Page 151 of 158 FirstFirst ... 51101141149150151152153 ... LastLast
Results 4,501 to 4,530 of 4736

Thread: SpaceX

  1. #4501
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    50,403
    Quote Originally Posted by cjameshuff View Post
    It looked like a fairly hard landing, I expect the legs were mostly pancaked. There wasn't much to them, just something to absorb the shock.

    ...apparently not enough of the shock, considering what happened afterward.
    Not clear yet if it was a leg failure or if it was engines not working perfectly and landing too hard or a combination. I'm guessing the landing ruptured a methane line, thus the fire after, and eventually an explosion.
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  2. #4502
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Great NorthWet
    Posts
    16,739
    Nicolas's sig:
    With sufficient thrust, water towers fly just fine.
    Landing, on the other hand, is tricky. But they're getting closer.

    Trivial stuff that makes me happy: I managed to tune in to a live stream a few minutes before ignition. Twice.
    Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

  3. #4503
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,912
    "It will be safe enough for human transport by 2023 -- it's looking very promising," Musk said [quoting from earlier post about dearMoon voyage].

    Whatever you say, Mr. Musk.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  4. #4504
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,603
    Congratulations to SpaceX for a successful launch and landing.

  5. #4505
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    16,083
    Upon closer examination of a replay, it landed 3 times! The first landing was quite hard and it visibly bounced. Then it exploded and came down a third time.
    With sufficient thrust, water towers fly just fine.

  6. #4506
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,074
    Quote Originally Posted by Swift View Post
    Not clear yet if it was a leg failure or if it was engines not working perfectly and landing too hard or a combination. I'm guessing the landing ruptured a methane line, thus the fire after, and eventually an explosion.
    I suspect the fire right under the fuel tank was boiling off methane faster than it could vent, hence the delayed explosion. The hard landing could just mean they need to do some software tuning.

  7. #4507
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,603
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas View Post
    Upon closer examination of a replay, it landed 3 times! The first landing was quite hard and it visibly bounced. Then it exploded and came down a third time.
    Must've been after SpaceX broadcast ended. I didn't see the explosion. Looks like a simple fix.
    Last edited by bknight; 2021-Mar-04 at 04:32 AM.

  8. #4508
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    19,838
    Here is a short (approx. 1 minute) edited video with the later event:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzhP3Q5fku8

    I've seen some joke comments. A couple: One said, "Wow! This is the fastest relaunch in history!" Another said, "This is a RUL (Rapid Unplanned Launch)."

    Well, it does seem like a real and serious improvement, but it still seems to be landing hard. Hopefully they can resolve that for the next one. Regarding the SpaceX video, I was very impressed by the closeups and camera angles. Amazing to watch it coming down. I expect there will be some CGI claims from usual suspects.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  9. #4509
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    commentators joking now that SN10 has "landed twice"
    Nah,
    I call it "pulling a Grammatica," which means the next one is Leon Lett- LOOK OUT! I want Eli Gold for color on these famous fumbles. Get Saban to give a speech and it will be Starr-ship.
    Last edited by publiusr; 2021-Mar-04 at 05:26 AM.

  10. #4510
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,601
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    Here is a short (approx. 1 minute) edited video with the later event:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzhP3Q5fku8

    I've seen some joke comments. A couple: One said, "Wow! This is the fastest relaunch in history!" Another said, "This is a RUL (Rapid Unplanned Launch)."

    Well, it does seem like a real and serious improvement, but it still seems to be landing hard. Hopefully they can resolve that for the next one. Regarding the SpaceX video, I was very impressed by the closeups and camera angles. Amazing to watch it coming down. I expect there will be some CGI claims from usual suspects.
    A very good attempt but those first 5 or 6 seconds of footage of the descent are amazing - you could (almost) be forgiven for thinking that it is CGI.

  11. #4511
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,772
    Quote Originally Posted by Swift View Post
    It just went boom!
    When I was reading about it, I came across for the first time (I'm sure everyone else knows it well...) the expression "sudden unscheduled disassembly." That's pretty funny.
    As above, so below

  12. #4512
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    19,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post
    When I was reading about it, I came across for the first time (I'm sure everyone else knows it well...) the expression "sudden unscheduled disassembly." That's pretty funny.
    I’ve always heard/read it as “RUD” or “Rapid Unplanned Disassembly” which is the basis for the joke I mentioned above, “Rapid Unplanned Launch.” Yes, it is pretty funny the first time you encounter it. I *think* I first saw it in a book on the early days of rocket development, the name of which escapes me at the moment, but I read it quite some time ago.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  13. #4513
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,154
    Maybe this is crazy talk-but...how about blow out vents to stop a BLEVE?
    CATO was all the rage before RUD.

  14. #4514
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,008
    Some of the v1.0 legs didn't latch, so it came down in the skirt. The impact knocked and something came loose, so the fire and later boomski.

    SN-11 rolls out soon, with slightly improved legs. SN-15+ are expected to have new legs. Also new alloys, etc.

    SN-12, 13, & 14 are cancelled.

  15. #4515
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,687
    Sorry if this has been covered during the many pages of this thread: when it is in the bellyflopped descent stage, is it just falling or does it spend some time flying on its flaps ?
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  16. #4516
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    16,083
    It is mostly vertical falling in these tests; lift generated by the flaps is used mainly for attitude stabilisation. Think of it as a skydiver using his arms and legs to maintain position while his parachute is not yet deployed.

    I don't know exactly how much range capability you'd get with the flaps if it came in from orbit, but apparently at least on paper enough to get yourself above a landing pad after the randomness of upper atmospheric return. It would have a poor glide ratio, but it was never meant to be a craft to glide significant horizontal distances.
    With sufficient thrust, water towers fly just fine.

  17. #4517
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,687
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas View Post
    It is mostly vertical falling in these tests; lift generated by the flaps is used mainly for attitude stabilisation. Think of it as a skydiver using his arms and legs to maintain position while his parachute is not yet deployed.

    I don't know exactly how much range capability you'd get with the flaps if it came in from orbit, but apparently at least on paper enough to get yourself above a landing pad after the randomness of upper atmospheric return. It would have a poor glide ratio, but it was never meant to be a craft to glide significant horizontal distances.
    Thanks for that, it was just that lift flying would be greater than the drag of falling. Even with a poor glide angle it could for example spiral down or fly in like the shuttle but with a final flip to land vertically. Both of course save on rocket fuel. I suppose coming home from high speed, it can turn right round and decelerate on engines, flying in backwards in that case.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  18. #4518
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,074
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    I expect there will be some CGI claims from usual suspects.
    Nah, it was obviously just the launch played back in reverse.

  19. #4519
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,912
    A SpaceX Falcon 9 launched a new set of Starlink satellites and landed the booster March 4, two and a half weeks after the landing failed on the previous launch.

    https://spacenews.com/falcon-9-launc...lands-booster/
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  20. #4520
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    16,083
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    Thanks for that, it was just that lift flying would be greater than the drag of falling. Even with a poor glide angle it could for example spiral down or fly in like the shuttle but with a final flip to land vertically. Both of course save on rocket fuel. I suppose coming home from high speed, it can turn right round and decelerate on engines, flying in backwards in that case.
    Upon further thinking, they are also planning to use Starship for point-to-point flight on earth. But it was my understanding that this would be mosty a ballistic flight, not aerodynamic. Of course, if you already have a lot of speed then even tiny "wings" like Starship has allow for quite some aerodynamic manoeuvrability.
    With sufficient thrust, water towers fly just fine.

  21. #4521
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,687
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas View Post
    Upon further thinking, they are also planning to use Starship for point-to-point flight on earth. But it was my understanding that this would be mosty a ballistic flight, not aerodynamic. Of course, if you already have a lot of speed then even tiny "wings" like Starship has allow for quite some aerodynamic manoeuvrability.
    Indeed, missiles use small fins to achieve high g turning, but for Earth to Earth flights, the issue of fuel saving ( and safety back up procedures ) could use lift to reduce speed If the flaps have some range of movement. You could imagine the hull vertical, moving sideways, with the flaps giving lift and attitude control to maximise drag while falling at speed. It’s a whole new way of point to point travel. Just using engines is neat but wastes fuel. Then what happens if motors won’t start? Maybe you could fly to a water touch down? That probability of one out of three engines starting becomes rather critical! As it is for all recovery strategy.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  22. #4522
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,687
    Actually for horizontal travel the use of engine plus wing lift makes sense if you want a soft landing. V2 style baliistics make for hard landings! And what level of reliability do you accept on restart to achieve any kind of survivable landing?
    Last edited by profloater; 2021-Mar-04 at 01:02 PM.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  23. #4523
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,912
    Elon Musk Announces Plans To Start Texas City Called "Starbase".

    https://hypebeast.com/2021/3/elon-mu...as-spacex-info
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  24. #4524
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    19,838
    Sounds similar to Russia’s Star City, but a tad more public: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_City,_Russia

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  25. #4525
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    16,083
    Given the "Elon Musk = ultrarich supervillain" meme, I give it 3 days max before somebody brings a can of paint and turns the sign into "Stark City".
    With sufficient thrust, water towers fly just fine.

  26. #4526
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,008
    SpaceX's Principal Integration Engineer/webcaster "Big John" Insprucker refers to the belly flop a the "Adama Maneuver" and Garrett Reisman seconded it. Guess that makes it official #SoSayWeAll #BSG

    John Insprucker @jinsprucker
    Mar 4, 2021
    Exciting day & not over! #10 came through - flew to 10km, did the Adama maneuver, got the data we needed, flipped and landed! Time for #11...Geronimo! And more to come - I'm working Falcon 9 launch tonight. But no webcast for me, I've done mine today (abort, recycle, launch).
    |
    Garrett Reisman ✓ @astro_g_dogg
    Love that you’re calling it the Adama Maneuver, John! Go Starship! Go SpaceX!

    https://twitter.com/jinsprucker/stat...50152080461827
    https://twitter.com/astro_g_dogg/sta...92762447327237

  27. #4527
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Great NorthWet
    Posts
    16,739
    Great video -- as usual! -- by Scot Manley on the Starship flight.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CF9mdMI1qxM
    Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

  28. #4528
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    16,083
    Ah, I see the issue. SN10 is afraid of heights. Came down with weak knees. Good thing SN15 will have a new leg design instead of these placeholders.
    With sufficient thrust, water towers fly just fine.

  29. #4529
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,603
    "Elon time"!!! Snicker

  30. #4530
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas View Post
    It is mostly vertical falling in these tests; lift generated by the flaps is used mainly for attitude stabilisation. Think of it as a skydiver using his arms and legs to maintain position while his parachute is not yet deployed.

    I don't know exactly how much range capability you'd get with the flaps if it came in from orbit, but apparently at least on paper enough to get yourself above a landing pad after the randomness of upper atmospheric return. It would have a poor glide ratio, but it was never meant to be a craft to glide significant horizontal distances.
    The flaps can adjust pitch, yaw, and roll. and to a degree fore and aft position. Just don't think of them as traditional airfoils because they have no lift
    producing profilee - flat as a board.

    https://youtu.be/fRdoP1sJP_s

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •