Biologist, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA Space Biologist and Payload integrator, Editor of NASAWatch.com and Astrobiology.com, Lapsed climber, Explorer, Synaesthete, Former Challenger Center board member...

56 replies on “Watching A Falcon Land On The Ocean – Without a Trampoline”

  3. When Musk looked into buying an old ICBM back in the day, I wonder if he had any idea that one day the Russians would be so good for his business.

  4. While all the old-timers fret over how to protect their retirements, SpaceX will continue to forge a new path which works, thrives, and eliminates the weaker of the industry. Like the dinosaurs of yesteryear, the old-timers will decline, then become extinct.

    1. What Elon is trying, we have tried long time ago and realized it was wasted time.
      Maybe Elon should stop wasting time with this and concentrate on improving his existing technology so he can launch on time and get the Dragon capsule man rated.

      2. it’s not wasting time. he’s succeeding where others have concluded it was not possible. this is revolutionary.

      3. Please attribute your statement that tail first retro landing by a booster rocket was tried a long time ago and was a wasted effort. Tried by whom ? When ? Where? Results ?

        I’ve never heard that before now, attempted by military or civilian rocket programs ( exception: Grumman Apollo Lunar Lander with its pintle engine —the same engine system as the SpaceX Merlin— which worked every time at the Moon.)

        So—–?

        1. If you have extra fuel to attempt controlled soft landing, why not use it to get more payload into orbit.
          The idea was studied on one of the earliest rockets, I just heard of it from one of my teachers that used to work for vonBraun in Huntsville. They even tried steerable parachutes and inflatable ‘Rogallo’ type wing.

          1. some launches will use all the fuel to get a larger payload to orbit. the two launches prior to CRS-3 did not test the boost back / water landing because they required more fuel to get the payload to orbit. it is an additional capability if the customer wants to launch a larger payload. Elon Musk has said that there is a 30% hit to payload capacity for returning the stage to the launch site, but for smaller payloads, using the extra fuel for this purpose is practical.

            reusing a rocket stage has long been a desired goal of the space launch industry. SpaceX is finally going to succeed where so many had not.

            by the way, the steerable parachute wing design you’re referring to was the original landing concept for the Gemini missions. they never could get it to work right in testing, so they did water landings instead.

          3. For much the same reason that commercial airplanes carry enough fuel to make powered landings instead of gliding. Think about it, it’ll come to you.

    1. There’s also a presentation about their big Raptor methane engine (1 mlbf) at ISDC on Saturday May 17, 10:00 AM. Component tests start next month at NASA Stennis. A new BFR is gestating 🙂

        1. Yup, and if anyone thinks an F9R stage landing will be impressive think of something that makes it look small. Can’t wait for ISDC to see if they include info about BFR/Eagle or whatevertheycallit.

  8. Maybe they are going to have Crew faster if he is releasing it. No telling when they will ban us from going to ISS. Europe and Japan better get some Astronauts ready, since they say they will work with the Russians. Congress is thinking of baning Russian engines this year unless they are built in the USA. This would give Crew to SpaceX. SpaceX had better get going on the pad and in-flight abort. We need ISS transportation now.

    1. Who is banning the US from going to ISS? Russians just won’t sell us seats on the Soyuz, but no one is banning us. We could have had a vehicle all ready to go – Ares1, anyone remember who canceled that in favor of “we’ll have it done faster and cheaper” commercial crew?

      1. “Ares I was not likely to have had its first crewed launch until 2017–2019 under the current budget, or late 2016 with an unconstrained budget”

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wik…

        “Musk hopes to launch an initial Dragon orbital test flight with a human crew of SpaceX test pilots perhaps as early as sometime in 2015”

        http://www.universetoday.co…

        BOOM.

          1. even if SpaceX’s manned test flight slips into 2016, it’s still flying sooner, with much less development time and much less money sunk into it, than the Ares I

          2. Dragon crew flights will fly from LC-39A not LC-40. The first launch from LC-39A is to be Falcon Heavy #1 in early 2015.

      2. Yep, and thank god they did cancel it. It is happening faster and a LOT cheaper, and also the astronauts wont have their teeth shaken out by riding on a solid. It amazes me that with all the smart people at NASA, the idea of sending people up on a singe solid gained any traction at all.

        1. Just because they are intelligent doesn’t mean they necessarily act smart. I don’t know why, but it seems to be true to me???

        2. The much ballyhooed thrust oscillations the vehicle might encounter were
          basically non-existent on Wednesday’s test flight. “We had two sensors
          to measure this and so far the oscillations look very small, similar to
          what the shuttle might encounter,” Ess said. “We didn’t see anything
          unusual or remotely like anything to indicate that thrust oscillation
          was a factor.”

          Read more: http://www.universetoday.co…

  9. History in the making. No one has ever done anything like this. When I say that I’m referring to the fact that his vehicle is coming back from hypersonic speeds to zero speed or close enough. Only a small step to a touchdown on land and possibly this year.
    The general media seem to be totally unaware. Guess Crimea is taking the spotlight and that may yet have some bearing on hsf.

      1. Both vehicles glided to a stop. the shuttle was more like an aerodynamic brick than anything else on touchdown.

        this is different. this is a rocket stage that actually launched something to orbit, controlling its descent, reaching the surface of the Earth intact and touching down under its own power. as BC notes, it’s a small additional step to fly back to land and touch down there.

        1. Do not feed a Troll. I came very close to start replying but thought better of it… SpaceX is, systematically and incrementally, doing things no one else has done before.

          1. please. using $100,000 worth of RP-1 and LOX to recover a stage that cost millions of dollars is a bargain.

          2. “Elon Musk stated that fuel and oxygen for the Falcon 9 v1.0 rocket total about $200,000” (for the entire propellant load). Does it take 50% more to recover just the first stage?

          3. oh, definitely not. i’d guess 15-20% more fuel. i just pulled a nice round number out of thin air, that it’s a gross overestimate just further serves my point.

          5. Less fuel than you would think. The booster is basically empty at that point. I assume most of the deceleration is by air drag. It’s not that much fuel for the final braking and hover maneuver.

    2. This is awesome but don’t forget that in the current context, touching down on land means the booster has to flyback to the launch site. This latest test was a ballistic flight path. The flyback portion is not trivial. I think they’ll make it happen, but it’s a pretty big deal. I believe that’s exactly what they’ll be testing on the next flight (but still landing in water).

      1. Not trivial?? We saw the divert test of grass hopper. Sure looks like the vehicle is capable to me. Just a few flying lessons.

        1. You understand don’t you that an actual landing of a booster on land or near land involves a lot more than what the Grasshopper flights did, right? After all, the Grasshopper flights didn’t have the issues that their first attempt with returning a booster did.

          I’d wager that Elon Musk and his employees understand there’s a big difference. People standing on the sidelines should also realize the same thing.

          1. Mr. Squared

            Help me here

            First to do this return stunt Spacex cheats a little bit. Instead of flying down range as soon as possible and as rapidly as possible falcon flies nearly vertical before stage seperation. Their second stage does more down range acceration than other rockets.

            Still the hardest part of this return was flipping the booster and doing the three engine burn that reduces their down range speed so they done break up or burn up. This they did on their maiden flight!!! Only a little spin botched their soft landing by chocking off the fuel of the single engine at touch down.

            So to fly back to land what is needed??? When falcon does its three engine declaration burn it is pointed in the opposite direction of launch or back to land.
            Can it just fire its three engines a little longer at that time or does it have to wait for the atmosphere to decelerate before firing the the central engine to get it home. Does flighting back to land involve another relight of the engine?? Rocket engines down like to light pointed into the wind.

          2. Again looking at grass hoppers ability to change direction it is obvious that with a little flying practice. Doing the right turns at the right altitude with enough fuel that getting back to land is no big big deal.

            Mr. Worthington

          3. Everything sounds simple when you simplify it so much that it no longer represents a real world scenario and leave out all of the complicating details.

            Your “explanation” does little justice to all of the hard work that SpaceX has no doubt put into this and to any problems they’ve had to overcome. If it were as simple as you describe, SpaceX or someone else would have achieved landed an ascent stage long ago.

          4. It Could have been done long ago Mr. Squared. No body tried!!!!!!!

            The big devantage Spacex has today over the past is computer power. As many have said there is little new about the falcon. Nope nothing new just an excellent design solution to a seemingly impossible problem.

            Mr. squared I studied design. I know an excellent design when I see it. I don’t have to be a rocket scientist to be able to SEE.

            Also I simplify to understand and hopefully help others here to understand that that surely doesn’t mean that I do not appreciate the difficulties of designing and flying rockets as you seem to like to imply sir!

          7. First off, Falcon 9 flies a lofted trajectory which is typical for unmanned vehicles (it has crew escape consequences which I’m sure SpaceX has addressed for manned Dragon flights) . It allows the vehicle to exit the densest part of the atmosphere as quickly as possible before pitching over and accelerating to orbital velocity.

            The thing you’re missing is the massive changes in delta-v and the additional maneuvers required for the first stage to flyback to the launch site. Grasshopper was going maybe 50 to 100 miles per hour and translated less than 1,000 feet. The Falcon 9 first stage is going Mach 10 and has to cover 150 to 200 miles in a direction opposite of it’s original flightpath. That requires more fuel and more maneuvers than a ballistic flightpath.

            It’s much more complicated than what they’ve done so far. I’m confident they can do it, but it’s not a walk in the park by any means.

        2. Not even close to being trivial. In fact, I’d say flying the booster back to the launch site might be harder than what they’ve done so far. Think about the physics involved between landing the booster downrange on a ballistic trajectory versus flying back 150-200 miles along a reverse course to the launch site. If you need some help visualizing it, look up the dynamics of a Space Shuttle RTLS abort.

  10. The Dragon capsule is already capable of sending crew up and back to ISS . It’s NASA and other agency regulations ( e.g. launch abort requirement ) that is the impediment, not SpaceX base hardware or mission capability. It’s probably a smoother ride up and down than a Soyuz already.

    I’d be happy to volunteer for a ride up and down to prove this. Get me a bean bag or old shuttle seat , a chamber pot and whizzer bottle , some breathing apparatus, a 25 lb wheel of cheese , inflight meals in a cooler, and good wine. I’m good to go. Now. I’ll sign the waiver.

    Might even bring 4-5 of my friends. Can your old fashioned Soyuz do THAT ?

    1. Dragon ready for manned flight? Not even close…..no matter what fantasy Musk comes up with……

      1. the manned variant of the Dragon capsule is set to be unveiled at the end of next month. they will perform two abort tests with it this year, a pad-abort test at Vandenberg and an in-flight abort test at Canaveral. thereafter, if both tests go well, SpaceX is planning a 3-day test flight with SpaceX crew aboard in mid-2015

    2. Dewdle

      I told you I was going to ride on cargo dragon. I stowed away. The flight was great! Iss is awesome!!! I liked leaving the driving and berthing to them. See you and your friends when you get here. Save me a seat for ride back.

      Easy Rider

  11. I came across an interesting paper concerning using a inflatable hyper sonic decelerator for the first stage so I posted it here,

    http://yellowdragonblog.com…

    the author reports that the 10 meter decelerator weights 1.5 tons so could this give back some of the fuel to payload?
    The author assumes a parachute system instead of retro propulsion.

  12. I hear some saying that Spacex has decided on making Brownsville Texas their commercial launch site is that true??

    Well I recall something about the nearby beach there can only be closed so many times a year. Does anybody know what the deal is with all that????

    If Spacex’s spaceport is going to become the hub of our access to Leo it will mean daily anytime launch. AND RETURN!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    PS. You guys convinced the affordable Returnable Space Age is here yet!!
    Yeah yeah It’s about the data. The data which says soft landing. Enter the age of affordable Spaceflight!!! 🙂 They did recover some of it!!! lolol

    1. that decision is technically still pending the Environmental Impact review approval.

      however, Elon has stated in press conferences he is eager to break ground there. so it’s a mere EI approval and a formal press conference announcement away.

      SpaceX has gotten approval to close the beaches there from both the State and County authorities. as i understand it they are not limited by amount of closures per year, but they ARE limited in duration of closures (no more than 15 hours per closure) and there are “blackout” dates where SpaceX cannot launch, like Memorial Day and the 4th of July, heavy beachgoing days.

Comments are closed.