Mad Rocket Scientist Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 1 minute ago, Spaceception said: Is anyone's feed cutting out? Mine did, at T-1 minute, and came back at T+30s. That was a local internet problem, though. x-post from /r/spacex: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceception Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 22 minutes in, and still no word of landing!? GAH, We need to know!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibb31 Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 (edited) 14 minutes ago, icedown said: WTF is with the drone ship name? The ASDS are named after spaceships from The Culture series of SF novels. In the books, the ships are massive AI entities with a weird sense of humor that name themselves after their own personality. Some of them are hilarious: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spacecraft_in_the_Culture_series Edited June 15, 2016 by Nibb31 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceception Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Over Africa now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Rocket Scientist Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Nice looking 2nd stage startup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 It crashed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceception Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 They said they may have lost it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icedown Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Vehicle Lost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CptRichardson Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Just now, CliftonM said: It crashed. Well, no, it landed upright and seemed to stay upright. It burned to the deck. There is a very important difference between the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Rocket Scientist Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Just now, CptRichardson said: Well, no, it landed upright and seemed to stay upright. It burned to the deck. There is a very important difference between the two. True. I really only said that it 'crashed' to be able to type faster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceception Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 (edited) 2 minutes ago, CptRichardson said: Well, no, it landed upright and seemed to stay upright. It burned to the deck. There is a very important difference between the two. Yeah, but It may have tipped over, I don't think they know for sure yet, so there's still hope, right? Edited June 15, 2016 by Spaceception Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icedown Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 the vehicle was destroyed according to the feed, don't know what happened yet though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CptRichardson Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Just now, Spaceception said: Yeah, but I may have tipped over, I don't think they know for sure yet, so there's still hope, right? No, I'm pretty sure 'on fire' is a bad day for rockets. Given that there is a lot of structural aluminum in a F9 as far as I know, the heat would be enough to melt and ignite the aluminum, leading to the rocket having a bad day. Tipping over? Probably not unless the fire melted the crush core of one of the legs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSK Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Good deployment. Job done - still keeping fingers crossed for the booster but it's not looking great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frozen_Heart Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Maybe the fire set off the remaining fuel and/or the explosive charges? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p1t1o Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 9 minutes ago, Nibb31 said: The ASDS are named after spaceships from The Culture series of SF novels. In the books, the ships are massive AI entities with a weird sense of humor that name themselves after their own personality. Some of them are hilarious: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spacecraft_in_the_Culture_series Wahahaha! Really? That is pretty cool. Almost too cool for Elon Musk. He can't have thought of it... Seems like a waste of good material for a barge though, what about the...umm..I dunno, real dang spaceships! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceception Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 (edited) 1 minute ago, Frozen_Heart said: Maybe the fire set off the remaining fuel and/or the explosive charges? That's a possibility. But it looked fine, that smoke needs to move faster! Edited June 15, 2016 by Spaceception Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Rocket Scientist Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 1 minute ago, CliftonM said: True. I really only said that it 'crashed' to be able to type faster. We must invent new, easily typable words for various types of landing failure. I suggest softfail for when falcon lands softly (-ish) but then falls over. Jason-3, umm, that second failure. With the RCS thruster firing to keep it up after landing. What was that one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Just now, Mad Rocket Scientist said: We must invent new, easily typable words for various types of landing failure. I suggest softfail for when falcon lands softly (-ish) but then falls over. Jason-3, umm, that second failure. With the RCS thruster firing to keep it up after landing. What was that one? Ok, so we've had a notknowfail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serpens Solidus Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CptRichardson Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 1 minute ago, Mad Rocket Scientist said: We must invent new, easily typable words for various types of landing failure. I suggest softfail for when falcon lands softly (-ish) but then falls over. Jason-3, umm, that second failure. With the RCS thruster firing to keep it up after landing. What was that one? A tippy. Depending on what happened to this one, I'd say it gooped itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icedown Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 (edited) Ascent phase & satellites look good, but booster rocket had a RUD on droneship per Elon on twitter Jeb needs to stay away from them Edited June 15, 2016 by icedown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB666 Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 1 minute ago, Mad Rocket Scientist said: We must invent new, easily typable words for various types of landing failure. I suggest softfail for when falcon lands softly (-ish) but then falls over. Jason-3, umm, that second failure. With the RCS thruster firing to keep it up after landing. What was that one? How about caic-fs. Contact acceleration initiated collapse - fuel system involvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceception Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 They did an Orlando bit And I thought they said they'd stay up so they can get confirmation on the booster, at least to see how violent it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts