz95]

The website has been updated. It now lists Jason-3 as the next mission, to be launched to LEO from Vandenburg in January. Not exactly new information, but just though I'd mention it.

Do we know yet when they're planning to test the Falcon Heavy?

[Motokid600]

Will Vandenburg be RTLS?

[Mitchz95]

It's another LEO mission, so probably. The barge is to be used for missions to GSO.

[Magion]

5 hours ago, Motokid600 said:

Will Vandenburg be RTLS?

Not clear yet, but probably not. Jason-3 is flying on the older version of F9 v1.1, which is not that powerful and we don't know if the SLC-4W landing pad is already finished. Also, at NSF I found some interesting maps showing a likely position of ADSD for the J-3 mission.

On the other hand, Jason is not very heavy sat with its 600kg, so this can compensate for a bit less powerful F9.

17 hours ago, Mitchz95 said:

Do we know yet when they're planning to test the Falcon Heavy?

As of today, it is scheduled to premiere sometime in April.

[Rune]

7 minutes ago, Magion said:

Not clear yet, but probably not. Jason-3 is flying on the older version of F9 v1.1, which is not that powerful and we don't know if the SLC-4W landing pad is already finished. Also, at NSF I found some interesting maps showing a likely position of ADSD for the J-3 mission.

On the other hand, Jason is not very heavy sat with its 600kg, so this can compensate for a bit less powerful F9.

As of today, it is scheduled to premiere sometime in April.

IIRC, before the June launch mishap, Jason-3 was going to be the first RTLS test, mainly due to the low mass of the satellite.

 

Rune. Of course, plans might have changed, and my memory is not 100% reliable...

[Lukaszenko]

On 12/23/2015 at 2:38 PM, Albert VDS said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The graphic says "This requires about four times as much total energy as New Shepard's 100.5km hop into space."

 

Isn't it something more along the lines of 40x more total energy (for the same payload)?

Depending on what exactly they're counting, even the lowest I can come up with is like 13x more energy. But definitely not four.

[AngelLestat]

1 hour ago, Lukaszenko said:

The graphic says "This requires about four times as much total energy as New Shepard's 100.5km hop into space."

 

Isn't it something more along the lines of 40x more total energy (for the same payload)?

Depending on what exactly they're counting, even the lowest I can come up with is like 13x more energy. But definitely not four.

For what I understand, is saying that it needs 4x that tank volume in fuel to reach the same deltav, to accomplish 8.5kms for the sheppard´s payload instead 3.5kms

Not sure if this takes into account the extra engine weight or an extra stage.

Edited December 28, 2015 by AngelLestat

[magnemoe]

On 26.12.2015 at 7:32 PM, AngelLestat said:

But a 747 only receive maintenance after 200 or 300 trips. And the cost may be lower than the testing cost from when is new.

So I don't think that is the industry he is talking about.

Still maintenance costs increase as the plane get older, this is why they scrap planes who are too old. 
You can however keep an plane flying almost forever if you are willing to pay the increased maintenance costs. 
This is true for many military planes especially the special use planes. 

Also failure rates for very new stuff is far higher than for things who has run for some time. It will raise again as the product ages. 
Think an U start then an V end.
Cars tend to have frequent service internals in the beginning for this reason (and the company has to pay for fails in new cars so its nice to catch them early) then the car get old you starts to get more fails again.

For Falcon 9, SpaceX first have to get experience with the service needed after launch and landing stress mostly on structure and systems.
Engines can be tested static so they are simpler here. 
If they continue with non returnable first stages for some missions it would be simpler to use aging stages for this. 

[Rune]

I was answering another post on a related topic, and I've been doing a lot of shuttle Phase I replicas, delving deep into the Shuttle history and, well... I kind of had what I think is a funny little thought cross my mind, and wanted to share it with you guys, see what you think about it. Basically, it's this: in F9, NASA stealthily got the Shuttle they had always wanted to have without no one noticing, 30 years later. Crazy, right? Well, let me explain it further, there is some merit to the declaration IMO.

Consider where the shuttle was born from, initially. It was supposed to be a "logistics vehicle" for personnel to a space station, and carry small payloads and satellites to low orbit (plenty of sources, but try this, or this). The point I'm making is that the shuttle, in the beginning, wasn't set in stone even as a winged vehicle, nor a particularly reusable one (many phase I studies on "Class I" proposals launched on Titans, which were ICBM variants). It just had to be somthing that could loft around 10mT to LEO, be it a reusable spacecraft or a piece of cargo. This point about reusable spacecraft, BTW, was in pretty much all the things I've seen, normally a lifting body or similar fancy thing, even BigG had the rogallo wing for land landings. Trouble was, this thing was meant to be developed on top of the huge Saturn-launched humongous station (several Saturn launches), the lunar base (yet moar S-V's), and the nuclear rockets (those were the days! ... and yeah, on top another Big S). It was only in the process of horse-trading that ensued afterwards, on the Nixon era, when NASA's budget was cut very short (no space station, no moon base, definitely no nuclear rocket). Then the Air force entered with its ludicrous set of requirements for a toy they really didn't want, everythign changed direction, and that was when the horrible contraption we all know and love came to be.

So how is F9 "the shuttle that never was"? Well, consider the original ideas for the shuttle. Faget (MSC's top spacraft design guy at the time) was really a capsule guy, only later did he come around to the winged idea. Reusing the manned spacecraft on land was a big thing, they wanted to reduce logistics and have it land "like an airplane". Around 10mT of cargo, as cheap as possible (1/10th to 1/100th the cost was often justified one way or another, from SSTOing on VTLV's to fantastics hypersonic sled-launched airbreathers). Fast turnaround and high flight rate were almost a given. And last but not least, nowhere was it said that crews and cargoes had to go in the same flight, except some limited ~1mT pressurized payloads. Only computer/comms limitations of the time precluded pilot-less flights, and still some companies proposed them. Well, I posit that F9, as built today by the dozens, complies with all of the points I have just enumerated:

- It goes with a capsule that is meant to land on land, Dragon (with quite the impressive approach, if I might add). Who needs wings in space, and Dragon, as any capsule, can maneuver pretty nicely on body lift alone, having a similar cross-range as some phase-II proposals, even, like the DC-3 that Faget favored by then.

- Dragon is meant to be reused, and while it may not carry a crew of 12 like BigG, six is not bad. It complies with most of the requirements for manned flights they had back then, including payload capacity and actually offering many other capabilities with its trunk and uncrewed cargo configurations, not to mention being pretty light and having a lunar-rated heatshield. I know, I know, reuse is yet to prove. Still, I think they will do it, personally.

- F9 can clearly loft 10mT, currently at the lowest market cost, and expected to drop in the words of their CEO. Some may not believe it, but hey, at least partly true, even if they don't improve one bit from now on with their reusability "aspirations".

- Fast turnaround is yet to see, but one can't deny landing the rocket softly a few miles form the launchpad is a great first step. Given even a decent turnaround of half a year and 10 reuses, they could support launch rates amazing to think about (they are building, right now, some 40 cores/year, if you fly them 10 times each, that's 400flights/year, potentially).

- Crew and cargo are separated, but so what, as I said, that wasn't a requirement until the station to get them together was axed (hey, ISS!), and today's pilotless capabilities (MIR assembly, berthing capabilities with robotic arms, autonomous rendezvous and docking) are pretty amazing compared to what they were dreaming about.

...and that's it. I've crossed every tick, and I haven't have had to even mention reusability that much. It wasn't a requirement at first. The cost argument, of course, is endlessly arguable, starting with whether it is even doable in the first place, but even there you have to say that they are doing, at the very least, decently. And for a comparatively very low development cost!

All in all, I thought it was really funny. It only took us 30 years and 135 shuttle flights to get the right shuttle, right? And just imagine if it turns out that SpaceX can pull off the "fly a booster more than once in a day" kind of stuff!

 

Rune. Now I "duck and cover".

 

 

Edited December 28, 2015 by Rune

[Mitchz95]

^ That is pretty funny, not that you mention it.

[Rdivine]

In light of the recent landing made by spaceX, i wrote a kOS script which can land a falcon 9 first stage automatically.

Spoiler

Clearscreen.
Print"Running landing software...".
 wait until alt:radar - 22.5 < 17500.
 sas on.
 set sasmode to "retrograde".
 gear off.

 Wait until alt:radar - 22.5 < 10000.
 Brakes on.
 set sasmode to "retrograde".
 gear off.
 print"Guidance and telemetry enabled.".

 when ship:velocity:surface:mag > 2 then {
 print"Airspeed(m/s):" + round(ship:velocity:surface:mag,2) + "     " at(0,15).
 print"Vertical speed(m/s):" + round(verticalspeed,2) + "     " at (0,16).
 print"Ground speed(m/s):" + round(groundspeed,2) + "     " at (0,17).
 print"Throttle:" + round(throttle,2) + "     " at (0,18).
 print"Altitude/m(rad):" + round(alt:radar,2) + "     " at (0,19).
 print"Altitude/m(abs):" + round(ship:altitude,2) + "     " at (0,20).
 preserve.
}.

 Wait until alt:radar - 22.5 < 2500.
 Until alt:radar - 22.5 <= 1500 {

 If alt:radar - 22.5 < 2500
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 180
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {Lock throttle to 1.0.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 180+ at 2500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 2500
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <=180
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 120
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.7.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 180~120 at 2500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 2500
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <=120
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 0
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.5.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 120~0 at 2500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 2500
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 0- at 2500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}.
}.

 Wait until alt:radar - 22.5 <= 1500.
 Until alt:radar - 22.5 <= 1000 {

 If alt:radar - 22.5 < 1500
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 100
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {Lock throttle to 1.0.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 100+ at 1500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 1500
 And Ship:velocity:surface:mag < 100
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag >= 80
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.8.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 100~80 at 1500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 1500
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag < 80
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag >= 60
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.6.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 80~60 at 1500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 1500
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag < 60
 And ship:velocty:surface:mag >= 40
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.3.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 60~40 at 1500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 1500
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag < 40
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 20
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.2.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 40~20 at 1500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 1500
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 20
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 0
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {Lock throttle to 0.1.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 20~0 at 1500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 1500
 And verticalspeed > 0
 {lock throttle to 0.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 0- at 1500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}.
}.

 Wait until alt:radar - 22.5 <= 1000.
 Until alt:radar - 22.5 <= 500 {

 If alt:radar - 22.5 < 1000
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 100
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 1.0.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 100+ at 1000 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 1000
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 100
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 75
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.85.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 100~75 at 1000 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 1000
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 75
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 50
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.65.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 75~50 at 1000 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 1000
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 50
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 25
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.4.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 50~25 at 1000 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 1000
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 25
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 0
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.25.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 25~0 at 1000 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 1000
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 0- at 1000 limit.     " at (0,13).
}.
}.

 Wait until alt:radar - 22.5 <= 500.
 Until alt:radar - 22.5 <= 250 {

 If alt:radar - 22.5 < 500
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 70
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 1.0.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 70+ at 500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 500
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <=70
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 55
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.8.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 70~55 at 500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 500
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 55
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 40
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.6.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 55~40 at 500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 500
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 40
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 30
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.45.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 40~30 at 500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 500
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 30
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 15
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.3.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 30~15 at 500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 500
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 15
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 0
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.15.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 15~0 at 500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 500
 And verticalspeed > 0
 {lock throttle to 0.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 0- at 500 limit.     " at (0,13).
}.
}.

 Wait until alt:radar - 22.5 <= 250.
 until alt:radar - 22.5 <= 100 {

 If alt:radar - 22.5 < 250
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 50
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 1.0.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 50+ at 250 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 250
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 50
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 35
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.95.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 50~35 at 250 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 250
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 35
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 20
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.85.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 35~20 at 250 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 250
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 20
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 10
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.7.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 20~10 at 250 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 250
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 10
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 0
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.3.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 10~0 at 250 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 250
 And verticalspeed > 0
 {lock throttle to 0.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 0- at 250 limit.     " at (0,13).
}.
}.

 Wait until alt:radar - 22.5 <= 100.
 Until alt:radar - 22.5 <= 50 {

 If alt:radar - 22.5 < 100
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 30
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 1.0.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 30+ at 100 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 100
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 30
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 20
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.55.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 30~20 at 100 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 100
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 20
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 0
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.45.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 20~0 at 100 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 100
 And verticalspeed > 0
 {lock throttle to 0.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 0- at 100 limit.     " at (0,13).
}.
}.
 wait until alt:radar - 22.5 <= 50.
 Gear on.
 sas on.
 set sasmode to "radialout".
 Until alt:radar - 22.5 <= 17 {

 If alt:radar - 22.5 < 50
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 15
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {Lock throttle to 1.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 15+ at 50 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 50
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 15
 And ship: velocity:surface:mag > 10
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.85.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 15~10 at 50 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 50
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 10
 And ship: velocity:surface:mag > 5
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.68.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 10~5 at 50 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 50
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 5
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 4
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.47.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 5~4 at 50 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 50
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 4
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 3
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.43.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 4~3 at 50 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 50
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 3
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 2
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.40.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 3~2 at 50 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 50
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 2
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag > 1
 And verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.30.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 2~1 at 50 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 1
 And ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 1
 {lock throttle to 0.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 1- at 50 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 Else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 50
 And verticalspeed > 0
 {lock throttle to 0.05.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 0- at 50 limit.     " at (0,13).
}.
}.

 wait until alt:radar - 22.5 <= 17.
 until alt:radar - 22.5 <= 0.68 {

 if alt:radar - 22.5 < 17
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag > 15
 and verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 1.0.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 15+ at 15 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 17
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 15
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag > 10
 and verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.95.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 15~10 at 15 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 17
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 10
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag > 7.5
 and verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.9.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 10~7.5 at 15 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 17
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 7.5
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag > 5
 and verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.75.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 7.5~5 at 15 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 17
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 5
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag > 4
 and verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.56.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 5~4 at 15 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 17
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 4
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag > 3
 and verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.5.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 4~3 at 15 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 17
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 3
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag > 2
 and verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.47.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 3~2 at 15 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 17
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 2
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag > 1
 and verticalspeed < 0
 {lock throttle to 0.33.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 2~1 at 15 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 17
 and ship:velocity:surface:mag <= 1
 {lock throttle to 0.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 1- at 15 limit.     " at (0,13).
}

 else if alt:radar - 22.5 < 17
 and verticalspeed >= 0
 {lock throtte to 0.05.
 print"Attitude control: boundary 0- at 15 limit.     " at (0,13).
}.
}.

 unlock throttle.
 set ship:control:pilotmainthrottle to 0.
 Unlock steering.
 sas on.
 wait 2.
 clearscreen.
 print"Stage One has landed.".
 wait 1.
 print"The Falcon has landed.".

 when ship:altitude - 22.5 < 1 then {
 print"Operators refer to recovery data on ocean.".
}.

 when ship:altitude - 22.5 >= 1
 and ship:altitude - 22.5 < 30 then {
 print"Operators refer to recovery data on coast.".
}.

 when ship:altitude - 22.5 >= 30
 and ship:altitude - 22.5 >100 then {
 print"Operators refer to recovery data on land.".
}.

 when ship:altitude - 22.5 >= 100
 and ship:altitude - 22.5 >1000 then {
 print"Operators refer to recovery data on highlands.".
}.

 when ship:altitude - 22.5 > 1000 then {
 print"Operators refer to recovery data on mountains.".
}.
 wait 1.
 print"Manual override enabled.".
 unlock steering.
 set ship:control:pilotmainthrottle to 0.
 unlock throttle.
 sas on.
 set sasmode to "radialout".
 wait 0.5.
 print"Falcon first stage landing confirmation. Data standby.".
from {local time is 0.} until time = 3600 step {set time to time +1.} do {
 print"T + " + time + " s    " at (0,17).
 print"latitude:" + round(latitude,4) at (0,19).
 print"longitude:" + round(longitude,4) at (0,20).
 wait 1.
}
 wait 10000.
 

Here's a GIF of the landing attempt i made.

Edited December 30, 2015 by Rdivine

[Exoscientist]

 Not Kerbal, but a nice simulation of this last F9 flight here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8vzt1PLG5U

 In the video, the mass of the stage and other flight specs are indicated on the left throughout the flight. The amount of propellant left over could be 25 mT to 30 mT at landing, based on the total mass indicated at landing and the estimated dry weight of the stage. This amount of propellant left over could serve as ballast to allow hovering on landing. 

 In other words, if accurate, for this flight, suicide-burn or hover-slam wasn't used.

   Bob Clark

[RainDreamer]

Not sure if anyone posted it yet, but here is a video of the landing:

What a glorious 12 seconds this video is.

[Hcube]

1 hour ago, Exoscientist said:

 Not Kerbal, but a nice simulation of this last F9 flight here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8vzt1PLG5U

 In the video, the mass of the stage and other flight specs are indicated on the left throughout the flight. The amount of propellant left over could be 25 mT to 30 mT at landing, based on the total mass indicated at landing and the estimated dry weight of the stage. This amount of propellant left over could serve as ballast to allow hovering on landing. 

 In other words, if accurate, for this flight, suicide-burn or hover-slam wasn't used.

   Bob Clark

But the video shows a perfect suicide burn : even if there was enough ballast there wasn't any hovering (at least, we couldn't see any)

[Exoscientist]

 From Chris Bergin:

Quote

 

@NASASpaceflight: I'm reliably informed there's *amazing* footage of the Falcon 9 OG2 S1 external cam view of the staging, boost back, entry burn and landing!

https://twitter.com/nasaspaceflight/status/679399307271892992

 

 

 Bob Clark

[KerBlammo]

2 hours ago, Exoscientist said:

 From Chris Bergin:

 

 Bob Clark

Hope this is correct and we get to see it.  I am very surprised we've seen so little video of this.

[mikegarrison]

On 12/26/2015 at 11:29 AM, Meecrob said:

They do not treat old airframes differently, they look at each individual frame and assess the maintenance required. In theory and practice, an old airframe has had the proper maintenance performed on it and thus does not require extra care. Wear and tear has literally been removed and replaced. There are aircraft 5 years old and 25 years old going through C checks. The crew does not go "oh crap, this is an old plane! We're in for overtime!" With properly scheduled maintenance, a 25 year old plane is the same as a 5 year old plane.

In theory, yes. In practice, it does get more and more and more difficult and expensive to keep fixing older airplanes.

[Kartoffelkuchen]

https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/682717803166695425

 

1St stage seems good to go! (Static fire next week??? I hoPe so

[StrandedonEarth]

3 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

In theory, yes. In practice, it does get more and more and more difficult and expensive to keep fixing older airplanes.

Especially as spare parts get harder to find. I hope the day comes when SpaceX has loads of spare parts from rocket bodies that have flown their limit.

[B787_300]

the static fire will probably not be next week.  I would bet the static fire would be like the week of the 11th or later as I dont think that 39A is ready yet.

[Mitchz95]

Musk on Twitter:

Quote

Falcon 9 back in the hangar at Cape Canaveral. No damage found, ready to fire again.

I assume he means a static fire. Wonder if they'll do a livestream.

[Hcube]

5 hours ago, Kartoffelkuchen said:

https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/682717803166695425

 

1St stage seems good to go! (Static fire next week??? I hoPe so

This picture looks really good ! Are those the RCS pods between the grid fins ? (Btw those grid fins look huuuge i never noticed that before, it's really hard to get a sense of the dimensions of this thing)

[sojourner]

Looks like they cleaned the soot off the top half at least.

[Hcube]

2 hours ago, sojourner said:

Looks like they cleaned the soot off the top half at least.

I guess it was probably necessary to look for damage in the structure ^^ they probably cleaned it all

[AngelLestat]

6 hours ago, Hcube said:

This picture looks really good ! Are those the RCS pods between the grid fins ? (Btw those grid fins look huuuge i never noticed that before, it's really hard to get a sense of the dimensions of this thing)

Yeah, the most certain. They also have cameras in the booster, but it does not look like a camera.

Edited January 1, 2016 by AngelLestat