Blue Origin Thread (merged)

[cptdavep]

Got a good feeling that this launch might be the time they pull it off. Very little fuss on media and social media though so they're clearly trying to avoid overhyping this attempt after the negative press last time!

Think this is one of those launches where it has to go at the exact right moment to get the correct orbit, so given Spacex record for delays I'd be surprised/impressed if it actually launches tonight! Anyone know how long we'll have to wait if it's scrubbed?

[RocketPilot573]

Got a good feeling that this launch might be the time they pull it off. Very little fuss on media and social media though so they're clearly trying to avoid overhyping this attempt after the negative press last time!

Think this is one of those launches where it has to go at the exact right moment to get the correct orbit, so given Spacex record for delays I'd be surprised/impressed if it actually launches tonight! Anyone know how long we'll have to wait if it's scrubbed?

During a press conference (NASA TV) a few minutes ago they said something about tomorrow being alright for another launch attempt in case it doesn't go tonight..

[Airlock]

Updated OP with more links/info.

Edited February 8, 2015 by Airlock

[RocketPilot573]

http://i.imgur.com/WvYfqwA.jpg

Grid Fins: Check

Legs: Check

Jeb: Check

Engnes: Check

Weather: Check

SAS: Not check? What button is that again?

Staging: Uhhh.

[Motokid600]

I have a question and forgive me if its off topic id rather not go hunting down an older SpaceX thread or make my own. Why was the second stage reusability scrubbed? Too improbable? Because im trying to replicate it in KSP and... well I think I know why. How the hell did SpaceX intend on spinning the stage 180 degrees in super sonic winds? The stage I made had the Dv and power to land, but it crashed and burned because I couldn't get retrograde.

Addition: Those grid fins seem a lot smaller then what I last remember.

[RocketPilot573]

I have a question and forgive me if its off topic id rather not go hunting down an older SpaceX thread or make my own. Why was the second stage reusability scrubbed? Too improbable? Because im trying to replicate it in KSP and... well I think I know why. How the hell did SpaceX intend on spinning the stage 180 degrees in super sonic winds? The stage I made had the Dv and power to land, but it crashed and burned because I couldn't get retrograde.

Addition: Those grid fins seem a lot smaller then what I last remember.

I have never heard of 2nd stage reusability begin scrubbed, they just haven't gotten to that point yet.

[cptdavep]

What do they make their fairings out of? Looks all lumpy like paper mâché in the photos!

[Scotius]

Small steps. SpaceX wants to learn how to do it properly using the first stage - which already proved to be tricky. Like you said, landing the second stage will be even more difficult.

[B787_300]

Small steps is right, but the 2nd stage reusablity is much much harder than first stage...

also the weather forecast was updated, still >10% chance of violating today, but 60% for tommorow

[AngelLestat]

in term of fuel consumption is not. Just reentry.

[magnemoe]

What do they make their fairings out of? Looks all lumpy like paper mâché in the photos!

Some sort of composite I guess like fibreglass, might be something more advanced, it don't need to be polished. In fact roughness reduce drag in lots of settings.

[Superluminaut]

I have a question and forgive me if its off topic id rather not go hunting down an older SpaceX thread or make my own. Why was the second stage reusability scrubbed? Too improbable? Because im trying to replicate it in KSP and... well I think I know why. How the hell did SpaceX intend on spinning the stage 180 degrees in super sonic winds? The stage I made had the Dv and power to land, but it crashed and burned because I couldn't get retrograde.

Addition: Those grid fins seem a lot smaller then what I last remember.

I think it was scrubbed because they decided to allocate those resources to the Mars project instead. However I have not seen this in rumor through any official channels.

Also in ksp you are crashing because of the way ksp drag works. Your engines are the most massive part off your rocket and so have the most drag. Try clipping a large nose cone into the top of the stage to more neutrally balance the vehicle.

[StrandedonEarth]

I have a question and forgive me if its off topic id rather not go hunting down an older SpaceX thread or make my own. Why was the second stage reusability scrubbed? Too improbable?

From Mr. Musk's AMA on reddit:

[–]ElonMuskOfficial 1261 points 1 month ago

Actually, we could make the 2nd stage of Falcon reusable and still have significant payload on Falcon Heavy, but I think our engineering resources are better spent moving on to the Mars system.

[Airlock]

From Mr. Musk's AMA on reddit:

He also talks about it here at 13:50 http://youtu.be/EQvv2_pDFVc?t=13m50s

[Streetwind]

During an interview at the MIT AeroAstro Centennial Symposium, Elon Musk went into greater detail re: 2nd stage reusability.

The main problem is that the Isp of the Merlin 1DV, even with the giant vacuum bell, is just too low to offset the payload penalty. The numbers just don't work out with kerosene fuel. For the Falcon 9, the 2nd stage could be made reusable but it would not be able to carry anything significant - not even a cargo Dragon to the ISS, which is the most lightweight/easy payload they're regularly sending up. (Recall: the Dragon missions were designed for the Falcon 9 v1.0 rocket, which was 40% less powerful than the current v1.1 iteration.)

The Falcon Heavy meanwhile could still launch Falcon 9 sized payloads even when fully reusable. But well, you still need to launch a Falcon Heavy for everything you can currently launch a Falcon 9, and the FH is simply that much more expensive. You run into the problem where you save money from the reusability, but at the same time, because you need to use oversized, overpriced launchers for the payload, you're not actually able to pass any cost/kg advantages on to the customers. Heck, while they're still practising right now, cost/kg would go up if they started setting aside fuel for 2nd stage reusability. And that's assuming the stunt of returning a spent stage intact from orbit it even works, which has yet to be proven.

So all in all, it would be a whole lot of wasted effort, time and money to do that with the current generation of Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy, and because of that, you can consider it effectively scrapped. When the third generation of SpaceX's launch vehicles debuts around 2020, then you can ask again. For those will use a better fuel and a more efficient engine cycle, resulting in much higher Isp and thus less payload lost to reusability considerations... on the first stage too, which compounds into even more savings on the second.

[Ikaneko]

I can't wait for the DSCOVR mission!! Awful acronyms aside, it's an interesting mission and one I shall have to follow closely!!

[AngelLestat]

but he said once that there is no real money save until all stages are reusable.. Because the most important thing is to have the rocket ready to re launch in a short time frame.

Is not because the cost to make a new one, is due all the test you need to do on new second stages.

Maybe is not needed a reentry shield, just improve a little more the tank material and enter in the atmosphere (almost emptly means much less density than soyuz capsule) with a prograde angle tilt up 30 degress and spining (so the heat is distributed over all faces) and it will use the body lift to keep its altitude and reentry angle.

[Space_Coyote]

Well I have a feeling that if they stick the landing on the barge, then this will be a great moment for space..

And I hear this time, the First stage hydrulidcs have 50 % more fluid in it.. so I have a feeling confidence will be high for a landing..

so let's see what happens in about say.. oh, 94 minutes or so..

Space_Coyote.

[KSK]

but he said once that there is no real money save until all stages are reusable.. Because the most important thing is to have the rocket ready to re launch in a short time frame.

I'll take your word for it, but that doesn't seem quite right to me. I would have thought that a reusable (as in refuel-and-go) first stage would still be a cost saving. How much of a cost saving I don't know.

Anyhow - this launch is running too late for me. For all those who will be watching it - hope there's something to watch and here's to a successful 1st stage recovery!

[Airlock]

Well I have a feeling that if they stick the landing on the barge, then this will be a great moment for space..

And I hear this time, the First stage hydrulidcs have 50 % more fluid in it.. so I have a feeling confidence will be high for a landing..

so let's see what happens in about say.. oh, 94 minutes or so..

Space_Coyote.

Keep in mind, they're foregoing the boostback maneuver on this mission due to fuel margins. That means the booster will have to survive twice the dynamic pressure and four times as much heating as the last attempt.

[Elthy]

Keep in mind, they're foregoing the boostback maneuver on this mission due to fuel margins. That means the booster will have to survive twice the dynamic pressure and four times as much heating as the last attempt.

Where did you read that? I dont question it but id like to know the source...

[GoSlash27]

I still don't understand why it ran out of hydraulic fluid the first time unless it had a leak. You're not supposed to lose hydraulic fluid, let alone run out of it.

Crossing my fingers,

-Slashy

[Airlock]

Where did you read that? I dont question it but id like to know the source...

The pre-launch briefing I believe.

I'll try to find the time stamp for it.

Edit

Here's an article on the reentry profile.

http://innerspace.net/spacex/dscovr-launch-presents-spacex-with-new-landing-challenge/

Unlike the recent CRS-5 launch in which the Falcon 9 boosted a Dragon spacecraft to low Earth orbit, Sunday’s flight will see a very different ascent profile, one which is much steeper. And even though at 570 kilograms, DSCOVR is a fraction of the weight of the heavily laden Dragon capsule, the necessity of hurling it to a solar orbit nearly a million miles from Earth, a task which will demand even more of the second stage, means that it will re-enter the atmosphere much more dynamically, and without the fuel margin for three separate burns. Instead it will make just two burns, depending on the hypersonic grid fins to adjust its trajectory and target the Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship (ASDS) waiting nearly 400 miles down range.

Edited February 8, 2015 by Airlock

[SuperFastJellyfish]

I still don't understand why it ran out of hydraulic fluid the first time unless it had a leak. You're not supposed to lose hydraulic fluid, let alone run out of it.

Crossing my fingers,

-Slashy

A pressure fed, open hydraulic system is used because of mass savings over an unnecessarily complex closed system with a pump AFAIK.

[Frozen_Heart]

During an interview at the MIT AeroAstro Centennial Symposium, Elon Musk went into greater detail re: 2nd stage reusability.

The main problem is that the Isp of the Merlin 1DV, even with the giant vacuum bell, is just too low to offset the payload penalty. The numbers just don't work out with kerosene fuel. For the Falcon 9, the 2nd stage could be made reusable but it would not be able to carry anything significant - not even a cargo Dragon to the ISS, which is the most lightweight/easy payload they're regularly sending up. (Recall: the Dragon missions were designed for the Falcon 9 v1.0 rocket, which was 40% less powerful than the current v1.1 iteration.)

The Falcon Heavy meanwhile could still launch Falcon 9 sized payloads even when fully reusable. But well, you still need to launch a Falcon Heavy for everything you can currently launch a Falcon 9, and the FH is simply that much more expensive. You run into the problem where you save money from the reusability, but at the same time, because you need to use oversized, overpriced launchers for the payload, you're not actually able to pass any cost/kg advantages on to the customers. Heck, while they're still practising right now, cost/kg would go up if they started setting aside fuel for 2nd stage reusability. And that's assuming the stunt of returning a spent stage intact from orbit it even works, which has yet to be proven.

So all in all, it would be a whole lot of wasted effort, time and money to do that with the current generation of Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy, and because of that, you can consider it effectively scrapped. When the third generation of SpaceX's launch vehicles debuts around 2020, then you can ask again. For those will use a better fuel and a more efficient engine cycle, resulting in much higher Isp and thus less payload lost to reusability considerations... on the first stage too, which compounds into even more savings on the second.

I really think that a single core, 9 Raptor engine rocket could make a far superior replacement for the Falcon heavy long term. With the Raptors current quoted stats it would produce the same thrust as the FH but with a much higher ISP. It could potentially allow full reusability compared to the FH partial reusability.