<snip>Naysayers... any last words?(other than ULA's 'wet blanket/lost performance' comment yesterday at #ulcats)
Quote from: AncientU on 05/02/2017 01:04 pmQuote from: MattMason on 05/02/2017 07:52 amWe've come a long way from reconstructing the landing footage of CRS-3, haven't we? Congratulations to SpaceX on their first DoD flight and for a spectacular depiction of how our robot overlords will soon invade us. I, for one, welcome more simulations.Nice reminder... CRS-3 was April 18, 2014. Three years to go from seemingly impossible to routine!First half (1y8m) got us to first land landing -- now (1y4m later) a core has been reflown, a handful are scheduled this year, and landing is routine -- though not boring. Final upgrade of F9 is being fab'd to incorporate lessons learned.Brilliant test program. Naysayers... any last words?(other than ULA's 'wet blanket/lost performance' comment yesterday at #ulcats)All good except for the Elon TimeTM factor, if you look back at the interview after CRS-3, the plan was successful landing in 2014 and refly in 2015, so it took them twice as long to accomplish what they set out to do.
Quote from: MattMason on 05/02/2017 07:52 amWe've come a long way from reconstructing the landing footage of CRS-3, haven't we? Congratulations to SpaceX on their first DoD flight and for a spectacular depiction of how our robot overlords will soon invade us. I, for one, welcome more simulations.Nice reminder... CRS-3 was April 18, 2014. Three years to go from seemingly impossible to routine!First half (1y8m) got us to first land landing -- now (1y4m later) a core has been reflown, a handful are scheduled this year, and landing is routine -- though not boring. Final upgrade of F9 is being fab'd to incorporate lessons learned.Brilliant test program. Naysayers... any last words?(other than ULA's 'wet blanket/lost performance' comment yesterday at #ulcats)
We've come a long way from reconstructing the landing footage of CRS-3, haven't we? Congratulations to SpaceX on their first DoD flight and for a spectacular depiction of how our robot overlords will soon invade us. I, for one, welcome more simulations.
...All good except for the Elon TimeTM factor, if you look back at the interview after CRS-3, the plan was successful landing in 2014 and refly in 2015, so it took them twice as long to accomplish what they set out to do.
All good except for the Elon TimeTM factor, if you look back at the interview after CRS-3, the plan was successful landing in 2014 and refly in 2015, so it took them twice as long to accomplish what they set out to do.
Quote from: AncientU on 05/02/2017 01:04 pm<snip>Naysayers... any last words?(other than ULA's 'wet blanket/lost performance' comment yesterday at #ulcats)Technical naysayers should be shut up by now yes. Economical naysayers? Remains to be seen. I'm crossing all my appendages for it to work out financially as well, but we don't know yet.
Quote from: edkyle99 on 05/01/2017 04:47 pmI have the longest boostback, at 45 seconds or longer, taking place during the CRS-9 flight, during which the first stage returned to LZ 1. For some reason, a shorter 33 second burn was used for CRS-10, which also returned to LZ 1. Both of these flights had a 141 second first stage MECO.Didn't CRS-10 have a much higher lofted trajectory than CRS-9? If so, less horizontal velocity and shorter distance to fly back. 2nd stage has to work a bit harder but as long as it has enough fuel, then that allows for a shorter burn for the boostback. May require a longer re-entry burn due to heating issues (falling at a steeper angle, from higher altitude) if the heating level is a concern for multiple re-use or minimal refurbishment/parts replacement.Took a quick look at Flight Club videos, MECO for CRS-9 seemed to be at about 58-58.5 km, CRS-10 at about 64 km. I'm sure much better detailed info is available, but that seems to confirm a higher lofted trajectory
I have the longest boostback, at 45 seconds or longer, taking place during the CRS-9 flight, during which the first stage returned to LZ 1. For some reason, a shorter 33 second burn was used for CRS-10, which also returned to LZ 1. Both of these flights had a 141 second first stage MECO.
Yup entirely correct. I'm optimistic it'll all be ticked off soon enough, but I'm still a scientist. It's not true until I've observed it!
Quote from: su27k on 05/02/2017 01:31 pmAll good except for the Elon TimeTM factor, if you look back at the interview after CRS-3, the plan was successful landing in 2014 and refly in 2015, so it took them twice as long to accomplish what they set out to do.I don't think his original timeline included the two RUD's. If you took the resulting delays out, how close would his estimate have been?
Quote from: Welsh Dragon on 05/02/2017 02:12 pmYup entirely correct. I'm optimistic it'll all be ticked off soon enough, but I'm still a scientist. It's not true until I've observed it!All timescales in the space industry as in many others in my view should be treated with the upmost scepticism when it comes to big projects.
Quote from: Welsh Dragon on 05/02/2017 02:12 pmYup entirely correct. I'm optimistic it'll all be ticked off soon enough, but I'm still a scientist. It's not true until I've observed it!As another scientist, it isn't 'true' when you observe it... quantum mechanics aside.You just have another data point that shows it has likely been true all along. I think we have sufficient data to avoid the knee jerk naysaying that assumes it is false (instead of unknown to us) until proven otherwise. There aren't many data supporting this version of reuse being uneconomical (spreadsheets used to support your opinion are not data).
Although Space-Track will never show orbits for the NROL 76 payload or its Falcon 9 second stage, it should list a "decay date" for the stage if and when it deorbits. As of today it does not show a decay date, but these updates have sometimes proven to lag reality by a day or days. Keeping an eye out. - Ed Kyle
LEO mission so the 2nd stage should have deorbited before making a single orbit - into the danger area in the Indian ocean posted a ways back?