Hacker News Reader

Comment by birken | Hacker News Reader

And they caught it again. Truly amazing.

Wonder if they will be able to launch it a third time, though, since it seemed it did get a bit more damage on entry this time around. Either way, impressive.

Btw, does anyone know how reusable these things are expected to be in the near term? As in, would a perfected Stage 1 be expected to be able to fly 10 missions? 100? 1000?

Headed to a museum, probably, after some testing.

I'm pretty sure the plan is to put this one in a museum. Later variants are supposed to be easier and more reliable to re-fly.

Something to think about: pretty soon there will be nothing strange about a rocket that has flown before. Contrast it with the feeling you have for a 737 that has done 2500 starts and landing prior to you going on board, it's a sign of confidence that it did that. Now it will be many many years before there will be boosters with numbers of take-offs and landings > 20 or so but at some point insurance premiums for unflown hardware will be higher than for hardware that has been flown before.

Huge game changer this, also in the frequency of launches.

"Flight tested" rockets is an interesting spin on this

As is, on the other end of the spectrum, "lithobraking" :)

>737 that has done 2500 starts and landing

You can probably add another zero there. 737 airframes don't even need a special inspection and maintenance program until they hit 60,000 takeoff/landing cycles. [1]

[1] http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFAR.nsf...

On the prelaunch video, they suggeste a try for at least 10x.

... for Block 5, which is the next version after this one. They've learned stuff since they started landing and examining them. First Block 5 launch is perhaps the end of this year.

They covered it in the webcast, they said they expect 10 cycles. Not sure which block/version they are talking about though.

This comment was very informative https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13999791

Sitting here smiling ear to ear :) Also interesting how many references there were to the Mars mission in the lead up to the launch.

Amazing. But the video seemed to cut out right before landing.

They warned that would happen, the real time coverage is a good show of confidence.

It always happen right after you can barely see the fire reflecting on the barge. The vibrations from the rocket screws with the satellite connection.

We don't have the technology yet to have internet in the middle of the ocean without satellites.

Why not have a small secondary ship parked about a mile away, that can act as a satellite relay? Should be able to maintain a good link over that small distance.

Ultimately they're a space launch company, not a TV channel :)

That's adding a lot of extra cost just to keep a live feed for going for the missing ~15 seconds around the landing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com