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

[georgegassaway]

Seems the (likely) loss of stage wasn't related to the stage tipping under the sea state, although it may have done regardless, we don't know. Seems one of the legs didn't lock correctly - exactly the same thing would have occurred if it had returned to launch site.

Wow, shades of the last landing of the DC-X program (this was failure to latch a leg, that was failure to even deploy a leg, but same net result).  See 1:14 into the video below.  Today's landing/tip over might look similar to that once video is released.

So, of FOUR actual landing attempts, they are 1 for 1 for land, and 0 for 3 at sea.  But every sea ASDS landing attempt has had a rocket hardware problem, the land attempt was problem-free (and using the new F9-FT).

- George Gassaway

[punder]

Find some of this discussion silly,  talking about bigger boats and building platforms at sea. Simple solution is bring it back for a landing on land.  What Spacex proved again today is that can return the stage to the exact location.  In the future it will be easier to get a license to return the stage to land.

Some missions will require recovery down range for both F9 and FH, so they have to get it right. Which they will.

[CJ]

If SpaceX has it right and a leg failed to lock, that has nothing to do with ASDS landing Vs. RTLS, because if that had happened on the RTLS, it would have been just as fatal to the stage.

And to confirm what's said up-thread, yes, they can't just do RTLS and avoid sea landings, because on some missions  there simply isn't enough prop margin to do RTLS. Even if they never get it right and lose most ASDS landings, the value of one recovered core a year IMHO (Guessing at the actual dollar values here) makes the ASDS fiscally worthwhile. The alternative is the certainty of losing the core on every mission that does not have RTLS margins.

[mvpel]

Wow, shades of the last landing of the DC-X program (this was failure to latch a leg, that was failure to even deploy a leg, but same net result).  See 1:14 into the video below.  Today's landing/tip over might look similar to that once video is released.

I remember that one. To this day any time anyone mentions "DC" I always think Delta Clipper, not Dream Chaser.

[alang]

"At least the pieces are bigger this time". Love it.

[AncientU]

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/688837706005131264

There is a picture of crashed 1st stage on JRTI, in that tweet

Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk  · 1 minute ago
Well, at least the pieces were bigger this time! Won't be last RUD, but am optimistic about upcoming ship landing.

Perfect summary and attitude.
This will succeed.

[Zach Swena]

RUD due to failed latch is extremely encouraging.  They strengthened the legs for the FT version, so the latch may or may not be a different model in the future.  They can always review that part.  Bigger pieces indeed, almost the whole stage is lying in basically one heap!

[Tuts36]

I'm actually encouraged by the fact that it was NOT caused by excessive rolling/pitching of the drone ship in heavy seas.

[punder]

RUD due to failed latch is extremely encouraging.  They strengthened the legs for the FT version, so the latch may or may not be a different model in the future.  They can always review that part.  Bigger pieces indeed, almost the whole stage is lying in basically one heap!

I think it's only a leg and some structure, maybe the octaweb.

[docmordrid]

Nope

[QuantumG]

Snagged one of the side ropes?

[punder]

DM, Could you elaborate on that cryptic "nope", and QuantumG, what rope? I'm a little slow.

[docmordrid]

DM, Could you elaborate on that cryptic "nope", and QuantumG, what rope? I'm a little slow.

Me? I said "nope (=no)" to only the octaweb surviving.  The rope rail is hanging off the octaweb at about 10 o'clock.

[Zach Swena]

DM, Could you elaborate on that cryptic "nope", and QuantumG, what rope? I'm a little slow.

He posted an enhanced version of the picture to elaborate.  It certianly looks like a large amount of the rocket body is still attached to the octaweb, even if everything is a little crushed.

[OxCartMark]

I think it's only a leg and some structure, maybe the octaweb.

Hard to say definitively but I'm leaning toward thinking you're right, what we seem to have is one leg and an octaweb.  Seeming evidence:

a) the two nubbins sticking up from the fuselage / leg correspond with nubbins seen on previous legs
b) the V shaped gap between the octaweb and the long feature correspond with that of a leg
c) the debris field at on the LH side appears to me to correspond more with tank chunks that any other possibility
d) we know from previous ASDS impacts and two (three?) water landings that the thin pressurized tanks go "kaboom" when they slap down to horizontal
e) that's where a leg would be if a leg survived with the octaweb

[punder]

Hmm, all I see is the octaweb and one leg attached on the right. You can tell it's not the tank because the triangular (attach points?) are visible along the length of the leg. Everything else is just a black pile. The rope looks more like plumbing to me.

[GregA]

It certianly looks like a large amount of the rocket body is still attached to the octaweb, even if everything is a little crushed.

I can't see any of the rocket body in that photo, just a single leg laying out to the right side.

I thought that leg was the body at first, but it's got the leg shape, and if it was the stage then the stage length would take it significantly off the side of the landing barge. Plus it's the right proportion to the octaweb.

Am I seeing that correctly? (seems to disagree with others).
(edit: well, agrees with punder and OxCartMark )

[Rocket Science]

In my opinion it is very impressive that they can provide the cause of the failure so quickly. And it is also interesting that this landing may have been a success without this glitch. I hope this issue is easy to solve.

They probably have the first video of the landing, which may have made the cause obvious.

I believe they do. I was watching the front right three flight controllers looking at "one screen" (post planned landing time) intently and one making a wobbling-hovering gesture with his hand...

[faramund]

I wonder if any of the engines can be test-fired, i.e. the ones that aren't on the bottom.

[meekGee]

Looks to me like the top half of the stage.