4 ms·

Not only this, but the spacex grasshopper test was the first that I saw that had the rocket do a vertical takeoff, and then land. https://www.youtube.com/watch

Not only this, but the spacex grasshopper test was the first that I saw that had the rocket do a vertical takeoff, and then land. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZDkItO-0a4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZDkItO-0a4

vpribish 11y ago
get a load of this: https://youtu.be/wv9n9Casp1o?t=2m11s https://youtu.be/wv9n9Casp1o?t=2m11s 1995, DC-X, and it's pyramidal
- ChuckMcM 11y ago
  Yeah, I still have a newspaper clipping on my wall from Aug 21st, 1993 (San Jose Mercury News) showing it in the take off, hover, and landing stages. I really wanted to work on it then too!
  - pi-err 11y ago
    TIL that the DCX was canceled by Nasa not for technical reasons - looks more like politics. The program was 21 months old and cost $60M. Is that correct? Amazing that this was achievable 20 years ago. Why no other re-usable rocket since 1996 if this was doable?
    - ChuckMcM 11y ago
      > Why no other re-usable rocket since 1996 if this > was doable? Economics, technology, motivation. All were in short supply in the 90's. One of my favorites was Rotary Rocket. It made great strides but didn't have the right team to get it into production.
    - gozur88 11y ago
      You should read one of Jerry Pournelle's rants on the subject. There was a lot of bitterness from people who supported the program. The problem with SSTOs, in general is that while getting them to take off and land isn't a big hurdle, getting them into orbit with more than a nontrivial payload is pretty difficult. http://www.jerrypournelle.com/slowchange/SSX.html http://www.jerrypournelle.com/slowchange/SSX.html It's a concept with its supporters, but there's a pretty large program risk - the numbers are so tight you may get to the end of your development and realize your rocket works but can take only, you know, 25 pounds of payload to LEO. Or maybe a few tons. Or maybe you can't get to orbit at all. SpaceX's plan to land each stage individually probably makes a lot more sense from the risk perspective.
gozur88 11y ago
This has been done a dozen times, from DC-X to JAXA's RTV to Armadillo's Stig. What makes the SpaceX effort different is it's part of a practical launch system and not an SSTO concept prototype like the others.

vpribish 11y ago

get a load of this: https://youtu.be/wv9n9Casp1o?t=2m11s https://youtu.be/wv9n9Casp1o?t=2m11s 1995, DC-X, and it's pyramidal

ChuckMcM 11y ago
Yeah, I still have a newspaper clipping on my wall from Aug 21st, 1993 (San Jose Mercury News) showing it in the take off, hover, and landing stages. I really wanted to work on it then too!
- pi-err 11y ago
  TIL that the DCX was canceled by Nasa not for technical reasons - looks more like politics. The program was 21 months old and cost $60M. Is that correct? Amazing that this was achievable 20 years ago. Why no other re-usable rocket since 1996 if this was doable?
  - ChuckMcM 11y ago
    > Why no other re-usable rocket since 1996 if this > was doable? Economics, technology, motivation. All were in short supply in the 90's. One of my favorites was Rotary Rocket. It made great strides but didn't have the right team to get it into production.
  - gozur88 11y ago
    You should read one of Jerry Pournelle's rants on the subject. There was a lot of bitterness from people who supported the program. The problem with SSTOs, in general is that while getting them to take off and land isn't a big hurdle, getting them into orbit with more than a nontrivial payload is pretty difficult. http://www.jerrypournelle.com/slowchange/SSX.html http://www.jerrypournelle.com/slowchange/SSX.html It's a concept with its supporters, but there's a pretty large program risk - the numbers are so tight you may get to the end of your development and realize your rocket works but can take only, you know, 25 pounds of payload to LEO. Or maybe a few tons. Or maybe you can't get to orbit at all. SpaceX's plan to land each stage individually probably makes a lot more sense from the risk perspective.

gozur88 11y ago

This has been done a dozen times, from DC-X to JAXA's RTV to Armadillo's Stig. What makes the SpaceX effort different is it's part of a practical launch system and not an SSTO concept prototype like the others.