Author Topic: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video  (Read 160499 times)

Offline sghill

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1401
  • United States
  • Liked: 1573
  • Likes Given: 2305
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #140 on: 07/23/2014 04:38 PM »
Forgive me if this got posted elsewhere, but could NSF members attempt a cleanup of this video too?

The dirt and ice pixels are pretty static.  Can those pixels be removed and replaced with known (or nearby) colors to negate the dirt and ice?
Bring the thunder!

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6161
  • California
  • Liked: 665
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #141 on: 07/23/2014 05:30 PM »
It would be a completely different process. And NO, the dirt and ice is not static, even if it would appear that way.

Offline MTom

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 378
  • EU / Hungary
  • Liked: 107
  • Likes Given: 435
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #142 on: 07/23/2014 05:41 PM »
sorry, wrong thread for discussing about the patent of Blue Origin...
« Last Edit: 07/23/2014 06:08 PM by MTom »

Offline Sohl

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 241
  • Liked: 77
  • Likes Given: 216
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #143 on: 07/23/2014 05:55 PM »
It would be a completely different process. And NO, the dirt and ice is not static, even if it would appear that way.

This is correct. Ice on the window in front of the lens will behave like a chaotic collection of little lenses and prisms sending beams of light in various directions in complex ways.  Light that should be 100% in pixel 1 could be spread over most of the other pixels, and vice-versa.

In theory, if you know exactly how the ice layer changes/spreads the light that is normally transmitted by a point source (the "point spread function") you can use that information in a de-convolution algorithm to recover the original, undistorted image.  This approach works well in astronomy (Hubble space telescope's early images were distorted by an incorrectly-made mirror, they were able to process out much of this effect until better optics could be installed in a repair mission) and in microscopy.  In the lab, even high amounts of distortion have been removed in experiments, but that was for a fixed type of distortion.  In the landing video case, the ice is built up over time, then partially melted/blown off as the landing progresses.  So it is very very difficult to determine an accurate point spread function for every frame of video and then process it out.

That's why my earlier post about crowd-sourcing a deconvolution had the rolling eyes ( ::)). ;)

Offline Quialiss

  • Member
  • Posts: 75
  • Liked: 82
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #144 on: 07/23/2014 06:03 PM »
Repairing the CRS-3 landing was restoring a painting that had been put through a shredder.  Repairing this video would be trying to restore a painting where the painter was constantly being interrupted by a toddler drawing all over their canvas as they were working.

Offline watermod

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 405
  • Liked: 109
  • Likes Given: 122
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #145 on: 07/23/2014 06:52 PM »
Regarding patents.   If one is not making money off of using an idea in a test it's  hard to classify it as a patent violation.  If a stage recovered from a floating platform was then used in a for profit launch the situation changes.   

If one looks at it from that POV and one only needs to do it to prove the concept of landing at a desired point to the FAA and spaceport authorities then violation of a patent would be rough to prove. 

Offline deadman719

  • Member
  • Posts: 95
  • Liked: 21
  • Likes Given: 231
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #146 on: 07/23/2014 07:06 PM »
If you listen closely, it sounds like you can hear the leg actuators moving around the 55 second mark of the video Chris posted at the start of the thread.   Kind of neat if you ask me.   :D

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10795
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 7717
  • Likes Given: 5556
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #147 on: 07/23/2014 08:27 PM »
We have been getting reports that this stage, er thread, is wandering all over, lacking guidance... Let it not be so and stay on topic.... or we may need to invoke the range safety mechanism. (stage, er thread, destruct) Thank you.
« Last Edit: 07/23/2014 09:08 PM by Lar »
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Online HMXHMX

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1517
  • Liked: 1355
  • Likes Given: 345
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #148 on: 07/23/2014 09:18 PM »
Incidentally, here is the Blue Origin patent with the sea going platform:
http://www.google.com/patents/US8678321

Granted March 25, 2014!

That's news.


This is such a silly patent (and I'm surprised someone hadn't patented it already years ago; maybe someone has and it's just lost in the archives). Is Blue Origin going to enforce it? Or is it just one of those safe patents to keep someone else from stopping you...

Regardless since SpaceX is in the R&D phase any efforts landing on a floating platform will be exempt.

The patent will likely be invalidated by prior art.  See for example The Rocket Company, page 52 (AIAA, published 2005).  I also proposed both launch and landing from a  floating platform in 1998, and while I didn't specify using a rocket, that is "obvious to one skilled in the art."

Thus I believe SpaceX could certainly attempt a platform recovery on a upcoming flight.
« Last Edit: 07/23/2014 09:20 PM by HMXHMX »

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2949
  • Liked: 2056
  • Likes Given: 664
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #149 on: 07/23/2014 09:21 PM »
The patent will likely be invalidated by prior art.  See for example The Rocket Company, page 52 (AIAA, published 2005).  I also proposed both launch and landing from a  floating platform in 1998, and while I didn't specify using a rocket, that is "obvious to one skilled in the art."

Thus I believe SpaceX could certainly attempt a platform recovery on a upcoming flight.

They *could*.  But if platform recovery isn't in their long-term roadmap, they may still try to avoid doing one so that Blue Origin doesn't feel compelled to sue them.  Patents can be expensive to invalidate.

Offline Mader Levap

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 963
  • Liked: 430
  • Likes Given: 495
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #150 on: 07/23/2014 09:51 PM »
I wonder why while this one has ice, previous one didn't?
Be successful.  Then tell the haters to (BLEEP) off. - deruch
...and if you have failure, tell it anyway.

Offline bilbo

  • Member
  • Posts: 94
  • Ground control to Major tom...
  • Liked: 27
  • Likes Given: 51
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #151 on: 07/23/2014 10:13 PM »
I wonder why while this one has ice, previous one didn't?
trajectory mostly, this stage had a much steeper trajectory then CRS-3 hence the Ice

Offline sublimemarsupial

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 386
  • Liked: 259
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #152 on: 07/23/2014 10:44 PM »
I wonder why while this one has ice, previous one didn't?
trajectory mostly, this stage had a much steeper trajectory then CRS-3 hence the Ice

Don't think it has anything to do with the trajectory, you can see the same ice formation during the video of the reentry burn for the CASSIOPE flight that SpaceX released. Seems like water vapor in the exhaust plume of the engine condenses and then freezes on the camera lens. It likely happened on the CRS-3 reentry burn as well, and it just melted or (more likely) got shaken off from vibration before the the start of the landing burn (and the released landing video).

Offline AJA

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 856
  • Per Aspera Ad Ares, Per Aspera Ad Astra
  • India
  • Liked: 135
  • Likes Given: 203
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #153 on: 07/23/2014 11:09 PM »
 1. So, no external video? <Groan>. What about the video from the NASA plane which filmed the hypersonic “re-entry”? Come to think of it, you don't even need a surface ship in order to get video. Even if everything goes horribly awry, a Falcon 9 isn't going to dive into the water and behave like a torpedo. Get a few quad-copters on a submarine, and operate them from underwater (are radio buoys – like in 'Crimson Tide' - a real thing?) Or simply float camera buoys from the submarine. :D

2. Did they do any boost-back on this flight? Anyone know the co-ordinates of the splashdown? With the high trajectory (which would also explain the icing – a shallower trajectory on the previous launch probably didn't take the first stage to such freezing altitudes?), I'd guess they didn't have to travel that far back (down-range atleast). AFAIK, they didn't boost back on the previous flight either. Wouldn't they want to demonstrate that they could fly the F9 S1, precisely, and using the same mass-vs-time profile as an S1 that had to carry prop reserve for boost-back? That suggests to me that that the next one will travel a significant distance cross-range (instead of boost-back), and that perhaps there's some uninhabited area (as opposed to the relatively densely populated Space Coast?) that SpaceX can touch down on. It's not immediately obvious where this would be. Again, this depends on how far down-range they are at the time of stage-sep.

3. Plus, I think they'd have to demonstrate more than pin-point landing accuracy. Definitely with the FH atleast. The side cores will presumably separate at the same time, or in quick succession (to avoid the complexities of asymmetry) – and they'd have to follow similar boost-back trajectories without a mid-air collision. So the requirement is for a pin-point trajectory. (EDIT: Couldn't all three S1 cores separate at the same time? They could all throttle down to ensure that there isn't a sudden deceleration of S2. I don't know the current shut-down sequence, but with each core having 9 engines, they could shut 3 down in each, three times over, without subjecting the S2 to any additional forces that it doesn't experience already in an F9 launch..?)

4. I don't understand why a floating platform would be uneconomical. In this current update, they've said that they are thinking of re-flying a returned stage without refurbishment. Maybe they can do gas-and-go, but I would've thought that they'd want to inspect the major bits before it flies again. If they're going to have to do that – they might as well land the stage down-range, dismantle it, and fly the bits back to the launch complex. Even if the design of the stage doesn't facilitate turning it into a knock-down kit each time, what's the problem with the time taken up by shipping? Their business model relies on a high launch cadence anyway. They shouldn't have to wait for a particular rocket to come back in order to launch the next payload... they'll have a fleet. (This offers the advantages of redundancies – in terms of parts and flexibility that this offers, as well as the expected performance margin in saving on prop).
« Last Edit: 07/23/2014 11:30 PM by AJA »

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6161
  • California
  • Liked: 665
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #154 on: 07/23/2014 11:11 PM »
So, no external video? <Groan>. What about the video from the NASA plane which filmed the hypersonic “re-entry”?

Chill down. Just because the footage has not been uploaded to YouTube or announced does not mean that it doesn't exist. SpaceX has a lot of footage that isn't released. Some of it (if it exists) may be shown in the future if/when they release a "mission summary video".

Offline AJA

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 856
  • Per Aspera Ad Ares, Per Aspera Ad Astra
  • India
  • Liked: 135
  • Likes Given: 203
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #155 on: 07/23/2014 11:19 PM »
Chill down.

That should qualify for a "You know you're a space geek when..." entry. I think the popular term's 'chill out'/'calm down'?

Anyway, FWIW, I don't think they'll put it up (if they have it in the first place). As far as SpaceX is concerned, the splashdown concluded their mission. So there's nothing beyond that which they'd need to include in the summary.

Online CameronD

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1441
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 469
  • Likes Given: 337
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #156 on: 07/24/2014 01:18 AM »
Anyway, FWIW, I don't think they'll put it up (if they have it in the first place). As far as SpaceX is concerned, the splashdown concluded their mission. So there's nothing beyond that which they'd need to include in the summary.

Agree totally.  There were conspiracies abounding at the time of the CRS-3 landing video around "how short it was" and "maybe SpaceX are hiding something".  Given that this landing video starts almost a minute earlier than the last one.. it seems some people are never satisfied.  :(

With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine - however, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are
going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead.

Offline mvpel

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1125
  • New Hampshire
  • Liked: 1295
  • Likes Given: 1686
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #157 on: 07/24/2014 03:14 AM »
The patent will likely be invalidated by prior art.  See for example The Rocket Company, page 52 (AIAA, published 2005).  I also proposed both launch and landing from a  floating platform in 1998, and while I didn't specify using a rocket, that is "obvious to one skilled in the art."

Thus I believe SpaceX could certainly attempt a platform recovery on a upcoming flight.

I found the Amazon link for The Rocket Company, and was able to reach page 52.

Quote
Conceivably the ship could be prepositioned down range so you could land the stage on it.
« Last Edit: 07/24/2014 03:16 AM by mvpel »
"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

Online QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8709
  • Australia
  • Liked: 3648
  • Likes Given: 854
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #158 on: 07/24/2014 03:27 AM »
The patent will likely be invalidated by prior art.  See for example The Rocket Company, page 52 (AIAA, published 2005).  I also proposed both launch and landing from a  floating platform in 1998, and while I didn't specify using a rocket, that is "obvious to one skilled in the art."

Thus I believe SpaceX could certainly attempt a platform recovery on a upcoming flight.

I found the Amazon link for The Rocket Company, and was able to reach page 52.

Quote
Conceivably the ship could be prepositioned down range so you could land the stage on it.

I'm really disappointed to see HMXHMX propagating the myth that patents cover ideas and the mere prior mention of the broad concept, or even a similar concept, can somehow invalidate a patent. By this logic 8,690,104 is invalid because Stardust is prior art.

Just leave the lawyerin' to the lawyers, eh? or Bezos and Musk can work out a deal over golf and canapes.
I hear those things are awfully loud. It glides as softly as a cloud. What's it called? Monowhale!

Online HMXHMX

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1517
  • Liked: 1355
  • Likes Given: 345
Re: Falcon 9 v1.1 ORBCOMM - First Stage Ocean Landing Video
« Reply #159 on: 07/24/2014 05:39 AM »
The patent will likely be invalidated by prior art.  See for example The Rocket Company, page 52 (AIAA, published 2005).  I also proposed both launch and landing from a  floating platform in 1998, and while I didn't specify using a rocket, that is "obvious to one skilled in the art."

Thus I believe SpaceX could certainly attempt a platform recovery on a upcoming flight.

I found the Amazon link for The Rocket Company, and was able to reach page 52.

Quote
Conceivably the ship could be prepositioned down range so you could land the stage on it.

I'm really disappointed to see HMXHMX propagating the myth that patents cover ideas and the mere prior mention of the broad concept, or even a similar concept, can somehow invalidate a patent. By this logic 8,690,104 is invalid because Stardust is prior art.

Just leave the lawyerin' to the lawyers, eh? or Bezos and Musk can work out a deal over golf and canapes.


I did leave the lawyering to the lawyers.  I asked my patent attorney for his opinion prior to posting.

Tags: