YNM Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Nightfury said: Go to 'Countdown Net Audio' and there to 38:15 (actually 38:29) The video you linked is only 34:18 long... 42 minutes ago, Lukaszenko said: Yeah, it looks like they got confirmation of booster destruction, but immediately after a "but don't say anything!!" Guess more of "oh, signals is really lost" which while you can't tell is it a destruction, you can be sort of sure it most likely is. Just like when Columbia broke-up, they didn't immediately say any problem off when comms goes off, nor when telemetry blanks. Sort of a reverse is the last Ariane V launch, where the rocket performs nicely other than losing contact for, like, the whole insertion. Payload magically survive though. The barge isn't manned or nearly watched when they're landing, right ? Or will the blooper from this launch be the most spectacular... Edited February 9, 2018 by YNM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightfury Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 Just now, YNM said: The video you linked is only 34:18 long... Thats because you need to switch between cameras, in the down right corner is a button Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxwellsDemon Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 Wow. I hadn't realized that it was assembled and transported horizontally and then raised up at the pad like that. Sergei P. Korolev is grinning somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NSEP Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 (edited) The BFR is by far my favourite PowerPoint presentation. Here is a sketch. By the way, Flat Earthers loved the landing of the side boosters from FH too. Edited February 9, 2018 by NSEP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 36 minutes ago, NSEP said: The BFR is by far my favourite PowerPoint presentation. Here is a sketch. By the way, Flat Earthers loved the landing of the side boosters from FH too. Let me guess: "It's a launch in reverse"? By the way, if you watch the webcast again closely, you get a glimpse of the 1-3-1-0 landing burn, up close and personal. The two side engines only fire for 2, maybe 3 seconds tops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NSEP Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 1 minute ago, sevenperforce said: Let me guess: "It's a launch in reverse"? I haven't heard any of that tbh. They know the landings are real because thousands of people witnessed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 Kewl pics. Why is the nose cone charred though? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 4 hours ago, MaxwellsDemon said: Wow. I hadn't realized that it was assembled and transported horizontally and then raised up at the pad like that. Sergei P. Korolev is grinning somewhere. Its cheaper on infrastructure, no need for an huge VAB you just need an hangar. Rocket need to be a bit sturdier, Now BFR will be interesting as its larger than N1, and more top heavy, however it looks like they will mate second and first stage on pad The N1 transporter an ejector was gigantic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 9 minutes ago, sh1pman said: Why is the nose cone charred though? From the exhaust plume of the core as it went by. You can see the char soot is a bit off Center. Man, kerolox is some dirty stuff.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 27 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Man, kerolox is some dirty stuff.... It is if you burn rich. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAL59 Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 15 hours ago, tater said: OK, barring a cancellation. Exactly. EM-2 will probably be cancled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSK Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 2 minutes ago, mikegarrison said: It is if you burn rich. Don't burn me, bro! On a serious note, those photos are great! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 Spoiler 1 hour ago, sh1pman said: Why is the nose cone charred though? They used NSEP's picture as a texture. 4 hours ago, NSEP said: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technical Ben Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 On 07/02/2018 at 9:39 PM, Ringkeeper said: someone put together 4 different landing angels and synced the audio .Careful with headset on loud!!! Spoiler Nope, nope and nope on those last two videos. 30 years of watching Sci-Fi has trained my brain to scream "it's not real, it's not real". It's gonna take another 30 years to get it to accept the change! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubinator Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 Apparently the highest mileage on a car is about 3 million miles, which means it'll take the Tesla about another week n flight to beat the record. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 Such a pity. An air strike did seem a bit much, What with all the navy/coast guard ships around who could do the same thing with a dozen rounds from Ma Deuce. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 29 minutes ago, cubinator said: Apparently the highest mileage on a car is about 3 million miles, which means it'll take the Tesla about another week n flight to beat the record. The Falcon Heavy carries roughly 340,000 gallons of fuel, so by the time this Tesla hits 3 million miles, it will still have only made 8 mpg. Kind of a shoddy fuel efficiency if you ask me. Of course, its mpg is destined to increase at a pretty steady clip. It should break 100 mpg in a 3 months, and it's only up from there! 28 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Such a pity. An air strike did seem a bit much, What with all the navy/coast guard ships around who could do the same thing with a dozen rounds from Ma Deuce. Well THAT tells us nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 42 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Such a pity. An air strike did seem a bit much, What with all the navy/coast guard ships around who could do the same thing with a dozen rounds from Ma Deuce. They might be doing other stuff while some pilots needed practice in bombing or staffing. Military has a bit of its own logic here, was involved in blowing up a lot of M-72 rocket propelled grenades who was too old and had to be discarded so you train with them. It was lots of dudes so they was well past useful life, we was to late for the shootout but we got to blow up stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 13 minutes ago, magnemoe said: It was lots of dudes so they was well past useful life Lots of dudes are never useful at all. But still, it seems pretty harsh to blow up dudes just because they are past their useful life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 5 hours ago, DAL59 said: Exactly. EM-2 will probably be cancled. EM-2 will not be cancelled. No way. Sunk cost fallacy, they'd never cancel with no manned flights. Not gonna happen. 6 hours ago, sh1pman said: Kewl pics. Why is the nose cone charred though? You'll notice that it actually returns with some significant angle of attack, hence the kerosene soot even on the nose (and the flow along the fuselage would bring some past the nose, anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llanthas Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 Kinda surprised that nobody's talking about the fact that those boosters reversed from 1,000 mph, back towards Canaveral. And THEN had power left to land. How can they possibly be so much more efficient than anything flown before? That's basically 2.5 full launches worth of fuel for each of them.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 7 minutes ago, llanthas said: Kinda surprised that nobody's talking about the fact that those boosters reversed from 1,000 mph, back towards Canaveral. And THEN had power left to land. How can they possibly be so much more efficient than anything flown before? That's basically 2.5 full launches worth of fuel for each of them.. Um ... remember that a booster nearly empty of fuel is much, much lighter than when it started on the launch pad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrandedonEarth Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, mikegarrison said: Um ... remember that a booster nearly empty of fuel is much, much lighter than when it started on the launch pad. And without an upper stage or payload Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 23 minutes ago, llanthas said: Kinda surprised that nobody's talking about the fact that those boosters reversed from 1,000 mph, back towards Canaveral. And THEN had power left to land. How can they possibly be so much more efficient than anything flown before? That's basically 2.5 full launches worth of fuel for each of them.. Like the other guys said. Grab MechJeb, KER or some other delta-v readout, and try it yourself in KSP. A nearly empty booster with no payload has a surprising amount left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starman4308 Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 (edited) 13 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said: Like the other guys said. Grab MechJeb, KER or some other delta-v readout, and try it yourself in KSP. A nearly empty booster with no payload has a surprising amount left. Don't forget that empty KSP tanks and KSP engines are way heavier than they should be. By the time the F9/FH boosters/FH core hits the boostback burn, they've lost so much mass that even a small burn produces a large change in velocity. For perspective, one of my RP-0 boosters has a 2.5 ton payload capacity, and an Agena upper stage of maybe 8 tons tops. The E-1 stage beneath it starts at 1.4 TWR... and hits 13 at MECO, delivering 6000 m/sec of delta V. By MECO, that first stage is basically a tin can with a giant engine on it. Edited February 10, 2018 by Starman4308 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.