Quote from: king1999 on 01/31/2018 08:03 pmQuote from: joertexas on 01/31/2018 07:56 pmSomeone posted a picture of both Falcon 9 and FH on the pads. I had an old picture saved that I combined with the new one. These aren't my pictures - I just put them together.The double shuttle picture was obviously a photoshop job. Not much meaning to compare these two pictures.No, not a photoshop job... this was taken during the flow for STS-125 which required the LON vehicle to be on LC39-B simultaneously.
Quote from: joertexas on 01/31/2018 07:56 pmSomeone posted a picture of both Falcon 9 and FH on the pads. I had an old picture saved that I combined with the new one. These aren't my pictures - I just put them together.The double shuttle picture was obviously a photoshop job. Not much meaning to compare these two pictures.
Someone posted a picture of both Falcon 9 and FH on the pads. I had an old picture saved that I combined with the new one. These aren't my pictures - I just put them together.
Quote from: drnscr on 01/31/2018 08:07 pmQuote from: king1999 on 01/31/2018 08:03 pmQuote from: joertexas on 01/31/2018 07:56 pmSomeone posted a picture of both Falcon 9 and FH on the pads. I had an old picture saved that I combined with the new one. These aren't my pictures - I just put them together.The double shuttle picture was obviously a photoshop job. Not much meaning to compare these two pictures.No, not a photoshop job... this was taken during the flow for STS-125 which required the LON vehicle to be on LC39-B simultaneously.Here look for yourself better quality: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Space_shuttles_Atlantis_(STS-125)_and_Endeavour_(STS-400)_on_launch_pads.jpg
RIP in pieces B1032...
So what recovery vessel was getting AOS and why?
After columbia they always had another shuttle prepared in case anything went wrong, right? (Sorry for the OT)
Reminder, this is an updates thread. Questions and comments should go to the discussion thread http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36807Also please hold your congrats till after the second S2 burn is successful...
Quote from: Terra Incognita on 01/31/2018 08:37 pmSo what recovery vessel was getting AOS and why?If they was testing some landing profile they still need to clean up the rubish.
This was an odd one. Kept mentioning not recovering, but then recovery ships were deployed? Also, the nasaspaceflight article mentioned "As with December’s Iridium-NEXT launch, SpaceX will dispose of the older Block 3 booster by flying it in an expendable configuration without landing legs" but the radio callout included stage 1 legs deployed. I'm surprised there isn't a need for another sample of the effects on a 2nd use rocket.
Is re-use a gimmick? Just not worth the risk/reward at this stage of development?
So that's how a payload adapter is supposed to work.
Going by the cadence of the callouts from burn to legs to splashdown, I'm going with the 3 engine suicide burn. Have they ever landed one of those, yet? I remember SES-9 punching a nice hole in OCISLY when they tried it then.
[Tweet from Eric Berger]:QuoteSo that's how a payload adapter is supposed to work.