>Jan. 17 Falcon 9 • Jason 3
>Launch time: 1842:18 GMT (1:42:18 p.m. EST; 10:42:18 a.m. PST)
>Launch site: SLC-4E, Vandenberg Air Force Base, California
>A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the Jason 3 ocean altimetry mission. Jason 3 will measure ocean surface topography to aid in ocean circulation and climate change research for NOAA, EUMETSAT, NASA and the French space agency, CNES. Delayed from March 31, July 22 and December. [Dec. 12]
>Tomorrow at 10:42 AM PST SpaceX is scheduled to launch the Jason-3 satellite into orbit from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. For many, it will be what happens after the launch that’s most important. Shortly after liftoff, SpaceX will make another attempt to land the first stage of their Falcon 9 rocket, this time on a floating drone ship in the ocean.
You ready, /spacex/?
>>7789255
>SpaceX will make another attempt to land the first stage of their Falcon 9 rocket, this time on a floating drone ship in the ocean.
1. Checked
2. Landing the first stage on a drone ship in the ocean, successfully, would be a monumental step forward in the quest for cheap spaceflight.
>also akin to landing a brick on a floating sponge
last two launches with climate related payloads failed
How long before they do anything with a human mission?
>>7789424
>Supposed to happen sometime this year, if all goes well. They're supposed to be ready for ISS crew rotations next year.
Nice.
They test fired the last rocket recently. Testing it for reusability.
Where can I find a live stream?
>>7789667
I wonder how long it will last from take off to landing.
Whats the point of landing on a barge?
>>7789688
Safety or some shit
>>7789337
intentional sabotage?
>>7789688
Reuse.
It's meant for high-velocity missions, such as FH launches. The core of the FH would be scheduled to land on the barges while the other stage rockets would land on land.
If this goes well, SpaceX is just gonna swallow the whole launch market altogether.
Nothing ULA or ESA can do. They've been laughing at SpaceX for years, and now they find themselves in a situation where SpaceX is gonna start piling up first stage like crazy, while they throw theirs until at least 2020.
>>7789780
Still have to build second stages
>>7789802
Sure, but that's basically 2 tanks and an engine vs 4 tanks and 10 engines.
>>7789780
SpaceX will "only" swallow the launch market for cheap/ low risk sattelites withtheir low prices.
When it comes to national security or a billion dollar satelite the most important factor is the launch record which spacex fucked up a little since their rocket blew up in summer.
>>7789857
You'd think that, then you realize, they're gonna be much more able to launch things faster.
Want a launch next year? Sure, no problem.
>>7789688
The rocket's coming down in the sea.
>>7789865
it usually takes years to plan, design and assemble a sattelite so that is hardly an advantage.
As for national security launches, i think the contractors are required to have rockets on hold for them anyway.
>>7789894
Let's put it another way.
Launch contracts are usually settled years in advance. Because the queue is that long.
Now you can get an earlier launch if you put the extra $. The highest bidder gets the earlier one. Meanwhile, it only costs SpaceX a second stage anyhow.
Reliability is still much unknown at this time. I'd say, 1 failure in 10 or so launches isn't that bad. Ariane 5 failed its first 2 launches and ULA had some fails back in Delta II days.
I don't expect Ariane 6 and Vulcan to have a better record in their first 10 launches.
>>7789901
or you can just book the flight for your billion dollar sattelite years in advance of assembly on a rocket with a better launch record, beacause there is barely any disadvantage in having to book earlier.
>>7789943
>there is barely any disadvantage in having to book earlier.
That is total bullshit. The reason new satellites take years to build is that they're full of cutting-edge new technology, which nobody is experienced with. That makes the build schedule not simply long, but unpredictable.
If they have to book a flight years in advance for a spacecraft with an unpredictable construction schedule, this causes all sorts of problems, commonly resulting in spacecraft being shipped to the pad incomplete to be worked on to the last minute, which causes delays, cost overruns, staff burn-out, and flaws in the launched spacecraft.
For similar reasons, high launch cost is a major issue, especially when you need to order launches far in advance.
Building two of a fancy new satellite doesn't really cost a lot more than building one (although some profiteering scum contractors will try and charge as if they cost the same). Furthermore, it gives you some security against damage-causing accidents before launch: when you build multiples. Launch reliability is only super-important for expensive, long-lead-time launches.
>>7789688
If they can do it, it means the landing pad can be just about anywhere they want in the world. So it can always come down in a good weather area.
>>7789857
It will get to the point they will be launching something once or twice a month maybe more.
>>7790384
That's not really how it works, particularly compared to flyback.
Reversing course and returning to the launch site means returning to land at a place where the weather was good enough to launch just minutes ago. So barge landing compared to flyback isn't going to improve weather conditions for landing.
What the barge allows is not freedom to choose the place you land for ideal conditions, but the ability to put a landing surface near the spot where the depleted stage will naturally fall to, minimizing the propellant required to reach it.
The flyback maneuver is costly. Saving propellant for reversing the course of the rocket significantly reduces the performance of the launch vehicle.
A downrange barge landing is much less costly. The stage more or less falls directly to the barge, with minimal redirection.
This will be especially important for recovering the center stage of the Falcon Heavy, which is essentially a three-stage launch vehicle. The side boosters can deplete early, compared to the normal Falcon 9 first stage, and fly the short distance back to land, but then the center stage will still be nearly full of fuel, going much farther downrange and to a much higher horizontal speed than a regular first stage. The performance penalty for flyback would be far more severe than it is for the side boosters or on single-stick Falcon 9.
i am hyyyyyyyyyyyyyype
>>7790449
>What the barge allows is not freedom to choose the place you land for ideal conditions,
That is exactly what I was meaning. It is up and back before the weather ever changes and can do so anywhere in the world's oceans if needed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkz_lclGXNg
>2 hour and 34 mins left!
>>7790605
I'll be watching the other feed. I expect they'll put on more of a show in the "hosted webcast".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivdKRJzl6y0
>>7789943
Why does your payload cost billions of dollars in the first place?
Most of them are basically an antenna, a computer, small thrusters and propellant tanks. Maybe some fancy optical piece for observations.
See, because you don't plan on launching a bunch of them, or having a spare ready to launch in case n°1 fails, you make damn sure it will operate for at least a decade.
It's the wash machine economics. Back in the days, a wash machine was bloody expensive, but it lasted 2 decades. Now they're cheap but last 5 years.
>>7790615
>not having both up at once
>>7790616
>Why does your payload cost billions of dollars in the first place?
It depends on the satellite. Some are really cheap and some are over 2 billion. Or, you can cob something cheap and small together in your garage and pay $4k to $12k per kg to have it launched by Interorbital Services on one of their Neptune rockets.
What's up nerds? /sp/ here.
SpaceX launches are the only times I visit /sci/
Who /hyperloop/ here?
>>7790643
>pay $4k to $12k per kg to have it launched by Interorbital Services on one of their Neptune rockets.
That is by far the safest strategy to protect your payload, since you are guaranteed it will never launch.
>>7789688
"atonomous drone ship"
>>7790756
/sp/ you say? If you are a gambling man, you can try your luck at Landing Barge Bingo.
http://asds.dansdoorway.com
Friendly reminder that Elon Musk was bald.
>>7790829
Wow, he has really moved up in the world.
What's piglike doing these days?
>>7790805
>one year free L2 membership for the winner
utter tears at you mugs. I make $500 on a slow day via sports betting. I'm so shrewd I have a 3% ROI in asia. I don't have time to play bingo with you penny punting slugs. Sending pellets your way lmao.
wow is there ANYTHING this guy cant do?
>>7790829
>get mocked for being bald
>also get mocked for getting hair plugs
wtf is he supposed to do then
>>7790856
Get a haircut that works with the baldness.
Fucking fog is gonna ruin the whole thing.
HELLO MARK_TAIWAN
So which stream is better, the hosted or non hosted one?
is nasa tv covering this?
>>7790867
Won't the fog make everything look super cool (assuming the launch doesn't scrub) ?
haha, everyone is outside watching this time.
Are both streams way out of sync for you guys too?
Captain America came!
What the fuck is Captain America doing there?
>>7790894
NO, it will make everything look like fog.
>>7790902
He heard about the high levels of freedom in the area.
I dont like the sound of this 'minor issue'
Is this how our parents felt during Apollo?
It is kind of underwhelming.
>this fucking crazy thick fog
It's go lads
>>7790912
all go on terminal count
NASA stream is actually more exciting
I take it they're going for a polar orbit, right?
>>7790913
This isn't such a big deal. This is just a satellite launch. It's kind of neat that they're making a landing attempt for reuse, but this isn't even their latest model of rocket, so it's not really something they'd want to reuse anymore. The recovery attempt is just a technology test.
audio got back in sync again
we're good
>>7790921
will it eventually be up on youtube?
I'd put money on it not actually launching today.
So the guy on the hosted webcast just said this was the last time they do the gonogo thing on the webcast can someone tell me why?
CANT SEE SHIT
The hosts on these SpaceX webcasts piss me off. They purposely cherry pick the select few good looking/non-autistic rocket scientists and put them in front of the camera. I work at a SpaceX competitor and 99% of this industry is ugly/autistic as fuck.
>>7790913
First succesfull attempt of stage 1 landing was bit like that.. I nearly "turned blue" as i watched it touching down. As it touched down i was "breathing again".
They have all these systems they need to check for "go" status.
Why the fuck are they using voice to confirm everything is go?
Can't they just put up a server and sync with each other via that?
You could even put more information than just go/no-go for each system.
>>7790931
check the no-commentary stream https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkz_lclGXNg
goddamn it is foggy as fuck
>>7790931
i see your moms vibrator fine in that fog
>>7790933
this
>>7790929
That was clumsy. I think he means it was the last such poll for the old Falcon 9 1.1, as opposed to the new Falcon 9 1.1 FT model (with densified propellant, which has a different procedure leading up to launch).
>>7790933
>I work at a SpaceX competitor
EAT SHIT FAGGOT
>>7790928
I'll bet you 5 spacebux they light that candle today
>>7790929
>So the guy on the hosted webcast just said this was the last time they do the gonogo thing on the webcast can someone tell me why?
This is the last Falcon 9 V1.1
All the rest will be Falcon 9 Full Thrust, FT, or per spacex internal use - just falcon 9. FT versions use supercooled lox and cooled RP-1, and the readiness poll is conducted ~38 minutes before launch - just before prop loading. That is before the webcast starts, so you won't hear it online.
>>7790935
I think they want to recreate old apollo missions a bit.
Same thing with lector countdown, no real need for that.
>>7790937
so much better
OH MY GOD 5 MIN
>>7790935
1. It's cool.
2. Better to hear from the guy in charge that everything is go rather than some computer program. Adds in some responsibility on the other end.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivdKRJzl6y0
https://youtu.be/vkz_lclGXNg
5 Minutes!!!!
>>7790933
...so?
absolutely every single industry ever does this
why are you salty
wtf does "strongback" mean?
>>7790944
( the landed Falcon 9 from last time was a FT version as well by the way, with some improvements compared to this version, so this version might crash anyway during landing)
>>7790953
it's the tower that supports the rocket
>>7790953
It's just the name for the towers either side of the rocket, holds the rocket and is what all the pipes climb up.
heavy breathing. 3 minutes
IT HAS RETRACTED
5$ on failure to land.
>>7790935
Well it makes everything sound more impressive for public engagement purposes, plus it is another way to keep a man in the loop for the launch. It allows an actual person to use their discretion rather than leaving it up to cold, lifeless algorithms .
Holly shit, that barge is as stable as my mental health
>FTS ARMED
A BOMB!
>>7790960
10 bucks says it succeeds
I hate this guy's voice. It's the cause of the failure months ago!
do they have a camera or drone on the boat?
or is this going to be like the last attempt where we had to wait for musk to tweet a fucking vine of it
No way it will land.
We get it. You vape.
>>7790962
That's good news anon.
>>7790970
>when you gotta launch but you not done with your bud
REEEEEEEEEEEEE
Stream stopped working for me.
>>7790970
falcon getting high and shit.
OH GOD IM DYING !!
10 SECONDS
Well at least, if it explodes, we won't see it.
>Tune in at 30 seconds left
Talk about good timing.
LIFT OFF BOIS
CANT SEE SHIT
dat watervapor
just werks.
Dragon Manned Capsule can hold 7 people. Musk should get Americans excited for manned space flight again, by holding a lottery. One dollar tickets and you are entered into a drawing to be a passenger on the first manned Dragon flight. Provided you are healthy enough to survive the flight. He could raise enough to pay for the winner into orbit and then some. While also getting a huge amount of free attention in the media.
Who's the qt?
nominal nominal nominal nominal nominal nominal nominal
Cool
these 2 hipsters won't shut up
>>7790992
He'd have better luck hiding golden tickets inside chocolate bars desu
goddamn quit flipping around all the cameras like that
>>7790998
protip
watch the other stream
>amazing shot of rocket lifting off, making all the fog light up beautifully
>HMM LADS LET'S SWITCH TO FUCKING BLACK-AND-WHITE PHONE-CAMERA TIER CHASE CAM
fucking spacex
>>7790998
There's a link to a commentary-free stream here in the thread.
I wonder if these are just media pr people or if they know anything about all this.
How long will it take to land?
Yuropoor here.
Does the youtube stream work?
All I'm getting is some gay ass hipster music.
>>7789857
The competition for national security launches also have had failed launches.
Getting hype for first stage landing
>>7791004
3 more minutes.
3 mins ETA on drone ship landing
>>7791005
Here's the non-reddit stream
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkz_lclGXNg
>the cheering that you see
Sure honey whatever you say
YES live ship camera!
>>7791015
keked
looks wobbly
holy shit the swells on that barge
>I-it's okay if we fail
drone ship is moving a whole damn lot.
They either need to get something bigger and more stable, or just go to dry land landings.
>>7791021
It seems like they should have made it like 10x the size it is.
Stop fucking talking bitches
lol barge cam frozen
elon musk needs to pony up for a better internet connection to his drone ship
It froze, yay
"theres no wifi"
HURR DURR
>>7791026
>something bigger
It's already the size of a football field
>or just go to dry land landings.
That's the plan, but that means they need more fuel to make a u-turn.
>>7791031
Drone ship confirmed kill
video feed is ded
rip
Video froze, FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
VIDEO FROZE
WHAT THE FUCK
>>7791029
dumbass
drone ship is ded
Thinks the landing failed, no telemetry from this page http://www.flightclub.io/live.php?code=JSN3
>>7791032
4g when
>404, droneship not found
>not one black guy on stream
>current year
>>7791031
Direct hit. I repeat direct hit.
>>7791031
oh god it's going to unfreeze with either a massive wreck or a landed rocket
or maybe the camera wont come back on because it's a fucking fireball right now
it's toast
The rocket landed on the camera
It's ogre.
yay, they fucked the steam up on the best part.
wtf get your shit together JRTI
CRASHED
R
A
S
H
E
D
oh shit...
LOSS OF SIGNAL
First stage confirmed kill
>loss of signal
rip
The rocket got cucked. I repeat, it got cucked.
>spacex in charge of barges
B L U N D E R
>>7791053
they cut it off because it was ogre
>That little mouse cursor in the stream
NOOOOOOOOO
First stage didn't slow down and just dropped and killed the barge
This fucking ayy lmao music what the fuck.
FUUUUUUUUUCK
Don't they have helos out there? I think they'd know pretty quickly what happened to it on account of needing to get in and get it fastened
probably blew up
>We can launch and land a rocket but we can't get a fucking video camera to work.
do they have any other video of the barge? like those helicopters from a distance? or will this be an entirely no-video flight because of shitty wifi?
What is this going on right now, this music. no.
SHUT IT DOWN
$20 it dipped in the ocean
Do you guys not realize the bandwidth required for a video feed? Relax.
Well at least, the mission seems to be going well.
>>7791076
its a "GAME OVER" song
>>7791064
hope to see it in /b/ gore thread.
Digging the beats
> Just read the instructions
Forgot to read the page that said slow down before hitting barge.
BOOM
Probably didn't want to announce that it exploded on the air
>>7791074
For the next launch Elon will use cameras that are made in-house to have a tighter grip on the quality control
>"second burn is later than predictions"
hmmmm
>>7791076
It's the sound of Aliens trying to read our minds.
NASA TV stream glitching up
ayys are onto us
>>7791079
It hit the AT&T bandwidth cap.
>mouse cursor in the stream
>>7791078
Not taking it.
Any tweets coming out of space x?
>>7791087
they didnt have to show any live video of this at all. They wanted to.
>>7791090
Posting in KSP thread.
Who XCOM here?
>>7791089
>Standing by for status
That stands for "we fucked up"
>>7791085
hello reddit
>tfw space cylinder isn't coming home
is stage 1 kill?
>Spacex incharge of barge technology
They need one of those platforms the oil well guys uses to keep things perfectly level.
>>7791054
who is this guy in the middle?
They would be cheering by now, they know exactly what's going on. It crashed again
>mfw Stage 1 hit the mission control
https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html
I always believed I'm a person with a bad luck. I didn't watch the falcon 9 landing and that's why it succeeded,
>>7791107
That's what they have.
It's all OGRE now
>>7791103
Thanks
>>7791106
They are quickly putting another rocket in landing place to then turn the camera on.
>>7791094
That's why they are going to launch those Internet satellites with Google, to make better streaming of launches possible
LE MILLION DOLLAR FIREWORK
>>7791100
Still in one piece?
Commander, I recommend we get a strike team to the crash site immediately.
How much does stage 1 cost and how much does fuel?
>>7791114
I can't find a photo of what I mean, but that barge didn't look like one. these are really awesome machines
" The 2nd stage engine has cut off #Jason3 is now coasting in an intermediate orbit until 2nd stage re-start in ~46min "
>trying to land rocket on barge
>not building custom spacex mother base
baka desu senpai
>>7791113
No, I'm pretty sure I'm the one with the bad luck. I watched the explosion in June, too.
>>7791122
ask mr.musk
THIS MUSIC FUCKING SUCKS
What the fuck is this music?
>>7791122
I think fuel is about $200,000, not sure about just the stage 1 though.
music really starting to hot up
>>7791129
Where is my DEATH GRIPS
>>7791107
https://i.imgur.com/Y57Bamb.gifv
>>7791134
why is fuel so expensive?
>>7791122
about $50M-60M for a complete rocket (both stage 1 & 2)
about $200K for fuel.
This muzak is straight up late night SMS chat TV program tier
>>7791140
thanks obama
>>7791140
Dead dinosaurs are expensive anon.
Elon right now
>launched in fog
>45m to sat deployment
>no word on 1st stage
>ayy music
JUST
>>7791140
Because shekels
>>7791140
don't want 3rd world countries going to space
CAN'T TUSK THE MUSK
where is this going to land?
>>7791122
From what I've heard, incremental cost of a first stage is about $20 million, and the fuel is around $30,000.
However, aside from the incremental cost of building the stage, there is also the facility cost and overhead involved in having a certain amount of manufacturing capacity, and the limits and difficulties of expanding.
By reusing the stages, they can do more launches without building a bigger factory and training more people, which takes time.
By doing more launches, they can make more use of launchpad facilities, and have reasons to streamline launch operations.
>15 white dudes in lauch control
>1 token woman
they did say there was a low probability of success for the landing though
so what the fuck happened to stage 1?
>>7791140
Elon should synergize, and put some tesla engines up in this bitch
WHY THE FUCK AREN'T THERE ANY UPDATES ON STAGE ONE
Fuel is cheap. That's about the same price it costs to fuel a 747.
>>7791159
and she kept fucking up on the radio too lol
>>7791157
On water after tipping over
maybe engine exhaust just damaged antenna?
>>7791157
anyone know?
Do rockets pollute a lot?
>>7791138
That isn't what I was thinking of, I found it though.
>>7791114
>>7791123
Are these normies or spacex people?
>one landing leg broke
>>7791163
Too late. Top Gear confirmed Tesla engines bullshit lies
>>7791159
Why the fuck would anyone care about "diversity" when it comes to important shit like this. I'm sure they have just the right people.
PARTIAL SUCCESS
>>7791159
Got to hire competence when launching millions of dollars and shitty stressful work conditions.
BROKEN LANDING LEG. FIRST STAGE KEKED.
HARD LANDING
Confirmed, booster slammed into the barge, broke a leg and fell over.
>implying the barge video wasn't delayed so it could be cut off in case of failure.
This was no coincidence.
>>7791162
It hit too hard, probably didn't blow up but it didn't work well either.
>LEG BROKE AGAIN
AYYY
>>7791176
Some are normies, others are employees
see you guys in 30 min
a leg broke as it was landing
>not standing upright
So.. its still standing?
>>7791161
new tweet! hard landing and a broken landing leg.
>>7791175
Thats awesome. Something like that might be a better bet if it could take the weight
>>7791175
Good luck building one that can support the size and weight of a rocket stage.
>>7791176
Both
look at me i'm going to land that multitonne hollow stick of metal on a barge in the full ocean
>leg broke
They should stop trying to land in shitty weather
>>7791192
We simply do not know.
Alright /sci/, what's the chance it fucks up?
>>7791201
They should build sturdier legs.
Gives a whole new meaning to break a leg
>>7791078
man should have taken that bet
>>7791206
Did it explode, or will they be able to fix the leg and possibly reuse it?
should try wheels next time
Alright question: what are the chances of a successful landing had they touched down on solid ground in this condition?
Fell on video camera confirmed
>>7791180
>Why the fuck would anyone care about "diversity" when it comes to important shit like this.
Are you kidding? If you don't bow to diversity, you get sued to death and refused government contracts. Most of the job market now is welfare by other means.
You might think, "I'm going to go into business and hire only the people I need." They won't let you. You've got to hire some not-very-useful people to carry your share of the burden.
>>7791187
There is no way it landed hard and didn't blow up
SpaceX uses soft language when things go wrong
Like when CRS-7 exploded they called it an "anomaly" rather than 100% mission failure
>>7791211
Those are expensive lessons.
>>7791214
They're like horses. If it's broke, they just shoot it.
Explosion or just had a little tumble?
>>7791217
It would probably land properly, considering it went well until it hit the fucking sponge.
>>7791217
very good. There was almost no wind.
>>7791182
>>7791180
exactly
>>7791217
probably not too bad considering they did that exact thing about a month ago
I'm actually starting to like this music
>>7791223
not really. the launches are currently priced assuming they will lose the first stage.
>>7791223
That's fine though. No human loss. This is how we progress. This is amazing.
>>7791227
a little tumble of an soda-can-thick tube filled with pressurized helium, LOx, RP1 and a burning engine at the bottom?
Thats the same thing as an explosion.
>>7791196
Doesn't seem very difficult desu.
>>7791224
Btw we should totally put horses in space at some point
12 foot waves. It was a tuff ask.
oh noes, it's going to antartica.
UN's gonna shoot it down before it crosses past the flat earth border.
>>7791219
I know, I know. I should've but 'should' in the sentence instead. On the other hand, SpaceX is very important to the US government, so it seems, so unless Tumblr & Co gets a shitfit out of it, everything should be all right,
Besides, I saw a pajeet and a brotha with ID's hanging, so they must have their quota or whatever.
>>7791217
I don't have numbers for you but landing on solid ground is much easier, there's no random fluctuations in the landing surface
If you watch the ORB-2 landing, you can see the rocket bounce a little when it lands.
Those legs have to absorb all the force of deceleration, and on a barge, one corner could be lifting upward in a wave, so you have the pressure of the ocean against the leg in addition to the deceleration force.
Absolutely not! Horses are soulless retards
>>7791217
I would say 90%
Did you see how barge was waving? I guess at the time of the landing barge was not level and one of the rockets' legs hit the barge harder than others, too hard.
>having legs in the first place
Just use a ring and fly into it, and deploy hooks that will catch on to the ring.
>>7791239
Too expensive to just build it for one landing.
>>7791254
>requiring the landing to be even more precise than it is now.
>>7791239
agreed, just need some fucking insane hydraulic pressure that can take the force of the landing
>>7791254
Legs give it an option to land in many conditions and spots. Landing in 1 spot perfectly is far harder.
>>7791248
its the difference between landing on a flat surface and landing on an uneven surface there is no "pressure from the ocean"
>>7791233
It's good music.
>>7791254
it would be going to fast and the arms that would catch the ring would break
I know the important thing is that they finish their mission, but these barge crashes suck
Gonna need some track IDs on this hot IDM.
>>7791263
Kek
JUST
READ
THE
INSTUCTONS
>>7791254
The goal is to have it land on mars, so they want to be able to land it without any prior infrastructure
>>7791240
yes, i want to see tumblr and PETA loose their fucking minds. shit would be epic
>>7791263
Why do they insist on landing it on a boat actually, and not on solid ground?
>>7791248
>you can see the rocket bounce a little when it lands.
Magnets. They need to use magnets.
>>7791276
Clearly because they are fucking badass.
>>7791271
I think it's just in-house music they commission people to make but damn is it autechy
>>7791221
Isn't that normal procedure in space missions? When Challenger blowed up they said it was a major mulfunction in the broadcast
>>7791276
fuel efficiency
Has it landed? Is it dead?
>>7791276
>so I've told the Falcon 9 R to land on a barge
>he actually did it the absolute madman
>>7791284
"Hard Landing"
>>7791276
A lot more flexibility, a full boostback to launch site would require more fuel, and won't be possible for the future Falcon Heavy center stage.
>>7791276
There's no solid ground within range of where the rocket is coming down.
>>7791240
Watching them try to eat hay in zero G would be hilarious, but the manure problem would be ungodly.
>>7791280
would be rad if there's a full time music division over at spacex lol
>>7791276
The stage can drop where it falls rather than have to manoeuvre it back to land and waste more fuel.
>>7791276
Because that means they need more fuel for the return trip, which means less payload into orbit.
>>7791276
Safer, rocket doesn't need to go over populated areas or buildings of any sort in case it blows up in the way down, or it crashes in an uncontrolled dive
>>7791276
It's traveling East to West, btw.
>>7791291
Maybe we could use the manure as fuel
>>7791274
Uh, there's no rolling surfaces on Mars, just lots of rock strewn ground.
>>7791297
Does everything in orbit go East to West or can do West East if they wanted?
>>7791298
Genius, and I think they also produce methane too.
Do they upload the stream video to youtube or something like that?
It's easy to download the whole thing as mp3 and then just cut the songs.
>>7791240
Aw dude, i'd totally watch horse moon races.
>>7791288
I hard landed in your mom last night but I'm still intact.
>>7791306
but muh lossless rotational velocidensity
we stage 2 now
>>7791302
it nearly all goes w to e. This one is going n to s in a polar orbit.
>Space X to Jason
Dang it is going like 15k mph right now. Love this stuff.
>>7791317
do you know about physics
how high is this thing going?
>>7791302
Last time (ORBCOMM2 launch and 1st stage landing) was West to East. Landed on land because enough fuel/not too heavy payload combo.
>>7791317
Just land it in a big bowl of this.
They should seriously consider buying an oil rig platform. These things are stable as fuck.
satellite was only 500kg so its possible the stage1 was too heavy from excess prepellant
HOLY SHIT IS THAT STREAM FROM BARGE?
>>7791332
>it bounces off and falls in the ocean anyway
>>7791317
might as well just dive it in the water, it will not break!
they released a landing vid
https://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
>>7791337
Nevermind I was an idiot, it was the second stage camera.
>>7791345
>january 2015
ITS 2016
What is this? 2nd stage cam?
>>7791345
>https://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
that was from 1st attempt a billion years ago.
>>7791345
thats a year old you massive faggot
>>7791332
They should cover the landing site in the ocean with chemicals that transform the water into jelly and then let the rocket land in that and then tow the jelly to land
>>7791341
Don't you have to then deal with seawater contamination of the engines?
>>7791347
oh fug sry bro I just had weed to calm myself
>tfw no more based SpaceX pause music
>>7791348
yeah.
>>7791345
>https://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
Fucking hell, the absolute madmen.
Its hard to tell how the barge was pitched at that point or if the rocket came down at a shit angle
>>7791317
Why not both, good legs and a tracking catcher?
loss of signal...?
>>7791348
yes
Even if SpaceX wasn't doing anything terribly interesting like attempting to land stages and refine the processes involved, it's awesome that they stream their launches. It's exactly the sort of thing we need if spacefaring is to ever again enter the collective consciousness in as big of a way as it did back in the 60s.
>>7791306
I don't know, you can try looking through their youtube channel but I don't think so since this is just filler for the live cast basically. I just started recording it though lol.
>>7791366
Yeah i agree. At launch they had like 52,000 viewers which isn't too shabby. It's not to shabby considering this is private company launching a boring weather sat
>>7791336
They got calculator too, anon.
>>7791366
I agree. NASA streams are boring as shit. NASA itself is boring as shit. They're trying to get the public interest back again but I think they're not doing well so far.
>>7791344
>https://i.imgur.com/Y57Bamb.gifv
Not the kind of weather we had there.
You can't deny the ballasts add a whole lot of stability.
>>7791358
I'm a few minutes behind on the livestream but what? Did it stop?
>>7791333
I wonder if the SeaLaunch rig is more stable than the barge.
>>7791373
I'm on an entire Minecraft server who was watching the launch and 1st stage landing. lol
>>7791379
They shut it off right before they Jason-3 deployment so the hipsters could awkwardly talk again.
>>7791380
yeah, it is.
it is also a money-drain of the highest order.
Cool how it disappeared into the darkness.
>>7791378
Doesn't matter. I've worked at sea for years. Even the biggest oil tankers and container vessels roll in waves, especially when you are static. The stream of the barge didn't look hugely dramatic but it was still probably a good 30 degree pitch
SO WHERE IS STAGE 1?
DID IT CRASH?
DID IT MAKE IT?
It's over?
>>7791394
Landed hard, broke a leg, fell over, blew up.
SpaceX's CATO needs to get their shit together
Musk should build a Torus Space Station at the lagrange point between the earth and moon.
>>7791396
YEAH WHAT DO YOU EXPECT A FUCKING CANDY ?
GTFO!
>>7791376
just a teory bb
>>7791404
Not until someone combines a lawn mower and a roomba or else you would have to bring mexicans
>>7791394
Stage one went full Kerbal on landing.
Can we at least see an explosion video so I can get some closure here?
>>7791387
Maybe Musk can pick it up as part of a future bankruptcy. I'm sure it could be stripped of its launch tech and be used as a landing only platform.
>>7791410
they already have roomba lawn mowers.
>>7791390
it's all ogre, mission: success, landing: ... we can't talk about it.
will they release the video recorded from the platform?
>>7791417
Then now is the time
>>7791418
When they bring the barge in find the cameras.
>>7791418
They said possibly in a few hours. The helo video has to be physically returned to base and analyzed first.
>>7791414
still will be expensive; the upkeep especially. And although I don't know much about the availability of these kind of ships, but it might be cheaper to buy an empty one instead of stripping all the plumbing from the sealaunch one.
I really just wanted to see that trajectory line meet back up with the rocket, but I suppose that line was not for the satellite.
>>7791414
Seems like it would be easier to just get a used oil rig
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odyssey_(launch_platform)
Although if they plan to re-launch them it would be perfect.
It was built in Japan
question;
what about dynamic control of the landing legs?
the legs sync with a little transponder in the drone barge and feed it accelerometer data so the rocket knows the difference between the plane crated by its landing legs, and the plan created by the drone ship's surface.
the landing legs basically "reach" for a stable footing on the drone ship, and after landing, the rocket sticks up
>>7791408
Actually you're right, it's possible. They will even check the data for everything, excessive fuel included.
Just from the barge drone footage, the rough seas might be more of a factor.
>>7791418
In a week or so. They need todays story to be "we had a successful launch and got our mission completed".
>>7791376
That doesn't mean it's not a factor.
Coming in with a heavy load of fuel makes the landing easier in some ways because they can start the burn earlier and possibly land with thrust equal to weight (one of the difficulties of landing Falcon 9 is that the minimum thrust of one engine is more than the empty weight, so it can't hover on its way to landing).
But on the other hand, it does mean more load on the legs when they shut down the engine. This could have broken a leg together with an unfortunately timed swell.
>>7791430
True.
No one can really say it was a failure since they are attempting things never done in average rocketry before. Everyone can say they'd launched and deployed, but only like 1 other company can say they returned the stage 1 rocket and had it land, and no one can say they didn't it on a barge 200 miles at sea.
>>7791430
No, Elon will GET TO THE CHOPPA immediately and take selfies with the wreckage.
>>7791431
Never said it's not a factor.
Wait, are they piloting that thing in real time?
They uploaded the stream, it's 1hour 40 minutes, it's the whole thing, right?
I'll download it and cut the songs and upload the somewhere, though I'll probably have to upload it in 5 hours or so since my internet here is pretty shitty.
Does anyone care to have them? Will this thread last that long?
>>7791404
I'm in.
>>7791450
Yes please do.
>>7791454
>implying fat NEETs are allowed on Elon's space torus
>>7791450
>Will this thread last that long?
It is 425 posts, no longer bumping, and is on page 3. It may be on page 7 in 5 hours, depending on traffic. Look for a new spacex thread in the catalog >>>/sci/catalog or make a new one when you return.
>>7791444
>Elon will GET TO THE CHOPPA immediately and take selfies with the wreckage
This. I'm now praying for it to happen.
>>7791428
Might be easier to stabilize the barge. Because we have a lot of practice with that.
>>7791461
>implying fat NEETs are allowed
Not me, I'm undergoing age reversal and will soon appear to be around 30 and still my normal 6' 185lbs. With my 50+ years experience, I'll be finding ways to exploit space resources and maybe you too.
>>7791471
not feasible to make the entire barge surface operate like that and carry the weight of the rocket which is why i suggested making the landing legs do the work, they already hold the rocket up after all
>>7791450
You're changing the world, anon!
Combine this thing with this >>7791175 thing.
>>7791488
It is feasible. Both might be needed. The barge and the rocket legs both having that tech.
>>7791450
I think some of the songs were of this guy?
>>7791488
More stable barge and flexible landing. Maybe we should get some monster truckies in here.
put some rockets on the barge with a 30 second fuel supply
make the barge launch and hover about 15 feet up as it "catches" the rocket and then lowest itself
this guarantees stability of the platform because the rockets can gimble and thrust-vector
Yeah it tipped over unfortunately.
>>7791449
>are they piloting that thing in real time?
The flight computer is.
>>7791496
he's got an album
http://www.discogs.com/Test-Shot-Starfish-Test-Shot-Starfish/master/760873
>>7791507
So, it could've been a success if all legs latched? That's even crazier than "oh the waves just a bit much".
>>7791507
footage when?
How many failures before they just give up?
>>7791517
That's what I'm getting from it, yes.
>>7791522
Just as soon as 1 time use $50 million rockets are worthless. This is a no going back thing. Rockets are reusable, you just need to recover them undamaged. The kinks will be worked out, no doubts here.
Elon says one of the legs didn't lock after folding out
>>7791544
Okay, so all they need to do is put 5 legs in case that happens.
>>7791522
Never; it doesn't cost them that much to try to land the rockets compared to fishing them mostly-destroyed out of the sea. They'll keep trying until they work out all the kinks.
Why isn't there additional support mechanisms in the barge to hold the thing down?
>>7791558
Because that'd create trip hazards for the legs and limit their landing zone even more.
what do they mean by "latch"?
>>7790242
Even being a SpaceX fanboy I still get nervous when I think of them possibly failing to launch a JWST-tier project
>>7791563
I bet even ULA is nervous about it.
As clean as their record is, it would be a major blow if it went kaboom.
>>7791561
Lock - leg didn't fully deploy or the locking mechanism seized.
>>7791563
>JWST
>implying that meme telescope will ever launch
>>7791571
Almost done
>>7791571
(you)
>>7791571
>>7791581
>JWST
>October 2018 launch date
All those guys do is stand around memeing,
http://jwst.nasa.gov/webcam.html
>>7791588
>>7791588
>All those guys do is stand around memeing,
>>7791565
Ariane is launching it
>>7791588
>project so delayed they have to stream it being built to prove someone is actually working on it
>>7791605
>project so delayed they have to stream it being built to prove someone is actually working on it
They are hard at work.
>>7791605
>stream shows engineers standing around not building anything
>>7791610
HA HA!
>>7791588
>http://jwst.nasa.gov/webcam.html
Look carefully, there's a new mirror ready to be installed.
I bet these guy are so under pressure they've gotta plan their pooping ahead of time. Take notes with time stamps of how many toilet paper they used, then review it in front of a panel of higher ups.
>>7791615
I'm sure they plan ahead for bathroom breaks since that entire place is a clean room. I wonder how many of them are indian. That must be awkward.
>>7791516
Was it any of you guys that requested this on what? If so mind uploading it somewhere else?
>>7791619
>"Ishaan don't shit there! This is a clean room!
>>7791522
There's no stopping the most successful African-American in the world.
>>7791599
God help us.
>>7791630
i doubt he sees himself as african
>>7791657
True, he hates the blecks
>>7791661
maybe you need that mindset to become a rocketscientist
>>7791679
BIG BLACK ROCKET
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/688837706005131264
rekt
Well at least they can reuse that leg.
>>7791753
actually that's a pretty good landing in ksp terms
I guess I tried is all I can say, there was a lot of noise from the mics and some songs started and ended abruptly, some songs were almost completely uninterrupted save for one or two lines so I kept them (I think they are the songs 7,8 and 9) and some songs had a lot of talk going, I feel kinda silly now since I see that someone posted a youtube account with the songs and a cd but well, I already uploaded them so here's the link:
https://mega.nz/#!uIQnHb4Z!0fU8fRsfQiX0zeNcKKiRwggRhwu9CJeMJIGzD7gEMSs
Cheers /sci/!
Reminder... some truth to counter all the SpaceXplode shilling.
All of Elon Musk’s businesses are FUNDED BY THE TAX PAYERS.. aka YOU!
That evil motherfucker is a the biggest welfare queen in the world! He became billionaire by getting tax handouts from government.
Fuck him!
> Elon Musk's growing empire is fueled by $4.9 billion in government subsidies
>Los Angeles entrepreneur Elon Musk has built a multibillion-dollar fortune running companies that make electric cars, sell solar panels and launch rockets into space.
>And he's built those companies with the help of billions in government subsidies.
>"He definitely goes where there is government money," said Dan Dolev, an analyst at Jefferies Equity Research. "That's a great strategy, but the government will cut you off one day."
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html#page=1
Bit pissed off by the failure. We know the rocket works, so the problem is the barge. Been thinking about how to level it in high seas. Its going to uave to he a new design, because this is doing an expensive retrieve and transport job.
My best ideas to now. A) A floating base comprising huge air filled circular balls, hydraulically damped, that move up and down independantly. B) The platform itself floats on a 'swimming pool' of oil on the barge, this oil is damped by baffles.
Anyone else have ideas?
>>7791869
so much better than handing out money to drunks and multi-child families.
>>7791886
It's the 3rd leg this time.
https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/688834952293519360
Also the drone barge is badass.
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/11/spacex-autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship/
>>7791895
That's a major relief, just shows that it was a minor problem.
>>7791918
Indeed, it gives me high hopes.
>>7791869
Tesla paid all his government money back, early.
>>7792018
Tesla paid the government loan back. It's certainly not paying the subsidies back.
Anyway, a loan to a corporation is a gift to its owner. If you could form a corporation tomorrow and borrow a hundred million dollars, you could, with near certainty, pay it all back the next day and keep a million for yourself, just by going to a casino. The small possibility of losing it all doesn't hurt you, because it's the corporation, not you, that would go bankrupt.
Corporations, by their nature, are for gambling. That's the point of them: limited liability. You put your stake in the corporation, then you take risks with that stake, and if you fail, the stake you put in is lost, but that's all you lose.
So you've got to be really careful about loaning to corporations. When the government starts handing out loans to a corporation for reasons and under terms that a bank wouldn't accept, that's a gift to the owner. That's encouraging them to gamble with the money, which they won't have to pay back if their gamble fails.
>>7791506
>landing a rocket on another rocket
that is so crazy it just might work!
>>7791753
better than the first two attempts.
>>7791869
yeah, let's give it to ULA instead, who are getting $1BN a year for "launch assurance"
SpaceX is such a better value for the tax payer it isn't even funny.
vid of the (almost) perfect landing!
https://www.instagram.com/p/BAqirNbwEc0/
>>7792293
Thats actually fucking badass.
>>7792293
infuriating
that's a successful landing with a failure to stay upright
>>7792293
Webm for prosperity
>>7792376
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHhh
Fucking had it.
What a shame
>>7792376
B T F O
T
F
O
>>7792376
>it falls over the side where it has no struts
gee I wonder why
>>7792592
Doesn't it have four in all directions? It looks like the one just gives in or something.
>Falcon lands on droneship, but the lockout collet doesn't latch on one the four legs, causing it to tip over post landing. Root cause may have been ice buildup due to condensation from heavy fog at liftoff.
eron musku
Why don't they catch it in a net
>>7792592
seeing as it falls directly on the one leg when it tips over, im not sure what clip you are watching. unless there is a KSP reference in there that i didnt get.
What I don't understand is why they're still stubbornly insisting on not having a catching system in place post-landing. This is the third time now.
NASA figured this out years ago. The Philae probe had a series of three harpoons that shot out once it touched down, maintaining its stability on a surface made entirely of ice.
Is there some reason that I'm not aware of? They don't want to fire harpoons into the asphalt of the ship? They want to get a 'clean' landing right? The extra weight isn't worth it?
>>7793174
Read this: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/688920586391805952.
>>7793194
I see a bunch of shitposting and some angry response from one of the engineers about how they don't need any help with their spacecraft and anyone making suggestions is being unhelpful.
Not exactly any solid reasoning.
>>7793204
Whining aside, explain how harpoons would help if one of the legs folded.
>>7793223
>Whining aside
Who's whining?
>Explain how harpoons would help if one of the legs folded.
More traction from the other legs to maintain balance on the folded leg. One of the legs folding would be more difficult if it's also being held aloft by the three other legs. Even if the leg wasn't fully locked in place.
This isn't even the only way they could do it. They could have a mechanism on the ship which grabs the spacecraft.
This isn't even a pipe dream, because the soviets did this in the 60's.
https://books.google.com/books?id=OXcECAAAQBAJ&pg=PA61&lpg=PA61&source=bl&ots=RddAycijnY&sig=X9HyXma-UNNhJru7t1C5z2mJ1BM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiereXM3rPKAhXDSyYKHfKDCEwQ6AEIMzAD#v=onepage&q&f=false
>>7793266
>Who's whining?
I can't see a bunch of it yet.
>More traction from the other legs to maintain balance on the folded leg.
>They could have a mechanism on the ship which grabs the spacecraft.
Good explanations, and example. Now how about more legs or (more) ice-proof locking mechanism? Which one's the cheaper/lighter/durable/reliable option?
Although as landing gets more precise, the landing platform's catching technique is more feasible. We might not even need legs. Just a huge soft dexterous hand.
>>7793266
>They could have a mechanism on the ship which grabs the spacecraft.
Costs money.
SpaceX is a low-cost space access business, which means that while yes a lot of fancy assistance features are possible from a technical point of view they are undesired due to cost issues.
As Elon also have a crush for mars they're going to focus on technologies that can be ported over for extraterrestial landings.
If you can land on a drone ship at sea reliably you can probably do something similar on mars.
>>7793360
>If you can land on a drone ship at sea reliably you can probably do something similar on mars.
Ah, of course. It's even in principle more complicated to make landing a two-separate-piece solution. You would have to drop the grabber pad first and then the lander second.
Better to just choose a landing site while improving the lander.
>>7790829
Fascinating. I'm going to use this to prove to religious people why we need to progress in science more. When you do, you stop going bald and grow your hair back!
>>7791254
I think this guy's on to something.
See you just add little wheels to make it mobile so it can catch the rocket in it's loving arms.
The rocket and "catcher's mitt" can communicate with each other to sync up minutely for little changes.
>>7791886
Make the barge a magnet and put little magnets on the feet of the rocket legs.
>>7792376
I hate to be the idiot in here, but why does it explode? Isn't it just fuel inside that would spew out as the thing break upon falling over?
>>7793174
Those harpoons sure helped Philae anon.
I'm just being stupid, I actually loved that entire mission and really wish the lander hadn't bounced around the comet into a dark ditch.
>>7793592
Dude, we're all idiots. So asking questions is always good. The answer is self-destruct because they don't want secret Iron Man tech to fall into the wrong hands.
No, really. I think the fuel (kerosene and oxygen) inside is super-cooled and pressurized (for density), so that explains the white blowout, which is flammable, and the engine is still super-hot, hence the fuel ignites like a fireball.
Good question, btw.
>>7793619
Ah, you're probably right, I completely forgot that it's not simply a container, but a controlled environment in it's own way. That definitely makes sense. Thanks.
>>7793629
I got a question for you, anyone really. How many explosion and how can you tell which one's bigger?