Author Topic: Poll: What will the eventual fate of the CRS-3 first stage be? (Read 44484 times)

Lar · « **on:** 04/21/2014 04:44 pm »

Standalone poll thread... Poll closes in 48 hours or when news announced if sooner.

Please keep discussion serious, quips will be removed... the quips caused deletion of this poll before.

We had 200+ votes on the previous poll and the trends were interesting.

RDMM2081 · « **Reply #1 on:** 04/21/2014 04:57 pm »

I've been drooling with anticipation of any word from SpaceX about the fate of the stage, and I've come to a personal conclusion that they will wait until at least Tuesday to release any information about it. If for no other reason than to bask in the positive press of a successful launch, rendezvous and berthing before adding more positive press about recovering the stage (Can you guess how I voted?

)

Lurker Steve · « **Reply #2 on:** 04/21/2014 05:36 pm »

I believe Mr. Musk may have to contact Jeff Bezos if he wants that stage recovered. Perhaps they can use the same vessel that recovered the F1 engines from Apollo.

Elvis in Space · « **Reply #3 on:** 04/21/2014 05:44 pm »

There's no need to go to all the trouble and expense of a deep water search and recovery when they know it worked and they are going to fly more. Whatever might remain floating around, and I doubt that is much, might be picked up but we're not going to see it before Elon does.

Jarnis · « **Reply #4 on:** 04/21/2014 06:19 pm »

The main reason they even have to go there is because it is possible that something is floating and if so, it would be hazard to shipping if it was left there. As a bonus, they might get some hardware back for analysis.

The real deal is when one comes to landing on land...

Ronpur50 · « **Reply #5 on:** 04/21/2014 06:45 pm »

I don't think they will find it, or are even looking for it. Do they need to? It can't fly again and they got the data they needed from this test. Why waste resources looking for it?

meadows.st · « **Reply #6 on:** 04/21/2014 06:48 pm »

Given that the stage took roughly 8 seconds to "fall over" then I believe that the tipping mechanism was likely similar (at least in terms of tip speed) to my model see: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=34065.msg1186146#msg1186146
so I think that the stage likely stayed intact until it contacted the water. What I don't know is how severe the swell was in the area and what forces those waves would have on a thin pressurized tube with large "sails" (two of the legs). I have not yet done any calculations on what forces these waves might have on the stage once horizontal but from the original model, it was pretty clear that the stage would be floating much like a soda can (virtually on top of the water while only submerged about 60-80cm at the engines).

As I have proven, my intuition is not to be trusted (I think waves >15ft/5m would cause bending forces that would buckle and rupture the tanks but until I model it, I really don't know and I have shown that I do not have a great understanding of how light and buoyant the vessel really is) but I have voted for damaged but still floating and can/will be recovered for study.

Keeping my fingers crossed...!

PahTo · « **Reply #7 on:** 04/21/2014 07:24 pm »

I say it is a combination of "sank before any recovery assets arrived" and "sank but some or all will be salvaged" (my actual vote) because of the NBC report about the Russian ship closely tracking the launch (and I expect the landing of the first stage). Because of this, SpaceX is compelled to attempt a recovery (if they don't already have it). If SpaceX doesn't attempt a recovery/salvage, someone will...

uhuznaa · « **Reply #8 on:** 04/21/2014 07:44 pm »

Well, I think someone will try to recover the stage and SpaceX will think so too, so they will try to recover it. Having all your trade secrets laying on the floor of the ocean somewhere is something that will nag on your mind too much to be comfortable.

It's hard to predict the fate of the stage with waves and whatnot, but I'm fairly sure this depends on the tanks remaining pressurized or not. Unpressurized the walls will buckle and then rupture and the stage will sink sooner or later. Maybe the shorter tank will hold out longer and with the stage being more vertical the bending forces will be lower... But once both tanks are damaged, this thing will go down like a stone.

Elmar Moelzer · « **Reply #9 on:** 04/21/2014 07:49 pm »

Seeing how hard it is to find an airplane, I have my doubts that finding and salvaging the stage without a major operation would be that easy, if it has indeed sunk (as I believe). I believe the Russian ship was too far away to get an exact landing position. Recovery from 2500 meters deep ocean is not that easy either. All that would probably attract a lot of attention.

ugordan · « **Reply #10 on:** 04/21/2014 08:00 pm »

Quote from: Elmar Moelzer on 04/21/2014 07:49 pm

Seeing how hard it is to find an airplane, I have my doubts that finding and salvaging the stage without a major operation would be that easy, if it has indeed sunk (as I believe).

The difference here being that SpaceX probably has GPS coordinates of the touchdown point if that sort of thing was relayed over telemetry (heck, even from range safety tracking radar before it went below horizon). Assuming it didn't drift on the surface for too long before sinking, that would significantly constrain the search area vs. a lost plane.

Not that I think they're actually going to attempt recovery from an ocean bottom. It would probably be easier to just wait for another stage to land in more favorable conditions. The next launch, for example.

Elmar Moelzer · « **Reply #11 on:** 04/21/2014 08:03 pm »

Quote from: ugordan on 04/21/2014 08:00 pm

The difference here being that SpaceX probably has GPS coordinates of the touchdown point if that sort of thing was relayed over telemetry (heck, even from range safety tracking radar before it went below horizon). Assuming it didn't drift on the surface for too long before sinking, that would significantly constrain the search area vs. a lost plane.

Not that I think they're actually going to attempt recovery from an ocean bottom. It would probably be easier to just wait for another stage to land in more favorable conditions. The next launch, for example.

Yes SpaceX does. I was referring to secret salvaging attempts by competitors.

ugordan · « **Reply #12 on:** 04/21/2014 08:07 pm »

Quote from: Elmar Moelzer on 04/21/2014 08:03 pm

I was referring to secret salvaging attempts by competitors.

Oh. That'll teach me to not pay more attention to the context of a post...

Lurker Steve · « **Reply #13 on:** 04/21/2014 08:59 pm »

Quote from: sghill on 04/21/2014 07:17 pm

That on-board autonomous landing software would be a rich prize to any foreign space-faring government with the undersea capabilities to go retrieve it. The Cassiope mission's booster avionics package has probably already been recovered...

It costs more to recover something from the bottom of the ocean than it does to re-develop the software package, especially a piece of software that is still in "alpha" or "beta" state, and not written specifically for your target package. It's not like they launched commented source code onboard the booster.

Space Ghost 1962 · « **Reply #14 on:** 04/21/2014 09:26 pm »

Depends on many things.

1. How was the stage passivated on landing (before it fell over). In particular valves affecting buoyancy and potential for shrapnel from a not despun turbine abruptly being dumped in water.
2. Shorts in the electrical creating high current drains rupturing tanks.
3. Rupture due to topple/wave action.

Absent those cases, expect that slow leaks water-log the stage, and the legs act as sails turning it into the wind, thus the bow (top) faces the waves. Hydrostatically stable. It'll sink slowly, and when buffeted by the waves, the lever arm of the engines will bob it's top when heavy swells thrash, possibly partially erecting the stage...

If there was any open valves or impact damage shearing, it's already on the ocean floor by now. But with something of that size, a radar reflection from a search/rescue aircraft system (or better) ought to tell if its there or not prior to any salvage operations.

Lar · « **Reply #15 on:** 04/21/2014 11:20 pm »

What value some putative third party might or might not derive from salvaging this stage is off topic.

So is reverse compiling and whether object code includes comments or not.

Some bathwater may have been thrown out with baby...

NovaSilisko · « **Reply #16 on:** 04/22/2014 12:38 am »

From QuantumG's link put up in the party thread (it deserves better than that!)... http://www.spaceflightinsider.com/space-flight-missions/commercial-space-space-flight-missions/spacex/crs-3/spacex-president-shotwell-talks-recovery-efforts-recent-ribbon-cutting-ceremony/

Quote

Johnson: Have you found it yet?

Shotwell: “Yes, we’ve found it.”

Johnson: Can you tell us what you found?

Shotwell: Not at this time, I haven’t seen all the photos. We’ve seen parts (laughs)!”

Johnson: Is there going to be video or photos released?

Shotwell: “I think we have some video. We didn’t have any real-time telemetry and video, so I haven’t seen it yet, I haven’t been back in the office.”

Lar · « **Reply #17 on:** 04/22/2014 01:04 pm »

Kept the discussion locked for a while to cut down on the off topic stuff...

So those who voted sank before assets arrived (the largest vote this time, different than the first version of the poll, which in itself was surprising to me) may apparently have been incorrect.

I'm not closing the voting yet but with the announcements, it sounds like more info will be revealed soon.

pagheca · « **Reply #18 on:** 04/22/2014 01:23 pm »

Wouldn't be nice to open a separate thread to discuss the actual recovery operations, and for questions concerning the reentry of the first stage for this mission only?

Mongo62 · « **Reply #19 on:** 04/22/2014 01:27 pm »

It does seem odd that posts concerning this historic event are scattered across half a dozen threads.