Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

SpaceX Falcon 9 FT launch - CRS 8 - SLC-40

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Not sure, but I suspect that a strong magnetic field could raise havoc with the electronics on board the rocket. They can't rule out any possible solution, that bounce across OCISLY is an obvious concern for long term reliability.

Judging from the video, at touchdown the Merlin engines seem to be producing just enough thrust to create a momentary hover. At that instant the rocket would become part of the air mass, drifting it downwind across the deck. Have no clue as to how much stress those carbon fiber legs can stand, but I wonder if SpaceX engineers will consider dropping it in from a couple of feet? I'm guessing they are currently only using a radar altimeter system to gauge the altitude above the deck. Apollo lunar modules also used a radar altimeter system, but backed it up with several 6 foot probes for precise information. At first contact the commander would manually close the throttle and drop it in. (Although on A11 Armstrong supposedly maintained some thrust until the legs touched the surface) Just a small jolt in one third G. They'll probably consider multiple ideas and it will be interesting to see how SpaceX eventually nails this issue.


A relatively simple solution seems to be to expand the deck of OCISLY e.g. until it is as wide as it is long. In case of wind with a constant component other tricks with the deck could be: purposely landing off-center up against the constant wind component, or even a light tilt of the deck to lean the center of gravity of the rocket stage into the constant wind component. I guess Space X could validate their recovered first stage while practising such landings.

As for magnets in the deck, they could consist of many small ones, each with a relatively localized field, and then only those directly under the landing feet would be enabled. The first stage has its apogee at about 140 km altitude, i.e. the ionosphere with nasty, hard X-rays and ionized particles, so I assume the electronics are radiation hardened, which may or may not include protection against an EMP. How that would help if at all against a magnetic field around each of the landing feet, is a good question.

Anyway, I will look forward to the next Falcon 9 launches. As for Elon, I actually hope he will spend most of his time ensuring that those 325k Model 3s are manufactured in a timely fashion to acceptable quality standards.
 
Last edited:
Thank you sparky for those details. You said your payload will be light. Any approx numbers ? Just wondering what is considered light for FH, and how does that compare to F9 payload that went up last Friday.

Thanks
I'm outside my field here and I don't know the total payload mass but the collection of small-ish sats on the manifest indicates we're a tiny, tiny portion of the FH boost capability. We'll be so light they'll load up with tons ballast for certification. Plus low-Earth-orbit (LEO) allows even more payload mass than GTO (where Direct-TV sats etc, pass the time).
The higher you need to go, the less mass you can carry.
The F-9 can put about 13 metric tonnes (13,000 kg) into LEO, so the FH is 4x that on paper. FH is really designed for competing with the Ariane-5 for big commercial payloads like Intelsats going to geosynchronous orbit. IIRC, FH has 2x the boost as the Ariane-5. And of course it can send a lot of stuff to Mars (~13 kt).
 
A relatively simple solution seems to be to expand the deck of OCISLY e.g. until it is as wide as it is long. In case of wind with a constant component other tricks with the deck could be: purposely landing off-center up against the constant wind component, or even a light tilt of the deck to lean the center of gravity of the rocket stage into the constant wind component. I guess Space X could validate their recovered first stage while practising such landings.

As for magnets in the deck, they could consist of many small ones, each with a relatively localized field, and then only those directly under the landing feet would be enabled. The first stage has its apogee at about 140 km altitude, i.e. the ionosphere with nasty, hard X-rays and ionized particles, so I assume the electronics are radiation hardened, which may or may not include protection against an EMP. How that would help if at all against a magnetic field around each of the landing feet, is a good question.

Anyway, I will look forward to the next Falcon 9 launches. As for Elon, I actually hope he will spend most of his time ensuring that those 325k Model 3s are manufactured in a timely fashion to acceptable quality standards.

Finding the best solution to those troubling surface winds would be a challenging, yet fun job to have at SpaceX. Since these rocket landings aren't required to be man rated, the engineers probably have more freedom to experiment. Your crosswind landing suggestions would be worth a look, especially targeting slightly upwind from the central X. I believe both the RTLS and drone ship winds are good to at least 15 knots. With practice they might even be able to raise the limitation someday. Who knows? If Elon could just find a tall ghost ship like the Queen Mary, just anchor it a few feet upwind of OCISLY and they'd be all set!
 
  • Like
Reactions: lklundin
The F-9 can put about 13 metric tonnes (13,000 kg) into LEO, so the FH is 4x that on paper. FH is really designed for competing with the Ariane-5 for big commercial payloads like Intelsats going to geosynchronous orbit. IIRC, FH has 2x the boost as the Ariane-5. And of course it can send a lot of stuff to Mars (~13 kt).

I think you're mixing units here. Should that "13kt" be 13 000 kg again?
 
Yes, and that is why the Falcon Heavy won't be the rocket used to get people and cargo to Mars, for that we need the SpaceX "BFR", much greater payload capacity.

Or SpaceX comes up with a strategy to build larger ships in orbit and fuel them there.

In my mind reusability trumps large payloads. If SpaceX can't reuse BFR boosters then they should stick with the boosters they can reuse.


I'd just like to point out that a lot of SpaceX naysayers were commenting about how superchilling the fuel was creating more problems SpaceX than the gains from it. They were pointing out the numerous delays. SpaceX said they had made improvements and it likely wouldn't be an issue in the future. This launch happened right on time with no issues. So apparently SpaceX have corrected whatever issues were out there.
 
Last edited:
Full Frontal Disclosure here......

As long-suffering readers know, I'm quite the Tesla Motors champion...very happy to have Mr Musk and Associates lead the world kicking and screaming into the electric age...it certainly seems to be the most exciting Big Picture development of our age....

...until I tune in to what SpaceX is up to - and then it becomes so absolutely clear as to why Mr Musk has said that at some point he'll hang up his TM hat to devote all his energies to space travel.

Such great stuff!
 
Sparky, very cool, thanks for sharing and participating on TMC.
Sparky. In the event that your satellites allow you to attend the Falcon Heavy launch, allow me to be the first here to volunteer to accompany you as your Valet. There may be others far more qualified on the thread, but none with the same abilities as a sycophant and glorified assistant. My skills are at your disposal.
 
  • Like
  • Funny
Reactions: Sparky and GoTslaGo
Almost along side

index.php