tater Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stone Blue Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 (edited) Hmm... whoever coordinates the camera feed switching, needs to have their pay docked... We got to *hear* several critical mission events, while watching the orbital animation, till the feeds got switched over quite a few seconds late... :face_palm: I cant believe (at least) those bottom few sats didnt collide, right after sep... Yeah, I know, they are probably on their own power/nav at that point, but seems like there ought to be a better way to deploy, than to have to have them have to institute collision avoidance within just seconds of deployment... lol Edited January 29, 2020 by Stone Blue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zolotiyeruki Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 The relative velocities of those satellites at deployment are probably measured in single-digit centimeters per second, and those satellites aren't very heavy. If they can make it through launch and staging, I think they can handle a tiny little bump against their neighbors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenperforce Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 1 hour ago, zolotiyeruki said: The relative velocities of those satellites at deployment are probably measured in single-digit centimeters per second, and those satellites aren't very heavy. If they can make it through launch and staging, I think they can handle a tiny little bump against their neighbors. Additionally, they're "stuck" to each others via rugged bumpers to begin with, so those would be the only contact points anyway. 1 hour ago, Delay said: We didn't catch the other half though. Still a great success! I wonder if wind conditions are just always going to be so unstable that fairing catches never reach a high success rate. Then, in turn, I wonder how much of a success rate is needed to pay back the dev work and investment in the two boats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wjolcz Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 (edited) 30 minutes ago, sevenperforce said: Then, in turn, I wonder how much of a success rate is needed to pay back the dev work and investment in the two boats. My guess is they spent money on them because reusability is profitable enough that catching fairings is an extra thing that's not necessarily needed, so they are trying it anyway. Edited January 29, 2020 by Wjolcz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 13 minutes ago, Wjolcz said: My guess is they spent money on them because reusability is profitable enough that catching fairings is an extra thing that's not necessarily needed, so they are trying it anyway. Catching them make them easier to reuse as they have not been in seawater. They have the boats already and need boats to pick them up anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 They've been reusing the ones that took a swim, so they're already saving money for Starlink. That's why Starlink is a better bet than other constellations, their launch cost is so very, very low. Reused boosters, reused fairings, no markup on anything, and the first customer for the booster paid for the booster and fairings. Cost is the cost of the recovery ops, launch campaign, stage 2, and refurb on core and fairings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatGuyWithALongUsername Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 21 minutes ago, tater said: They've been reusing the ones that took a swim, so they're already saving money for Starlink. That's why Starlink is a better bet than other constellations, their launch cost is so very, very low. Reused boosters, reused fairings, no markup on anything, and the first customer for the booster paid for the booster and fairings. Cost is the cost of the recovery ops, launch campaign, stage 2, and refurb on core and fairings. 60 satellites per launch helps with costs, too. Less launches. Although still a lot of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerwood Floyd Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 I don't pay quite as much attention as I could; so forgive me not knowing the answer to this. When was the last time SpaceX tried to recover a booster but failed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Kerwood Floyd said: I don't pay quite as much attention as I could; so forgive me not knowing the answer to this. When was the last time SpaceX tried to recover a booster but failed? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_Heavy_launches The Falcon Heavy center core, June, 2019 didn't make it. For F9 it was December 2018 (hydraulic failure on grid fins). That FH core was going very fast and they knew they might lose it. Spoiler About 36 minutes in (a little before that are the side cores landing, though). Edited January 29, 2020 by tater Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerwood Floyd Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 Thanks. I tried looking in Wikipedia, but failed to find that particular article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonu Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 Anyone know if/when the new starlink would be visible in Central Europe or has page showing the trajectories etc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 It looks like 17 in a row, not counting the FH core loss (which they knew was pretty marginal). The Dec 2018 one was a legit failure, though. 2 minutes ago, Toonu said: Anyone know if/when the new starlink would be visible in Central Europe or has page showing the trajectories etc? https://www.heavens-above.com/PassSummary.aspx?satid=72001&lat=51.5074&lng=-0.1278&loc=London&alt=0&tz=GMT Looks like visible passes are gonna be like here in N. America, not until the weekend of the 6th, and then in the morning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealKerbal3x Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 (edited) Sadly I missed the launch because school, but I was able to watch the video on YouTube. Looks like a successful launch, but I wonder if the landing damaged the booster at all - it looked pretty hard. Edited January 29, 2020 by RealKerbal3x Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying dutchman Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 8 minutes ago, RealKerbal3x said: Sadly I missed the launch because school, but I was able to watch the video on YouTube. Looks like a successful launch, but I wonder if the landing damaged the booster at all - it looked pretty hard. Was sondering about this too, engine seemed to cut off a few meters above the badge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExtremeSquared Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 Crush cores should bottom out before engine contact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brotoro Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 4 hours ago, Stone Blue said: Hmm... whoever coordinates the camera feed switching, needs to have their pay docked... We got to *hear* several critical mission events, while watching the orbital animation, till the feeds got switched over quite a few seconds late... :face_palm: I cant believe (at least) those bottom few sats didnt collide, right after sep... Yeah, I know, they are probably on their own power/nav at that point, but seems like there ought to be a better way to deploy, than to have to have them have to institute collision avoidance within just seconds of deployment... lol Have we EVER seen video of the moment of the Starlink stack separating? It always seems to me that they cutaway to the orbit animation at that point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delay Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 Didn't the second mission feature video of the deploy sequence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 1 hour ago, ExtremeSquared said: Crush cores should bottom out before engine contact. Yes, aluminum is nice as you can just melt it down and reuse it. However its better to wreck the booster structure than the engines. if the booster get an abnormal g load you will scrap it anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCgothic Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 The April '19 Falcon Heavy centre core was also lost after landing due to sea state conditions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 1 hour ago, RCgothic said: The April '19 Falcon Heavy centre core was also lost after landing due to sea state conditions. Yeah, but the landing was OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying dutchman Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 20 minutes ago, tater said: Yeah, but the landing was OK. Ja maar daar is ook alles mee gezegd. *A dutch saying that means: yeah but that's about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 (edited) If an airliner lands, and later, while being pulled to a hanger the tractor drags it past a building so the wing gets knocked off, it's not the aircraft's fault. Or if instead of blowing up during a test, what if the Crew Dragon used for DM-1 had been on a truck, and it got in a wreck on the road. Failure of Crew Dragon? No. Edited January 30, 2020 by tater Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying dutchman Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 (edited) 5 minutes ago, tater said: If an airliner lands, and later, while being pulled to a hanger the tractor drags it past a building so the wing gets knocked off, it's not the aircraft's fault. Or if instead of blowing up during a test, what if the Crew Dragon used for DM-1 had been on a truck, and it got in a wreck on the road. Failure of Crew Dragon? No. I get what you mean it was down to the barge going up and down. F9 landing legs are tougher than i thought! Edit: i thought we were still talking about today's launch. Then i Read the fh thingy. Confusion ensued. Edited January 30, 2020 by Flying dutchman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 The question was about landing success, not transport across the ocean success. They've had better luck since getting "octograbber" working. Presumably the grabber is designed to get under the core even with a hard landing. 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.