3 ms·
Once they have achieved sub-meter precision landing, getting rid of embedded legs in favor of external “legs” only makes sense.
by coolspot 6y ago
Once they have achieved sub-meter precision landing, getting rid of embedded legs in favor of external “legs” only makes sense.
- remarkEon 6y agoDoes it? Genuinely asking. I would expect the precision involved to do this to be a lot higher than when you have actual landing legs, which would provide some bit of “buffer” for hitting the target landing point. A RUD that takes out the first stage is one thing, but a RUD that takes out the first stage and the tower?
- coolspot 6y agoa) I think for the landing they will use a different tower from the launch tower. Launch tower has fuel/oxygen lines and in general is not well suited for landing catching role. b) I would imagine landing tower(s) as lightweght specialized structure that can move relatively fast to catch a rocket within +/- couple meters of ideal landing center.
- remarkEon 6y agoThat's an interesting idea. A landing tower, built to refurb the first stage before wheeling it back over to the launch tower for refueling and then another launch.
- lfuller 6y agoIt's my understanding that the purpose of landing at the launch tower like this is to reduce refurbishment time rather than to lower weight from the legs - their stated goal is being able to re-launch in under an hour after landing. Having a second landing lower would add similar delay to simply landing at a pad.