Elon Musk Just Unveiled A Game-Changing Ocean Landing Pad For His Reusable Rockets

[bananas]

Source: Business Insider India

Elon Musk's latest twitter announcements are the stuff of SciFi: He's just tweeted out images of the company's latest achievement- a drone ship that will be a self-stabilizing landing pad for rockets - even in rocky seas.

<snip>

During next two resupply SpaceX flights, scheduled for this December 16 and January 23, 2015, the Falcon 9 rockets will attempt to land on the floating platform. And SpaceX suspects that they have about a 50 percent probability of being successful on the first try. The company has succeeded in the past with bleaker chances than that.

<snip>

If the landings in December and January are successful, the landing pad will refuel the rockets at which point SpaceX will transport the rocket back to the mainland for another launch.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.in/Elon-Musk-Just-Unveiled-A-Game-Changing-Ocean-Landing-Pad-For-His-Reusable-Rockets/articleshow/45274908.cms

---

Sounds like they're going to have the rocket refuel at sea and fly back to the mainland on its own.

[TeamPooka]

1. Are we sure he isn't a real life Bond villain? nt

[Ken Burch]

2. You expect to see "MUSK" stamped in large letters on every building he owns n/t.

[DetlefK]

3. As long as he doesn't pet a cat while giving a monologue...

[Bosonic]

4. Hopefully more Tony Stark-esque

[caraher]

5. I think by "refuel and flyback" he means back to space

The only reason to land on a platform at sea that I can think of (as opposed to doing so on dry land near a launch site) is safety. Refueling the rocket to fly it back to a launch site strikes me as negating that advantage and costing a bunch of fuel - if you can do this safely, why not just make the original landing near where you plan to re-launch?

I think they plan to recover at sea, then bring it to shore by boat/barge. That would be much cheaper and less risky.

[bananas]

15. There's a chicken-and-egg problem with FAA approval

He can't land directly from orbit without FAA approval, but FAA won't approve it without a demonstrated safety record. Once it's approved he'll be able to land directly, but first he needs sufficient water landings.

He'll probably have to do it all over again with Falcon Heavy and Mars Colonial Transport as well.

[FailureToCommunicate]

6. What's the advantage? Aren't thing a lot harder to recover and study if

things go wrong and they have to dredge the rocket up from the bottom of the ocean? Or am I missing something?

[magical thyme]

7. the ocean is just a giant toilet. nt

[KJG52]

8. What game does this change?

Pardon me, but I don't see the utility of this "game changer," using an ocean based recovery system seems to be safer for people only if landing this thing is dangerous under other circumstances. Landing on floating things is very difficult, that is one of the reasons that aircraft carriers are so large and expensive and why the airframes and landing gears of carrier aircraft have to be made so robust and heavy. I can understand launching from ocean based platforms because of the possibility of a pad explosion and the utility of being able to launch from an equatorial point on Earth; however, even this has its risks, both for the environment and the rocket. This seems like another wealthy guy's idea of a fun thing to attempt, not a serious use of corporate or public resources. In fact it seems like some kind of tax dodge or way to avoid public regulation, another Propertarian escape hatch from social responsibility.

[ragemage]

9. Did you even read the article? This is indeed game changing and ground breaking.

Sorry you are being foolish with your reply. They have done their homework on this and are using barges designed for oil rigs that are meant to be stable in rough seas, the rockets have been tested multiple times with their landing legs deployed, this will be the first attempt to actually land on a solid surface. They are doing it at sea due to the high probability of a failure and explosion. Risk to humans is greatly lessened. Once they do it a few times and iron out the issues they can then attempt the landing near the spaceport.
SpaceX is a private company employing thousands of people. This is not some rich guy getting his kicks with expensive toys.
You do realize SpaceX has a contract with NASA to take astronauts to low earth orbit (i.e. the space station)? They are working with government agencies and regulations all the time. Your comments are misinformed. Please read up on SpaceX and what they are attempting. It is ground breaking and game changing. They are trying to move us into the 21st century of space flight.

[djean111]

10. Thank you.

Not only this, but Musk has started production, or will start soon, of small satellites - a LOT of them, which will give the whole world access to cheap and fast internet. Which is how it should have been, in the first place. The United States' expensive and not as fast access to the internet is shameful. And the ISPs are trying to make it more expensive. And I am sure the ISPs and the Congressmen and agencies that they own are working to keep Musk from doing this, somehow. Like the nuke and coal energy producers are trying to get their trained legislators to somehow keep solar panels from homeowners by ending subsides (while they keep their subsides, of course) and making it expensive to hok on to the grid. I think that massive grid has actually had its day, but they will fight tooth and nail to keep things the way they are.

This is what you get when the first consideration for EVERYTHING is profit. At any human cost. Which is why we theoretically have The Best health Care in the WORLD!!!!! if, of course, one can afford access to it.

[arcane1]

11. And you are being rude with your reply. There is no need to be rude.

Maybe we should see if it works, no?

[KJG52]

12. Yes I did read the article and your confidence in the "game change" of this technology is unfounded

In fact the article reads like a press release for Spacex and Elon Musk and in no way ushers in a "game change," in space technology. Reusable rockets is a game change, launching them or recovering them from ocean platforms is not. It is old technology, Boeing has been launching from an ocean based platform since the 1990's. I understand that you seem to think Elon Musk is a miracle worker, but he is not, he's a businessman sucking dollars out of the federal government, just like every other government contractor, while living in his Propertarian dreamworld. I am not being foolish, I am simply actually aware of the state of the technology and you obviously are not. Also, the majority of "21st Century space flight," is military and low earth orbit communications satellite driven and is only being done by Spacex because our government is trying to launch satellites cheaper and service the ISS at less cost while dismantling another government agency, essentially privatizing the space program on a Democrat's watch. You don't seem to understand the politics or economics of what Musk is doing and the Executive branch and Congress are doing by privatizing space launch capability, that's the "game changer,"

[ragemage]

16. I actually know the tech, I work with some of it. Thanks for asking.

Ok calm down...take a deep breath...and relax.
I actually know the tech, I work with some of it. Thanks for asking.
Musk is doing more for space then most people realize. Is he a businessman/showman? Of course...but you will not get anywhere in this business if you don't think outside the box and try new things. He has the cash to do this, so let him do it. Without this kind of innovation we (human race) will get nowhere, stuck in LEO and only looking out to deep space.
Agreed that we have been launching from mobile platforms for quite some time, but we have not LANDED on them yet.
NASA is a big part of this equation, they are not going away. SpaceX, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, etc. all work with NASA on spacecraft and launches. You do realize that NASA has been using contractors since the beginning, right? Who actually built the Saturn V and the LEM? Who helped design and build the space shuttle? Who actually builds the Mars rovers/satellites/etc.?
Let me ask you this question. Are you most upset because you see SpaceX and other contractors as ruining NASA? What is wrong with privatizing some of this? Is that not the American Dream of capitalism? (a little bit of snark in there...) You want REAL change? Have the congress pass a massive budget increase for NASA who can then contract with the private companies to get more real work done. Good luck with that in today's world. Bottom line-SpaceX (or any private contractor for that matter) is NOT dismantling NASA, on the contrary they are helping to keep it alive. And saving money along the way helps too.
Lastly, don't make comments you cannot verify. I know some of the tech (do you know some orbital mechanics and thrust vectors?) and I definitely know the politics and economics of private contractors (been there, done that). I will happily cheer on SpaceX and any other private company that is attempting to do great things to advance our knowledge of space (not necessarily defense contractors, but true space companies).

[KJG52]

18. Were you born supercilious, or have you just acquired that tone through writing garbage on the net

I don't care about Elon Musk or SpaceX and they aren't doing anything to further deep space exploration and I'm well aware that contractors have always been used by NASA. What's your point, Musk is not doing anything great and I don't doubt that you would cheer on the privatization of the space program. When the technology is in the hands of the private sector and we'd actually like to use it for public purposes will Elon Musk let us, or charge us an arm and a leg, like the security contractors we hire. Elon Musk is a businessman not a public benefactor and your Propertarian arguments are just the sorry excuse for robbing the American people that every New Democrat voices...

[bemildred]

13. It is an attempt to reduce cost.

It's not remotely good enough, but is addressed to the real problem with space flight, cost.

[Sunlei]

14. How about some public stock SpaceX?? otherwise you're just another military contractor taking

Federal funds away from a real space program.

[NobodyHere]

17. SpaceX launches rockets for half the price of NASA

If NASA was more efficient I might agree with you.

[Old Vet]

19. How Intresting.............

I don't understand all the babble about who's bad and good, This technology is incredible...