Go get ‘em.
Sounds suspiciously like the recovery method used for the Space Shuttle SRBs.
Posted on 04/15/2015 5:06:04 PM PDT by Vince Ferrer
Go get ‘em.
Sounds suspiciously like the recovery method used for the Space Shuttle SRBs.
SRB are simple steel tubes, filled with rubber to burn out a hole in the back.
These are true rocket engines (very, very high-speed, super-small clearance turbo-pumps at many tens of thousands of rpm pump cryogenic fuels and liquids, gyro’s, radio, controls, hydraulics .... You CAN’T land that in salt water.
Go get ‘em.
The point of salvaging the booster is to re-use the engines -- which aren't going to respond well to a salt water bath.
SpaceX already tried parachutes, but they considered the effort a failure. Salt water is really bad for the rockets. The space shuttle solid rocket boosters landed in the ocean and were reused, but there was so much refurbishment required due to the salt water that it really didn’t save money. This whole design is a way to avoid salt water.
Better fire up that 3-D printer. We’re gonna need another one.
Not if they plan to have people riding in them. Being flung to a semi-random part of the Earth isn’t confidence inducing, especially when it means you’re landing in the middle of an ocean.
It’s one thing to have a good shape going up, but people tend to want to return to Earth - safely. I hope SpaceX figures that out.
They should stretch a net across the big hole in Chicago and land them there.
Think even if they had it perfectly vertical at touchdown, it would have been too fast to avoid damage.
Too much correcting on final approach. Should have been stabilized at that point, not yawing around.
In the videos of SpaceX’s “Grasshopper” test vehicle, the successful landings appear to be much slower.
Why can’t they use parachutes and airbags?.......
Too much correcting on final approach. Should have been stabilized at that point, not yawing around.
...
You’re right. Just as with airliners the approach should be stable. The thing is, they’ve landed softly on water when a precise landing spot wasn’t targeted. My guess is the last second corrections are causing the remaining fuel to slosh and moving the center of gravity which could lead to something similar to pilot induced oscillations, but in this case with a flight computer instead of a pilot.
I get the impression it was coming in way too fast.
...
It does look that way, but vertical velocity seems to be nearly zero when it gets to the deck, however it wasn’t vertical and there was some horizontal velocity causing it to topple over.
F=MxA
Your rover has about 3% of the mass of this 1st stage, a cg about 20’ lower, and no side winds.
ya, there’s this little matter of getting Range Safety approval for the desert landing......
Maybe the SpaceX folks could make movies.
Dudes need to spring for a few dollars and buy some parachutes.
I figured some approval thing, these guys are wicked thought out...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.