Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
2862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 307


  Reply # 1953658 8-Feb-2018 14:32
2 people support this post
Send private message

The 6-8 Tonnes of Merlin Engines in the bottom don't actually like getting wet, as much as they have been recently. The plan is to lower costs by re-use. Water damage somewhat inhibits that.

 

Trajectory to get from Florida to the equator or LEO is generally always over open ocean (same as RocketLab) for safety. So there's not really any land for it to even conserve gas and booster toward to use a chute.

 

http://www.spacex.com/news/2015/06/24/why-and-how-landing-rockets 

 

 

 

On the flipside, the out-takes of early tests is a clear indicator of how hard the balance of fuel weight vs fuel needed is. Most the early ones kept running out on landing.. :D


2862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 307


  Reply # 1953670 8-Feb-2018 14:44
One person supports this post
Send private message

Always a fan of the barge pics for size reference to these things..

 

 

 

 

Next question of course, when do they become quarantine items for leaving country :P never know when that Prometheus strand DNA may get back :P




5248 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1133

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1953674 8-Feb-2018 14:57
Send private message

Geektastic:

 

Can I ask a dumb question: why not attach a parachute to the bit that keeps crashing in the ocean instead of having to lift and and then use fuel to bring it back? You could take up less fuel, then use the fuel left to get it close enough to be recovered and use a parachute for a soft, non-explosive landing.

 



Estimate the size of such a parachute.......





____________________________________________________
I'm on a high fibre diet. 

 

High fibre diet


13594 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2453

Trusted

  Reply # 1953679 8-Feb-2018 15:03
Send private message

Linuxluver:

 

Geektastic:

 

Can I ask a dumb question: why not attach a parachute to the bit that keeps crashing in the ocean instead of having to lift and and then use fuel to bring it back? You could take up less fuel, then use the fuel left to get it close enough to be recovered and use a parachute for a soft, non-explosive landing.

 



Estimate the size of such a parachute.......

 

 

test


12030 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3910

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1953680 8-Feb-2018 15:06
Send private message

Linuxluver:

 

Geektastic:

 

Can I ask a dumb question: why not attach a parachute to the bit that keeps crashing in the ocean instead of having to lift and and then use fuel to bring it back? You could take up less fuel, then use the fuel left to get it close enough to be recovered and use a parachute for a soft, non-explosive landing.

 



Estimate the size of such a parachute.......

 

 

 

 

Use more than one. Split it into bits. etc






5216 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2123


  Reply # 1953682 8-Feb-2018 15:12
One person supports this post
Send private message

I think parachute deployment would be an issue.  You have a payload compartment from which to deploy the payload.  Then you need another system for deploying the parachute.  That all adds weight.





Mike

114 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 64


  Reply # 1953683 8-Feb-2018 15:12
Send private message

Geektastic:

 

Linuxluver:

 

Geektastic:

 

Can I ask a dumb question: why not attach a parachute to the bit that keeps crashing in the ocean instead of having to lift and and then use fuel to bring it back? You could take up less fuel, then use the fuel left to get it close enough to be recovered and use a parachute for a soft, non-explosive landing.

 



Estimate the size of such a parachute.......

 

 

 

 

Use more than one. Split it into bits. etc

 

 

 

 

https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/7718/why-would-spacex-not-use-parachutes-for-the-final-descent-of-the-first-stage


994 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 160

UberGroup

  Reply # 1953685 8-Feb-2018 15:13
Send private message

It's just not viable for their goals, Between chute costs, reliability and the whole stage taking a corrosive salt water bath it's not the preferred option.





Most problems are the result of previous solutions...

All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated 

Mad Scientist
19116 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2484

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1953696 8-Feb-2018 15:42
Send private message

Let me get this straight. Save on a few co2 here and there, and use the money to burn a continent's worth of fuel for fun?

Wow. IF I buy a V8, barbeque lots and use petrol house tools from now and never stop burning firewood, Elon Musk ain't got nothing on me.




Swype on iOS is detrimental to accurate typing. Apologies in advance.


12030 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3910

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1953704 8-Feb-2018 15:56
Send private message

May as well buy an empty island somewhere and use that to land on. Probably easier than a floating barge in the ocean!






14409 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1886


  Reply # 1953722 8-Feb-2018 16:13
Send private message

networkn:

 

The landing of those two rockets at the same time was something I'll never forget. Amazing. I didn't even know it was possible to land something so tall, back on it's small "side" let alone with however much weight and force to boot. Spectacular.

 

 

 

 

I saw some tests of those a while ago, and thought it was amazing. I  thought multiple parachutes would be a lot cheaper to do, as this isn't the first large rocket that has reusable parts like this. I wonder if they can get a space vehicle that re enters to do that? That potentailly could be a lot safer as the old space shuttles were unpowered and  used to glide, and only had once chance of landing in the right place. Although ironically the russian space shuttles were powered.


2862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 307


  Reply # 1953733 8-Feb-2018 16:41
Send private message

mattwnz:

 

networkn:

 

The landing of those two rockets at the same time was something I'll never forget. Amazing. I didn't even know it was possible to land something so tall, back on it's small "side" let alone with however much weight and force to boot. Spectacular.

 

 

 

 

I saw some tests of those a while ago, and thought it was amazing. I  thought multiple parachutes would be a lot cheaper to do, as this isn't the first large rocket that has reusable parts like this. I wonder if they can get a space vehicle that re enters to do that? That potentailly could be a lot safer as the old space shuttles were unpowered and  used to glide, and only had once chance of landing in the right place. Although ironically the russian space shuttles were powered.

 

 

That'd be 'Dragon 2'.

 

Goes up, can be thrown around by rockets onboard. Chute deceleration and potentially rocket touch. (idea scrapped however for now)

 

 SpaceX announced that "land landing will become the baseline for the early post-certification missions" while precision water landing under parachutes was proposed to NASA as "the baseline return and recovery approach for the first few flights of Crew Dragon."[25] Thus the parachute system was initially anticipated to be only a backup system; due to the cancellation of propulsive landing, however, the parachute system will be used for all landings.[24]


994 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 160

UberGroup

  Reply # 1953785 8-Feb-2018 18:24
One person supports this post
Send private message

Batman: Let me get this straight. Save on a few co2 here and there, and use the money to burn a continent's worth of fuel for fun?

Wow. IF I buy a V8, barbeque lots and use petrol house tools from now and never stop burning firewood, Elon Musk ain't got nothing on me.

 

 

 

https://www.quora.com/When-Elon-Musk-launches-a-rocket-into-space-is-he-releasing-more-carbon-which-is-what-he-is-trying-to-reduce-through-electric-cars

 

 





Most problems are the result of previous solutions...

All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated 

1520 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 777


  Reply # 1953791 8-Feb-2018 18:39
Send private message

A lot of fuel is used for the first few KM's, and as mentioned, it takes less energy to launch from the equator.

I always wondered why smaller space rocket launches don't happen by the way of airplane carriage launches, or even by balloon (shoot the rocket through the balloon)


95 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 55


  Reply # 1954040 9-Feb-2018 09:04
Send private message

Anyone interested in options for getting into space should take a look at Isaac Arthur’s YouTube channel. He has a whole playlist dedicated to the topic.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLIIOUpOge0LsGJI_vni4xvfBQTuryTwlU

On topic... I think what SpaceX has done with the Falcon series of rockets is fantastic. They have dropped the price of getting into space by an order of magnitude and this should be applauded.

I look forward to them building up a stock of block 5 cores and then focusing all their development efforts on the BFR.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.