1oldman2
- 1,456
- 1,209
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.
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.
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.
Readers interested in aerospace engineering, rocket design, and the technical challenges of spaceflight may find this discussion relevant.
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.1oldman2 said:Apparently not quite "flawless". but they did get it on the barge.
http://news.discovery.com/space/pri...-spacex-rocket-suffered-max-damage-160518.htm
This flight profile apparently heat was the issue, about four or more times the normal load.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.
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.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
And likely a rocket crash from time to time.rootone said:Good job.
Looks like the barge has to be designed to dissipate a lot of sudden heating and gas presure.
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.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.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.