Updates SpaceX Falcon 9 F5 CRS SpX-2 through CRS SpX-12 Updates

Urwumpe said:
...
The whole final targeting phase before powered descent has to be more precise. And/or the powered descent has to start earlier to allow compensating problems without exceeding control stability limits.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY. That is why I say hovering capability should be given to a vertically landing stage.

Bob Clark
 
RGClark said:
EXACTLY. That is why I say hovering capability should be given to a vertically landing stage.

Bob Clark
Click to expand...

Thats not the same. Hovering is as much needed for a vertical landing as bicycles for fish.

What I mean is correcting already earlier in flight, when the necessary impulse for a correction is still low.
 
I salute SpaceX for the concept of trying to reuse boosters.

But they sure chose a tricky landing enviroment

1) In water with a modestly rocking platform (even with dampeners)

2) Some wind motion potentially interfering

3) No room for error in terms of needing a direct hit


Maybe they should look at small twin solid rocket strap-ons for the booster to increase lift capacity so that more Fuel remains in the main Engine fuel/oxidizer tanks.

That way you will have a better choice as to WHERE to Re-Land the booster.
 
A lot of the original posters show the flyback stage performing a burn that sends it retrograde back to cape canaveral. Wouldn't it be logical to land it in a place like Africa instead?
 
fsci123 said:
A lot of the original posters show the flyback stage performing a burn that sends it retrograde back to cape canaveral. Wouldn't it be logical to land it in a place like Africa instead?
Click to expand...
Not really considering the political situation in alot of the African countries. It would take alot of effort and money to secure the proper permissions for not only the landings but the construction of the actual landing pads. And any new political leadership could just decide to end things in a heartbeat and then you're back at square one again.

It's easier and better to turn around and land where you launched from.
 
Admiral_Ritt said:
I salute SpaceX for the concept of trying to reuse boosters.

But they sure chose a tricky landing enviroment

1) In water with a modestly rocking platform (even with dampeners)

2) Some wind motion potentially interfering

3) No room for error in terms of needing a direct hit


Maybe they should look at small twin solid rocket strap-ons for the booster to increase lift capacity so that more Fuel remains in the main Engine fuel/oxidizer tanks.

That way you will have a better choice as to WHERE to Re-Land the booster.
Click to expand...

Well, SpaceX made it clear many years prior that they did not like SRBs, hence why the Falcon 9 is the way it is currently. They are going all liquid...


The barge landings are a interim solution, for approval to actually land on...solid land. When the FAA (or whoever) see that they can land on a predetermined point more than once, they will be certified to actually do a RTLS.

Until then, barge landings.
 
I can't help but to wonder if CRS-7 fails to land on the ASDS if they'll keep Jason-3 in July as an RTLS or if they'll move it to an ASDS attempt.
 
Kyle said:
I can't help but to wonder if CRS-7 fails to land on the ASDS if they'll keep Jason-3 in July as an RTLS or if they'll move it to an ASDS attempt.
Click to expand...

Without successful ASDS landing, a RTLS will be pretty risky. It is likely now easier to land on land than on the barge again, but nothing guarantees that the landing will not end with the rocket hitting something valueable - so even if there are good arguments for trying an RTLS (no waves, no double GPS navigation error), there has to be not just a successful ASDS landing, but especially important: Also an competent ASDS landing. If it looks like you have just been lucky, you should better do it again with more juice.

Especially the wind vaning problem of this landing might end worse for a KSC landing.
 
Last edited:
RGClark said:
That is why for the powered landing manned version of the Dragon it will have hovering capability. ;-)

Bob Clark
Click to expand...

Will it? Really? :lol:
 
I don't think this was posted yet, a longer version of the "landing":
 
Looks like the legs never got completely locked.
 
fsci123 said:
Wouldn't it be logical to land it in a place like Africa instead?
Click to expand...
I thought the problem was that there is nowhere near enough speed for it to cross the Atlantic?

GLS said:
I don't think this was posted yet, a longer version of the "landing":
Click to expand...
Looks very familiar to me - i had my quadrotors oscillate like that when the control was too tight and the wind picked up or the arms were flexing. What follows is usually a chaotic tumbling mess that spontaneously disassemble upon meeting the ground. Camera first, because Murphy.
 
Not to mention how much it would cost to ship it back FROM Africa.
 
Despite the low quantity of fuel, that's still a fairly violent explosion. I want to see them get the ASDS landings down right at least twice before seeing them attempt a landing at SLC-4W/LC-13.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

gattispilot
C++ Question Help debugging
2
Replies
31
Views
7K
Buck Rogers
Buck Rogers
B
Titan surface launch anomaly
Replies
4
Views
3K
BrianJ
B
Hotdog
Scenario Scenario editing - STS payload orientation
Replies
1
Views
2K
gattispilot
gattispilot
Pioneer
Problem Starship Payload Orientation
Replies
2
Views
2K
francisdrake
francisdrake
Thunder Chicken
Discussion Setting Touchdown Points for Vessels on Solid Planet Surfaces I: The Mass Spring Damper Model
2
Replies
37
Views
13K
Thunder Chicken
Thunder Chicken
Back
Top