4 ms·

The mission was to launch the satellite they were being paid to launch. Recovery of the rocket was a test they were running on the side. The mission justifiably

• mikeash 12y ago
  It's strange how many people seem unable to understand this. SpaceX got a bunch of testing essentially for free. NASA was gracious to allow it. They could have easily said, "We're paying you to launch stuff to ISS, keep those crazy landing legs far away from our payload." Sea conditions were too rough for recovery. Their options were to wait for better weather, annoying the customer and possibly losing the launch (they had one more launch window after the one they used before the payload went to another launch company), or go for it and still accomplish a great deal of testing even though they probably couldn't recover the rocket. Total no-brainer to choose the second option.
  • kristofferR 12y ago
    NASA isn't stupid, they know that if SpaceX manages to get rocket reusability they'll save a lot of money which would otherwise be spent on rocket launches.
    • mikeash 12y ago
      Of course. But in the short term, they have a bunch of cargo that needs to get to the ISS soon, and they weren't in a position to tolerate many more delays. It goes beyond NASA as well. If SpaceX can demonstrate that their reusability testing doesn't impact the launch, that increases the odds that their other customers will allow it on their launches too.
    • clarky07 12y ago
      On the other hand, it probably just means their budget will be cut by a similar amount. NASA isn't a for profit company. It's tax payer funded. No guarantees they really benefit much from saving money.