SpaceX Falcon 9 v1.1 - Jason 3 - SLC-4E Vandenberg - Jan 17, 2016 - DISCUSSION

[gadgetmind]

This one is missing.

Wow, the lengths some people will go to just to win the bingo game!

[NovaSilisko]

This one is missing.

Wow, the lengths some people will go to just to win the bingo game!

I'm not complaining, he moved it to the square I had picked. 

[xcel102]

Has anybody bothered to bring up the thematic similarity to the Stark comment "How did you deal with the icing problem?" from the Ironman movie?

And that's about as far into the fannish stuff I'll go ...

How the conversation might go in real life:
Elon: "How'd you solve the icing problem?"
Jeff: (Describes solution.)
Jeff: "Ha, sucker! Didn't think I could solve it, did you?"
Elon: "Perfect, we have a patent on that method. Now let's work out a licensing deal."

[JamesH]

When its all done I'm wordering if even Elon may have gotten it wrong with the welded shoes method he told us of at the AMA in early 2015.  That's a long time ago and the state of the art may have evolved.

Someone on the arocket mailing list says he spoke to a SpaceX engineer and welded shoes is still the current mechanism for hold down once landed on the barge.

[LouScheffer]

And to be clear, I don't think any of this is SpaceX's fault, its simply a consequence of attempting a novel course of action.

Actually, it is SpaceX's fault, and I'm happy about it.

The alternative is to analyze, test, and hold design reviews until you are certain you have found all the problems it is humanly possible to suspect beforehand.  You'll still find one or two more, but not many, since an army of smart folks have thought long and hard about everything that could possibly go wrong.  This is pretty traditional in aerospace, and is a good part of the reasons projects take many years.

Here SpaceX is trying an experimentalist approach, finding problems by trying it, not by analyzing it.  You fix everything you know of, try, then fix what failed (or nearly failed) that time.  It's more costly in terms of materials, and there are more failures total, but it gets done faster.  This approach is responsible for the bogglingly fast schedules achieved during war time.  (All of WW-II lasted less than the interval between design start and first flight for many modern systems)

[kevinof]

I agree. They could spend months if not years analyzing this to death  and never really learn anything. They are learning a lot from success and failure and making progress so much faster than the "traditional" way.

Fun part is that we get to go along for the ride.

[fatdeeman]

How about turning the deck into a giant version of one of these?



The legs could sink down wherever they land and then be prevented from moving even if they haven't locked.

Might be a bit disastrous if the rocket moves sideways across the deck though!

[Lar]

Guys. This thread is  NOT for proposing new Rube Goldberg ideas.

Comga's post was trying to collect ideas that had been presented before... NOT generate new ones. So ixnay on the further wacky ideas ok? Thanks

[symbios]

Talking about bad articles in regards to the Jason 3 mission, This uninformed peace of... well read it and weep:

NASA Might Drop SpaceX for Blue Origin This Year by Clapway

[ugordan]

Talking about bad articles in regards to the Jason 3 mission, This uninformed peace of... well read it and weep:

NASA Might Drop SpaceX for Blue Origin This Year by Clapway

A waste of good electrons on the interwebz.

[fatdeeman]

Talking about bad articles in regards to the Jason 3 mission, This uninformed peace of... well read it and weep:

NASA Might Drop SpaceX for Blue Origin This Year by Clapway

A waste of good electrons on the interwebz.

Even if you put aside the whole comparing apples to oranges thing it's just so clumsily written. In the same sentence they say blue origin is "slightly smaller" before saying the falcon 9 is "much larger"

There's a tabloid newspaper here in the UK called the daily star where the author would fit right in.

[fatdeeman]

How about turning the deck into a giant version of one of these?

The legs could sink down wherever they land and then be prevented from moving even if they haven't locked.

Might be a bit disastrous if the rocket moves sideways across the deck though!

Perhaps turn that idea on its head and have the pins on the feet and the deck having thousands of depressions to receive them or a grid over the deck. The pins could even be extended 1 sec after touchdown to allow for some initial slippage or leg extension movement then locking although obviously a little more complex mechanism.

I'm sure something like that could be made to work but in reality I'm sure it's easier to just make sure the legs lock correctly!

[StuffOfInterest]

Talking about bad articles in regards to the Jason 3 mission, This uninformed peace of... well read it and weep:

NASA Might Drop SpaceX for Blue Origin This Year by Clapway

A waste of good electrons on the interwebz.

The comments on that "article" say all that needs to be said.

[AncientU]

I for one, enjoy watching the guilt/cost-free kabooms. My kids think they are pretty neat too.  No one else can successfully launch their payload, and still blow up their rocket!

Who cares what the uninformed masses & media thinks.  Everyone who knows what SpaceX is doing realizes how difficult and trail-blazing their work is.

Wrong. ULA has been doing this for years.

[BruceM]

Another problem could arise. I am not expecting it but you never know. I think that Musk is trying to lower expectations.

This is the ultimate issue. It seems that there are many people who assume that because SpaceX has solved the known problems, that all will be well.

But when a novel undertaking occurs, there are an unknown number of unknown problems. Who before the last landing, knew the latch mechanism problem existed?

So yes, I assume SpaceX will get reusability working, but it will not be smooth from here on. Unknown problems will continue to occur, and progress will be made, but there will be ups and downs.

I think the latch mechanism problem was interesting. Until then, SpaceX had shown they could land a stage (admittedly on land), but they were brought down by a different environment (in terms of the launch weather).

There could be more of this, perhaps the next stage will land, and then be relaunched, and then 'because of something different', another failure could occur.

And to be clear, I don't think any of this is SpaceX's fault, its simply a consequence of attempting a novel course of action.

Fully agree.

And yet the landing could not have been more in the center of the "X" (see ugordan's great photos a few entries above).  These guys are smart and it is only a question of time before they'll overcome the knowns & any remaining unknowns.

Fun to speculate on what the business of space flight will be like in another 2-3 years!

[hopalong]

Talking about bad articles in regards to the Jason 3 mission, This uninformed peace of... well read it and weep:

NASA Might Drop SpaceX for Blue Origin This Year by Clapway

A waste of good electrons on the interwebz.

The comments on that "article" say all that needs to be said.

Zero research, clueless, I was about give 'Clapway' both barrels, reload and both again just be make sure, but you need a Facebook userid to do so, I am not that sad

[CraigLieb]

...
OK while we're at it: Since we already know they can hit the bulls eye, let the rocket land in a silo that's just slightly wider than the rocket and padded on the inside, it won't tip over that's for sure.

already discussed in 2013...

Crazy idea number 37:
...What if there was a specially prepared pit with appropriate fire resistant, padded material (think deep ball pit for the kids play area at pizza joint)?
...

{edit: removing most of the idea, leaving the reference}

[rsdavis9]

I may start a poll, and am soliciting help on making a complete list.  It would be titled "I was wrong" and will read

"I posted that SpaceX needs:

1   A bigger barge *
.... snip....
25 Roombas wielding MIG welders # *

* And I was wrong"

# which a really clever person like me can see but *

What is missing from this list?  I am sure there were more such suggestions.

edit: Already added #19, 21-25

* Metaklett (steel velcro for the feet to stick to)
* The ability to hover
* Swarms of drones measuring and transmitting wind velocities
* The ability to change landing targets based on an uplink
* The ability to change targets based on super smart all aware software

instead of roombas with welding shoes. Use roombas with eletromagnets that are turned on when over the legs.

Edit/Lar: What part of no NEW ideas were we having trouble with? Ixnay, Ixnay, I say.  Don't make me swing the axe of doom on these posts. PM Conga if you really think his list is missing an idea already mentioned.

[JamesG123]

Wrong. ULA has been doing this for years.

O' Really?

[cscott]

Wrong. ULA has been doing this for years.

O' Really?

ULA has difficulties broadcasting live video of their expended stage exploding during re-entry.