Author Topic: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video  (Read 158811 times)

Offline MattyJ

  • Member
  • Posts: 7
  • Pittsburgh, PA
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #120 on: 07/23/2014 12:39 PM »
Incidentally, here is the Blue Origin patent with the sea going platform:
http://www.google.com/patents/US8678321

Patents are territorial in nature.  To infringe a method claim of a US patent (which all but one of the BO patent claims are), you need to perform each and every step of the claim in the US.  By positioning the landing structure in international waters, Sp-X has a pretty strong argument that they do not infringe the claims of the patent.

Offline fatjohn1408

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 316
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #121 on: 07/23/2014 12:44 PM »
There is the possibility that flight 14 will be to a floating "launch" pad and then flight 15 will touchdown on land. With respect to CRS-4 having a low probability of success, is it possible that it could be a repeat of Cassiope, where the rocket spins out of control due to lack of legs?


Bonus: Here is the article saved for posterity: https://web.archive.org/web/20140722210143/http://www.spacex.com/news/2014/07/22/spacex-soft-lands-falcon-9-rocket-first-stage

I find it odd they used the words "floating launch pad", when as far as we know, there's not intent to launch an Falcon from a floating platform, is there?
I would think they'd refer to it as a "floating landing pad".

They wouldn't dare to land, fuel, take off, land at cape, refurbish, fuel, fly mission? Would they?

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7140
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 662
  • Likes Given: 771
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #122 on: 07/23/2014 12:51 PM »
Wow! That icing on the lens didn't obstruct the vision in the way I thought. Given the video cuts off as the vehicle tilts over on the ocean surface, I'd say that's the point the structure failed for whatever reason. Off-axis loads of that kind are obviously more than it could take.

How about an old oil platform.  They are perfectly stable.

Where's Sea Launch's launch platform right now?
« Last Edit: 07/23/2014 12:56 PM by Ben the Space Brit »
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline mvpel

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1124
  • New Hampshire
  • Liked: 1295
  • Likes Given: 1686
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #123 on: 07/23/2014 02:06 PM »
I'm curious, is this the camera smashing through the inter-stage?  ???
I don't really know what this could be other than that.

Wow! That's one way to get the ice off the lens, I suppose.  :o
"Ugly programs are like ugly suspension bridges: they're much more liable to collapse than pretty ones, because the way humans (especially engineer-humans) perceive beauty is intimately related to our ability to process and understand complexity. A language that makes it hard to write elegant code makes it hard to write good code." - Eric S. Raymond

Offline Norm38

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1138
  • Liked: 513
  • Likes Given: 738
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #124 on: 07/23/2014 02:08 PM »
How did I miss this yesterday?  This news is 18 hours old!
Great to see first video of the retro burn, and audio too!  I wonder what the drive flame looks like from the side?  A parabolic bow wave?

As for the ice on the lens, wouldn't a heating element be simpler than the mechanics of an ejectable/flip-up cover?  Of course, heat doesn't help with soot, but that wasn't much of a problem on the last flight.

Exciting times ahead

Offline corrodedNut

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1542
  • Liked: 213
  • Likes Given: 130
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #125 on: 07/23/2014 02:10 PM »
"Going forward, we are taking steps to minimize the build up of ice and spots on the camera housing in order to gather improved video on future launches."

I would think a simple heater, like the typical automotive electric rear-window defroster, and a super-hydrophobic and oleophobic coating on the camera housing glass would take of most it. Especially if the glass is angled. No moving parts or expendable covers/films needed.

Offline Elmar Moelzer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3165
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 847
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #126 on: 07/23/2014 02:11 PM »
I don't think you need floating platform to demo "pin point accuracy", just a set of GPS coordinates should be enough to convince the authorities, at most you need a floating beacon, platform is overkill.

As for CRS-4 landing's "low probability of success", based on pure speculation, it could be they don't have the enhanced RCS on that flight.
I am almost certain that the "low probability of success" refers to the low probability that the stage will survive toppling over in the ocean after the soft landing. I am sure they are confident the soft landing and pin point landing itself will work now. I agree that you do not need a floating platform to demo pin point accuracy.

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2949
  • Liked: 2054
  • Likes Given: 664
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #127 on: 07/23/2014 02:18 PM »
How did I miss this yesterday?  This news is 18 hours old!
Great to see first video of the retro burn, and audio too!  I wonder what the drive flame looks like from the side?  A parabolic bow wave?

In theory, that's what the NASA observation flight got good pictures of.  One can always hope that those pictures will be released/leaked.

Offline mvpel

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1124
  • New Hampshire
  • Liked: 1295
  • Likes Given: 1686
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #128 on: 07/23/2014 02:30 PM »
The video doesn't seem to show any data link drop outs, or any bit flips, or even any visible macroblocks!  Is it possible that this was extracted from on-board storage?

No idea.. but it would indeed be nice to know if they followed any of the recommendations from the team here this time around eg. non-interlaced video, etc.

Can anyone confirm this from what has been released - or would you need the full transport stream?

It certainly wasn't extracted from on-board storage - they just had solid telemetry this time since the weather was better and the plane had an actual antenna on its radio, instead of a pizza pan wedged in the window.

The video camera is still interlaced NTSC, as it was before - you can tell easily by looking at the last digits in the clock. This isn't surprising, considering that the party thread was started on May 1 when the first launch attempt for this mission was approaching, and we didn't post the until June 22. I wouldn't have expected them to crack open the hull to swap out the camera system in the meantime. However, the footage from the F9R-Dev flights gives me hope for a future of super-sexy luscious video feeds.
"Ugly programs are like ugly suspension bridges: they're much more liable to collapse than pretty ones, because the way humans (especially engineer-humans) perceive beauty is intimately related to our ability to process and understand complexity. A language that makes it hard to write elegant code makes it hard to write good code." - Eric S. Raymond

Offline JasonAW3

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2438
  • Claremore, Ok.
  • Liked: 395
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #129 on: 07/23/2014 02:33 PM »
Wow! That icing on the lens didn't obstruct the vision in the way I thought. Given the video cuts off as the vehicle tilts over on the ocean surface, I'd say that's the point the structure failed for whatever reason. Off-axis loads of that kind are obviously more than it could take.

How about an old oil platform.  They are perfectly stable.

Where's Sea Launch's launch platform right now?

I'm kind of curious how they thought a red hot, or hotter, rocket motor was going to survive immersion in relatively cold sea water?  (Cold relative to the motor).

     If it didn't immediately explode or distort, I would be VERY suprised.  (Wonder if there were any volitiles left in the stage when they cut off the motor.  If so, they might have also had a BOOM on their hands).
My God!  It's full of universes!

Offline Llian Rhydderch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 925
  • Terran Anglosphere
  • Liked: 657
  • Likes Given: 6177
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #130 on: 07/23/2014 02:34 PM »
From the update on the SpaceX site:

"We will attempt our next water landing on flight 13 of Falcon 9, but with a low probability of success. Flights 14 and 15 will attempt to land on a solid surface with an improved probability of success."

The real story here is flights 14 & 15 on LAND!!  That's before the end of this year.

Does this mean they have gotten precise in hitting a designated landing location?

I wonder if F9R-Dev 2 is going to be needed if they keep collecting data with these flights?

From the same update...

At this point, we are highly confident of being able to land successfully on a floating launch pad or back at the launch site and refly the rocket with no required refurbishment


Or possibly some sort of barge. :o

Maybe rent the Blue Marlin or Black Marlin for a few days.  Put some sort of surface on it to protect it, and have it partially submerge (but keep the deck above water) and it shoudl sit pretty stable in the water I'd think. 

There may be barges that are cheaper, especially if they were planning to have it land close to shore. 

Would a barge pitch too much?  Do they have ways of stabilizing them like these heavy lift ships have.

I think the answer for reducing the pitch might be a semi-submersible platform.  See this other thread discussing the SpaceX floating launch platform:  http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35248.msg1232468#msg1232468
Re arguments from authority on NSF:  "no one is exempt from error, and errors of authority are usually the worst kind.  Taking your word for things without question is no different than a bracket design not being tested because the designer was an old hand."
"You would actually save yourself time and effort if you were to use evidence and logic to make your points instead of wrapping yourself in the royal mantle of authority.  The approach only works on sheep, not inquisitive, intelligent people."

Offline jaufgang

  • Member
  • Posts: 60
  • Liked: 73
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #131 on: 07/23/2014 02:39 PM »
I figure the cheapest, safest option would be an unpowered/towed barge. Just a big hunk of floating metal. A ship would tow the barge out, and then leave the vicinity of the landing area for the safety of the crew.

Due to the height, I'm not sure how practical it would be to move it or lift it using a crane from another ship once it lands, but it would at least prove that the Falcon 9 could land intact at a small target location.

There would also need to be some way to prevent the barge from moving too much (or have the first stage be able to compensate for the barge drifting) and stabilize it enough so it doesn't tip over.

Heck, if it comes to a full stop on top of a barge and balances there for a few seconds, and then the barge pitches the whole thing topples over, even that ought to be adequate to have proven the ability to do a pinpoint landing and get clearance to land on solid ground the next time.

Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4319
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 2552
  • Likes Given: 529
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #132 on: 07/23/2014 03:07 PM »
Wow! That icing on the lens didn't obstruct the vision in the way I thought. Given the video cuts off as the vehicle tilts over on the ocean surface, I'd say that's the point the structure failed for whatever reason. Off-axis loads of that kind are obviously more than it could take.

How about an old oil platform.  They are perfectly stable.

Where's Sea Launch's launch platform right now?

I'm kind of curious how they thought a red hot, or hotter, rocket motor was going to survive immersion in relatively cold sea water?  (Cold relative to the motor).

     If it didn't immediately explode or distort, I would be VERY suprised.  (Wonder if there were any volitiles left in the stage when they cut off the motor.  If so, they might have also had a BOOM on their hands).

They probably didn't ever expect the engines to survive the thermal shock...at least not the three used for the re-entry and landing burns.

But they had hoped the tanks would survive intact so that the stage could be recovered for inspection. Apparently they are now resigned to the fact that the tanks won't survive the belly flop, so the next step is the "solid surface" landing.

Offline Elmar Moelzer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3165
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 847
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #133 on: 07/23/2014 03:10 PM »
They probably didn't ever expect the engines to survive the thermal shock...at least not the three used for the re-entry and landing burns.
I can see the middle one being hot (and how hot may be up for debate, since it is regeneratively cooled), but the two others should IMHO have cooled off by then. But I am not a rocket scientist. So I might be off with my assumption there.

Offline rpapo

  • Cybernetic Mole
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1192
  • Michigan, USA
  • Liked: 627
  • Likes Given: 479
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #134 on: 07/23/2014 03:16 PM »
They probably didn't ever expect the engines to survive the thermal shock...at least not the three used for the re-entry and landing burns.
Only one.  Three are used for the retro/flyback burn, but only one gets used (several minutes later) for the touchdown burn.
An Apollo fanboy . . . fifty years ago.

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28468
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 8336
  • Likes Given: 5481
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #135 on: 07/23/2014 03:41 PM »
There was some talk about the center core of a FH not being able to return the launch site because it will be too far downrange at staging.  Makes me think they’re building a floating platform for landing the center core of the (then safing it and lowering it to horizontal and shipping it back) and they’ll use that for floating recovery of the F9 stage.
I read some where that the FH can deliver 7T to GT0 with all 3 boosters recoverable, I think they all stage at same time. At +7T the middle booster will have to do a down range recovery.

With FH delivering most of GTO  payloads we are going to see a lot of FH launches with the boosters being reused multiple times, especially as launches that require a booster/s to be expended will be far and few between.

Originally I expected recovered F9 boosters to be lost on next expendable launch but sounds there may not be any ELV launches for F9.
Even if the stages are all flying back to the same point, it is NOT optimal to stage them off all three at once.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Dudely

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 312
  • Canada
  • Liked: 109
  • Likes Given: 92
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #136 on: 07/23/2014 04:01 PM »
Even if the stages are all flying back to the same point, it is NOT optimal to stage them off all three at once.

27 merlin engines shutting down simultaneously. . . yeah that would rip the second stage to shreds.

Online rocketguy101

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 836
    • Strib's Rocket Page
  • Liked: 204
  • Likes Given: 681
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #137 on: 07/23/2014 04:20 PM »
How about an old oil platform.  They are perfectly stable.
Not many off the East coast :)
David

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3246
  • Boca Chica, Texas
  • Liked: 5383
  • Likes Given: 340
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #138 on: 07/23/2014 04:30 PM »
There was some talk about the center core of a FH not being able to return the launch site because it will be too far downrange at staging.  Makes me think they’re building a floating platform for landing the center core of the (then safing it and lowering it to horizontal and shipping it back) and they’ll use that for floating recovery of the F9 stage.
I read some where that the FH can deliver 7T to GT0 with all 3 boosters recoverable, I think they all stage at same time. At +7T the middle booster will have to do a down range recovery.

With FH delivering most of GTO  payloads we are going to see a lot of FH launches with the boosters being reused multiple times, especially as launches that require a booster/s to be expended will be far and few between.

Originally I expected recovered F9 boosters to be lost on next expendable launch but sounds there may not be any ELV launches for F9.
Even if the stages are all flying back to the same point, it is NOT optimal to stage them off all three at once.
With an FH, it's not likely they'll have to be anywhere near optimal. They're talking about using it for payloads an expendable F9 could have handled.

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3246
  • Boca Chica, Texas
  • Liked: 5383
  • Likes Given: 340
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #139 on: 07/23/2014 04:34 PM »
They probably didn't ever expect the engines to survive the thermal shock...at least not the three used for the re-entry and landing burns.
I can see the middle one being hot (and how hot may be up for debate, since it is regeneratively cooled), but the two others should IMHO have cooled off by then. But I am not a rocket scientist. So I might be off with my assumption there.
The only time they ever thought of reusing after splashdowns was when it was a pure parachute re-entry, and all engines would have been cool. That went away before the F9 even flew, when the F1s did so poorly after hitting the water.

Tags: