4 ms·
Super Heavy landing burn and soft splashdown in the Gulf of Mexico [video]
- ChrisArchitect 2y agoRelated tons of discussion: Super Heavy has splashed down in The Gulf of Mexico https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40596883 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40596883
- TMWNN 2y agoYes, but this is newly released footage. That it was taken from a nearby buoy is evidence that the booster landed exactly where SpaceX aimed it.
- numpad0 2y agoIs it going to make too little sense to add angled subscale engines in the interstage area in quadcopter configuration, in a manner that resembles Porsche 918? That'll look cool, and could mitigate propellant feed problem too.
- EnigmaFlare 2y agoProbably as much sense as if you're building some software and have the general design worked out and are still working on some broken bits, then someone comes along and suggests why don't you use this separate library to patch over the broken bits instead of fixing them like you were already doing?
- moffkalast 2y agoSo, a normal Tuesday.
- _Microft 2y agoI think you just invented ullage rockets (if you meant that the thrust of these small rockets should help to settle the fuel at the bottom of the tanks). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ullage_motor https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ullage_motor
- numpad0 2y agoI mean, firing all the way down. Ullage motors are for ignitions only, my proposal is dedicated descent engines. It'll improve control authority by a lot too.
- quartesixte 2y agocomplexity + weight probably not worth the trade off. If you can hit it with just main engine gimallinga and grid fins, why bother? also, combustion devices are always one more point of complex and catastrophic mihaps. better keep it as simple as possible and don't miss.
- numpad0 2y agoBut there's flame coming from lower rocket body in the video, that suggests partial RUD around thrust structure, which has to be looked into and worked a lot. There's already fuel line going into the fins as a ghetto hydraulics, so it should be more of "just" adding the oxidizer line rather than completely redoing that area for something that hasn't been done. Plus it could make the entire stack more flush and sleek.
- simonh 2y agoThe engines combust fuel to run their turbopumps, the exhaust will be the flames coming from the side of the rocket body. You can see it on the ascent as well. On Falcon 9 too.
- _Microft 2y agoRaptor is a full flow staged combustion engine [0], that means that the preburner exhaust is fed into the main combustion chamber. This is more efficient than dumping it separately like it happens on the Falcon 9 engines [1]. The black, sooty smoke on the first image of the Wikipedia article [1] is the (kerosene) fuel-rich preburner exhaust of the Merlin engine. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Raptor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Raptor [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Merlin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Merlin
- Willingham 2y agoLooking forward to seeing this bad boy get grabbed by the “The Claw”(can’t help but think of toy story here XD)
- moffkalast 2y agoThat roar once the sound hits, amazing. It's a real shame they had nothing in the indian ocean waiting to film the upper stage. I mean cmon, people build solar drone boats as college projects for relative pennies, don't tell me spacex couldn't have one autonomously sail to the projected point and launch a drone to record what happens if it makes it that far.
- XorNot 2y agoI think the upper stage missed by something like 6 km from its intended target (which is not surprising given the toasty state of the fins) - even with drones you couldn't really bracket a large enough area to get good camera footage. Basically it definitely wouldn't be worth the expense for the benefit - I think they'd prefer just to film the one which nails it.
- moffkalast 2y agoWhere are they getting the material for their next blooper reel though? But yeah you're probably right.
- _Microft 2y agoI’d bet that Starship will have a continuously updated, estimated landing point throughout the whole maneuver anyways. A plane can easily go 6km in about a minute (at a mere 360km/h), so if there was a plane trying to film the descent and landing, it will have some kind of footage.
- whamlastxmas 2y agoWhat’s the source on that? The feed said trajectory was nominal the whole time
- XorNot 2y agoInterview with Elon by Ellie in Space - this is around the time stamp: https://youtu.be/tjAWYytTKco?si=Iz1k7sfNsGK3vZp7&t=141 https://youtu.be/tjAWYytTKco?si=Iz1k7sfNsGK3vZp7&t=141 He says it was 6 kilometers off geographically, but executed the landing well.
- creativenolo 2y agoThis _looks_ incredible fake. I’m not saying that it is fake but it _looks_ like out its out of a b-movie remake. I guess this is the SpaceX/Elon style.
- brador 2y agoThings moving against gravity always look fake. We’re just not used to seeing that.
- creativenolo 2y agoYeah. The way the bouy comes into view adds to the theatre of it.
- whamlastxmas 2y agolol the lengths people go to to criticize el*n
- creativenolo 2y agoIt wasn’t actually a criticism. I am commenting on the aesthetic. Clearly touched some nerves.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]