Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message

Vine: SpaceX rocket landing on droneship just misses

Posted on 4/14/15 at 8:16 pm
Posted by beaver
The 755 Club
Member since Sep 2009
46861 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 8:16 pm
LINK

crazy they got so close on their second try...they might nail it next time

quote:

Elon Musk @elonmusk
Ascent successful. Dragon enroute to Space Station. Rocket landed on droneship, but too hard for survival.


Posted by GeauxxxTigers23
TeamBunt General Manager
Member since Apr 2013
62514 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 8:25 pm to
They need a bigger barge
Posted by lsu480
Downtown Scottsdale
Member since Oct 2007
92876 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 8:31 pm to
Why not just have it land on actual land?
Posted by beaver
The 755 Club
Member since Sep 2009
46861 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 8:32 pm to
quote:

Why not just have it land on actual land?


serious?
Posted by Thib-a-doe Tiger
Member since Nov 2012
35341 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 8:33 pm to
What am I looking at there? Looks like someone dropped a doobie in a gasoline puddle
Posted by beaver
The 755 Club
Member since Sep 2009
46861 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 8:36 pm to
here

LINK
Posted by Goalman34
Ruston, LA
Member since Sep 2013
512 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 8:38 pm to
Posted by GRTiger
On a roof eating alligator pie
Member since Dec 2008
62841 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 8:40 pm to
I didn't realize they were trying to land it upright. Crazy they even got that close.

I wonder if they considered a way to cushion the impact and cutting off the propulsion higher up.
Posted by GeauxxxTigers23
TeamBunt General Manager
Member since Apr 2013
62514 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 8:44 pm to
quote:

Why not just have it land on actual land?



I think the long term plan is to be able to land it back the launch pad. Then they can just give it a once over and fuel her back up and shoot it back into space.

The reason space flight is so expensive is because everytime we launch a rocket we are just throwing it away. They cost on average $55 million and the fuel only cost a like 200K. The cost of sending payloads to space will decrease exponentially if recovering the rocket becomes the norm.
Posted by chesty
Flap City C.C.
Member since Oct 2012
12731 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 8:44 pm to
Wow. That's wild
Posted by beaver
The 755 Club
Member since Sep 2009
46861 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 8:45 pm to
Posted by TigerstuckinMS
Member since Nov 2005
33687 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 9:01 pm to
quote:

Why not just have it land on actual land?


Good point. We'll use your back yard. No?

Also, I'm not sure that NASA's range safety would ever allow them to fly a rocket stage toward the East Coast and all those back yards up and down the coast. If you can avoid putting it in the water as well that's good, as that salt water bath would require a lot of careful cleaning because of the corrosion possibilities that would drive the cost of refurbishment up. So, the next best thing is to land it on a barge to keep it away from pink, squishy humans, and keep it out of the water. Then you just float it back to the launch complex for refurbishment.
This post was edited on 4/14/15 at 9:10 pm
Posted by CarRamrod
Spurbury, VT
Member since Dec 2006
57426 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 9:03 pm to
that is awesome
Posted by jbgleason
Bailed out of BTR to God's Country
Member since Mar 2012
18893 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 9:05 pm to
Whether y'all realize it or not, that is some Buck Rogers shite. The fact they got that thing to fly back to a place, slow down and almost land is amazing. I am trying to conceive of the amount of calculations involved. How do they compensate for wind gusts?
Posted by lsu480
Downtown Scottsdale
Member since Oct 2007
92876 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 9:06 pm to
I was thinking more of the middle of a desert

ETA: I am on my phone and it looks like they tried landing it on a barge or something, if that isn't the case then nevermind
This post was edited on 4/14/15 at 9:08 pm
Posted by Goalman34
Ruston, LA
Member since Sep 2013
512 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 9:09 pm to
Why don't they just let it land in the water? It's an empty tank at that point so it will float. Just scoop it up, hose it off, and use it again.
Posted by Jobu93
Cypress TX
Member since Sep 2011
19200 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 9:14 pm to
looks like it would use a shite ton of fuel on the way down.

That style of landing seems exponentially harder than a shuttle (which was like landing a brick).


Sidebar: If you go to Space Center Houston, there is a simulator to land a shuttle. Pretty cool.
Posted by AUbagman
LA
Member since Jun 2014
10561 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 9:20 pm to


Those cows don't seem to like all the commotion.
Posted by roguetiger15
Member since Jan 2013
16144 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 9:23 pm to
Lulz at the cattle hauling arse away from the rocket. That had me literally laughing out loud.
Posted by TROLA
BATON ROUGE
Member since Apr 2004
12289 posts
Posted on 4/14/15 at 9:25 pm to
Can't believe they are that close on only the second try.. If they are able to bring the cost down to even a million a launch then they can really accelerate commercial use of space.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram