Flawless Falcon Flight (SpaceX)

  • Context: SpaceX 
  • Thread starter Thread starter 1oldman2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Flight Spacex
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the recent Falcon 9 launch by SpaceX, specifically focusing on the performance of the booster during its return and landing. Participants explore the implications of the flight profile, the challenges of booster reuse, and engineering aspects related to landing dynamics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that the Falcon 9 flight was not entirely "flawless," citing reports of damage to the booster upon landing.
  • There is a suggestion that the challenges of reusing boosters for higher delta-v missions may stem from excessive heating or insufficient return fuel.
  • One participant mentions that the booster for geosynchronous missions encounters the atmosphere at higher speeds, resulting in significantly increased energy and heat.
  • Concerns are raised about SpaceX's ability to predict the maximum temperatures encountered by boosters during specific mission profiles and the implications for recovery operations.
  • Participants discuss the engineering feature known as the "Contingency Crush Core," which is designed to absorb energy during harder landings, although its impact on recovery operations remains uncertain.
  • There are references to historical engineering solutions, such as the honeycomb structure used in the Apollo moon landers, drawing parallels to current technologies.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the challenges of booster reuse and the implications of the recent flight. No consensus is reached on the effectiveness of current designs or the predictability of booster performance.

Contextual Notes

Some discussions highlight limitations in understanding the specific conditions affecting booster performance, such as the dependence on mission profiles and the unresolved nature of certain engineering challenges.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in aerospace engineering, rocket design, and the technical challenges of spaceflight may find this discussion relevant.

Physics news on Phys.org

:smile:
 
mheslep said:
That sounds as if they've still not cracked booster reuse of the higher delta-v missions: too much heating or too little return fuel available.
This flight profile apparently heat was the issue, about four or more times the normal load.

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/local/spacex-falcon-9-first-stage-booster-suffered-max-damage-on-landing/207178195
 
1oldman2 said:
This flight profile apparently heat was the issue, about four or more times the normal load.

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/local/spacex-falcon-9-first-stage-booster-suffered-max-damage-on-landing/207178195
Yes, as I said this flight had a more challenging orbit requiring more velocity. That class of satellites appear beyond reach of reusable boosters with the current SpaceX booster design or configuration.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1oldman2
I see the video indicates the booster for raising geosynchronous mission hits the atmosphere twice as fast as a LEO mission, thus the booster has four times the energy, generating eight times the heat.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1oldman2
Seems as if SpaceX should already know the max temperature encountered on return by the booster for this mission profile, and should thus be able predict booster reuseability, whether or not the booster lands succesfully. How many crispy boosters will they expensively retrieve only to be stored in a warehouse as opposed to the bottom of thee Atlantic?
 
  • #10
I expect a work around attempt very soon, they have a good learning curve.
 
  • #12
Curious about the condition of this booster, nice landing though. :ok:
 
  • #13
Good job.
Looks like the barge has to be designed to dissipate a lot of sudden heating and gas presure.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1oldman2
  • #14
rootone said:
Good job.
Looks like the barge has to be designed to dissipate a lot of sudden heating and gas presure.
And likely a rocket crash from time to time. :wink:
 
  • #15
About 21 minutes into video is lift off, a nice flight.

:doh: The video link I posted earlier in this thread was from an earlier landing, sorry about that. This landing occurs at about 29 minutes into the tech broadcast.
 
Last edited:
  • #16
This is an engineering aspect I wasn't aware of.
"Touchdown was somewhat harder than previous landings, causing the ‘Contingency Crush Core’
to come into play to cushion the impact, a device Elon Musk describes as an “aluminum honeycomb for
energy absorption in the telescoping actuator.” This is a replaceable part giving Falcon 9 the ability to survive
corner-case landings at higher speeds. What implications the Crush Core actually crushing has on recovery operations
is unknown". (From- http://spaceflight101.com/thaicom-8-space-x-launch-success/ )
My favorite segment of the video was the view from the core booster at roughly 26-28 minutes, The video of that view ends with what appears to be a camera meltdown.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Hoophy
  • #17
As I recall a similar honeycomb was used in the legs of the Apollo moon landers. I suspect it's just a matter of changing the shock absorber bit like you can do on a car.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1oldman2
  • #18
CWatters said:
As I recall a similar honeycomb was used in thesuspension legs of the Apollo moon landers. I suspect it's just a matter of changing the shock absorber bit like you can do on a car.
Sure enough, there it is. In all the Apollo landings I have watched I had never considered the LM's suspension, thanks for pointing this out.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/LM_Landing Gear1973010151.pdf
LM suspension.PNG

LM suspension 2.PNG
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mheslep
  • #20
Interesting, thanks.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1oldman2

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
10K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 271 ·
10
Replies
271
Views
30K