Skylon

SpaceX Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

Something tells me the Universe does not want any Center Core to be successfully recovered. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, RCgothic said:

I remember the sea looked pretty rough after the landing. Not surprised nobody could board to make safe if octagrabber wasn't compatible. 

Still sad though. This the first loss of a block 5?

CRS-16 was a block 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ProtoJeb21 said:

Something tells me the Universe does not want any Center Core to be successfully recovered. 

If the engines work Mother Nature has to step in!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm actually amazed they can keep any core upright in ocean waves. 

There are plenty of videos out there showing what the storm at an open ocean looks like. Quite rough.

Kraken needs to be fed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aww, really universe? ;.; Please just let SpaceX recover STP-2’s centre core.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Geonovast said:

CRS-16 was a block 5.

Good call, although CRS-16 wasn't a total loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spoiler
10 hours ago, Shpaget said:

I'm actually amazed they can keep any core upright in ocean waves. 

They need it.
Otherwise the ship can't go.
1200px-USM_steamship_Baltic_(1850).jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why can't the central core launch itself from the barge to the cape? It is not flying over land and can work. Except the losses by restarting engines, chance of crash or failure and sooo much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Toonu said:

Why can't the central core launch itself from the barge to the cape? It is not flying over land and can work. Except the losses by restarting engines, chance of crash or failure and sooo much.

For the same reason it can't RTLS: it has already used pretty much all of it's fuel.

I also suspect that refueling at sea is also less safe then welding the feet down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Toonu said:

Why can't the central core launch itself from the barge to the cape? It is not flying over land and can work. Except the losses by restarting engines, chance of crash or failure and sooo much.

Fuel. The barge is not equipped to refuel the booster. It may even need a full transporter/erector/launch pad... I think that the barge isn't even equipped to handle the weight of a fully fueled booster, and neither the legs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, the legs can't retract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Toonu said:

Why can't the central core launch itself from the barge to the cape? It is not flying over land and can work. Except the losses by restarting engines, chance of crash or failure and sooo much.

Like the other guys said. 

IIRC, this was mentioned way back in the early days of booster recovery, but since it hasn’t come up since then, and Falcon itself has become just a stop-gap to BFR, I’m guessing the idea was abandoned as too complicated and risky for the minor gains. 

After all, up until now recovery by barge had been working just fine (once they stuck the landings), and without OctaGrabber this was still an incomplete system. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Delay said:

Well, they lost it due to the inevitabilites of nature, not due to technical failure. Still a 100% success in my opinion.

I was always skeptical of a Falcon Heavy center boost recovery: that thing has to go *much* further and faster than a normal recovered booster.  Landing that thing goes a long way to show that they can give Super Heavy Booster (or whatever BFR's booster is called these days) an optimal amount of delta-v for launching and returning (Falcon was largely designed to be expendable or at best recover with parachutes, thus has a pretty low delta-v from just the booster).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tater said:

Also, the legs can't retract.

Drag at the back, amirite?

Especially with that giant opening at the top.  Fairly certain that re-launching would rip the interstage to shreds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, barge wouldn't probably take it well. It's one thing to blast a concrete launch pad with exhaust gases. It was built to shrug it off. But the deck of a ship is not the best place to light a huge bonfire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, cubinator said:

Wernher von Who?

You know, that guy... he makes electric razors or something...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted this in the wrong thread.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RIP titanium fins. At least the engines are still there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the engines are the most expensive part. At least STP-2 will have an FH-compatible octograbber so this won't happen again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2019 at 11:09 AM, RCgothic said:

Good call, although CRS-16 wasn't a total loss.

I assume they reused the grind fins and legs and refublished the engines and some other parts. 

Assume they do the same with this stage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.