Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9 : GovSat-1 (SES-16) : Jan 31. 2018 - Discussion  (Read 207805 times)

Offline ValmirGP

All joking aside (and it really is kind of funny), they'd probably be best off sinking it in deep water.  It won't tow well, (because it's not a solid-fuel booster that was a lot stronger), they don't have the right kind of equipment and personnel out there, and the Port probably won't want them bringing it back in in that condition.

Right about now Elon's probably hoping it will sink on its own and save them the trouble. Problem was, they couldn't just leave it floating there.

Just fire a few shots at the tanks from a safe distance to make sure they aren't pressurized anymore, then run it over with the ship in the middle. Drag on board whatever is still floating then.

I agree that trying to tow it is not worth the time and effort and would be just a complex way to sink it sooner or later anyway.

I believe it would be easier to just detonate the booster with the already on board Termination System. I don't know how it works exactly, but even if it depends on the existence of fuel on the tanks, I guess the mere gaseous remains of the fuel on the tank would suffice to do the trick.

Offline Bananas_on_Mars

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 552
  • Liked: 448
  • Likes Given: 253
I believe it would be easier to just detonate the booster with the already on board Termination System. I don't know how it works exactly, but even if it depends on the existence of fuel on the tanks, I guess the mere gaseous remains of the fuel on the tank would suffice to do the trick.

I think the termination system is essentially a line of detonation cord running along the raceway.

The Fuel fumes are less dangerous than inside a gasoline tank in your car, and the fuel tank is normally pressurized with an inert gas (Helium for Falcon 9).
No oxidizer, no boom.

Offline Cherokee43v6

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1176
  • Garner, NC
  • Liked: 935
  • Likes Given: 236
IMO the most likely explanation for the stage surviving tip-down, apart from the sea state (which is probably the leading factor), is the presence of deployed legs.


This might be true except for the fact that every attempt (even the water ones) had legs.  The very first one that the 'crowd-sourced' debugging of the video here on this site clearly shows landing leg deployment.



ps.  To everyone else I was wrong about my my 'legectomy' comment earlier.  I completely mis-interpreted that picture. :(  Totally my bad.
"I didn't open the can of worms...
        ...I just pointed at it and laughed a little too loudly."

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428

The Fuel fumes are less dangerous than inside a gasoline tank in your car, and the fuel tank is normally pressurized with an inert gas (Helium for Falcon 9).
No oxidizer, no boom.

Not really, previous vehicles that fell over after landing made some big booms

Offline IanThePineapple

I wonder if Port Canaveral is deep enough to get the booster vertical and out without the legs or octaweb hitting the bottom.

I'm wondering if they'll bring OCISLY with a crane on it a bit off shore and pick it up there, then do the usual offload procedure at Port.

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
  • Greece
  • Liked: 524
  • Likes Given: 10431
How hard would it be for the weight of the stage to be calculated or at least bounded from the released image?
« Last Edit: 02/01/2018 01:53 pm by cartman »

Offline eeergo


IMO the most likely explanation for the stage surviving tip-down, apart from the sea state (which is probably the leading factor), is the presence of deployed legs.


This might be true except for the fact that every attempt (even the water ones) had legs.  The very first one that the 'crowd-sourced' debugging of the video here on this site clearly shows landing leg deployment.


Not every soft splashdown attempt had legs, but regardless, every one of them has two key differences with respect to this case: they were either not v1.2 (FT) stages or the sea state was rough, or both:


MISSION          VERSION       LEGS       SEA STATE     OTHER FAILURES

Cassiope           1.1                X             ?                   √
SpX-3               1.1                √            X                   -
OG2(1)             1.1                √            √                   -
SpX-4               1.1                X            √                   -
DSCOVR            1.1               √            X                   -
IridiumNEXT(4)  1.2               X            ?                    -
« Last Edit: 02/01/2018 02:23 pm by eeergo »
-DaviD-

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8840
  • Lower 48
  • Liked: 60431
  • Likes Given: 1305
 They should have kept the original Marmac 300. You didn't have to worry about lifting loads onto it's deck. It could go to them.
http://www.dredgemag.com/March-April-2003/Titan-Lifts-4000-ton-Wreck/
« Last Edit: 02/01/2018 02:06 pm by Nomadd »
Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who couldn't hear the music.

Offline matthewkantar

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2076
  • Liked: 2506
  • Likes Given: 2211
Bit of a pickle SpaceX has gotten into. Not sure if the stage would stand on its legs if it were to be helped up. They have a giant aluminum balloon basically, with kerosene fumes, explosives, TEA-TEB, and compressed gases aboard being towed toward civilization. Would they risk bringing it into Port Canaveral? What permissions would they need?

Though it will be interesting to see what happens, I don't see any upside to continued salvage operations.

Offline Firehawk153

  • Member
  • Posts: 82
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 3
It’s 300 odd miles out at sea and the only thing keeping it intact is the internal pressure left in the tanks, like an unopened Soft drink can. I don’t think it stands a chance, once that pressure leaks out the thin walls will be crushed, even without trying to tow that thing with the landing gear drag anchors. Shame, as it is the first rocket we know off that has survived an ocean landing... :-\



I've seen a picture (I believe on this forum) of either a Titan or Titan II first stage that more or less landed undamaged intact in the ocean.  It was pulled alongside a recovery ship.  Some of our resident members with a better recall may know the photograph I'm referring to.
« Last Edit: 02/01/2018 02:38 pm by Firehawk153 »

Offline Skylab

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 477
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 55
This one may have been it.

« Last Edit: 02/01/2018 02:54 pm by Skylab »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
It’s 300 odd miles out at sea and the only thing keeping it intact is the internal pressure left in the tanks, like an unopened Soft drink can. I don’t think it stands a chance, once that pressure leaks out the thin walls will be crushed, even without trying to tow that thing with the landing gear drag anchors. Shame, as it is the first rocket we know off that has survived an ocean landing... :-\



I've seen a picture (I believe on this forum) of either a Titan or Titan II first stage that more or less landed undamaged intact in the ocean.  It was pulled alongside a recovery ship.  Some of our resident members with a better recall may know the photograph I'm referring to.

One half of the stage.  Just the ox tank and no engines

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
All joking aside (and it really is kind of funny), they'd probably be best off sinking it in deep water.  It won't tow well, (because it's not a solid-fuel booster that was a lot stronger), they don't have the right kind of equipment and personnel out there, and the Port probably won't want them bringing it back in in that condition.

Right about now Elon's probably hoping it will sink on its own and save them the trouble. Problem was, they couldn't just leave it floating there.
Because of ITAR?
Also it's a hazard to navigation. Which it would not be if sunk in deep water.

The issue bringing it back is that there is some marginal situation in which it sinks (or partly sinks so it's sticking out) in a very bad spot, some narrow part of the port entrance for example, and gums up the port...
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Roy_H

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1209
    • Political Solutions
  • Liked: 450
  • Likes Given: 3163
Ok, my theory:  This came to a stop with engines firing in a vertical position with the legs just touching the wave tops. At cut-off the water below would be boiling and full of air bubbles from the rocket exhaust. This would have created a soft cushion for the rocket to fall into and probably went straight down most if not all of its length. It then bobbed back to the surface, falling over as it did so causing very little bending stress. I maintain that the primary reason for no breakup was the combination of vertical position, zero velocity at cut-off and "soft" water.
"If we don't achieve re-usability, I will consider SpaceX to be a failure." - Elon Musk
Spacestation proposal: https://politicalsolutions.ca/forum/index.php?topic=3.0

Offline starhawk92

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 245
  • Burlington, NC, USA, North America, Earth (for now)
  • Liked: 240
  • Likes Given: 227
The engines are full of salt water -- is this worth recovering for some non-engine related engineering lessons, or more for the boats to learn to deal with a rocket which fell off the barge?  Or is there another reason this is valuable to get to land and review?

Offline mme

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1510
  • Santa Barbara, CA, USA, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way Galaxy, Virgo Supercluster
  • Liked: 2034
  • Likes Given: 5381
The engines are full of salt water -- is this worth recovering for some non-engine related engineering lessons, or more for the boats to learn to deal with a rocket which fell off the barge?  Or is there another reason this is valuable to get to land and review?
There may be data/video stored that was not transmitted.  I don't know if they need to get it to land to retrieve.
Space is not Highlander.  There can, and will, be more than one.

Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4846
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 3429
  • Likes Given: 741
The engines are full of salt water -- is this worth recovering for some non-engine related engineering lessons, or more for the boats to learn to deal with a rocket which fell off the barge?  Or is there another reason this is valuable to get to land and review?

In theory they could do something like test fire one of the engines to see if it survives after being dunked in seawater, but why? They're never going to try to refly submerged engines, because they'll have so many recovered non-submerged engines.

IMO, probably the main reason they decided to tow was that they couldn't just leave the booster floating there, for navigation hazard reasons as Lar mentioned, or on the off chance it got snagged by a Russian "fishing vessel."
« Last Edit: 02/01/2018 05:32 pm by Kabloona »

Offline input~2

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6810
  • Liked: 1540
  • Likes Given: 567
2018-013A    43178    PAYLOAD    SES-16/GOVSAT-1   
2018-013B    43179    ROCKET BODY    FALCON 9 R/B   

I guess no public TLEs are to be expected for this NATO linked military satellite

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8755
  • Liked: 4673
  • Likes Given: 768
2018-013A    43178    PAYLOAD    SES-16/GOVSAT-1   
2018-013B    43179    ROCKET BODY    FALCON 9 R/B   

I guess no public TLEs are to be expected for this NATO linked military satellite
correct

Offline John Alan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 958
  • Central IL - USA - Earth
    • Home of the ThreadRipper Cadillac
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 2735
Let us not forget, THEY have seen what happened at touch down and we have not...  ;)

They may be amazed as heck it did not pop, and want very badly to look at that airframe to understand it better...
The other comments of salvaging the onboard data could also be a high priority with them...

I for one can't believe the port will let them just drag it in... Or it will stay in one piece very long...  ???


Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1