My thoughts on this-a) Who woulda thunket that in a cross feed launch the center core would be returning to the launch site?
c) How does this interact with the EIS that they're trying to get approved?
d) What is up with the building / tower at what I presume to be 39A? They currently aren't allowed to remove the RSS but in this video everything has been changed changed. Perhaps this is a sign that the video depicts not the near future of something likely to happen in the next 2 years but rather a longer term vision of what they eventually want to achieve with it.
Quote from: JamesH on 01/28/2015 03:39 pmIt's a video, done by an marketing animator on an unknown date about an unknown date, found on the internet.Clearly it's 100% prescient.But someone has to tell the animator what to animate. Someone told them to depict all 3 FH cores landing at LC-13. He didn't just pull that out of his/her rearend. And it looks to be an official SpaceX video, so it has as much weight as statements they'd make I would assume. I assumed this is at least all the things they'd -like- to do.
It's a video, done by an marketing animator on an unknown date about an unknown date, found on the internet.Clearly it's 100% prescient.
Quote from: Lobo on 01/28/2015 04:34 pmQuote from: JamesH on 01/28/2015 03:39 pmIt's a video, done by an marketing animator on an unknown date about an unknown date, found on the internet.Clearly it's 100% prescient.But someone has to tell the animator what to animate. Someone told them to depict all 3 FH cores landing at LC-13. He didn't just pull that out of his/her rearend. And it looks to be an official SpaceX video, so it has as much weight as statements they'd make I would assume. I assumed this is at least all the things they'd -like- to do.Animators pull a lots of stuff out of their rear ends. I seriously doubt this video will be representative in 12 months time. SPaceX change their minds. A lot. This, I think, is a good thing. They learn. But it means statements or video or whatever made 12 months ago are generally not representative - check out the original full reusability video for starters. That was stuff they wanted (or liked) to do. But we know the second stage won't be recovered. So it clearly wrong in at least one major area.
Quote from: JamesH on 01/28/2015 07:36 pmQuote from: Lobo on 01/28/2015 04:34 pmQuote from: JamesH on 01/28/2015 03:39 pmIt's a video, done by an marketing animator on an unknown date about an unknown date, found on the internet.Clearly it's 100% prescient.But someone has to tell the animator what to animate. Someone told them to depict all 3 FH cores landing at LC-13. He didn't just pull that out of his/her rearend. And it looks to be an official SpaceX video, so it has as much weight as statements they'd make I would assume. I assumed this is at least all the things they'd -like- to do.Animators pull a lots of stuff out of their rear ends. I seriously doubt this video will be representative in 12 months time. SPaceX change their minds. A lot. This, I think, is a good thing. They learn. But it means statements or video or whatever made 12 months ago are generally not representative - check out the original full reusability video for starters. That was stuff they wanted (or liked) to do. But we know the second stage won't be recovered. So it clearly wrong in at least one major area.Sure, but for its time, it is surprisingly accurate. This movie states that SpaceX intends to land multiple cores in LC-13, in contradiction with the EIS that we've seen. That's as much as we can deduce. They intended to, at the time the movie was made. Also, they decided it was worth releasing, yesterday.
[Animators pull a lots of stuff out of their rear ends. I seriously doubt this video will be representative in 12 months time. SPaceX change their minds. A lot.
Quote from: meekGee on 01/28/2015 07:44 pmQuote from: JamesH on 01/28/2015 07:36 pmQuote from: Lobo on 01/28/2015 04:34 pmQuote from: JamesH on 01/28/2015 03:39 pmIt's a video, done by an marketing animator on an unknown date about an unknown date, found on the internet.Clearly it's 100% prescient.But someone has to tell the animator what to animate. Someone told them to depict all 3 FH cores landing at LC-13. He didn't just pull that out of his/her rearend. And it looks to be an official SpaceX video, so it has as much weight as statements they'd make I would assume. I assumed this is at least all the things they'd -like- to do.Animators pull a lots of stuff out of their rear ends. I seriously doubt this video will be representative in 12 months time. SPaceX change their minds. A lot. This, I think, is a good thing. They learn. But it means statements or video or whatever made 12 months ago are generally not representative - check out the original full reusability video for starters. That was stuff they wanted (or liked) to do. But we know the second stage won't be recovered. So it clearly wrong in at least one major area.Sure, but for its time, it is surprisingly accurate. This movie states that SpaceX intends to land multiple cores in LC-13, in contradiction with the EIS that we've seen. That's as much as we can deduce. They intended to, at the time the movie was made. Also, they decided it was worth releasing, yesterday.In my view we should take this video only a representation of their current vision (or maybe of some months ago), rather than as an exact description of how the launch and recovery operations are going to work. I think the animator had a lot of information in hand and made an honest effort to incorproate as much details as possible... but the particulars are naturally subject to change.
I haven't seen this posted yet, but it's pretty on topic for this thread so here goes. The ink is now dry on the 5-year LC-13 pad lease between the Air Force and SpaceX:http://www.floridatoday.com/story/tech/science/space/2015/02/10/spacex-air-force-sign-deal-for-landing-pad-at-cape-canaveral/23163757/SpaceX and the Air Force have reached an agreement to use a former Atlas launch pad on Cape Canaveral Air Force Station as a landing site for returning Falcon rocket boosters, the 45th Space Wing has confirmed.FLORIDA TODAY reported last month that a five-year lease of Launch Complex 13 was expected by the end of January."The way we see it, this is a classic combination of a highly successful launch past morphing into an equally promising future," Brig. Gen. Nina Armagno, commander of the 45th Space Wing, said in a statement."For decades, we have been refining our procedures for getting successful launches skyward here on the Eastern Range," Armagno said. "Now we're looking at processes on how to bring first-stage rockets back to earth at the first landing pad at the Cape. We live in exciting times here on the Space Coast."Before flying boosters back to shore, SpaceX must first show it can land them safely on an ocean platform. The company will make a second attempt to do that today after a planned 6:05 p.m. launch of a Falcon 9 with the Deep Space Climate Observatory.
Quote from: MattMason on 01/13/2015 01:25 pmParabolic Arc reports that a draft environmental report supports the new facility. While clearing out several acres of brush will temporarily disrupt some wildlife, they'll offset this with fresh growth over the next 5 years.http://www.parabolicarc.com/2015/01/12/draft-environmental-report-backs-spacex-landing-facility-cape-canaveral/One item in there is: "The assessment also recommended a number of other mitigation measures, including limiting construction activities during the scrub-jay’s nesting season."
Parabolic Arc reports that a draft environmental report supports the new facility. While clearing out several acres of brush will temporarily disrupt some wildlife, they'll offset this with fresh growth over the next 5 years.http://www.parabolicarc.com/2015/01/12/draft-environmental-report-backs-spacex-landing-facility-cape-canaveral/
Will "Landing Complex 1" be the official (US Air Force) name, or will it remain LC 13 on their books?(I see Jonathan has already pointed out that "LC 1" will be confusing to historians, since Cape Canaveral already had a "Launch Complex 1", and others have pointed out that it shouldn't be "1" anyway, since missile and space landings have previously occurred at the Skid Strip and Shuttle Landing Facility). - Ed Kyle
There's no requirement for them to adopt "LC-1" as the abbreviation. They could go with "LanC-1" (sounds like Lancy), or "LanCom-1" (sounds like Lancome), etc.
Quote from: deruch on 03/11/2015 11:17 pmThere's no requirement for them to adopt "LC-1" as the abbreviation. They could go with "LanC-1" (sounds like Lancy), or "LanCom-1" (sounds like Lancome), etc.Or LC-1-Down (as opposed to LC-40-Up)