totm nov 2023 SpaceX Discussion Thread

[XB-70A]

16 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said:

Wow, thanks for that great video! I’m sure at the end you were thinking “Where’s the kaboom? After that descent there should be a (an earth-shattering) kaboom!

That's it! Everybody was waiting for the famous "sonic bang" we're having at each RTLS, but once 1050 disappeared behind the tree I was pretty worried to see a nice fireball rising. Sole comforting point: from our location, I saw that it "landed" further South than usual, and farther too, and (usually) we can clearly see the remnant exhaust gases coming from the engines. As there was none, we deduced that it had probably landed at sea.

[CatastrophicFailure]

1 hour ago, StrandedonEarth said:

Where’s the kaboom? After that descent there should be a (an earth-shattering) kaboom!

...pokes @KSK with a stick... 

[Ultimate Steve]

Credit: u/SciVibes on r/spacexmasterrace

[tater]

11 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said:

Credit: u/SciVibes on r/spacexmasterrace

This wins the internet today.

[kerbiloid]

Spoiler

Craft status: splashed.

They should just keep the engine on and get to the shore like a torpedo. This works in KSP.

 

[Delay]

2 hours ago, Ultimate Steve said:

Credit: u/SciVibes on r/spacexmasterrace

Out of likes, sorry.

[CatastrophicFailure]

1 minute ago, Delay said:

Out of likes, sorry.

You & me both.  For a while now. 

[Lukaszenko]

14 hours ago, tater said:

They crashed many times learning how to land, and a couple after learning (FH, and one other, I think). So out of 65 launches, and maybe 40-something landing attempts, they have landed 32.

I don't think it's fair to count destructive tests during the R&D phase as "failures". Even after the first successes there's a grey zone. 

Perhaps when they stopped referring to it as "experimental landing" and simply "landing" would be a good starting point to count failures/ successes.

[Delay]

2 hours ago, Lukaszenko said:

Even after the first successes there's a grey zone. 

I'd say we should start counting from the moment when SpaceX called their landings "Stage 1 Landing" on the timeline, rather than "Experimental Landing".

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

12 minutes ago, Delay said:

I'd say we should start counting from the moment when SpaceX called their landings "Stage 1 Landing" on the timeline, rather than "Experimental Landing".

...this is actually the first landing failure since they stopped referring to them as experimental. (excluding FH, since that was a test flight)

That gives them a 24/25 success rate, or 96%.

 

[cubinator]

So has the first stage been fished out of the ocean yet, or is it still on its little sightseeing adventure?

[CatastrophicFailure]

2 minutes ago, cubinator said:

So has the first stage been fished out of the ocean yet, or is it still on its little sightseeing adventure?

Slow boat to Cape Canaveral. 

[Ultimate Steve]

Looking at the NSF thread, they stationkept overnight, have something under construction at the dock to help with recovery, and have hired divers. They have a sling over one end of the booster, a line hooked up from the base (?) of the booster to Go Quest (I think) and the divers are about to start clearing the area.

[CatastrophicFailure]

Dang. That’s gonna be one looooong soak in corrosive seawater. Maybe that’s why they gave up on the GovSat booster, if it’s taking them this long to recover a splashed one right next door...

[tater]

 

3 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

Dang. That’s gonna be one looooong soak in corrosive seawater. Maybe that’s why they gave up on the GovSat booster, if it’s taking them this long to recover a splashed one right next door...

Yeah, it will at least give them data on a soak, though, even if all they do is examine it, and maybe test it. Sea Dragon and Boeing LEO were both ideas that involved a soak, it might be cool to have some actual data, even if it never flies.

[CatastrophicFailure]

Well in Sea Dragon’s case it was gonna be built in a shipyard technically making it a boat, so... 

 ...somewhen there is a parallel universe where Sea Dragon is on its fifth or sixth generation and doesn’t seem ridiculous at all...

[sh1pman]

1 hour ago, tater said:

Yeah, it will at least give them data on a soak, though, even if all they do is examine it, and maybe test it. Sea Dragon and Boeing LEO were both ideas that involved a soak, it might be cool to have some actual data, even if it never flies.

I dunno. They can replace the electronics, flush the fuel lines, maybe static fire it, see what happens. If all is ok, use it for maxQ abort test. 

[tater]

 

[magnemoe]

10 hours ago, Lukaszenko said:

I don't think it's fair to count destructive tests during the R&D phase as "failures". Even after the first successes there's a grey zone. 

Perhaps when they stopped referring to it as "experimental landing" and simply "landing" would be a good starting point to count failures/ successes.

This, and its why NASA or anything official or bureaucratic could never use spaceX way of doing this.  

Any dropped first stage is just polluting the ocean, lets play.
bureaucracy: you asked for 10.000 to test landing of rocket but it failed you are fired. 

No logic is does not matter its rater the enemy here. 

[CatastrophicFailure]

17 minutes ago, tater said:

 

Great, so they’re recovering it piece by piece, then? 

[sh1pman]

I never get used to how frickin’ huge that thing is. 

Edited December 6, 2018 by sh1pman

[mikegarrison]

1 hour ago, sh1pman said:

I dunno. They can replace the electronics, flush the fuel lines, maybe static fire it, see what happens. If all is ok, use it for maxQ abort test. 

It may be cheaper to build one new than to do the kind of refurb that would be needed to make it fly again.

5 minutes ago, sh1pman said:

 

Ha! One of the comments on that twitter post hearkens back to ye olde mid-80s: "Who's the u-boat commander?"

[Jaff]

Composite interstage is a little buggered - that won’t be reused 

[cubinator]

It'd make a fantastic museum piece if they decide they can't reuse it.

[Scotius]

1 hour ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

Great, so they’re recovering it piece by piece, then? 

Probably as a weight reducing measure. Also, it's easier to manipulate a huge cylinder, than a huge cylinder with four big legs