• SpaceX retires Grasshopper (aka that giant fucking rocket that takes off and lands autonomously)
    26 replies, posted
[quote]Did you take a moment to look at that August video of the Grasshopper rocket deliberately going sideways and then appearing to hover for a bit before returning to Earth? For more video fodder, there’s also this high-flying test the rocket took in October. We hope you enjoyed these views, because Grasshopper is being retired. SpaceX now wants to focus its energy and resources on to the larger Falcon 9-R first stage, which should see its first test flight in New Mexico this December. It sounds like SpaceX would have loved to go further, in a sense. “In some ways we’ve kind of failed on the Grasshopper program because we haven’t pushed it to its limit,” SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell said at the International Symposium for Personal and Commercial Spaceflight (ISPCS) in New Mexico last week, as reported in the NewSpace Journal. ”We haven’t broken it.”[/quote] [t]http://d1jqu7g1y74ds1.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/grasshopper-580x435.jpg[/t] [url=http://www.universetoday.com/105702/incredible-vertical-landing-grasshopper-rocket-has-retired/]source[/url] You did well, Grasshopper o7
That's... Uh, what? Are they moving forward to grasshopper integration with the Falcon system or something? I thought that was the end-game. It's a bit weird to just see them drop the project entirely, after having done so much in promotion for it.
[QUOTE=woolio1;42622962]That's... Uh, what? Are they moving forward to grasshopper integration with the Falcon system or something? I thought that was the end-game. It's a bit weird to just see them drop the project entirely, after having done so much in promotion for it.[/QUOTE] Moving on to grasshopper 2 and F9R. They almost recovered a stage last fight. Might have reusability by next year.
[QUOTE=woolio1;42622962]That's... Uh, what? Are they moving forward to grasshopper integration with the Falcon system or something? I thought that was the end-game. It's a bit weird to just see them drop the project entirely, after having done so much in promotion for it.[/QUOTE] The title may have been a bit misleading. The prototype is the Grasshopper and [I]that's[/I] what's being retired. The testbed has pretty much done its job. Now they're working on other things. At least, that's what all the sources I'm reading tell me.
They basically don't need it anymore because the flight ready rockets can already land, they just need legs.
[QUOTE=OvB;42623011]They basically don't need it anymore because the flight ready rockets can already land, they just need legs.[/QUOTE] Fan. Freaking. Tastic. I love it when revolutionary technology comes together, don't you?
[QUOTE=woolio1;42623038]Fan. Freaking. Tastic. I love it when revolutionary technology comes together, don't you?[/QUOTE] No, all this progress is awful. [editline]23rd October 2013[/editline] [quote]It sounds like SpaceX would have loved to go further, in a sense. “In some ways we’ve kind of failed on the Grasshopper program because we haven’t pushed it to its limit,” SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell said at the International Symposium for Personal and Commercial Spaceflight (ISPCS) in New Mexico last week, as reported in the NewSpace Journal. ”We haven’t broken it.”[/quote] It's great that one of their goals was "break it".
The technology is ready, on the last flight of the new Falcon they almost landed the first stage in the ocean but encountered a roll problem that starved the engines. That problem will be counteracted by the addition of the landing legs. Though the next two flights are private flights and the contracts did not include saving fuel for landing attempts, and Elon wants to give the customers the "full performance" of the rocket so they will not attempt to land this year. However on the next Dragon flight the rocket [I]will[/I] have legs and they [I]will[/I] attempt to land it, possibly even back at Cape Canaveral. The first attempt to reuse the stage will be at the end of 2014 if everything goes well. Newest Falcon launch: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtDbDMRG3q8[/media] Last Grasshopper launch: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZDkItO-0a4[/media]
[QUOTE=OvB;42623011]They basically don't need it anymore because the flight ready rockets can already land, they just need legs.[/QUOTE] If some greenheaded monogendered aliens manage to do that, then we can do that too.
Now they just got to figure out how to recover the 2nd stage.
Good. It was an interesting concept but ultimately not a necessary one. Parachutes work fine, as NASA found out with the shuttle's solid rocket boosters. No need to reinvent the rocket in order to be able to re-use it again.
[QUOTE=TestECull;42623125]Good. It was an interesting concept but ultimately not a necessary one. Parachutes work fine, as NASA found out with the shuttle's solid rocket boosters. No need to reinvent the rocket in order to be able to re-use it again.[/QUOTE] Except with parachutes you can't control where it lands even slightly. (Which means it's gonna end up landing in salt water which adds a shit-ton of refurbishing need).
[QUOTE=TestECull;42623125]Good. It was an interesting concept but ultimately not a necessary one. Parachutes work fine, as NASA found out with the shuttle's solid rocket boosters. No need to reinvent the rocket in order to be able to re-use it again.[/QUOTE] They're retiring it because it worked swimmingly and they don't need it anymore, not because it didn't work. Tech will be in use by next year.
[QUOTE=TestECull;42623125]Good. It was an interesting concept but ultimately not a necessary one. Parachutes work fine, as NASA found out with the shuttle's solid rocket boosters. No need to reinvent the rocket in order to be able to re-use it again.[/QUOTE] yeah no let's spend loads of money recovering them and them fixing all the water damage and practically rebuilding them each time. The prototype is being retired, the return system will be used.
[QUOTE=TestECull;42623125]Good. It was an interesting concept but ultimately not a necessary one. Parachutes work fine, as NASA found out with the shuttle's solid rocket boosters. No need to reinvent the rocket in order to be able to re-use it again.[/QUOTE] You know, for someone who spends a lot of time in the KSP thread, you sure are a negative nancy toward spaceflight.
I can't wait for the Falcon 9-R launch.
Doesn't SpaceX also have the most efficient engine with a weight trust ratio of 1 to 150?
[QUOTE=Bradyns;42623280]I can't wait for the Falcon 9-R launch.[/QUOTE] I'm even more hyped for the Falcon Heavy launch next year.
[QUOTE=TestECull;42623125]Good. It was an interesting concept but ultimately not a necessary one. Parachutes work fine, as NASA found out with the shuttle's solid rocket boosters. No need to reinvent the rocket in order to be able to re-use it again.[/QUOTE] they aren't retiring the entire landing method, they are just retiring this platform
[QUOTE=Niklas;42623287]Doesn't SpaceX also have the most efficient engine with a weight trust ratio of 1 to 150?[/QUOTE] Weight isn't all there is to efficiency, as far as thrust/fuel consumption, it's not even close. It is correct that they have made the engine with the highest thrust to weight ratio though. The highest efficiency chemical engine in terms of fuel consumption is the RL10: [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RL10[/URL]
[QUOTE=Dacheet;42623294]I'm even more hyped for the Falcon Heavy launch next year.[/QUOTE] If they can deliver on the cost/kg, then holy sweet mother of God, we will be opening some previously infeasible avenues of construction on scales never before seen.
[QUOTE=Bradyns;42623377]If they can deliver on the cost/kg, then holy sweet mother of God, we will be opening some previously infeasible avenues of construction on scales never before seen.[/QUOTE] $2,200/kg to LEO is absolutely insane! [editline]23rd October 2013[/editline] Hell, [I]Facepunch[/I] could probably throw together enough money to put a big ass sat into LEO at that cost (hint hint)
Well, we're not that rich :v: most of us haven't got jobs :v: but maybe a little cube or something a bit bigger
[QUOTE=Dacheet;42623431]$2,200/kg to LEO is absolutely insane! [editline]23rd October 2013[/editline] Hell, [I]Facepunch[/I] could probably throw together enough money to put a big ass sat into LEO at that cost (hint hint)[/QUOTE] Cubestats are around 1 kg so that isn't a crazy cost.
[QUOTE=TestECull;42623125]Good. It was an interesting concept but ultimately not a necessary one. Parachutes work fine, as NASA found out with the shuttle's solid rocket boosters. No need to reinvent the rocket in order to be able to re-use it again.[/QUOTE] the solid rocket boosters for the shuttle weren't reusable they were recycled
[img]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-VpIc2UBlZAA/UUtODz9uIPI/AAAAAAAAAw8/wOxn424ZOj4/s1600/tintin_rocket18_.jpg[/img] Now that the prototype is done, hop to it SpaceX
[QUOTE=TestECull;42623125]Good. It was an interesting concept but ultimately not a necessary one. Parachutes work fine, as NASA found out with the shuttle's solid rocket boosters. No need to reinvent the rocket in order to be able to re-use it again.[/QUOTE] Sudden gust of wind and your huge spent rocket lands on someones house.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.