Mallette Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) Space doesn't get a lot of press right now, but SpaceX attempt to soft land a 14 story booster on a 300X300 foot platform in the Atlantic this morning after a "flawless" ISS resupply mission should be noted. No pictures yet, and SpaceX says it was foggy and bad weather around the platform so the video may not be much. However, they've apparently examined the platform and said there was a bit of damage but easily fixable for another attempt. It was characterized as a "hard landing," generally meaning that the spacecraft didn't crash but also didn't successfully land. Hard to tell if it hit hard, or hit the edge and fell into the sea, or what. Point is this is a milestone and what we should have done 30 years ago instead of the shuttle. Shuttle main engines were a marvel...50,000 parts. This booster is FAR less complex and SpaceX believes it can get 40 launches before needing significant repairs. It's what we need for a REAL space age. Dave Edited January 10, 2015 by Mallette 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minermark Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Great comment. Sorry, outta "Likes" today after using four 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oscarsear Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I know they have conducted a successful soft landing on a terrestrial platform. If they can do this on land why even attempt it on a ocean based platform? If they need to be around water why not use a manmade lake that would be free from tidal fluctuations? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted January 10, 2015 Author Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) Easy. Those terrestrial touchdowns were in a 7 mile square. 300X300 feet is the equivalent of a postage stamp bouncing in the Atlantic ocean. If they can perfect this, they can land them on top of a building in downtown Houston... Dave Edited January 10, 2015 by Mallette Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators dtel Posted January 10, 2015 Moderators Share Posted January 10, 2015 It will happen in time, they got this far, I'm just glad someone away from NASA is finally going after this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted January 10, 2015 Author Share Posted January 10, 2015 It will happen in time, they got this far, I'm just glad someone away from NASA is finally going after this. Amen, brother. NASA has a great history and could do great things, but with a government that has shown itself through several administrations of starving them to death and constantly moving the target I am grateful for Elon Musk taking up the challenge of getting humanity into space in a big and permanent way. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Smith Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 sounds like they need to go back and train more... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted January 10, 2015 Author Share Posted January 10, 2015 sounds like they need to go back and train more... They who? Where is the image from and what are the units? Image looks like something from the early 80s...is it even relevant? I've not had any info on last telemetry yet. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Smith Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Easy turbo.. I was kidding, and that's a picture from Lunar Lander, where even the slightest error in landing results in catastrophic explosions. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Stay snarky my friend... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted January 10, 2015 Author Share Posted January 10, 2015 Gives you an idea of what they were trying to land on. Extraordinary. Dave 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oscarsear Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Easy. Those terrestrial touchdowns were in a 7 mile square. 300X300 feet is the equivalent of a postage stamp bouncing in the Atlantic ocean. If they can perfect this, they can land them on top of a building in downtown Houston... Dave Can understand the need to improve landing precision............. but why on the open ocean????? Does it have to land at sea for some special reason? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I would guess privacy especially if it goes wrong. At least there would be no collateral damage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted January 10, 2015 Author Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) Does it have to land at sea for some special reason? Inadequate fuel to bring it back from downrange, which is over the Atlantic. Remember, it was a working mission and this is just a "tack on." Besides, major good press in hitting that postage stamp. They will eventually being doing it on land and this will minimize public concerns. Dave Edited January 10, 2015 by Mallette Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oscarsear Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Does it have to land at sea for some special reason? Inadequate fuel to bring it back from downrange, which is over the Atlantic. Remember, it was a working mission and this is just a "tack on." Besides, major good press in hitting that postage stamp. They will eventually being doing it on land and this will minimize public concerns. Dave Mmkay........ If I read this correctly they launched from a location that did not allow for a land based landing site given the fuel capacity and other factors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted January 11, 2015 Author Share Posted January 11, 2015 Mmkay........ If I read this correctly they launched from a location that did not allow for a land based landing site given the fuel capacity and other factors. Roger that. Canaveral launches are eastward over the ocean. Just guessing, but I suspect separation was several hundred miles downrange and the trip back prohibitive. Besides that, Musk wants absolute precision in the landing zone anyway. When he can demonstrate the ability to put a booster down in a tiny unmanned area like they are shooting for he has an advantage that is pretty unbeatable. Godspeed his efforts, and I am good with him making billions. The survival of the species is at stake. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Ah what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted January 11, 2015 Author Share Posted January 11, 2015 Ah what? Could you state that as a specific question. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.