-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
And this really is by far the most important thing today. Congratulations to Elon and the team at SpaceX!
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
Let me just quote some other answers
I can't find it but another quote I saw said that Falcon Heavy would have to land the center module on the barge even if the outer two modules RTLS as it will have more thrust and cut off at a higher altitude.
essentially you will have
Some falcon missions will have light cargo or cargo intended for low orbit and will RTLS (landing on land)
Some falcon missions will have heavier cargo or cargo intended for higher orbit and will land on the barge (landing at sea).
Falcon Heavy missions might have light enough cargo or cargo intended for low enough orbit to allow some or all modules to RTLS or might not so you might see
Falcon Heavy scenario 1: 3 modules attempt to land on barge(s)
Falcon Heavy scenario 2: 1 module attempts to land on barge, 2 modules RTLS
Falcon Heavy scenario 3: 3 modules RTLS
FH scenario 2 and 3 being less likely but more reliable if possible (depending on payload and launch site).
Last edited:
hockeythug
Active Member
Cheaper to land on the ocean due to orbital mechanics. Watch the livestream again, they give a great explanation.
Interesting that polar deploys are better from west coast and Falcon Heavy will launch from Vandenberg. That was also a cool explanation!
TheTalkingMule
Distributed Energy Enthusiast
Exactly. With all the resources and effort put into SpaceX, I would think a gyroscopic/pneumatic "platform above a barge" would be the way to go. That webcam shot before it was exploded showed the landing surface rocking back and forth to the extent that nothing upright could possibly land on it.
Also, why are they trying to land perfectly on a barge? Why not just a bunch of parachutes, a quiet splashdown, and a balloon for buoyancy?
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
This has been discussed to death already. A sea landing means the rocket is not reusable because of corrosion. The argument against parachutes is that it doesn't allow for a controlled landing like that of a rocket (will need much wider landing area). Also, supposedly the weight penalty was higher for a parachute system than a rocket system.
Wshowell
Member
Went to the launch today. We were about 1km away from the pad. Heavy fog obscured any visual reference but the sound and feel of the launch were amazing. Wish I could post a video and share it but that doesn't seem to be an option. There are just a few Tesla's in this area but I counted a dozen in attendance, relevant field trip. Thought it was cool to see the Musk linkage, I bet those folks have solar city setups at their homes too. Next time I'll take our Rav4EV and see if any Model S owners recognize their step sister.
I consider that relatively good news. There was a component failure and they will learn from that. Stage was on target and despite heavy seas the landing would likely have been successful if all legs had locked properly just like they did during the first stage landing success in December.
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
parachutes and balloon weight more and reduce functional payload.
Landing upright with main engines uses less weight.
I think it is great news, SpaceX seems to be on track to become space ballet dancer
Baby Space X contemplating its future - what do I want to be?
Space X uuups, gimme a break, I am on L's
Space X trying, dang wobbly legs
Space X juuuust making it (this is so darn hard...)
Space X mastering the stand (smirk)
Space X ballet moves in space (appropriate soundtrack....)
Space X victorious roar - looook at moa, I am the space master!!! Jeff eat your heart out
Last edited:
