Slashdot Mirror


SpaceX Falcon 9R Vertical Take-Off and Landing Test Flight

schwit1 (797399) writes "The competition heats up: SpaceX [Wednesday] released a new video of the most recent Falcon 9R vertical take-off and landing test flight. The flight was to test the deployment and use of fins for controlling the stage during its return to Earth. Watch them unfold and adjust themselves beginning at about 1:15 into the video. In the second half you can see them near the top of the stage. Yet another video from SpaceX of the world's most blase cows. You can imagine new cows to the herd, reacting to the launch as the conditioned cows just yawn, just another 100 foot tall rocket launching and landing nearby. Nothing to see here."

105 comments

  1. Fins by Otter+Popinski · · Score: 3, Funny

    Aaaand 3... 2... 1... Deploy flyswatters!

    1. Re:Fins by CWCheese · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Interesting to see how the fins managed the torsional direction while guiding the rocket laterally. Much smoother than the thrusters used on the DC-X demonstrator. Those flyswatters are a remarkable advance in stabilizing the rocket for touchdown.

      --
      Have a Day!
    2. Re:Fins by RevWaldo · · Score: 1

      Fool - they're for the sideline steakburger stand. Cooked by rocket fuel!

      (Don't tell the cows.)

      .

  2. Kerbal Space Program by Piata · · Score: 2

    If Kerbal Space Program has taught me anything, it's that giant rocket engines are incredibley hard to control going forward. I can't even fathom the engineering skill and knowledge of physics required to make a rocket fly near flawlessly in reverse.

    1. Re:Kerbal Space Program by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, you don't fly a rocket in reverse ... you fly it less forward than usual. ;-)

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:Kerbal Space Program by richtopia · · Score: 2

      If KSP has taught me anything, it is that computer controlled rockets (MechJeb) can land vertically very reliably.

    3. Re:Kerbal Space Program by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember the first time I tried building a Munar Lander, and then decided to test fly it on the surface of Kerbin. That ate up quite some time before I managed to land it without a tip-over or an explosion.

    4. Re:Kerbal Space Program by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks to KSP, I am a champ at landing rockets now. If they added cross winds though....

  3. Too much credit to cows ... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Funny

    the world's most blase cows. You can imagine new cows to the herd

    I have it on the authority of several friends who have been involved in the raising of cows ... cows are far too damned stupid for what you're ascribing to them.

    I believe the entire cow decision tree comes down to: Does it look like it will eat me? Are the other cows moving and do they seem scared? Can I eat it? Can I poop on it? Is it time for a nap?

    Everything else, apparently, is mostly random chance and blind luck.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Too much credit to cows ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There's got to be a Farside cartoon in there somewhere.

    2. Re:Too much credit to cows ... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      There's got to be a Farside cartoon in there somewhere.

      For the record, if Gary Larson wishes to use that to create a Far Side cartoon, he may use it free of charge. ;-)

      More Far Side would be awesome.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:Too much credit to cows ... by Kjella · · Score: 1
      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:Too much credit to cows ... by Talderas · · Score: 1

      Is it bad that my first reading I had substituted Farscape for Farside?

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    5. Re:Too much credit to cows ... by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      They're very dumb animals that are hard to scare with things they should be scared of. On offroad rallies they aren't bothered by trucks driving right past them at high speed. And if they get in the way, they usually don't want to move. I once had a bull posture as if he was going to charge my truck, but he changed his mind after a couple of seconds and lazily began to stroll out of the way. Honking and revving didn't make him speed up.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    6. Re:Too much credit to cows ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, you haven't spent much time around horses, then.

      cows can be relied upon to figure their way out of a pasture sooner or later, don't
      often injure themselves, and are generally fat, dumb and happy.

      horses, on the other hand do none of these things. they get scared and break
      legs (and that's the end for the horse), they seldom manage to get out. cows are
      downright einsteins in comparison.

    7. Re:Too much credit to cows ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering the tiny spectrum of intelligence of the various mammals, it entertains me how keen humans are to rank them (and themselves).

      I believe the entire cow decision tree comes down to: Does it look like it will eat me? Are the other cows moving and do they seem scared? Can I eat it? Can I poop on it? Is it time for a nap?

      I believe the entire human decision tree comes to this too, although "pooping on" (sometimes) has a metaphorical meaning.

    8. Re:Too much credit to cows ... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      well, you haven't spent much time around horses, then.

      As a rider, no. But around horses and people who do, quite a bit.

      cows are
      downright einsteins in comparison.

      I know for a fact you can train a horse. I've seen it.

      I have never seen a trained cow.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    9. Re:Too much credit to cows ... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      You left out eating pieces of barbed wire. One must be VERY careful when stringing the fence that no pieces get left around, or they are likely to be eaten.

      So their "Can I eat it?" decision seems to revolve around capability rather than likely results.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    10. Re:Too much credit to cows ... by garyebickford · · Score: 1

      Horses are also very good at body language. There are a lot of very subtle cues that a good horseman learns, that a horse already knows. IMHO there's good evidence that, like dogs, we have co-evolved horses to be good at working with humans. At one time I could make my horse turn either from the front or back, moving forward or backward or staying in one place, with my arms folded and just turning my head and adjusting my posture.

      The historical way of teaching horses is rather crude, but has improved greatly in the last two decades. It basically is the equivalent to shouting "42!" (or any meaningless phrase) repeatedly until the horse does what you want, at which point you reward the horse. The horse has no idea what 42 means, it just keeps trying things until it gets rewarded (or, in older times, it stops getting hit.)

      But, as a former-fellow-horseman once told me, horses have two purposes in life - to eat and get away. :) I'd add one more thing about every 21 days, except for geldings.

      --
      It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
    11. Re:Too much credit to cows ... by NZKiwi · · Score: 1

      well, you haven't spent much time around horses, then.

      cows can be relied upon to figure their way out of a pasture sooner or later, don't often injure themselves, and are generally fat, dumb and happy.

      horses, on the other hand do none of these things. they get scared and break legs (and that's the end for the horse), they seldom manage to get out. cows are downright einsteins in comparison.

      Cow's get out because the herd is effectively the animal equivalent of a superfluid; A superfluid will also escape from an unsealed container and it's not remotely intelligent...(except in the case of fiction)

    12. Re:Too much credit to cows ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      as you've proven

  4. confused by electrosoccertux · · Score: 1

    I'm still confused how you can fire a rocket in reverse going mach 17 and not have problems with exhaust doing something to the nozzle.

    also, start at 2m20s to watch the cows run away!

    1. Re:confused by dale.furno · · Score: 1

      Did you notice some shrapnel at the 4:00 mark?

    2. Re:confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Air resistance will slow the rocket most of the way down and then when it starts to fall they use the engine to land.

    3. Re:confused by tp1024 · · Score: 1

      Simple. You don't.

      First stage separation happens at a very modest mach 6 (which accounts for part of the 30% performance loss when reusing the 1st stage) and pretty high up at a fraction of the normal atmospheric pressure. There had been doubts as to whether you could use rocket engines that way or not, but as it turns out the answer is: hell yeah.

    4. Re:confused by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      I don't think Terminal Velocity is at some Hyper Mach number. Why not use the engine to slow the craft down to a use gravity for a vertical decent?

    5. Re:confused by electrosoccertux · · Score: 1

      mach 6 not so bad still much impress

    6. Re:confused by waimate · · Score: 1

      also, start at 2m20s to watch the cows run away!

      And at 4:20 as it lands, the cows run back again. Very suspicious.

    7. Re:confused by electrosoccertux · · Score: 1

      lol

  5. Flyout and back plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On a space station launch from the cape, the first stage separates 180nm down range with considerable velocity away from the launch site.

    What flight path does SpaceX propose to use to get in a position to use this landing method?
        How much additional take off weight will this path require?

    1. Re:Flyout and back plan by 0123456 · · Score: 2

      If I remember correctly, the stage is so light by that point that they believe they can turn around and fly back using 10% of the fuel. That cuts payload somewhat, but a 20% lower payload for 10% of the price would still be a big win.

      The other option is to launch such that there's a convenient spot to land around where the stage would come down. That would take much less fuel, but you have to fly it back to the launhch site afterwards.

    2. Re:Flyout and back plan by mknewman · · Score: 1

      I believe the first stage makes an orbit before de-orbiting via a burn, comes in head first with an ablative heat shield, and flips over once it's roughly subsonic. The details are still sketchy but from what I heard the first real 'landing' on water was approximately 1 mile off course. Musk wants 300 ft on next flight and on a pad at the cape by end of the year.

    3. Re: Flyout and back plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why can't you just drive it back? It's got fins; surely it has wheels too!

    4. Re:Flyout and back plan by Spy+Handler · · Score: 2

      Huh? No the first stage never makes it into orbit. Otherwise you wouldn't need a second stage and it would be a SSTO vehicle.

    5. Re:Flyout and back plan by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      You're referring to the second stage. The first stage never get's anywhere close to orbit.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    6. Re: Flyout and back plan by 0123456 · · Score: 2

      Why can't you just drive it back? It's got fins; surely it has wheels too!

      Yeah, but it corners like a whale.

    7. Re:Flyout and back plan by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      You wouldn't have to fly it back to the launch site; the Falcon 9 travels by road, and the diameter (3.66 metres) was specifically chosen to be the largest diameter that can be transported by truck on regular roads. It's a cost-saving measure.

    8. Re:Flyout and back plan by garyebickford · · Score: 1

      In a real launch the vehicle is a couple of hundred miles downrange at separation. I'm guessing that one of the purposes of having a launch site in Texas is that then they can let the stage coast downrange some more, and land it at Canaveral. This would require less energy than returning to Texas. However Canaveral is pretty far downrange, so my guess may be bogus. This also depends on what type of orbit the launch is intended for.

      --
      It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
    9. Re:Flyout and back plan by kuldan · · Score: 1

      This is wrong, they said specifically that they aim to land back at the launch site, for quick refuel/restart (less than 24h turnover in production). No plans to return to other pads and carry via road/waterway.

  6. Thank you Elon by wjcofkc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I know Elon Musk has his haters, even in the nerd community, and they have their reasons. But personally, I am thankful beyond thankful for him, his companies, and many fine employees. There is no one out there working so hard to make the Earth a better place while also opening the doors to space in order to ensure the survival of our species. I find it interesting that the business ventures he lines up are not only geared toward making a better Earth, they simultaneously serve the purpose of developing crucial technologies we would need to colonize Mars. The man is a genius, and yes I'm a fanboy.

    --
    Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
    1. Re:Thank you Elon by turp182 · · Score: 1

      I'd mod you up if I had points. Elon Musk is a true visionary of our times. I hope he continues to have success with his current endeavors, and even more with future projects.

      I can't think of anyone who is changing the world in constructive ways like he is.

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
    2. Re:Thank you Elon by towermac · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm right there with you.

      I believe that a landable full sized rocket is somewhat of a big deal. I know we've been hearing about it for a while, but seeing is believing.

      I needed some good news today.

    3. Re:Thank you Elon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bill Gates?

    4. Re:Thank you Elon by queazocotal · · Score: 2

      In 12 years, Musk has gone from having no involvement in space to actually having a company that's designed and flown several rockets.
      Actually having a first stage that is reusable (the first stage of the last rocket launched hit the ocean slow enough that if it'd have had legs, and been on land, it'd have been reusable with little more than refueling)
      Having actual customers for a new rocket which exceeds all current launchers lift capacity is also notable.
      Mars is a hell of a stretch, yes. But he's already come a long way.

      The costs for mars are generally costed without assuming renewable launch. If this can be gotten working, a lot of the costs go down dramatically.

    5. Re:Thank you Elon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      100% agreed. This man is probably the first engineer to be a public hero in many young peoples life times.

    6. Re:Thank you Elon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If by constructive you mean erroneous software patents.

    7. Re:Thank you Elon by 50000BTU_barbecue · · Score: 1

      He's many things but an engineer he is not.

      "In 1992, after spending two years at Queen's School of Business in Kingston, Ontario, Musk transferred to the University of Pennsylvania where he received a bachelor's degree in economics from the Wharton School. He stayed on a year to finish his second bachelor's degree in physics. He moved to California to pursue a PhD in applied physics at Stanford but left the program after two days to pursue his entrepreneurial aspirations"

      By the time he finished his economics degree, he could probably work out for himself that engineering is not the path to riches. Paying OTHER people to do engineering, on the other hand...

      --
      Mostly random stuff.
    8. Re:Thank you Elon by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      I don't hate Musk, but he's not the first rich guy to have a vanity space program that ultimately goes nowhere. I'm still waiting for Bigelow Aerospace to open a space hotel with transportation provided by Virgin Galactic and Armadillo Aerospace.

    9. Re:Thank you Elon by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Bigelow is providing a module scheduled to fly on the ISS beginning next year. Their more ambitious activities are waiting on SpaceX's man rated launch vehicle.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    10. Re:Thank you Elon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is total bullshit.
      Starting with the deceptive moniker "Falcon9R".
      This is a small vehicle, and not even a scaled 9-engined Falon9.
      This doesn't have to propel a load half way into space then land; all it can do is go up...come down...a few hundred feet.
      NASA and the Russians were doing the same vertical landing on the Moon and Venus in the 1960's.
      Maybe Elon's own small penis compels him to rehash 50-year old technology in the shape and length of the penis he never had.

      This demonstrates NOTHING other than a waste of taxpayer money.
      NASA and ESA already tested and scrapped reusability.
      Elon's insecurity about his manhood translates to money put of taxpayer's pockets.
      The loser also can't beat the Russians for ISS supply pricing; more money leaking out of taxpayer's pockets.

    11. Re:Thank you Elon by gargleblast · · Score: 1

      I wish I was a loser like Elon Musk.

    12. Re:Thank you Elon by queazocotal · · Score: 1

      Not having a formal qualification does not - in other than the strict legal sense that is almost meaningless make you not an engineer.
      Being a civil engineer - for example - would not particularly help developing rockets.

      Spending ones own time to gain an understanding of the mechanics of rocketry well enough to be able to do broad conceptual design with somewhat realistic numbers that you hand off to others to check and implement is quite possible.
        This is the normal role of a lead engineer in a project.

    13. Re:Thank you Elon by queazocotal · · Score: 1

      The test stage shown in the video above is a test vehicle used to test - amongst other things the aerodynamic surfaces.
      The prior launch of falcon 9 had a first stage which came down in the sea, at a low enough velocity that if it was on land, it would have landed safely.
      The aerosurfaces tested yesterday will help enormously in fine control and reduce the need for lighting the engine during some parts of the descent or fuel for vernier engines on the proper full sized and weight stage.

    14. Re:Thank you Elon by kuldan · · Score: 1

      It will do so when they have the permission to fly out of McGregor, where the Falcon9 Dev-2 will be stationed. Where they are right now, they are not allowed to do acutal launches, so they have to wait.

      Also, they test on production flights right now, see CRS-3 last time or the upcoming AsiaSat flight in a few days.

    15. Re:Thank you Elon by kuldan · · Score: 1

      You are aware that they already did the landing (albeit in water) on CRS-3 with a fully orbit-capable production Falcon9(R-dev)? They turned around, slowed down, and soft-landed in the water, exactly what was planned for that flight. The next one will be on water again, but aims closer to the cape, and so on. It is an iterative concept... and, what you said Falcon9R does not do (and is a scam for it) it will do later when they have the new test site in texas ready to go, which they are currently lacking permissions to use.

      TL;DR: They are doing what they said they were doing, and they incrementally increase the height/flight paths of the rockets.

    16. Re:Thank you Elon by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      Yes but he hasn't actually done anything that hasn't been done before. You're extrapolating that to things that no one's done before.

      No-one in the West has built rockets so cheaply before. Look at Arianespace floundering because they're planning to build a new rocket that no-one will want to use if SpaceX are offering similar reliability for a fraction of the cost.

      No-one has ever landed a first stage after launching a rocket into space. SpaceX haven't quite achieved that yet, but their last demo clearly brought it down to sea level and would likely have recovered the stage if it had returned over land.

    17. Re:Thank you Elon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't take away from the fact that reusability is false economy as far as NASA and ESA are concerned.
      Elon Musk is beating a dead horse with my tax money.

      But if you want to get down to details, you mentioned grid fins are effective down to ~80m/s (#47280333).
      In which case "FR9" should be on the ground in ~12 seconds from 1000m.
      In the video, "FR9" took at least 40 seconds to descend 1000m, and I didn't perceive any dramatic acceleration (i.e. constant speed).
      Ergo, the grid fins had no useful aerodynamic effects during this particular test?

      Another point is if you look at existing grid fin examples, the fins have dimensions comparable to the diameter of the missile.
      "FR9" fins appears WAAAY too small (beyond the fact that "FR9" wasn't descending anything close to 80m/s).

      The informed viewer can conclude nothing other than a waste of taxpayer money.

    18. Re:Thank you Elon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oops, that should be "F9R".

  7. The Cows by NoSalt · · Score: 0

    They did not like that. Watch them scatter.

  8. New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by catchblue22 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you watch the Tesla news lately, I think it is apparent that the current American launch monopolists have initiated a wide ranging propaganda and political campaign against SpaceX. Examples of this are here and here, as well as comment boards on various articles about Space X. The memes I have noticed emphasized are first and foremost that SpaceX is cutting corners (aimed at legislators), that Space X is the beneficiary of "corporate welfare", and that Musk is a "communist bum" (aimed at right-leaning readers).

    One of the primary reasons I think this is evidence of an organized campaign is the timing. Space X initiated the campaign against the Russian rocket engines being used by ULA, as well as objecting to the bulk purchases of launch contracts by the Airforce from ULA, thus locking Space X out of a significant number of launches before it gains certification. I can imagine this as a directive from ULA exectives being given around that time. Such campaigns typically take a few weeks to work-up. They take studies of public opinion, come up with themes to base their campaign around, and then test those themes with the public, often with focus groups. This lag of a few weeks for propaganda campaigns is typical when an organization suddenly decides to initiate a campaign based on new information. Watch for it next time you see a government or corporation being attacked by a new threat. This lag of two or more weeks between threat and response is typical I believe of an organized propaganda campaign.

    --
    This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
    1. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

      and that Musk is a "communist bum" (aimed at right-leaning readers).

      Hahaha they called the guy who is closest to one of their mythical Randian supermen a communist bum!? LOL!

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    2. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 2

      And who is it that actually buys Russian rocket engines? ULA

      Who makes their own engines in California? Space-X

    3. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      I am a right leaning libertarian and I think Musk is doing well. It is his business and he can try to accomplish whatever he wants.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    4. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by thrich81 · · Score: 2

      I read them both and it is gratifying to see that every comment so far (there aren't many) attached to the two stories you listed (WashPo and Bloomberg) rips ULA and Sen Shelby new ones for their attacks on Space X. I guess ULA's astroturfing isn't quite up to speed yet.

    5. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by garyebickford · · Score: 1

      society's high IQ groups, while nothing is left for African-Americans and Latinos

      - that's a pretty racist remark. Are you implying that only whites have high IQs? You're also incorrect - there have been a number of astronauts of all races, and almost every space (and engineering) company actively works to increase the number of minorities and women in engineering disciplines. And it's working, slowly. I was just at a conference for internet hosting companies, and the percentage of 'minorities' and women was much higher than I would have seen even 10 years ago.

      But it's still difficult to find even one US woman in graduate computer science programs, and the vast majority of 'minorities' in those programs that I've seen have been from outside the US. Anecdote: I was back in school a few years ago. At that state school, the graduate CS program had 0 American women, and 0 American blacks - and well over 1/2 the program was foreigners. But about 20% of those foreigners were women. The foreigners knew that success here meant the difference between a comfortable middle class life, and not. Interestingly, the school's new building was named after a foreign student who went through the EE program, succeeded, and gave the school $12 million for the building.

      Societally the hardest part of increasing the number of technically educated youngsters is changing the culture within the home and early school to encourage and support analytical thinking, rational discourse, and motivation to achieve on the merits. It's hard to be a 'geek' kid when everyone in your class laughs at you, calls you names, and shoves you into lockers.

      The "ultimate revenge of the nerds" is that they grow up to be engineers, and build the world everyone else has to live in! :D

      --
      It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
    6. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by catchblue22 · · Score: 1

      I am a right leaning libertarian and I think Musk is doing well. It is his business and he can try to accomplish whatever he wants.

      I too believe that Elon Musk is awesome. He embodies the best of the free enterprise system. The problem is that most on the right, and that includes the funders of the tea party movement, espouse policies that will result not in a proper system of free enterprise where the best and brightest rise to the top, but rather a system where entrenched players act ruthlessly to maintain there positions of power. Whenever a small player looks too competitive, they will just absorb that player.

      The idea that the removal of government power will result in a world where super-humans like Musk will be free to make life better for all of us is, I believe, a delusion. The simple fact is that you can never, ever eliminate the State and its power. There will always be some organization making laws that all society must follow. What is happening in the US is that the power of the State has migrated into private hands. Congress is now, for all intents and purposes owned by private corporations, who get Congress to write laws in their own interest (they are already writing laws to hinder the disruptive Space X) And if Congress lost the ability to control society, the power would then migrate into the hands of the largest corporations, which would basically mean a return to a feudalist society of lords and serfs. And judging by the fact that you are spending time posting on a plebian board such as slashdot, you are likely to be a serf, and not a lord. Doesn't sound very libertarian to me.

      --
      This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
    7. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      The State will always wield its power badly. The more power you give them past what is 100% absolutely needed results in worse than what you want to be protected from. Always.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    8. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by catchblue22 · · Score: 1

      The State will always wield its power badly. The more power you give them past what is 100% absolutely needed results in worse than what you want to be protected from. Always.

      You completely missed my point. If you try to eliminate the democratic State, the corporation will become the State. Only it will not be restricted by the laws of a democratic government. It will make its own defacto laws.

      --
      This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
    9. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by Dishevel · · Score: 1
      No one said anything about eliminating the government.

      Every single time you hear about reducing government power over its people you can only hear "Destroy the state, Anarchy Rules!"

      This is childish. What people are saying is that the State has for quite some time now over stepped its righteous authority over the people and started to become our parents. It has gotten so bad that when you even mention it the masses flip out and wonder why some evil bastard wants to steal all the free shit they "Come up on" from others.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    10. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by catchblue22 · · Score: 1

      So then, what is the purpose of the State?

      --
      This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
    11. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      By that logic, we should abolish the police and rely on the murderers and rapists and robbers to police themselves, since the police are worse than them. Also, do you really want to return to pre-EPA days, or are you young enough not to remember them? The river in Cleveland catching fire? Love Canal?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    12. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by Dishevel · · Score: 1
      National Defense, Infrastructure, Foreign Relations, Border Security, Protecting Individual Rights, Protecting trade between the states, Ensuring a uniform set of laws that normal people can understand and follow.

      Off the top of my head. You could look to the constitution. There you will find the actual enumerated powers of the Federal government. They were enumerated for a reason. The Feds have been chipping away at the freedoms the individual states, local governments and people had to experiment and try things differently on smaller scales and brought them into an all encompassing federal quagmire of horror.

      It is a problem. If you have ever started a real business you know this. Even when you spend weeks looking into the regulations you are required to follow in many businesses you can never really be sure if you are complying with them all. As just a person you have no idea how many Federal, State and Local laws you break on a Monthly basis.

      We now have a government that has amassed so many Laws and regulations and is so deeply involved in all aspects of our lives that if they decide to out you away, it does not matter how decent of a person you think you are they can and will find something to legally put you away with.

      When the laws a person must live under can not be fully understood by that person he or she can never be truly free.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    13. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      You completely missed my point. If you try to eliminate the democratic State, the corporation will become the State.

      Only if you read too many Cyberpunk novels.

      How do you have a corporation without a State, when the very idea of a corporation is the product of the State? How long would Microsoft survive if they had to pay to enforce copyright themselves, without a State to do it for them?

    14. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by Dishevel · · Score: 1
      I have lived in California most of my life. When I was in grade school we had "Smog Days". We were not allowed to play outside during recess. The EPA and the AQMD fixed it. My kids have never had a smog day. Did they fix the problem and then cut the budget down and keep the standards.

      No. They did not.

      They continually decide that more regulations need to be made. That less pollution is acceptable. They pull more power into their sphere. They go to far. Name 3 regulations put in place to solve a problem that were later removed or lessened when the goals were reached. Name 2 agencies that set goals and then met them and did not then set their goals even higher. Name 2 federal programs that were shut down when it was found that they had no positive effect.

      The problem is not that it starts bad. The problem is the State has never found something that it will not regulate.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    15. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by catchblue22 · · Score: 1

      National Defense, Infrastructure, Foreign Relations, Border Security, Protecting Individual Rights, Protecting trade between the states, Ensuring a uniform set of laws that normal people can understand and follow.

      What happens when the rights of an individual conflicts with the rights of a huge corporation?

      --
      This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
    16. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by Dishevel · · Score: 1
      Ok. Name a Right that an Individual has that conflicts with a Right of a Corporation.

      If you are talking about environmental damage and or pollution. This is one of the areas where government does need to step in under "Protecting Individual Rights". It historically has. EPA ring a bell? The issue is that as a people we need to distrust this as much as possible. That way the individual rights can be protected but the EPA is constrained by the mistrust of the people into not abusing and expanding its powers.

      Government is not bad. Too many laws and too much regulation is. Remember Wal-Mart may be able kick you out of their stores and they could conceivably decide at some point that Mexicans and People in Wheelchairs are no longer welcome there. This would be a bad thing of course for some. For others though, they might see an opportunity to make a lot of money serving an under served (Shunned) market. Personally I would love to see the ADA repealed. I would search high and low for communities where disabled people had no access to some service. I would make some money serving them.

      When government though decides to treat me badly with their extra power what do I do? They do not come offering to sell me junk food that is "irresistible" they come with force. Chevron can not take my life. Government can. Target can not fine me for choosing to shop elsewhere. Government can. No private company can force me to buy their product without using government against me.

      Government should be small, on the side of the people and transparent when at all possible. Also, Importantly we should never have a regulation or law that we are compelled to live under that can not be easily explained and understood.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    17. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by catchblue22 · · Score: 1

      Government should be small, on the side of the people and transparent when at all possible. Also, Importantly we should never have a regulation or law that we are compelled to live under that can not be easily explained and understood.

      Ok, I agree with the "on the side of the people" and the "transparent" part. The "small" part might be nice. However, I would like you to consider a thought experiment, basically a reducto ad absurdum. Imagine a world in which there is only one corporation that controls all trade. I mean all. All goods must be bought through this corporation, and all people work through this corporation. What would the role of government be then? What if a person disagreed with that corporation? What if that corporation chose to banish that person from working? This would mean that this person would basically be out on the street with no chance of work. Would the government's role be to protect that person? Should the government act to break up that huge corporation to preserve trade? Would it? Or would the State have become the corporation?

      --
      This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
    18. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by Dishevel · · Score: 1
      What you are looking at IS the State, unless you stay constantly vigilant.

      We already have common sense monopoly laws. They are getting a bit convoluted due to corporations influencing the legislation and regulations. But this is the fault of the voters. If we keep voting in the same people and bitching about the results ...

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    19. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by catchblue22 · · Score: 1

      What you are looking at IS the State, unless you stay constantly vigilant.

      Yes, exactly. And obviously we are not there yet. However, from what I can see, we are going towards this. It may not be once corporation, but even if it is ten, twenty or thirty corporations that control most economic activity, this is concerning to me. Of particular concern is the American food supply, both its creation and its distribution. Small farms are disappearing, with huge corporate owned farms becoming dominant. I believe this is a dangerous concentration of power.

      However, the elephant in the room is wealth distribution. The wealthiest Americans own a concerningly large portion of the national wealth right now. And it is a simple mathematical fact in the American system that wealth leads to political power. Thus, the American political system is now acting primarly in the interests of the most wealthy. The right wing, which is the most owned by the wealthy, push "low tax" and "small government" policies, whose sole aim is to increase the wealth of the most wealthy relative to the rest of the nation. And the "tea party" movement will not fix this. It will in fact make it far far worse.

      It is a historical fact that the ONLY way America has found of leveling out wealth distribution is via a progressive income tax system. Following WWII, the top tax bracket (over $500000) was more than 90%. These tax rates effectively created the American middle class. In 1980, the upper tax bracket rate collapsed, and this began the decline of the American middle class. Seemingly paradoxically, the decline of the middle class has led to economic decline as well.

      I would advise that if you value the future economic well being of your children and grand-children, that you perform a political and economic reality check.

      --
      This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
    20. Re:New ULA anti-SpaceX campaign is apparent by Dishevel · · Score: 1
      People are so worried about how much the other guy has.

      Lets look at the real important stuff. What information do I have access to? How easy is my life? What is being poor now? Can you move up and down the ladder?

      Information is power. Today. Most people have more access to information than ever before. Our lives are easier. We have more things making our lives easy. We spend less time keeping the basics up. Poor used to be starvation and death. Now ... Poor is shitty computer, Slow DSL, a crappy feature phone, a couple of older LCD TVs and at least one car. You can get poorer but that is becoming increasingly rare. No one needs to starve. Homelessness is mostly for the mentally ill (We need to fix this.) and single men.

      The really wonderful thing is that in this country it takes nothing more than the balls to fail, dedication and a tiny bit of luck and sooner or later you will become wealthy. This is what needs to be protected more than anything. The freedom to succeed. I know what it takes for me to have more money. I am just unwilling to dedicate that much of my life to it. I am a family guy. A 20 year old guy who decides he will eat Ramen and take the bus till he makes it will have Bently by the time he is 30.

      With freedom there will be disparity. Without disparity your are stuck where you are born. Think not on how can I make myself more even with the guy on the top. Think only how can I have a better life for me.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
  9. Re:Smells bad. Another video? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you have to work at sounding that stupid, or does it come naturally?

  10. Prelude to Mars? by Invisible+Now · · Score: 1

    With a thick atmosphere and oceans and wide open plains everywhere there is little engineering justification to landing a rocket when you can simply pop a parachute.

    But Mars has a thin atmosphere and you need a working rocket to come home. Are the fins a lattice to simulate mar's thin air?

    Elon is nothing if not forward looking...

    --

    "Knowing everything doesn't help..."

    1. Re:Prelude to Mars? by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      It'd be impossible to land something the shape of a Falcon 9 first stage precisely enough (and on its landing legs) when using a parachute, and it's easier to simply refuel a rocket than to refuel a rocket and replace the parachutes (which tends to be a somewhat destructive process, if you've seen pictures of the Dragon after parachute deployment, where the parachute cords are stored beneath ablative insulation that they rip out).

      The fins have greater surface area, and work better at high speeds than regular fins. It has nothing to do with Mars, particularly because the Falcon 9 first stage will never leave Earth's atmosphere.

    2. Re:Prelude to Mars? by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

      little engineering justification, sure. But there's a whole lot of financial justification.

      It's all about operational costs. To retrieve something like an Apollo capsule that pops a parachute and lands in the ocean, they have to deploy fleet of ships and bunch of personnel, which all costs money even though it has nothing to do with rocket engineering. Also landing in salt water will mean extensive refurbishing and/or making the rocket marine-resistant, which leads to even more downtime and money.

      Like in the airliner business, time is money. The faster you can relaunch, more money you save. Elon's goal is to have both stages land in the same place they launched from, clean em up a bit, refuel, and relaunch in a matter of days (or hours). Like an airliner.

    3. Re:Prelude to Mars? by Invisible+Now · · Score: 1

      Interesting reply. Thinking about the economics. Gotta love Elon's Elan in any event...

      --

      "Knowing everything doesn't help..."

  11. Missed my daily dose of Elon Musk by Gothmolly · · Score: 0

    Thanks Slashdot, for continuing to fawn over this guy, it had been hours since you last told me how awesome he was.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  12. spacex 2014 is... by steak · · Score: 1

    like apple circa 1978.

  13. Gridfins! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    VERY Interesting that SpaceX added gridfins to the upper-end of the stage.

    Gridfins work like regular fins (adding drag and providing steering/roll control) but at optimally at supersonic speeds (where shock waves are fomed within the voids of the grids and effectively make them like solid paddles) which is why they're most-often seen on missiles, bombs that are carried on supersonic aircraft, and the Soyuz launch escape system (they are the big rectangles folded on the side of the soyuz at launch that would fold-out into the airstream during an abort)

    It appear that SpaceX decided the added weight and complexity was worth it for added roll control and guidance during the supersonic descent (where the "top" of the stage is the "back-end" where the deployed fins will be) - must have decided the current scheme of using thrusters needed lots more fuel to cover contingencies, making it heavy and no longer superior to fins.

    1. Re:Gridfins! by queazocotal · · Score: 1

      Not only supersonic - it seems likely that they'll perform quite adequately even down to the ~80m/s that it hits while freefalling down to a landing.

      I'm not sure about added weight.
      Certainly, it's added weight, if the stage is not intended to be recovered.
      However, the extra control authority right down to the point you need to light the main engine to start the 3-4G burn means that you may gain back the
      mass in less fuel needed both for the main engines and attitude control systems.

  14. You don't understand politics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Generic Republicans (the country-club sort who routinely get duped into supporting RINO candidates) are generally most-concerned with "the economy" and "national security" (which from their viewpoint protects the economy). Any accusation by America's old established famous and reliable defense contractors that a new guy from South Africa (not the US) who's in bed with Obama (getting tax money for Tesla as "green" subsidies AND for SpaceX under a program competing against the traditional aerospace providers) is a "commie bum" WILL have an impact. The vast majority of this type of Republican is either as ignorant of (or HATES) Ayn Rand every bit as much as the most-liberal Democrat - "Atlas Shrugged" was an equal indictment of the crony-capitalism of establishment Republicans as it was against the toxic blend of Crony Capitalism and Socialism advocated by Big-Government Democrats.

    The type of Libertarians, Conservative Republicans, and TEA Partiers who embrace Ayn Rand's cautionary tales are generally fans of SpaceX and the giant crony-capitalist corps will fail to sway them with the "commie" style slurs... which is why they are ALSO pushing the "corporate welfare" attack. Good PR flaks tailor their messages to their audiences. These flaks apparently are more-sophisticated than you (knowing the different "buttons" they need to push with the different groups they need to influence) but not quite sophisticated enough to realize that the libertarians and TEA Partiers already KNOW about the cronyism the big defense contractors are involved in and already know that it was one of these firms (Lockheed Martin) that bought its rocket engines from the "Russkies" rather than employing hard-working Americans (so much for "national security" and "patriotism"...)

    Your ignorance about anybody who is not a left-winger leads you to some bizarre ideas like the conclusion that this propaganda is one item aimed at one group who are ("obviously", to you) stupid-enough to fall for the contradiction. Sorry, but YOU are the dummy; you are apparently so insular in your politics that you think everybody who's not a leftist is "the same" .... sorta like some ignorant bigot who cannot pickout a particular black guy in a line-up because he thinks "they all look alike"

  15. Beef prices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If there was a crash landing beef prices would have sky-"rocketed" ;)

  16. awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    awesome.. enough said.

  17. Didya hear the one about two cows sent into orbit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didya hear the one about two cows sent into orbit?

    They were the herd shot 'round the world!

  18. Parachutes and fins.... by Invisible+Now · · Score: 1

    Good to know about the fins... It was just a guess.

    I don't see why parachutes are inevitably destructive for Earth re entry however... Dragon design aside ...

    --

    "Knowing everything doesn't help..."

    1. Re:Parachutes and fins.... by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      Parachutes won't slow down something that big slow enough for it to survive landing on dry land. They put parachutes on the early Falcon 9, it didn't survive even a water landing.

      The shuttle's SRBs used parachutes and survived, but they also hit the ocean, and you can't land in the ocean and be rapidly reusable (need to refurbish after the saltwater damage).

      You also have little to no control over a parachute landing (if you also want to land at a sufficiently slow speed), so instead of being able to land rather precisely on a small pad, you'd need an absolutely enormous potential landing area. So you'd pretty much have to land at sea, which as I said, makes rapid reusability impossible.

  19. FUD that Elon Musk is a commie to the Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This accusation against Musk is similar to the Big FUD spread against open-source and Linus Torvalds in particular. Those conservative forums all run on open-source platforms and none run on Microsoft's servers that come to mind. There are a small but persistent group of rightwingers who regularly extoll various security-oriented Linux distros on many of these forums; no one ever calls them commie infiltrators.

    I know of no major sources or forums on the Right that actually buy into this FUDding of either open source projects or SpaceX in the least.

    What I see is considerable enthusiasm for Musk's space project, far more so than for some of his other efforts. A lot of these forums are older folk who recall watching the '69 moon landing and they would like to see a big return to space under American leadership if costs can be brought down sharply as Musk is trying to do.

    1. Re:FUD that Elon Musk is a commie to the Right by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      Remember. The truth is what the left yells at you often enough.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?