SpaceX Falcon 9 FT 1st reuse launch - SES-10 - LC-39A

[Nikxice]

Just watched the CBS News segment posted by Grendal. A fair report until near the end. The media never seems to miss an opportunity to add drama to these stories. In this case the reporter (not Bill Harwood) stated that SpaceX has stuck the landing 8 out of 13 times (with SES-10, now 9 out of 14). Producers are also compelled to add in the dramatic video of a Falcon 9 toppling over and exploding on a drone ship. After watching, my guess is that the typical uninformed viewer is still pretty skeptical of all this new rocket science. As we all know, perceptions can be twisted using stats. Here's a couple of simple facts for the media to ponder. SpaceX has now "stuck" the landing 8 out of their last 9 attempts. How about those last 5 in a row! Best I can tell, the word "experimental" is no longer part of SpaceX's Falcon 9 booster landing lexicon.

 

[scaesare]

There was a CBS radio entry this morning at their 8am national broadcast a the top of the 8am hour.

They used the term "recycle" which, while technically accurate, probably paints a picture in people's minds of grinding up old rockets to make new ones.

They also talked about the booster recovery, and then cut to an Elon quote (paraphrased): "Imagine a pallet of 6 million dollars crashing down in to the ocean, of course you'd try and snatch that rather than letting it go to waste." So it appears they used a quote regarding going after the fairings in the context of recovering the booster. Too bad, as the financial magnitude of the booster recovery is the bigger deal.

All that having been said, good to hear it make the national media...

 

[Krugerrand]

Just watched the CBS News segment posted by Grendal. A fair report until near the end. The media never seems to miss an opportunity to add drama to these stories. In this case the reporter (not Bill Harwood) stated that SpaceX has stuck the landing 8 out of 13 times (with SES-10, now 9 out of 14). Producers are also compelled to add in the dramatic video of a Falcon 9 toppling over and exploding on a drone ship. After watching, my guess is that the typical uninformed viewer is still pretty skeptical of all this new rocket science. As we all know, perceptions can be twisted using stats. Here's a couple of simple facts for the media to ponder. SpaceX has now "stuck" the landing 8 out of their last 9 attempts. How about those last 5 in a row! Best I can tell, the word "experimental" is no longer part of SpaceX's Falcon 9 booster landing lexicon.

Agreed. They also got it wrong about which booster was reused. They said the one that got reused for SES-10 was the one that landed back on ground. It was not from my understanding. It was the one that landed last April on Of Course I Still Love You.

 

[Electroman]

SpaceX has stuck the landing 8 out of 13 times

How about also mentioning that NASA, ULA, the Russians and everyone else have a success rate of 0 out hundreds of landing

 

[TEG]

How about also mentioning that NASA, ULA, the Russians and everyone else have a success rate of 0 out hundreds of landing

Well, we should give some credit to the retired space shuttle program which had re-use working. Yeah, a whole different sort of platform, but these new rockets are the replacement for that program.

 

[dhanson865]

Just watched the CBS News segment posted by Grendal. A fair report until near the end. The media never seems to miss an opportunity to add drama to these stories. In this case the reporter (not Bill Harwood) stated that SpaceX has stuck the landing 8 out of 13 times (with SES-10, now 9 out of 14). Producers are also compelled to add in the dramatic video of a Falcon 9 toppling over and exploding on a drone ship. After watching, my guess is that the typical uninformed viewer is still pretty skeptical of all this new rocket science. As we all know, perceptions can be twisted using stats. Here's a couple of simple facts for the media to ponder. SpaceX has now "stuck" the landing 8 out of their last 9 attempts. How about those last 5 in a row! Best I can tell, the word "experimental" is no longer part of SpaceX's Falcon 9 booster landing lexicon.

Here's a visualization someone did of the landings from Successful SpaceX Falcon 9 Landing Attempts [OC] • r/dataisbeautiful

 

[ohmman]

Here's a visualization someone did of the landings from Successful SpaceX Falcon 9 Landing Attempts [OC] • r/dataisbeautiful

Thanks. Although, if I were commenting on r/dataisbeautiful, I'd be joining the rest of group tearing apart the scale issues and y-axis choice (number of successful landings).

It does give a vague idea of the progression, though.

 

[Electroman]

Is there a full uninterrupted video of the landing uploaded yet ?

 

[ccutrer]

Well, we should give some credit to the retired space shuttle program which had re-use working. Yeah, a whole different sort of platform, but these new rockets are the replacement for that program.

While yes, the space shuttle is a footnote, it's just a footnote. My understanding is both the SRBs (from landing in the ocean and getting all that salt-water on them) and the orbiter required significant refurbishment costs and time between launches (see Criticism of the Space Shuttle program - Wikipedia). We haven't been told how much this first reflown booster cost to refurbish, but I would expect it to be quite expensive. It's obvious that SpaceX intends to rapidly drive this cost down, as they become more confident in their designs. One specific thing Elon mentioned in the press conference is that the grid fins are currently made out of aluminum with a heat-shield type coating, and it's a huge pain because they still burn up. So they're working on changing them out to titanium ones (with possibly the world's largest titanium press I think he said) that can withstand the heat much better, with little to no damage.

 

[Grendal]

Is there a full uninterrupted video of the landing uploaded yet ?

No. And SpaceX has not gone out of their way to put out the landing videos they've gotten off the ASDS's when the video feed fails like they used to. So while the video exists, we may never get to see it. Personally, I'd like to see a video of the roomba/Optimus Prime in action but I don't think that will happen either. This time around we lost the feed from the rocket and the ASDS. So no landing video at all for us this time.

 

[Electroman]

As that commentator was explaining the live feed from the rocket might get interrupted because as they lose altitude they also lose the line of sight with the base station (which is odd because I thought all feeds go via satellite), and then the drone ship usually loses signal just around touch down because of intense vibrations. So bummer both ways.

 

[Grendal]

This flight profile was a very hot landing for the booster. My impression was that the booster looked really good compared to JCSAT 14 and Thaicom 8. My conclusion from this is that SpaceX has really got the landing program dialed in. During the press conference, Elon mentioned that a lot of the improvements were to the base of the booster for prevention of reentry damage. I would guess that some of those improvements have already been implemented. There was no fire still burning at the base of the landed booster like we've seen on numerous landings. Obviously the company could use some super paint that can withstand temperature extremes and extreme friction. Watching the grid fin catch on fire from reentry friction was fascinating but not something that SpaceX wants to happen. Repainting an entire booster will take a lot longer than 24 hours.

 

[larmor]

This flight profile was a very hot landing for the booster. My impression was that the booster looked really good compared to JCSAT 14 and Thaicom 8. My conclusion from this is that SpaceX has really got the landing program dialed in. During the press conference, Elon mentioned that a lot of the improvements were to the base of the booster for prevention of reentry damage. I would guess that some of those improvements have already been implemented. There was no fire still burning at the base of the landed booster like we've seen on numerous landings. Obviously the company could use some super paint that can withstand temperature extremes and extreme friction. Watching the grid fin catch on fire from reentry friction was fascinating but not something that SpaceX wants to happen. Repainting an entire booster will take a lot longer than 24 hours.

Graphene--- could conduct the heat away from vulnerable areas.

 

[thimel]

Any idea why the booster is painted? Couldn't they just leave it bare aluminum? It would save a bit of weight and they wouldn't get damaged paint.
The only reason I can think of is that the paint protects the aluminum, but that doesn't see likely to me.

 

[Skotty]

Any idea why the booster is painted? Couldn't they just leave it bare aluminum? It would save a bit of weight and they wouldn't get damaged paint.
The only reason I can think of is that the paint protects the aluminum, but that doesn't see likely to me.

Paint protects against oxidation. But it's also aesthetics, and ultimately, public opinion about Elon's rockets. They probably don't need to paint them fancy-like nor clean them (dirty plain grey primer would probably work fine), but then they would look awful, and people would react negatively to it and the company.

Yes, I really think life is that petty.

Plus, Elon himself just likes things to look cool.

 

[scaesare]

I've noticed that the shrouds on the landing legs burn quite a bit. My assumption is that those are sacrificial, and in addition to their primary role as aerodynamic fixtures for the main flight, they also protect the legs from the hot exhaust gasses during the final hover-slam burn.

I'd expect the paint on the entire booster is ablative in that it's easier/practical/economical to re-paint than to deal with actual damaged surface material,

 

[macpacheco]

Paint protects against oxidation. But it's also aesthetics, and ultimately, public opinion about Elon's rockets. They probably don't need to paint them fancy-like nor clean them (dirty plain grey primer would probably work fine), but then they would look awful, and people would react negatively to it and the company.

Yes, I really think life is that petty.

Plus, Elon himself just likes things to look cool.

Actually the SES-10 relaunched booster wasn't repainted. High def pics very clearly showed the booster either had soot or degraded paint due to the first landing heating.
I think they do wash the booster though.
In my opinion the dirty look is quite interesting to show and tell "look at that, this boosters has been launched before".

 

[ohmman]

Ran across this glorious photo on reddit.

 

[ICUDoc]

the grid fin catch on fire from reentry friction was fascinating.

Yes! I've never noticed this before, thought it was exhaust gases somehow tangled up in the grid fins, but this one was clearly burning.
Aluminium BURNING due to air friction heat. Amazing to watch.
(Yes I know ablation heat shields deal with stupid temps but this still fascinated me)

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Paint protects against oxidation. But it's also aesthetics, and ultimately, public opinion about Elon's rockets. They probably don't need to paint them fancy-like nor clean them (dirty plain grey primer would probably work fine), but then they would look awful, and people would react negatively to it and the company.

Yes, I really think life is that petty.

Plus, Elon himself just likes things to look cool.

They might have to clean them so they can look for paint damage.