Musk tweeted here [twitter.com] that the rocket landed fine but there was residual lateral velocity that tipped it over after landing. The photos on that tweet are worth looking at.
Obviously, now they have to work on fine positioning with elimination of lateral velocity before it comes down on the barge. Not an easy problem, especially given that the first stage doesn't have much Delta-V in its cold gas reaction control thrusters and does most of its positioning with the grid fins and the engine. Which means using more f
You know, they don't necessarily *need* to save the tank in order to save most of the cost. I bet the engines are both the most expensive and the heaviest parts, and they're at the bottom. If the stage doesn't actually hit so hard that the legs crumple and the engines contact the platform/ground, having the first stage tip over *might* still allow recovery of at least some of the octaweb. Maybe not the ones on the side that it landed on after tipping, but there's lots of engines on those stages, and I'd be
Well, the video is up on SpaceFlightNow [spaceflightnow.com], and it cuts off before the rocket tips over. Yes, we have no reason to believe there was anything left.
The first one hit hard and sank into the water.
The second one touch down fell over and sank into the water.
I predict the third one will burn down, tip over, then sink into the water.
But the fourth one, that will stand!
This is an achievement. Take it from an old rocket grognard, a veteran of Amroc, Orbital, and others: just getting this far is an accomplishment.
And it's smart of Musk to append a test operation onto a paying mission. The launch fee for the ISS delivery offsets a major portion of the cost of the test.
And in a test sequence, close does count, because all data gathered is useful. And often, data from a failure is more useful than data from a success.
"Success is a lousy teacher; it seduces smart people into
Musk tweeted here [twitter.com] that the rocket landed fine but there was residual lateral velocity that tipped it over after landing. The photos on that tweet are worth looking at.
Obviously, now they have to work on fine positioning with elimination of lateral velocity before it comes down on the barge. Not an easy problem, especially given that the first stage doesn't have much Delta-V in its cold gas reaction control thrusters and does most of its positioning with the grid fins and the engine. Which means using more f
You know, they don't necessarily *need* to save the tank in order to save most of the cost. I bet the engines are both the most expensive and the heaviest parts, and they're at the bottom. If the stage doesn't actually hit so hard that the legs crumple and the engines contact the platform/ground, having the first stage tip over *might* still allow recovery of at least some of the octaweb. Maybe not the ones on the side that it landed on after tipping, but there's lots of engines on those stages, and I'd be
Well, the video is up on SpaceFlightNow [spaceflightnow.com], and it cuts off before the rocket tips over. Yes, we have no reason to believe there was anything left.
The second one touch down fell over and sank into the water.
I predict the third one will burn down, tip over, then sink into the water.
But the fourth one, that will stand!
This is an achievement. Take it from an old rocket grognard, a veteran of Amroc, Orbital, and others: just getting this far is an accomplishment.
And it's smart of Musk to append a test operation onto a paying mission. The launch fee for the ISS delivery offsets a major portion of the cost of the test.
And in a test sequence, close does count, because all data gathered is useful. And often, data from a failure is more useful than data from a success.
"Success is a lousy teacher; it seduces smart people into