ProtoJeb21 Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 Something tells me the Universe does not want any Center Core to be successfully recovered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geonovast Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delay Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 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! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shpaget Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealKerbal3x Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 Aww, really universe? Please just let SpaceX recover STP-2’s centre core. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCgothic Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 10 hours ago, Geonovast said: CRS-16 was a block 5. Good call, although CRS-16 wasn't a total loss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultimate Steve Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonu Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terwin Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultimate Steve Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 Also, the legs can't retract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wumpus Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 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). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geonovast Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotius Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xd the great Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 11 hours ago, tater said: The next generation of spacepen. For the Space Force. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 copycat! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubinator Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 4 hours ago, sh1pman said: copycat! Wernher von Who? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 3 minutes ago, cubinator said: Wernher von Who? You know, that guy... he makes electric razors or something... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Posted this in the wrong thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 RIP titanium fins. At least the engines are still there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealKerbal3x Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 Well, the engines are the most expensive part. At least STP-2 will have an FH-compatible octograbber so this won't happen again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.