Falcon 9 first stage has successfully landed!

[Streetwind]

I hope they have a cleaner version. That was like trying to watch a movie on a scrambled channel back in the '90s.

They don't. In fact, this is already the cleaned-up-by-hand version; the raw footage was worse. That's the reason it took them so long to release anything.

Elon Musk gave a press conference on April 25th where he talked and answered questions about how the landing went for some 15-20 minutes. I had the opportunity to watch a full recording yesterday; unfortunately the video has since been removed from youtube for unknown reasons, so I can't link to it. But here's some details I can remember:

- All telemetry and sensors agree that the stage touched down soft and fully vertical, as intended, so the experiment was a success.

- The beefed-up RCS successfully kept rotation under control (rapid spinning is what led to the failure of the first attempt last year)

- Landing was "a couple miles" off target, but then again, SpaceX didn't really try to be on target this time. They wanted to validate the soft landing process.

- The booster came down essentially in the middle of a storm that was forming, which impacted the data links. Telemetry got priority and was received in full, but the video feed was badly damaged. It took the team a week to bring it into a halfway watchable state. Elon Musk stated that he hopes that releasing it publically will lead to some enthusiasts on the web with better skills to attempt to further clean it up.

- Also because of the storm, SpaceX could not get a boat to the landing site for over two full days, as not even the coast guard wanted to be caught out there in that weather. Musk described waves "fifteen to twenty feet" high. Some shredded pieces of the interstage were later recovered, but the main booster remains lost, likely destroyed by the heavy sea and sunk to the bottom of the ocean.

- SpaceX will attempt further soft landings with most of their flights this year (they have 11 more scheduled in 2014). First there will be more water landings to refine accuracy, but they will be in shallower seas, closer to land in order to facilitate a booster recovery. Apparently they also hired "a bigger boat", whatever that means.

- After recovering at least one splashed-down booster and bringing the margin of error to less than one mile off target, they will attempt a soft landing on solid ground.

- The ultimate goal is to return a booster to Kennedy Space Center before the end of this year. Several sites have been identified that allow safe landing with relatively large margins of error, but Musk states that theoretically they should be able to hit their intended landing site within a single meter of accuracy. This may not happen on the first KSC landing right away, but it's a goal.

- A booster recovered from the ocean could be refurbished within one to three months, depending on its state. A booster that soft landed at KSC with precision could theoretically be flown again the same day.

- The first stage booster hardware makes up about 70% of the entire Falcon 9 rocket launch price the customer has to pay (currently between $55 million and $60 million), while fuel cost is as low as 0.3%. Therefore, returning the first stage booster to KSC and reusing it with little to no refurbishing required could cut launch prices by two thirds.

- The current SpaceX launch prices assume zero reusability. Musk claims that there are no margins to be padded, and cost savings achieved through reusability would be directly passed on to the customer in the form of reduced launch prices.

- Musk concedes that it may be difficult to convince customers to entrust their payloads to refurbished booster hardware. If necessary, SpaceX will provide as many demonstration flights from their own pockets as needed to build confidence.

...that's all I remember for now. Shame that the video is no longer available.

[sgt_flyer]

Well, if it was a live Data feed, they might not have enough bandwidth avaible for a HD stream... Plus, i think they would proritize telemetry over video.

If it was recovered from the stage, it might have been damaged by the seawater.

Edit : streetwind already answered

Edited April 30, 2014 by sgt_flyer

[Motokid600]

The video doesn't NEED to be in HD. Ill take 480p over.. well.. that. But it looks like to me the camera may have been damaged at some point during the launch.

[Dkmdlb]

Musk concedes that it may be difficult to convince customers to entrust their payloads to refurbished booster hardware. If necessary, SpaceX will provide as many demonstration flights from their own pockets as needed to build confidence.

I don't think this is going to be as big of a problem as everybody says. After a couple of successful flights I doubt there will be any kind of concern. If you remember, on the first flight of the falcon 9 v1.1 they gave their customer a deep discount for using unproven hardware. The payload was delivered without any problems. That's a positive mark for them - showing that they can be successful on unproven hardware.

It seems to me that the regular discount offered as a result of using refurbished hardware should be more than enough to convince people to give it a shot.

[Nibb31]

When you have a $200 million comsat that you rely on for your business, you don't skimp on the launch price. You just want to be as sure as possible that your bird ends up where you want it, and you are perfectly ready to pay a premium for that.

Edited April 30, 2014 by Nibb31

[Meithan]

Thank you, Streetwind, that was extremely informative (and what a good memory!). Too bad the link is down; I would've loved to watch the press conference.

If the actual video feed is so bad, perhaps SpaceX could make an animated video using the telemetry data? With a big "using actual flight data" notice, that would be great advertising.

[KSK]

Apparently they also hired "a bigger boat", whatever that means.

In case there are any sharks swimming around the booster?

I'll get my coat.

[Dkmdlb]

When you have a $200 million comsat that you rely on for your business, you don't skimp on the launch price. You just want to be as sure as possible that your bird ends up where you want it, and you are perfectly ready to pay a premium for that.

Tell that to CSA, who sent their CASSIOPE satellite up on unproven hardware with the first Falcon 9 v1.1 because SpaceX offered a discount.

Edit: and I might add that Musk himself said that rocket had a significant probability of failure.

Edited April 30, 2014 by Dkmdlb

[CaelumEtAstra]

Have a nice swim, Falcon 9!

[Meithan]

This may be slightly off-topic, but it seems SpaceX just won the injunction, which will prevent ULA from selling rockets to the U.S. Air Force based on russian-built engines:

SpaceX says rocket purchases violate Russian sanctions, gets injunction [Ars Technica]

Musk is playing the "our engines are U.S.-built" card amidst the climate of tension between the U.S. and Russia over the Ukraine affair, and it would seem that Rogozin's statement arrived at just the right time for the court to make up its mind over the injunction. All I can say is: well played, Mr. Musk, well played.

[Tiberion]

No, the injunction only bars them from buying more engines from Russia, they have a fair number of them on hand (I think they said 18 months worth?) so launches will continue.

It's still a win for SpaceX because it'll force ULA to deal with it, possibly swapping all launches to Delta IV, or working up another engine for Atlas V. And it puts ULA on the defensive, like their current claim of "National Security!" which is tenuous given that is relies on Russian engines.

Another interesting side effect? Both of SpaceX's main competitors in the commercial crew dev program (CST-100 and Dream Chaser) plan to fly on.. yep.. the Atlas V. Uncertainty on engine supply could affect its man-rating process

[Motokid600]

This may be slightly off-topic, but it seems SpaceX just won the injunction, which will prevent ULA from selling rockets to the U.S. Air Force based on russian-built engines:

SpaceX says rocket purchases violate Russian sanctions, gets injunction [Ars Technica]

Musk is playing the "our engines are U.S.-built" card amidst the climate of tension between the U.S. and Russia over the Ukraine affair, and it would seem that Rogozin's statement arrived at just the right time for the court to make up its mind over the injunction. All I can say is: well played, Mr. Musk, well played.

Lol I just read that article not long after I saw the trampoline comment. These tensions could have a small silver lining. Get SpaceX a little more attention and get that Dragon ready to fly sooner. No offense to the Russians, but I'll be able to breathe a little easier once we can launch Americans on home soil.

[Streetwind]

It's honestly an asshole move by SpaceX. Yes, it was a well-timed and well-executed move that got them exactly what they wanted, but at the cost of intentionally exacerbating the tensions between USA and Russia for their own gain. We need that stupid conflict to deescalate, not to become worse. Thousands of people stand to die if someone decides they had enough and brings weapons to bear.

They could have challenged ULA's block buy on the grounds of free market laws alone, but they chose to play dirty. Son, I am disappoint.

Edited May 2, 2014 by Streetwind

[Deathsoul097]

It's honestly an asshole move by SpaceX. Yes, it was a well-timed and well-executed move that got them exactly what they wanted, but at the cost of intentionally exacerbating the tensions between USA and Russia for their own gain. We need that stupid conflict to deescalate, not to become worse. Thousands of people stand to die if someone decides they had enough and brings weapons to bear.

They could have challenged ULA's block buy on the grounds of free market laws alone, but they chose to play dirty. Son, I am disappoint.

Well, knowing politicians, if it happens because of an aerospace company pulling a **** move, it was going to happen anyway. Frankly, the situation in Crimea could end tomorrow, or start WWIII. Elon Musk and SpaceX simply know how to use a situation for their own advantage.

What's done is done, all that we can do now is wait and see, and see if we will regret this worse than it not happening.

[Ikaneko]

Even then, Skylon is ground-breaking. Even if it doesn't work, it may influence designs that do work. Anyway, Alan bond has 30+ years of experience in SSTO design, I think he's nailed it with Skylon.

[Red Iron Crown]

Even then, Skylon is ground-breaking. Even if it doesn't work, it may influence designs that do work. Anyway, Alan bond has 30+ years of experience in SSTO design, I think he's nailed it with Skylon.

Seeing how there hasn't been a successful SSTO design yet, I'm not sure how much of an endorsement that is.

Still, it's an interesting design, I hope it actually gets built and works.

[Ikaneko]

With enough testing, we will probably find an SSTO design that works. The fact that there aren't any yet is because it's still under development and also due to the fact that the Space Agencies care little for SSTOs at the moment (seriously, Skylon has had peanuts). Also, ground-breaking because, well, SABRE.

[Rakaydos]

I still think JP Aerospace will be able to nail "low cost bulk cargo to orbit," but their peanuts make Skylon look well funded.

[mellojoe]

FYI:

SpaceX released the video of the reusable booster with landing legs touching down in the ocean.

http://www.spacex.com/news/2014/04/29/first-stage-landing-video

They are asking for help, or offering up anyone with the hobby, to try to salvage and/or fix the video. The recording is just very poor, and its hard to make out anything. But somewhere there is a video guru waiting for a project. Hopefully one of you out there can have a little fun and do SpaceX a favor in the process.

[Albert VDS]

New test of the Falcon 9R, highest test yet.

Edited May 2, 2014 by Albert VDS

[Scotius]

Beautiful. Future is happening now, guys Go SpaceX!

[Nibb31]

I still think JP Aerospace will be able to nail "low cost bulk cargo to orbit," but their peanuts make Skylon look well funded.

The airship-to-orbit idea is so flawed it's not even funny.

To get buoyancy, you need air. If you have air, you have drag. A balloon big enough to carry enough propellant to accelerate itself from 0 to 27000 km/h is going to have a lot of drag.

[Meithan]

I fully agree, Streetwind.

[RocketPilot573]

If SpaceX achieves reusability as planned, then wont the make all other non-reusable rockets obsolete? The amount of progress that they have already made amazes me, it's KSP in real life!

Edited May 3, 2014 by RocketPilot573

[vger]

The airship-to-orbit idea is so flawed it's not even funny.

Heh. I'm sure there's some other huge problem with the idea, most likely the size of the balloon you'd need for this, but I always wondered whether or not launching a craft from one would be possible. Even if not for practical applications, it would be an interesting concept for amateur rocketry, if only there wasn't that maximum payload requirement for balloon launches.