Slashdot Mirror
SpaceX Signs Lease Agreement With Air Force For Landing Pad
PaisteUser writes Space News reports that SpaceX has signed a historic agreement to allow construction of a landing pad for Falcon 9 booster stages. From the article: "The U.S. Air Force announced Feb. 10 that SpaceX has signed a five-year lease for Cape Canaveral's Launch Complex 13, which was used to launch Atlas rockets and missiles between 1956 and 1978. In its new role, it will serve as a landing pad for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy booster cores launched from Florida, the Air Force said. Financial terms of the lease were not disclosed." Patrick Air Force Base also provides the documentation used for the environmental impact study which details out how the landing pad will be constructed.
Or they are producing news worthy material at a pace much quicker than most other companies...
Seriously, why would SpaceX give a shit about promotion on Slashdot? It's not like any of us schmucks will buy a rocket.
People are interested in a successful privatized space company? NO. NEVER. MUST BE SHILLING.
Seriously, why would SpaceX give a shit about promotion on Slashdot?
Don't worry - the AC is just upset that Musk and Co. are building the future whist he merely spends his life complaining about things in front of his terminal.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
They should build a giant robotic arm that can grab these rockets when they're landing. That would bring the cool factor to 11.
Less dangerous than LAUNCHING near populated areas.
Very intriguing article, but it makes one wonder about the landing pad being at the launch site - normally the main booster is a good ways away from the main launch site and moving rapidly away (that's why the floating landing pad was 500 miles downrange from the launch site)...this would appear that SpaceX would carry enough fuel to turn the booster back around (from mach whatever) and fly all the way back to the launch site (would seem to be alot of fuel) - I would have expected landing on a floating landing pad or construct such a landing area on an island(s) that isn't too far from the parabolic fall area of the booster (i.e. where the floating pad would be).
Looking forward to more details....
Did you miss the part where it's already a launch complex? I.e. an isolated place designed for big-ass rockets packed to the gills with fuel to take off from? A landing accident would be much less of an issue than an accident during launch, and they've already demonstrated their ability to get the rocket to the bulls-eye once, despite severe mechanical problems. The fact that it crashed instead of landing is irrelevant to the safety of the distant population. Presumably by the time they've mastered actually landing at sea they will have a long run of "managed to hit the landing pad" under their belt.
Besides, it's not like they're planning to land them there today, and they're going to need lead time to actually design and build a suitable landing pad, etc. so that it's ready by the time the rockets are. It's not like you can just have FedEx deliver a landing pad overnight.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Tons of huge rockets are already being launched from KSC (with plans to launch far louder ones in the future), and have been for half a century. Landing rockets is unlikely to produce much more noise than that already does...
Seriously, why would SpaceX give a shit about promotion on Slashdot?
Don't worry - the AC is just upset that Musk and Co. are building the future whist he merely spends his life complaining about things in front of his terminal.
Seriously. SpaceX is cool for what they have already accomplished reducing launch costs significantly. If they can reduce costs even further it will enable far greater space exploration and much more sustainable utilization of space. If SpaceX can actually land some of these rocket stages so they can reuse the rockets eventually and make good on reducing costs even further, then that is a giant leap forward on par with all the great milestones. People are excited about SpaceX and the new space race for all the right reasons.
Surely a rocket trying to come in for a soft landing and going splat! boom! can't be worse than blowing up on the pad during lunch.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
I think SpaceX has already stated their intent to launch from a more westerly launchpad, IE their Texas site, Spaceport America, something like that and then land at Cape Canaveral. Then after a quick check and splash of fuel they wanted to fly the booster back to the launch point. The First part is pretty much a certainty, I'm not so sure that the second part is quite as viable. I'd think it would be more practical to put them on a barge and ship them back, but only time will tell.
It's not like any of us schmucks will buy a rocket.
I won PowerBall last night, you insensitive clod!
than a floating platform in the sea. While the latest launch is successful, they have to scrap the landing attempt due to choppy sea. NASA is paying for the launch, and not for the booster recovery. So if it's feasible to launch but not recover, they launch, because that's what the customer paid for. Recovery is currently just doing data gathering on the customer's dime.
Lots more details describe in this article: DSCOVR Mission Updates. One interesting information is that landing burn in only 28 seconds. That's all it takes to slow down from the terminal velocity down to 0 while performing the final guiding maneuver to the bulls eye.
Just remember what happened to Hugo Drax.
FTFY. He was pushed out an airlock.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Keep in mind, the rocket has a self-destruct feature. Going up or coming back down, one can destroy it if it threatens populated areas.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Yeah, but coming down is inherently safer. The difference in the amount of damage it can do with and without fuel is quite large.