SpaceX Rocket Launch Succeeds, But Landing Test Doesn't

New submitter 0x2A writes: A Falcon 9 rocket built by SpaceX successfully launched a Dragon cargo ship toward the International Space Station early Saturday— and then returned to Earth, apparently impacting its target ocean platform during a landing test in the Atlantic.

"Rocket made it to drone spaceport ship, but landed hard. Close, but no cigar this time. Bodes well for the future tho," Elon Musk tweeted shortly after the launch. He added that they didn't get good video of the landing attempt, so they'll be piecing it together using telemetry and debris. "Ship itself is fine. Some of the support equipment on the deck will need to be replaced."

Comments

Minor setback

[Dereck1701]

The fact that it made it to the platform itself is a major milestone, correcting whatever caused it to land hard (rough seas, hardware/software issue, ran out of fuel at the last second) would seem to be childs play compared to what was required to get to that point. Reentering craft usually have landing ellipsis of dozens if not hundreds of square miles and this thing landed on a 300'x170' platform. I look forward to the next (hopefully successful) test.

Re:Minor setback

[Zibodiz]

Exactly. The fact that it landed well enough that they're reporting the "ship itself is fine" means that it was a success. It doesn't take much to damage a rocket/module/anything that flies into space beyond use. They probably just landed on top of a toolbox or something.

Re:Minor setback

[ssam]

I assume that meant the boat was undamaged, not the rocket.

Re: Minor setback

[Rei]

Landing *anything* that's been to space on a barge has never been done before.
Landing a full-size *first stage* that's delivered a payload to space *anywhere* has never been done before (far, far harder problem than landing a crew capsule, they're massive, hard to control, and imbalanced).

The thing is nearly as heavy as the Space Shuttle, much larger, a much more unstable shape (due to the nature of rockets), has only stubby grid fins for manueuvering, is controlled by a computer with no ability for real-time corrections by a pilot, and was landing on a barge barely larger than itself. And was created on what's by comparison a shoestring budget. Let's not pretend that this isn't a massive challenge.

I know it's the nerd-equivalent of being a hipster to berate anyone who expresses any support for SpaceX, but for god's sake, look objectively at the nature of this challenge for a minute. One can hate Elon, but these engineers are not exactly picking the low hanging fruit, and they've still achieved very impressive results thusfar.

(The real question will be, of course, whether they can actually refurbish these first stages cheaper than they can build them... most people assumed the Shuttle would be dirt cheap to refurbish, after all...)

Re:Minor setback

[Gavagai80]

There has to be a test range on land somewhere they can try putting one down instead of a pitching platform in the middle of the ocean.

Not when you launch eastward from Florida.

it made it home

[onepoint]

Well, I think it's a milestone. Just getting it to land on the platform, in the dark, without any human help. That speaks a lot of the hard work that people invested. So it gets some damage, big deal.
I am glad that it was not a total success, otherwise people might get into lazy thinking and not look for bugs. I believe (not sure, cannot cite sources on this), but some airplane was not tested enough because everything happened perfect on testing, it was placed into production (1950's). Over the course of a year or 2, the planes were having issues and a few crashed. And they had to stop production. Some sort of fault in the structure.

So, in summary, He's done it!!! now to get all the bugs worked out.

Re:it made it home

[thrich81]

Sounds like the aircraft you are describing is the De Havilland Comet, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...

Re:Volunteers needed

[Immerman]

There will never be manned landings of the first stage. Or the second. For the simple reason that there is no reason to man them in the first place. As for the crew capsule - well by then they will have had lots of practice landing the first two stages, not to mention the much more similar unmanned cargo capsules which are a much easier control challenge than the booster stages - compare balancing a vertical broom in your palm to balancing a baseball. It might get a bit more exciting if the crew were allowed to wander around during landing, chaotically modifying the mass distribution, but I suspect most everyone would rather be strapped firmly in place anyway.

Re:No good video?

[rHBa]

According to Elon "Didn't get good landing/impact video. Pitch dark and foggy."

Re: No good video?

[Dan East]

Another news story said it was foggy and zero visibility. The cameras on the rocket really only showed anything when it fell over into the water, where bubbles could be seen.

Considering spaceX has navigated the rocket exactly where they wanted every landing attempt, I wonder when they will finally get permission to land on, um, actual land. For all we know the ship may have pitched up increasing the velocity that the rocket touched down. Plus I'm sure the poor visibility at sea couldn't have helped either.

Re:No KSP at SpaceX?

[EnglishTim]

Firstly, I think SpaceX were trying to get away from parachute recoveries. The Shuttle solid booster rockets used to parachute down into the ocean, but the problem with that is that they need completely cleaning out and refurbishing between each flight.

Secondly, they would need more than parachutes to recover the first stage because it is travelling so fast when it separates (not sure of the exact number, but somewhere between 2 and 4 Kilometers per second). They have to do a retrograde burn to slow down enough to safely re-enter the atmosphere.

Re: No good video?

[EnsilZah]

The bubbles you're probably referring to were from a camera inside the liquid oxygen tank of the second stage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Twitter: Ran out of Hydralic fluid

[frank249]

Elon Musk @elonmusk "Grid fins worked extremely well from hypersonic velocity to subsonic, but ran out of hydraulic fluid right before landing."
"Upcoming flight already has 50% more hydraulic fluid, so should have plenty of margin for landing attempt next month."

Re: A bit off topic

[joh]

Putting wings on something that consists of empty tanks in front and heavy engines in the tail is harder. A rocket stage has totally the wrong center of gravity to fly this way. Try to throw a dart with the heavy tip backwards and you will see why.

Re:Twitter: Ran out of Hydralic fluid

[Kjella]

Not an official reply but answered on Twitter:

Chris (Robotbeat) @Robotbeat 3h3 hours ago
@dtarsgeorge @rocketrepreneur In aerospace, hydraulics are pressurized with gas (no pump) and no return lines. Pretty standard, actually.