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

[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: 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.

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: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.