Spacex just put out a new video of falcon heavy, enjoy :)

spacex just put out a new video of falcon heavy, enjoy :)

youtube.com/watch?v=A0FZIwabctw

Attached: FHLiftoff1.jpg (2405x1605, 703K)

So the center core knew it wouldn’t be able to land, thus missing the droneship and not deploying the legs

if you didn’t know, f9 cores aim for a point past the LZ/ASDS on purpose until they can verify that a safe landing can be made

neato

nice. That was a pretty hard landing. I thought it just ran out of propellant while in the air. But it was shooting right till the end. F to pay respect.

yeah it did. good thing it missed the pad that would have been costly.

>I thought it just ran out of propellant
It ran out of hypergolic ignition fluid (TEA-TEB, ignites in a very hot flame on contact with oxygen).

Well would you look at that :) more footage from one of the most dishonest companies in the history of private space travel. Seriously each launch following the Falcon family as they “revolutionize the launch industry” has been indistinguishable from the rest. Aside from the meme landings, the company’s only party trick has been to overwork and underpay its employees to reduce launch costs, all to make the mythical “full and rapid reuse” seem effective.

Perhaps the die was cast when Musk vetoed the idea of ambitious yet realistic missions like Red and Grey Dragon; he made sure the company would never be mistaken for an innovative force to anything or anybody, just ridiculously questionable government contracts for his companies. SpaceX might be profitable (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-NASA in its refusal of wonder, science and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the landings are cool though
"No!"
The camerawork is dreadful; the landings of the charred boosters are boring. As I watch, I noticed that every time a Falcon 9 lands, Musk said either “self-sustaining civilization on Mars” or “imagine if you had a 747 and you threw it away after one flight.”

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time one of those phrases was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Musk's mind is so governed by clichés that he has no other style of thinking. Later I read a poorly-written news story on SpaceX by some fat web blogger. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are watching these launches now, surely they will work for SpaceX in the future and they too can have paychecks based off of government handouts." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you are a SpaceX fan, you are, in fact, trained to be a mindless supporter of government-funded billionaires.

Attached: 1496349718368.png (1051x1080, 681K)

At least he showed the footage.. even it it was just 2 seconds.

Attached: Heavy core failure.webm (1280x720, 264K)

me on the left

I think the best thing to promote private space flight would be something like a sport involving rockets. Sports makes billions each year.

Don't reply, it's a corporate shill. It gets paid per (You). Imagine being such a sad person you could shit on space jesus for money.

Checked. Also it's a copy-pasta that's posted in most SpaceX threads.

I should have known, it looks like a very well polished post and has just the right amount of smugness.

>look mom! i posted it again!

It's probably more that it comes in on an angled trajectory, that will go past the barge, so that as it slows down it will also kill that lateral velocity. If it slows down as calculated then it will come into line with the barge as it becomes vertical and can land, if it's going to fast it'll overshoot before it becomes vertical.

Landing legs are also probably velocity triggered, not so much determined by whether the core thinks it will be able to land.

it had only enough of the reignition fluid to light up the center engine when it needed 3
so it had 1/3rd the deceleration thrust.

of all the things to go wrong, that's super easy to fix

This seems like such a stupid mistake to make. Are you sure the so called "professionals" at SpaceX would forget something obvious like this?

Do you believe every bullshit the well-known liar Elon Musk shoves down your throat?

mistakes do happen
They have been testing rockets to failure without admitting it, thats a lot of their failed landings, you don't know exactly how far you can push it until you've gone to the limit(and past).

Though I would imagine they would have wanted to recover the center stage to make sure all their modifications & modelling is good

I highly doubt a mistake like this happens after almost 50 flights. Clearly something else went wrong.

>This seems like such a stupid mistake to make.
The assumption you are making is that it uses a fixed amount of the fluid every time it lights the engines.
It's entirely possible that when starting up, when doing the boostback burn, when doing the entry burn more fluid than usual was needed in order to get ignition.
Remember, this fluid is weight so they don't want to just load it up with the fluid and have to haul more than they need into space.
The Heavy was a new rocket. Perhaps they can't accurately model exactly how much fluid they need per engine to get an ignition. They put in as much as is normally okay for the number of engine starts it was going to do but it wasn't enough.

That's not really something to jump down their throats about. They test launched it for a reason.

>I highly doubt a mistake like this happens after almost 50 flights.
They successfully landed 21 though, before the Heavy test flight.

Which is actually more than I thought and is now around 40% of their launches.
And I'm not counting the ocean soft landings.

Falcon Heavy uses the exact same engines Falcon 9 does, just more of them. They basically launched three Falcon 9s at the same time. Unless these issues with ignition fuel happens more often, I highly doubt that was the issue.

Im not an expert but I reckon the amount of igition fluid required is not exact. The rocket probably uses as much fluid as it needs until ignition is achieved, and they just carry a little more than is estimated to be used.

Same goes for the fuel itself, all kind of variables like wind and air pressure affect how much fuel is needed to reach orbit. With a rocket every bit of weight counts, so there's a good reason to cut it as close as you can.
Being a maiden flight with new hardware and flight profile, it's easy to see that they may have under estimated the requirements.

I know, but launching the Falcon Heavy is different to launching the Falcon 9.
For instance, they don't start up all 27 engines at the same time. Perhaps this starting program resulted in more of the fluid in the core booster being used than usual.

I also think that the Falcon Heavy was going faster than a Falcon 9 usually does when the core stage separated, this would have meant it was going faster when it did the boostback and probably entry burns, possibly when doing the landing burn also.
If this added speed affected how reliably the fluids mixed it could have resulted in more fluid being needed for each ignition.

You seem to be kinda in the mindset that Musk was around 5 years ago when he first pitched the Falcon Heavy.
"Just strap three cores together, how hard could it be?"

"there's no simulation like the real thing"

the core booster is way the fuck different from a normal booster, way heavier i believe along with a slew of other structural changes

It was a mistake and quite embarassing one.

SpaceX is a meme and their incompetence is glaring when compared to other aerospace companies.

The center core was just a prototype, and they didn't really want it back for reuse or parts. It would have been nice to recover it for bragging rights and data, but it wasn't a high priority compared to testing the ascent phase. They likely knew that the ignition fluid was in short supply, due to the increased number of relights, but used unmodified F9 engines for the prototype anyway, because the cost and time for the modifications wasn't considered worthwhile.

wow it's so real

Attached: wow cool.gif (501x230, 2.12M)

>What is sub-cooled liquid oxygen?

In the shape of a Tesla logo...

I wonder, is this schizophrenia? I always wonder is posters like this are just trolls or legit mentally ill

I'd ask you the same thing if you actually think that shit looks real. Embarrassing.

it is real, either you are confused by compression artifacts or certified moron

Of course you'd say that Muskcuck, they could shoot jizz out the booster and you'd still say it was real.

try not to engage with them, it's literally impossible to convince them of anything regardless of evidence. i'm guessing he's a flat earther as well

Both, the cure is reporting them so they can stop smearing shit all over the walls

Kek, keep living in your sci-fi bubble then.

this.
always ignore the deluded idiots, they'll even agree that no evidence will ever satisfy them if asked right, pointless to talk to

>Projection at its finest

The American taxpayer money at work :)

> f'n bowie

Russia already has hypersonic missiles nobody cares about that meme tax money embezzling company.