Interesting Chris should be a great spectacle when it crashes . Maybe they should ask the U.S airforce as i have herd that they have tried this sort of thing before and it never work well

---

Interesting Chris should be a great spectacle when it crashes . Maybe they should ask the U.S airforce as i have herd that they have tried this sort of thing before and it never work well

Yes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDI8SQ2fmLA

---

On the one hand I hope they succeed, but on the other I wouldn't bet my life on it.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

they have a go..

The fifth official SpaceX cargo mission to the International Space Station under NASA's Commercial Resupply Services contract now is scheduled to launch at 4:47 a.m. EST Saturday, Jan. 10, from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. NASA Television coverage of the launch will begin at 3:30 a.m.

---

Great let's hope there a bit more successful than the other mob ...so far they seem to be

---

If you hadn't noticed it has launched, news on the recovery of the first stage rocket is,

the Rocket made it to drone spaceport ship, but landed hard. Close, but no cigar this time. Bodes well for the future though

http://www.spacex.com/webcast/

That was just the 1st stage booster. I'm waiting for a deorbit burn and vertical landing without parachutes or wings.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

That was just the 1st stage booster. I'm waiting for a deorbit burn and vertical landing without parachutes or wings.

You probably won't see that because you are talking about landing the second stage or the spacecraft itself.

Powered landing of the first stage is feasible (but not easy) for two reasons: the stage has engines by it's nature, and it is relatively low and slow when it separates, so it doesn't need a heavy thermal protection system to get back down. It just needs to carry a small amount of extra fuel for the landing.

The second stage is moving at almost orbital speed when it separates so it would need thermal protection to get down. That adds a serious weight penalty.

The spacecraft has no engines, just thrusters. You would have to add landing engines too it, again, a serious weight penalty.

Not even Musk's billions could finance the development of a fully reusable two-stage. And no government seems to have the courage.

According to the SpaceX website there is a manned vehicle they are building that he claims can reenter under it's own power and make a soft landing anywhere. I think it is BS too.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

That was just the 1st stage booster. I'm waiting for a deorbit burn and vertical landing without parachutes or wings.

Landings on the moon and comet excepted I assume?

On a body with an atmosphere parachutes are just too easy to slow down. Don't need to lift tons of extra fuel to slow with. But you can cut them off a short distance above ground and land under power.

---

Musk made it clear that he was talking about a manned landing back on earth without the use of wings or parachutes, strictly on rocket power. I think he is nuts. The vehicle is called Dragon V2 here is a link.
http://www.spacex.com/news/2014/05/30/dragon-v2-spacexs-next-generation-manned-spacecraft

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

Musk made it clear that he was talking about a manned landing back on earth without the use of wings or parachutes, strictly on rocket power.

Ok, not impossible, using the launch abort engines for landing. It will have to be very reliable unless they have 0/0 ejection seats or some other safety strategy for landing.

Boring old reliability & maintainability will be the make or break factors. The shuttle failed because they had to rebuild the engines every flight. Not sexy but the hardest thing to get: long life parts, high performance, high reliability and controlled costs. It's a nightmare actually.

Not impossible but much harder than just making something that will fly. We shall see. And I truly wish them luck.

Musk made it clear that he was talking about a manned landing back on earth without the use of wings or parachutes, strictly on rocket power. I think he is nuts. The vehicle is called Dragon V2 here is a link.
http://www.spacex.com/news/2014/05/30/dragon-v2-spacexs-next-generation-manned-spacecraft

That it all it takes...a 1 nutcase deteminded to succed! ;)

---

non-profit org. Play4Life in Zagreb, Croatia, EU

SpaceX's Elon Musk Says Rocket Landing Test Ran Out of Hydraulic Fluid

Space.com:
Engineers with the private spaceflight company SpaceX are still trying to piece together what went wrong with a reusable rocket test Saturday, but the company's founder Elon Musk said Sunday (Jan. 11) that the rocket's steering fins ran out of hydraulic fluid during the attempt. Knowing that, Musk said that there's a better chance of a successful landing during a future test.

---

Coming back to earth from space after being in orbit will continue to be risky business no matter which form of re-entry is used. That is, until or unless a way to neutralize the effect of gravity is discovered.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

What I don't get is what difference the shortfall of hydraulic fluid had to do with a crash landing. I thought the fins help slow and steer the rocket. So if the rocket hit the floating pad, which has like a 30-foot margin of error on each side of the rocket when the rocket reaches it, then wouldn't that mean the fins had already completed their jobs of accurately aiming the rocket? And wouldn't it then fall to the engines and other features to actually perform the landing? Unless the fins continue to slow the rocket very close to sea level so that the engines can fire at a very specific velocity. But if the fins were locked into place, wouldn't they still be producing the right amount of drag, as the rocket still hit the target? Or do the landing legs share hydraulic fluid with the fins, and having fluid in the legs was that important in allowing the rocket to survive landing? The tweets and Musk's audio interviews about the mission didn't make mention of the landing legs.

Anyway, SpaceX seems like they will be trying this with every launch now. Next one is going to be about first week of February. I'm also skeptical about how much reusability a rocket can have. Musk is quoted saying he hopes to reuse rockets 1000x, to bring costs down to 1% or less than what costs are now. And to be able to relaunch within the same day, with minor maintenance. It feels hard to believe that all those precision parts can fully function after so many high stress cycles. Maybe reusability can be high, but not 1000x. Or maybe Musk and his team will figure out how to do it. Either way, I think SpaceX will really change the future of aerospace tech. They seem to have already challenged how the business and day to day operations of aerospace works.

What I don't get is what difference the shortfall of hydraulic fluid had to do with a crash landing. I thought the fins help slow and steer the rocket. So if the rocket hit the floating pad, which has like a 30-foot margin of error on each side of the rocket when the rocket reaches it, then wouldn't that mean the fins had already completed their jobs of accurately aiming the rocket? And wouldn't it then fall to the engines and other features to actually perform the landing? Unless the fins continue to slow the rocket very close to sea level so that the engines can fire at a very specific velocity. But if the fins were locked into place, wouldn't they still be producing the right amount of drag, as the rocket still hit the target? Or do the landing legs share hydraulic fluid with the fins, and having fluid in the legs was that important in allowing the rocket to survive landing?

I too am curious to find out why the grid fins are important at low speed. If they are slaved to the engine gimbals then maybe they lost engine steering too. I also was puzzled about "running out of hydraulic fluid". Conventional hydraulic systems are closed-loop.

Anyway here's a video of the grid fins in action:

http://youtu.be/DgLBIdVg3EM

SpaceX has finally released a visual of the crash landing. Been waiting for anything, ever since staying up all night the morning of the launch to have live updates. You can go to their twitter https://twitter.com/spacex to see the Vine they posted, just a few seconds long. Man they were so close. Looks like the rocket was sort of off target by just a little bit, and it was tipping over to get closer to the center of the platform. Or else it was having trouble maintaining orientation. Maybe the hydraulic fluid really was a major factor. 2 more weeks until the next trial. Looking forward to results.

SpaceX has finally released a visual of the crash landing. Been waiting for anything, ever since staying up all night the morning of the launch to have live updates. You can go to their twitter https://twitter.com/spacex to see the Vine they posted, just a few seconds long. Man they were so close. Looks like the rocket was sort of off target by just a little bit, and it was tipping over to get closer to the center of the platform. Or else it was having trouble maintaining orientation. Maybe the hydraulic fluid really was a major factor. 2 more weeks until the next trial. Looking forward to results.

That was very close and a fantastic first try.

Reading around a bit I believe the press have tripped over their ignorance of physics and engineering...

The problem was that the hydraulics for the steerable paddle fins ran out of gas pressure to power the hydraulics. The landing then went tits-up...

For their next attempt, there is going to be a further 50% gas provisioned.

("Gas" in this instance is indeed actual gas pressure as opposed to USA petroleum!)


Fantastic stuff! Roll on Thunderbird 1!!

Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Why didn't anyone think about consumption of the gas before?

And if the levels were too low, why wasn't the landing aborted?
:/

---

non-profit org. Play4Life in Zagreb, Croatia, EU