SpaceX's Falcon 9 first stage has landed (again) | Hacker News Reader

SpaceX's Falcon 9 first stage has landed (again)

twitter.com

112 pointsSignez39 comments

It's almost like this is becoming a regular occurrence. I'm looking forward to the next generation looking back on this and being incredulous that we used to completely throw away boosters on every launch.

Well, I had to scroll down to find that entry. I expected it to be in the top 3 already. Human jades very rapidly.

"I think we will be successful - ironically - when it becomes boring." - Elon Musk

At the NASA press conference after the first successful drone ship landing.

When will SpaceX actually reuse one of these landed stages? That's the whole point, right?

At the CRS-8 post-launch presser Musk said "sometime in June", though lately I've seen them describe it as "later this year". That sort of implies after June.

How many do they have?

4 now, though the first one is going on display at their headquarters. I believe the second one is going to be examined and undergo ground testing only (might be wrong on that). So that leaves just the third and now this one as candidates for re-flight.

I like being able to use the term "re-flight".

The high velocity drone ship landing (#3) landed too hard and was deemed unusable for launch duty (Edit 1: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/731984739012251648), so realistically, it's likely just two of the four so far.

Edit 2: per mikeash, it's definitely flyable (i.e. I'm wrong), but it'll still be grounded to aid with testing efforts. Thanks for the correction, Mike! https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/734274360588926976

Ah good, thanks. That might have been the one I was thinking of then that was just going to be examined. This flight though was also a high velocity landing so it might have similar issues if that's the case.

Nope, wrong. It took as much damage as any returning stage could be expected to, but is still reusable.

> Nope, wrong. It took as much damage as any returning stage could be expected to, but is still reusable.

Edited my comment with source tweet from Elon.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/731984739012251648

It's very likely not going to fly again.

Edit 2: per user mikeash, it's definitely flyable (i.e. I'm wrong), but it'll still be grounded to aid with testing efforts. Thanks for the kind correction, Mike! https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/734274360588926976

"Max damage" doesn't imply unflyable. A later tweet clarified that it's capable of flying again. They'd rather keep it for extensive testing, though, as an example of the most extreme conditions. It won't fly again, but not because it's too busted.

Edit: disregard per Mike's comment below.

I would think if damage was within tolerances (even at the maximum of such), they'd be willing to relaunch. Implications from the tweet and subsequent conversations are that the damage exceeded thresholds to guarantee safe future flight, which is why they'd use it for testing on the ground.

I'd still read his tweet as meaning it's "too busted" to fly, but I suppose it's up to each person's own interpretation. Your point is well received.

No need look for implications, there was a clear statement that it's flyable:

https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/73427436058892697...

It's being recruited as the testing leader because it represents the extreme, not because it's grounded.

Nice catch; I went digging through his tweets and must've missed it. Thanks!

Some of this info can be hard to dig up, for sure. Of course, most companies are much tighter with their information, so I can't really complain!

https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/73427436058892697...

Check your sources. Max damage meant upper limit of the range of expected damage.

Yup, user mikeash linked this soon after and clarified it for me, so I expressed my gratitude for his far more graceful and generally polite correction of the error in my comment. heh

That's not what he said. He said SpaceX will start testing with the booster that took the most damage, because if it works well then there is high chance that the others will work too.

The problem isn't that it landed hard, it's that it had to slow down very quickly. That's going to be the case for any GTO launch, including today's flight.

From what I understand there was heat damage around the engines.

Thanks for the clarification. I'd read that elsewhere but couldn't ID a source in time. Where've you seen that?

The good news there is that it might mean the rocket can be rehabilitated if needed since structural damage would be less likely.

Nothing official. This is based on comments (at Ars, I think) from people who studied the pictures closely.

According to the latest Musk tweets today's rocket was actually somewhat damaged in the landing - the scrificial "crush core" was, well, crushed.

At least 3 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/731981135454986240

4 including todays one, granted nothing wrong happens in transportation.

Is the plan to re-launch the booster during their normal launch schedule (i.e. carrying a client's satellite/material into space)? Or is the plan to simulate a launch and not add additional risk to the launch?

If it is the former, do they think they will be able to adequately calculate a risk percentage for the re-launch? I would assume that if a client is going to be the first test dummy for this process, that they will negotiate significant rate decreases based on the perceived additional risk and the cheaper cost associated with reusing the booster.

They could just simulate a client cargo by loading it up with various heavy objects. They can even be funny about what they load it up with. Imagine 2 tons of "Make America Great Again Hats", floating in orbit, wreaking havoc.

They plan on launching one of the re-used boosters this fall.

Congrats again to SpaceX!

They had some live footage of the first stage reentry which was pretty cool.

I hope the next SpaceX technological breakthrough is cameras that don't fog up on reentry.

In all seriousness I hope they release the full feed from that camera. It's got to be a hell of a view to see it bearing down on the drone ship from above.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jEz03Z8azc

I think it's more than just fog and water condensation, IIRC the lens broke last time.

Such things exist already, it's a question of whether they want to invest in changing their hardware for a slight benefit.

If anyone was wondering about repeatability I think they're well on the way to putting that to rest.

They're landing so many, pretty soon they are going to have to open up a used booster sales lot.

Speaking of which, when the first booster landed successfully, someone put up a gag Craigslist ad for a used booster ("only used once, excellent condition") but it got taken down quickly, unfortunately.

Good launch pace, if they keep it up, they'll surely build up a positive reputation quickly.

I've watched the SpaceX launches with my 4-year-old and 2-year-old. Exciting for me, but they really get into it as well. Indoctrination at it's finest. I was born in the 80s and missed the moon race, so it's nice to have this new space race.

I'm reminded of my early 20s when I played Everquest hardcore. My guild was one of the top among all servers. As soon as a new expansion came out we would quickly get to the endgame content and then spend weeks wiping over and over until we finally beat it all. Then we'd beat it again. And again. After a few times no one cared anymore and we went back to "farm-mode" until the next expansion was released. I guess the "next expansion" for SpaceX would be Mars.

Only a few frames of the actual landing, but here was the live stream.

https://youtu.be/zBYC4f79iXc?t=2290

when are they going to perform a launch with a recycled booster?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com