Author Topic: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3  (Read 603190 times)

Offline Jet Black

found something

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2011/12/14/2011-32007/seagoing-barges

"In 1993, Congress exempted from inspection seagoing barges that are unmanned and not carrying hazardous material as cargo, or carrying a flammable or combustible liquid, including oil, in bulk."

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2014-title46/html/USCODE-2014-title46-subtitleII-partB-chap33-sec3302.htm

"(m) A seagoing barge is not subject to inspection under section 3301(6) of this title if the vessel is unmanned and does not carry—
(1) a hazardous material as cargo; or
(2) a flammable or combustible liquid, including oil, in bulk."

not a lawyer so not sure if this actually covers what it sounds like
In that case, this barge is probably not exempted from inspection. The ASDS carries four substantial containers worth of combustible liquids.

depends on whether you class that as 'in bulk' though. I guess those containers are for fuel to be used, rather than stuff to be transported about the place.
For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled. -- Richard Feynman

Offline JamesH65

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 676
  • Liked: 406
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #241 on: 03/24/2016 01:44 PM »
found something

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2011/12/14/2011-32007/seagoing-barges

"In 1993, Congress exempted from inspection seagoing barges that are unmanned and not carrying hazardous material as cargo, or carrying a flammable or combustible liquid, including oil, in bulk."

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2014-title46/html/USCODE-2014-title46-subtitleII-partB-chap33-sec3302.htm

"(m) A seagoing barge is not subject to inspection under section 3301(6) of this title if the vessel is unmanned and does not carry—
(1) a hazardous material as cargo; or
(2) a flammable or combustible liquid, including oil, in bulk."

not a lawyer so not sure if this actually covers what it sounds like
In that case, this barge is probably not exempted from inspection. The ASDS carries four substantial containers worth of combustible liquids.

But not as cargo, and not really bulk when compared to the rest of the barge. But that could be a cause for inspection.

Online CraigLieb

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 790
  • Dallas Fort Worth
  • Liked: 696
  • Likes Given: 799
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #242 on: 03/24/2016 01:55 PM »
OK you ASDS sleuths..
Ready to make a prediction who is going to win this round, the Anti-ASDS missile targeting system, or the Anti-rocket repellent, or will it be a draw?

Landing Poll just out..
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39862.0
Colonize Mars!

Online dorkmo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 665
  • Liked: 298
  • Likes Given: 792
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #243 on: 03/24/2016 03:04 PM »
not sure the difference between what they have listed as the CFR and the eCFR. one lists 250 barrels as bulk.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/46/90.05-25

§ 90.05-25 Seagoing barge.

(a) Each seagoing barge, as defined in 46 CFR 90.10-36, is subject to inspection and certification; except that a seagoing barge is exempt from those requirements if it is unmanned for the purposes of operating or navigating the barge, and carries neither a hazardous material as cargo nor a flammable or combustible liquid, including oil, in bulk quantities of 250 barrels or more.

http://blog.transportbusinesslaw.com/2013/09/13/maritime-seagoing-barges-the-u-s-coast-guard-is-exempting-specified-seagoing-barges-from-its-inspection/

“The second commenter requested more detailed discussion in support of our proposed definition of a seagoing barge carrying flammable or combustible liquid, including oil ‘in bulk.” We are amending 46 CFR 90.05-25(a) to define ‘in bulk’’ as a quantity equivalent to at least 250 barrels (10,500 gallons). Some regulatory definition of ‘in bulk’ is needed so that barge operators know whether or not they are subject to the 46 U.S.C. 3302(m) exemption. The statute does not provide that definition. However, as we pointed out in the NPRM, 78 FR at 2150, col. 3, Coast Guard policy set the bulk threshold at 250 barrels in 1996. That same policy has been in place without public concern for almost two decades and so the regulatory definition follows current Coast Guard policy.”


we should start an extralegal probono NSF barge law office

Offline IntoTheVoid

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 214
  • USA
  • Liked: 151
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #244 on: 03/24/2016 04:02 PM »

"(m) A seagoing barge is not subject to inspection under section 3301(6) of this title if the vessel is unmanned and does not carry—
(1) a hazardous material as cargo; or
(2) a flammable or combustible liquid, including oil, in bulk."

Not sure why everyone is so focused on (2), when (1) seems so much more relevant. I expect that a rocket (or parts there of) that was launched not 10 minutes prior would certainly be classified as hazardous material. (High pressure vessels, kerosene LOX, TEA/TEB)

Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4086
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 2256
  • Likes Given: 464
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #245 on: 03/24/2016 04:48 PM »

"(m) A seagoing barge is not subject to inspection under section 3301(6) of this title if the vessel is unmanned and does not carry—
(1) a hazardous material as cargo; or
(2) a flammable or combustible liquid, including oil, in bulk."

Not sure why everyone is so focused on (2), when (1) seems so much more relevant. I expect that a rocket (or parts there of) that was launched not 10 minutes prior would certainly be classified as hazardous material. (High pressure vessels, kerosene LOX, TEA/TEB)

The TEA/TEB is probably all burned off during the landing burn ignition just for that reason, the tank pressurant is vented after landing, and the remaining LOX boils off. Kerosene is not a hazardous material.

The only remaining hazardous material on the rocket is the FTS charges, in such relatively small quantity that it's debatable whether that clause applies or not.

Offline IntoTheVoid

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 214
  • USA
  • Liked: 151
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #246 on: 03/24/2016 05:06 PM »

"(m) A seagoing barge is not subject to inspection under section 3301(6) of this title if the vessel is unmanned and does not carry—
(1) a hazardous material as cargo; or
(2) a flammable or combustible liquid, including oil, in bulk."

Not sure why everyone is so focused on (2), when (1) seems so much more relevant. I expect that a rocket (or parts there of) that was launched not 10 minutes prior would certainly be classified as hazardous material. (High pressure vessels, kerosene LOX, TEA/TEB)

The TEA/TEB is probably all burned off during the landing burn ignition just for that reason, the tank pressurant is vented after landing, and the remaining LOX boils off. Kerosene is not a hazardous material.

The only remaining hazardous material on the rocket is the FTS charges, in such relatively small quantity that it's debatable whether that clause applies or not.
Try to tell TSA at the airport that it's not hazardous.  :)
But anyway, anything that happens "after landing" is too late. It's cargo at soon as it lands.
I wouldn't expect SpaceX to test the limits of what they could get away with regarding inspections. It might be considered a poor indicator of how they might treat other far more important inspections.

Offline OxCartMark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1008
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 779
  • Likes Given: 855
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #247 on: 03/24/2016 05:23 PM »
restricted airspace

selfie stick:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Will-Burt-9-5-56-Pneumatic-Mast-56-Tall-Telescoping-Mast-Broadcast-Mast-/281978116276?hash=item41a73498b4:g:i2kAAOSw0JpV6Pk7

Its common to have a camera on top of these things along with the microwave antenna but in our case I think it would be more um, interesting if we were to bolt an otherwise motionless drone to the top of it.

Edit:  The one shown is the simple American version that just goes up and down.  I think the Canadians make a version that is much longer and has articulated joints with grippers and various attachments on the end.  It used to be used to take selfies of the space shuttles.  If we were to put the Canadian version on our van it would probably reach a good portion of the way across the harbor.
« Last Edit: 03/24/2016 07:32 PM by OxCartMark »

Online Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9116
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 5791
  • Likes Given: 3886
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #248 on: 03/24/2016 06:56 PM »
Paperwork delays: In reality, with cost no obstacle, there are none.  They'll arrange for the inspector to come and take a final look once the work is complete and they're sweeping up ready to leave (he may even be checking daily progress already..).  He'll sign-off right then and away they go.  The paperwork gets lodged when the inspector gets around to it - maybe that day or maybe later.. it doesn't matter, just as long as he signs off (and, more importantly, that they fix anything he doesn't like) before they leave the dock.

I would be surprised if anyone can pay an official agency for faster service, and in fact that might be illegal

If done informally that's a bribe. But some agencies do have provisions for paying extra for faster service. It's an option that is then open to whomever wants to pay the fee, so it's not a bribe. For example read up on US passport processing. You can pay extra for rush processing.

I have no idea if that's the case here... but did want to point out that it's not unprecedented to have two tracks, the expensive/fast track and the normal/normal track.
"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 launchwatcher

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 315
  • Liked: 216
  • Likes Given: 245
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #249 on: 03/24/2016 08:30 PM »
If done informally that's a bribe. But some agencies do have provisions for paying extra for faster service. It's an option that is then open to whomever wants to pay the fee, so it's not a bribe. For example read up on US passport processing. You can pay extra for rush processing.

I have no idea if that's the case here... but did want to point out that it's not unprecedented to have two tracks, the expensive/fast track and the normal/normal track.
It's also the case that, sometimes, when one part of the government is your customer, they may have ways of encouraging other government agencies to help you out.   Years ago I heard a story about just how quickly you can get a passport if Something Is Broken on the other side of an ocean and your customer -- the US Navy -- needs your help to fix it...

Offline RayL2

  • Member
  • Posts: 3
  • Massachusettes
  • Liked: 36
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #250 on: 03/25/2016 03:01 PM »
I happened to look over the rail on Disney Dream

Online tleski

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 356
  • Washington, DC
  • Liked: 231
  • Likes Given: 309
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #251 on: 03/25/2016 03:17 PM »
Looks like a new photo was just posted in the CRS-8 party thread. No selfie stick needed.

I happened to look over the rail on Disney Dream

Edit: Removed the photo, since the original posting was moved just above. I will keep the post to celebrate my 50th post on this forum.
And congratulations to RayL2 for a very nice first post.
« Last Edit: 03/25/2016 03:59 PM by tleski »

Offline maximlevitsky

  • Member
  • Posts: 85
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #252 on: 03/25/2016 05:45 PM »
@RayL2 Thank you very much. Yet another picture that clarified more things.
This photo finally gave me view, directly  from the side on the engines

If you happen to be able to picture the barge again from this angle, it would be pefect to have a close up of the stern engines also directly from the side, pretty much form the same angle.

(I am doing scale model of the barge and it is going to be great, hope to finish it by CRS-8 launch)

Best regards,
       Maxim Levitsky
« Last Edit: 03/25/2016 05:47 PM by maximlevitsky »

Offline RayL2

  • Member
  • Posts: 3
  • Massachusettes
  • Liked: 36
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #253 on: 03/25/2016 06:56 PM »
Here are 2 other Pictures from slightly different angles. This is all I have. I hope this helps. I am a very novice follower of Spaxex and was excited to happen to see OCISLY. I am spending the winter in Jupiter and have seen a couple of the launches and the successful return (or at least a partial view)

Offline maximlevitsky

  • Member
  • Posts: 85
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #254 on: 03/25/2016 07:28 PM »
Thank you very very very much  :)

Offline RayL2

  • Member
  • Posts: 3
  • Massachusettes
  • Liked: 36
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #255 on: 03/25/2016 08:06 PM »
I have taken advantage of the great sharing on Spaceflight.com and am glad I can contribute

Offline maximlevitsky

  • Member
  • Posts: 85
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #256 on: 03/25/2016 08:12 PM »
This is current state of my model for reference  :)

https://github.com/maximlevitsky/ASDS

Its not yet ready to be built though. Now I am working on model for engines, and while I have exact blueprints for them, its is still hard due to many things missing in the blueprints + need to translate everything to paper.

Also engines in 1:100 scale are damn small  :) - this will soon be big challenge for me to make them out of paper.
« Last Edit: 03/25/2016 08:13 PM by maximlevitsky »

Offline OxCartMark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1008
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 779
  • Likes Given: 855
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #257 on: 03/25/2016 09:23 PM »
Can someone help me understand why in this series of images of OCISLY coming back into port on March 8th we see scattered bits of debris on deck but we don't see the large chunk (presumably interstage or top of 1st stage or octaweb) that is prominent in Marek's and other pictures in the days after being tied up in port?

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36326.msg1501071#msg1501071

edit: a rathole of thought that is straightened out by others below (it was on deck).
« Last Edit: 03/26/2016 02:51 AM by OxCartMark »

Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4086
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 2256
  • Likes Given: 464
Re: SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 3
« Reply #258 on: 03/25/2016 10:03 PM »
Can someone help me understand why in this series of images of OCISLY coming back into port on March 8th we see scattered bits of debris on deck but we don't see the large chunk (presumably interstage or top of 1st stage or octaweb) that is prominent in Marek's and other pictures in the days after being tied up in port?

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36326.msg1501071#msg1501071

I think this is it. Note that in both photos, it is in roughly the same rotational orientation on the ASDS. Once in port, they just dragged it forward, away from the crater.

« Last Edit: 03/25/2016 10:32 PM by Kabloona »

Offline CyndyC

In Beittil's photo what I'm seeing in answer to OxCartMark's question is below. I've never understood why people have been saying anything the shape or size of an octaweb could be under that white tarp near the 'X'. To me some kind of single large glass dome appears to be peaking out, as seen again in Kabloona's photo, and I've had zero theories of my own on what it could be.

"Joy to the world!" -- G.F. Handel

Tags: