CatastrophicFailure

Saw that, too. The retort is that supposedly, the rumor came from NSF L2, from a source who is very reliable. Grains of salt may be involved.

This is so cute I think I just grew ovaries.

Well, they’ve got that one... it functions perfectly, as a mock-up...

The USAF: Would be veeeery interesting to be a fly on the virtual wall during those Air Force/SpaceX zooms...

Elon must’ve laughed his S off when he heard this... probably a lot sooner than the rest of us. Next earth-shattering BO tweet: BO committing to reusable upper stage. And then: National Team redesigns HLS lander, now looks like this. [pokes @kerbiloid with a stick]

I was never here. @kerbiloid was...

Caught this gangly, awkward little bundle of adorable on camera last night: Then guess who I just found hiding in the grass: Guess I'm not mowing today after all.

Quantum orbit. It is simultaneously in orbit and not in orbit. Also, this thread: Tho I suppose that’s better than squirrels. Schrodinger’s Launch Tower too, apparently.

Unlikely, the HUGE, important difference between SupeeHeavy and F9 (other than, well, size) is that SuperHeavy can hover. This really cannot be stated enough, it’s what makes all the difference here. SuperHeavy can hover, that’s what allows the pinpoint accuracy and zero-ish “touchdown” speed this needs to work. If SH is off a couple meters, it can stop, and then correct (fuel remnant notwithstanding). The real load on the tower should be relatively minor. F9, OTOH, has to cut its engine at exactly the right moment to stop just before it hits the deck, and can’t really correct its course in the final moments before touchdown, as such (we saw this, sort of, in the FH core that “aborted” and went shooting off sideways), so trying to “catch” it is a nonstarter. Also: Vandy getting some action again.

All the needed components exist as separate pieces: giant, superstrong structures; strong, fast hydraulics; robotics; booster-landing accuracy; massive shock absorbers, etc. What SpaceX needs to do is combine them all together. Which is NOT to say this isn’t a huge engineering challenge, but it’s far easier than conjuring something entirely new up from scratch, like belly-flopping Starship. The more I think about it, the less kooky catching the booster seems.

Also: Mind=blown.

now you can see it again, with explanation.

:48 Douglass A-3 controlled crashing landing on a carrier. 40,000lbs doing well over a hundred mph all stopped without damage by a chunk of metal not much bigger than, well, your arm. Turns out, metal is really strong. And engineers are really smart. SpaceX has lots of both. Humanity has made moving building-sized things before: The rest is just details at thus point.

SpaceX is already gonna be tempting fate with such a tricky, untried arrangement... best not to go tempting the Kraken, too.

Operate the shock absorber mechanism in reverse at the moment of liftoff and pick up a tiny performance noose too.

Looks kinda like the original design for the space shuttle... yo dawg I herd you like space shuttles...

Man, sometimes I really miss wheeling around terrain like that. Then I remember, oh yeah, it’s also hot as cojones out there, too.

Welcome to Seattle, here’s your umbrella. If they don’t gimbal, I think so, could swear I’ve seen a diagram somewhere. Also, can Rvacs throttle? If so, there’s your control right there.

Prolly a few months after SLS lands a core stage. They have the New Shepherd suborbital tourist rocket/capsule, which will carry actual people any day now (just you wait!). And the New Glenn heavy lifter... of which all we’ve seen is a single fairing half and maybe a piece of a mock-up outside. For all we know, the whole thing could be sitting in the factory ready to go, but y’know, very step-by-step, much graditam...

I would think so. That ability to hover is a huge bonus, even abort into the sea away from the ship if something’s not right. I’m no engineer, but I would think when weight is essentially “no issue,” building a NG-proof bunker and hardening the ship overall is easier than robodroid hold downs. As you said, even a direct hit by nearly-empty booster wouldn’t be “that bad.”

I think they can. This is a converted cargo ship, after all, with basically no cargo. An empty post-flight booster weighs relatively little. So they should have plenty of mass budget for a crew bunker on the far end from where the landing will take place, maybe with a couple of oil rig-style lifeboats. Whether this would get past regulators, at least initially, is a whole other matter.

Neat, that’s the same combination I have on my luggage!

Isn’t this why they’re aiming for recovering the booster while the ship is underway? () Easier for stabilizers to keep the deck more, well, stable that way.

That does seem like a bit of a rat’s nest to separate cleanly without something getting cut. IIRC the bottoms of the boosters kick out for a split second at separation, before the noses do, what might cause that?