Author Topic: SpaceX outlines CRS-3 landing legs plan toward first stage recovery ambitions  (Read 28781 times)

Offline TripD

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 635
  • Waiting for longer boats
  • Liked: 512
  • Likes Given: 367
Quote
Any chance they will get video of the legs deploying?

The on board video cameras would give a great view of that!  One can only hope.

Online ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7549
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 1759
  • Likes Given: 395
The on board video cameras would give a great view of that!  One can only hope.

The launch occurs at 4:41 local time. Don't expect to see much.

Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4321
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 2554
  • Likes Given: 529
Yes, unfortunately. But maybe they will have infrared cameras on the recovery ship. Handheld HD infrared camcorders are surprisingly inexpensive.

On the other hand, the exhaust plume from the landing burn might overwhelm the IR sensors and make it difficult to see any part of the rocket.
« Last Edit: 03/09/2014 09:44 PM by Kabloona »

Offline GalacticIntruder

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 455
  • PPPPPPP
  • Huntsville, AL
  • Liked: 176
  • Likes Given: 61
Since it will be dark, it is an experimental Landing System, it does have innovative, secretive, ITAR stuff, and SpaceX usually is not timely about things, I doubt we will get much info and video from the first stage water landing/crashing anytime soon.
Watch out for those pesky corners, they have teeth.

Offline 411rocket

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 261
  • Retired RCEME w/ tours in Cyprus, Croatia, Bosnia
  • Vancouver Island
  • Liked: 79
  • Likes Given: 120
Since it will be dark, it is an experimental Landing System, it does have innovative, secretive, ITAR stuff, and SpaceX usually is not timely about things, I doubt we will get much info and video from the first stage water landing/crashing anytime soon.

Unless, it is part of the NASA post launch news conference. Which is about 2 hours after launch.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/news/spacex3_briefings_events.html
"POST-LAUNCH NEWS CONFERENCE
A post-launch news conference will be held approximately two hours after launch. NASA Television will provide live coverage, as well as streaming Internet coverage."

Offline sojourner

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 253
  • Liked: 30
  • Likes Given: 1
Wasn't sure where to put this, since it was getting off topic in the orbcom mission thread:

This is not specific to the OG2 mission.
Maximizing payload (at the expense of recovery) is not what SpaceX is going to do.
The oft stated analogy would be setting the range for a passenger jet at the limit of zero fuel ignoring the FAA or ICAO rules for reserve fuel. You can't charter a plane for such a flight.
Somewhere down the road, if SpaceX success at reuseability, expending the rocket to maximize payload will be "heroic" like Doolittle's Raiders.
Payload on a reuseable rocket will be less than for the same rocket in expendable mode and SpaceX is going for reuseability.

Not heroic, just more expensive.  Reusability and expendability both become options, and are priced accordingly.  There's no reason for SpaceX to turn down a profitable launch just because it requires them to build a new stage.

Wouldn't SpaceX come up with a "lifetime" for the first stage measured in number of reuses, then decide once it reaches that point to mark that particular stage as expendable and save it for a launch requiring an expendable?

This would seem to have some benefits.
1. A steady accumulation of expendable first stages.
2. Assured median lifetime of the reusables.
3. Better management of the production lines due to increased lead times

Basically, You would only be producing new units for reuse. Expendables become a benefit of the life expectancy of those stages.  The production line could just keep churnng out standardized units at a steady rate.

Offline guckyfan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6779
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1801
  • Likes Given: 1821

Wouldn't SpaceX come up with a "lifetime" for the first stage measured in number of reuses, then decide once it reaches that point to mark that particular stage as expendable and save it for a launch requiring an expendable?

This would seem to have some benefits.
1. A steady accumulation of expendable first stages.
2. Assured median lifetime of the reusables.
3. Better management of the production lines due to increased lead times

Basically, You would only be producing new units for reuse. Expendables become a benefit of the life expectancy of those stages.  The production line could just keep churnng out standardized units at a steady rate.

A likely approach. But it may result in no stage ever reaching its natural lifespan before it is assigned for a suicide mission.

Offline sojourner

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 253
  • Liked: 30
  • Likes Given: 1
I would think that would be a good thing, considering what would happen to the payload on a rocket that "reached it's natural lifespan".

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4272
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 2915
  • Likes Given: 3799

Wouldn't SpaceX come up with a "lifetime" for the first stage measured in number of reuses, then decide once it reaches that point to mark that particular stage as expendable and save it for a launch requiring an expendable?

This would seem to have some benefits.
1. A steady accumulation of expendable first stages.
2. Assured median lifetime of the reusables.
3. Better management of the production lines due to increased lead times

Basically, You would only be producing new units for reuse. Expendables become a benefit of the life expectancy of those stages.  The production line could just keep churnng out standardized units at a steady rate.

A likely approach. But it may result in no stage ever reaching its natural lifespan before it is assigned for a suicide mission.

Or they could disassemble it and recycle it.  Might be able to get a discount for new material from their aluminum supplier since they will be providing high quality recycling material.

Guess it would depend on how much they can get from an expendable launch at that point.
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Tags: