SpaceX Falcon 9 historic landing thread (1st landing attempt & most recent missions)

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
And do my eyes deceive me or in the third view can you see the two outer engines shutting down? Someone please verify, I'm not totally sure.

Might be. I had seen a hi-quality simulation that indicated the outer engines shut down at around 200 feet, but I'm not sure how that data was derived, so it could have been lower. Of course 200 feet is little more than the height of this booster!

So, here's some more video.

Video by US Launch Report, showing the booster this morning after a crane hooked up to it. Since then it has been moved from the barge OCISLY to the dock. As you will see, it got extra-crispy. Hopefully that’s mostly cosmetic and minor easy-cheap to fix stuff and not significant damage that will seriously impact reuse. Although no matter what, they’re finding out what areas may need modification or better protection. And of course this was the hottest that a Falcon booster has gotten, and landed safely to inspect (SES-9 hot re-entry ran out of fuel, did not crash due to re-entry heat unless something caused fuel to leak. More likely it was so on the edge it just didn't have quite enough or used more fuel than expected)

[video=youtube;nPlt56HckRI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPlt56HckRI[/video]


Currently LIVE video on Port Canaveral Webcam is showing the booster on the dock.

https://portcanaveralwebcam.com/

The camera will switch to other ships such as cruise ships coming and going. Last time the majority of the video feed was the booster on the dock, till it left. And the camera operator did a great job of following what was going on (nobody knows if the operator is a space program fan, having fun showing something OTHER than boring ship stuff, or what.
 
Last edited:
There is probably an answer to this upthread, but why does the char stop in a clear line just above the S in the SpaceX logo? It appears to stop there on all of the recovered boosters.
 
There is probably an answer to this upthread, but why does the char stop in a clear line just above the S in the SpaceX logo? It appears to stop there on all of the recovered boosters.

That's where the LOX tank is. The theory is that frost outside the LOX tank melts off, carrying away the soot that had built up there.
 
Whoa, neat photos from before they got back to port. Shot from a C-130.

Source:

https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinte...us_pic_my_brother_just_sent_me_of_the_spacex/

The ones below have been rotated and cropped from the originals at the above source:

OhnL6Q0.jpg


YiREqDH.jpg
 
That's where the LOX tank is. The theory is that frost outside the LOX tank melts off, carrying away the soot that had built up there.

Thanks for this. You'd think that by the end of the flight there'd be so little LOX in the tank that the frost would melt during the reentry, but I guess not.
 
There are two green flashes during shutdown. Looks like they are they dumping TEA-TEB, but I'm wondering why? :confused2:

Reinhard

This is a totally uninformed guess, so worth about as much as you paid for it. They have to deal with a bunch of different HAZMAT materials before they get to the point of disassembly back in the shop, and possibly before they weld (if they do, can't remember) shoes on to the feet of the landing legs for sea transport. It would suck to stick the landing then have your rocket fall over and blow up at sea due to waves. LOX can be vented (carefully), kerosene is probably stable enough to just leave in the tank until you can pump it off, helium can definitely just hang around in their tanks. TEA-TEB may be easier to just dump and burn rather than pump off later.
 
From the SpaceX Twitter feed https://twitter.com/spacex



The Dragon is back from the ISS with quite the cargo, almost 4,000lbs. It would be great to see some footage of the decent and reentry. So far all I can dig up is NASA's YouTube, which is not very revealing except that around 2 min in you can see some pulses from the Draco thrusters. George do your magic and dig!

[video=youtube;gKC2OFtHtXQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKC2OFtHtXQ[/video]
 
Last edited:
It does indeed seem that the TEA and TEB hypergolics that are used to ignite, and re-ignite the engines, were vented at and after landing. They burn green so the green flashes indicate TEA and TEB burning as noted. There would be no need for the TEA and TEB to be used for landing itself, since once an engine is (or engines are) re-ignited, there's no need to keep injecting during normal engine operation.

They had not done that before, it seems. But when the CRS-8 booster was at the dock and being prepared to be moved, one-by-one the residual TEA and TEB for each engine was burned off. So it would seem one of those "dog caught the bus.... now what" things Musk referred to, was this issue and how to deal with that better. Certainly lots of sense to burn that off right after touchdown than have a complicated process to do at the dock, plus hypergolics are never safe for humans to be around to begin with. And there's not a LOT of it, since they only need to inject a small amount of each for a brief time when the Lox and Fuel start pumping thru, for ignition.

Just like you do not need a full box of matches to have onhand to light a fuse for a firecracker, just one match to burn long enough to start the fuse properly. Or in the case of a Falcon-9 booster, four set of matches worth (original launch on 9 engines, boostback burn of 3 engines, re-entry burn of 3 engines, landing burn with 1 to 3 engines).

As for the LOX, whatever is left (and it ain't much) is vented as it warms up to become gaseous, vent at the top. I would not be surprised if after landing and a crew goes aboard, one of the early tasks for the ASDS crew would be to hook up a hose to purge remaining oxygen gas from the Falcon tank, such as nitrogen. To keep the tanks pressurized in flight so it does not buckle as fuel is consumed, pressurized helium is released to maintain tank pressure (that is a very common and old-school method to maintain tank pressure). So most of what is left in the tank after landing is helium, or rather a mix of helium and oxygen, but that is not as inert as nitrogen (can't just pump air into the tank since the air would be humid and salty, not the kind of stuff you want to have in a reusable rocket's oxygen tank, or RP-1 tank for that matter).

The RP-1 (kerosene) fuel is very stable so no need to burn that off, it can be drained safely later (this presumes no "hot re-entry" damage that might cause a leak. But if damaging heat got that far deep upwards, there would likely be more serious issues such as with the gimbal steering systems which would then tend to "solve" the problem of significantly leaking RP-1 after landing, by crashing out of control). Heck, the ASDS barge has way more diesel fuel (or whatever fuel is used for the engines that runs the electrical generators and hydraulic pumps) onboard than the Falcon booster does after landing.

mpitfield - thanks for posting the CRS-8 Dragon return update. It seems I really would need to have "magic" to come up with video of the landing, none of the usual sources have anything. Since the landing is an unmanned capsule hundreds of miles into the Pacific, with perhaps no more than the commercial ship SpaceX hires to do recovery, the only likely video would be from onboard that ship, no NASA resource. Certainly no re-entry video, and no "descent" video until low enough for a ship-based camera to see. Now, no doubt one or more people onboard shot video, but not necessarily high quality zoomed-in gimbal-stabilized video (this is a ship at sea after all), but of a handheld variety. If SpaceX did have a live video feed to see real-time at the control center, they didn't feel like sharing it live.

OK, I did some more searching after writing the above. There is only one CRS Dragon mission with landing video, which is CRS-1. Indeed it was shot handheld and not great quality, showing the last few moments before splashdown. This does not mean there is no re-entry / descent video somewhere, just this is what I found.

- George Gassaway

Ta-Daaa! Yeah, not much magic mojo this time given the request criteria.....

758645_cards,192x192,r:1.jpg


[video=youtube;SqndBnON1Ks]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqndBnON1Ks[/video]
 
Last edited:
Watching that, after the discussion on the first stage barge landing, made me wonder if SpaceX might eventually attempt a capsule landing on the barge before attempting to land, you know... on land.
 
Watching that, after the discussion on the first stage barge landing, made me wonder if SpaceX might eventually attempt a capsule landing on the barge before attempting to land, you know... on land.

I presume you mean the Dragon v2 propulsive landings:

[video=youtube;vleASILamss]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vleASILamss[/video]

Which is what this testing from January is about:

[video=youtube;07Pm8ZY0XJI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07Pm8ZY0XJI[/video]

The same Super-Draco engines available during launch for abort, being used for propulsive landing.

The first crewed missions will use chutes and splash down. They do plan to phase over to the propulsive landings at some point (keeping chutes as a back-up). Whenever they do make uncrewed tests that re-enter from orbit, indeed it would seem logical that the first might be a barge landing, on "Just Read The Instructions" (West Coast ASDS, for Vandenberg launches). And also that the first land landing, I could see that being done at Vandenberg rather than at the Cape/KSC, on the Landing Zone they are working on for Falcon cores, just as there is LZ-1 at LC-13 for Cape launches.

One detail I'm not quite so sure of is how they plan for the "trunk" module debris to land in the ocean. Since the trajectory to say cause the Dragon to ballistically come down near the Cape, would cause the pieces of the trunk module to land over Central Florida (The trunk is much lighter for its area, so would slow down quicker and eventually break up into many pieces, some of which would survive as opposed to being vaporized). Whereas for a landing at Vandenberg, the pieces would come down in the Pacific ocean, requiring "only" to have a safety zone much as they do for launches, and make sure the debris path would avoid islands). For landings at the Cape, the only thing I can think of is they'd do a partial re-entry burn that would cause the trunk to re-enter East of the Cape, separate the trunk, then do a 2nd re-entry burn to make the Dragon come down on a ballistic path a LITTLE bit East of the coast, then use aerodynamic steering (As Apollo and Gemini did, and Falcon-9 booster does with Grid fins) to fine adjust the projected landing point and do final adjustment with the rocket engines during landing burn (as the Falcon booster does)

As for landing video......Google-Fu magic working a little better today, but not for CRS-8.

Some HD Footage by NASA of what might be CRS-1, or might be a final high altitude drop-test, of a Dragon coming down on drogue chutes. Get to see the whole sequence of the mains deploying and disreefing. Actual splashdown moment obscured by clouds. This was shot by a P-3 Orion aircraft, I have no idea if they have done this for other CRS landings.

Expect they will resume doing this for the Falcon-9 launched inflight abort test and also unmanned tests of the crewed Dragon flights (as well as the actual crewed missions of course)

[video=dailymotion;xrur69]https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xrur69_spacex-hd-aerial-footage-of-dragon-splashdown_tech[/video]

cT6kwp9.gif
 
Last edited:
mpitfield - thanks for posting the CRS-8 Dragon return update. It seems I really would need to have "magic" to come up with video of the landing, none of the usual sources have anything. Since the landing is an unmanned capsule hundreds of miles into the Pacific, with perhaps no more than the commercial ship SpaceX hires to do recovery, the only likely video would be from onboard that ship, no NASA resource. Certainly no re-entry video, and no "descent" video until low enough for a ship-based camera to see. Now, no doubt one or more people onboard shot video, but not necessarily high quality zoomed-in gimbal-stabilized video (this is a ship at sea after all), but of a handheld variety. If SpaceX did have a live video feed to see real-time at the control center, they didn't feel like sharing it live.

OK, I did some more searching after writing the above. There is only one CRS Dragon mission with landing video, which is CRS-1. Indeed it was shot handheld and not great quality, showing the last few moments before splashdown. This does not mean there is no re-entry / descent video somewhere, just this is what I found.

- George Gassaway

Ta-Daaa! Yeah, not much magic mojo this time given the request criteria.....

758645_cards,192x192,r:1.jpg


[video=youtube;SqndBnON1Ks]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqndBnON1Ks[/video]

Thanks for digging and your magic George.

It will certainly be interesting to see how they phase in the propulsive landings for the Dragons. As much as I love watching these landing's I think I will feel a bit uneasy watching one of these Dragon's coming in ballistic and committed to a propulsive landing. What do you know about the redundancies designed into the propulsion system and backup systems for these future propulsive landings? One thing that seems limited is that the once they past a specific AGL they are committed to the Dracos.
 
It will certainly be interesting to see how they phase in the propulsive landings for the Dragons. As much as I love watching these landing's I think I will feel a bit uneasy watching one of these Dragon's coming in ballistic and committed to a propulsive landing. What do you know about the redundancies designed into the propulsion system and backup systems for these future propulsive landings? One thing that seems limited is that the once they past a specific AGL they are committed to the Dracos.

Part of the redundancy is that while there are 4 "pods" with engines, there are two Super-Dracos per pod. Each Super-Draco has a Sea Level thrust of 16,400 pounds. A wiki for the Dragon lists a "dry" mass of 9,300 pounds, so I assume that is not including mass of fuel for the Super Dracos (I'll abbreviate them as "SD"), as well as not the mass of crew/payload. But it may include mass of the "trunk" module. The listed return payload mass is 7,300 pounds. Of course the current CRS missions from ISS are bringing back a lot of payload mass sometimes, and there are no humans onboard. I do not know if the Dragon v2 is supposed to be able to bring back much payload mass in addition to the crew..... I sort of doubt they'd bring back much payload mass on those. Unless they eventually went to doing CRS unmanned missions using a resupply version of Dragon v2 also

But anyway just for example let's say the re-entry mass of the Dragon v2 was 20,000 pounds, and round down the SD's thrust to 16,000 pounds. With 8 SD's, that would be up to 128,000 in thrust. Way overkill, a 6.4 to 1 thrust to weight ratio. They would not want to subject the crew to THAT many G's, IIRC the shuttle topped out at 3.5 G's going up, for Dragon v2 half-throttle on 8 SD's would be 3.2 G's (this assumes the return mass really was 20,000 but I think it would be a lot less than 20, just using that as worst-case). So, the 8 SD's will be throttled down a lot. If one of the 8 SD's cut out, they'd increase (double) thrust on the one next to it to keep it balanced. If one of the 4 pods had a common problem, that would indeed be very tricky..... it could use two opposing pairs of pods, a total of 4 SD's producing up to 64,000 pounds of thrust. But if say the two opposing pods in the pitch axis were the ones that were cut out (One pod going bad and the opposing one shut down to keep balance), there could be issues controlling the pitch axis. Now this has come up in discussion before and one of the ways to address that is that there is an internal movable mass that is moved laterally to shift the lateral CG in the pitch axis towards the "feet down" side for a similar slight angle of attack re-entry as Apollo (and Gemini) had, producing some aerodynamic lift for steering. That mass trim position is adjustable by the onboard computer so that it seems it may be able to quickly go to neutral, or whatever position would be needed to keep the capsule balanced.

Also of course the four pods are not aligned with the pitch axis or the yaw axis. I said the above just to get the idea across. They are in a sort of squashed "X" arrangement of 60-60-120-60-60-120 degrees. If using a clock face as an example of rotary position, if pitch-up was at 12 O'clock, then the four SD pods are at 2, 4, 8, and 10 O'clock positions.

If there was a severe-enough problem with the SD's, then the parachute system would take over. There definitely would be a "dead zone", an altitude below which if the SD's failed, the parachute system would not be able to deploy fully before crashing. The prevailing thinking is that any problem with the SD's would be most likely to occur at start-up or shortly after start-up, in plenty of time to use the chutes. And very unlikely for a catastrophic SD shutdown or loss of control once they've all begun to fire normally, too low for the chutes. Of course, helicopters have a dead zone, if the engine shuts down while hovering at low altitude there is not enough altitude to use to spin-up the blades fast enough to do a safe auto-rotation.

And an update:

Some Multicopter footage of the Falcon, OCISLY, and dock area. Shot with permission. Indeed it is listed as "media B Roll"

[video=youtube;86CZQKOY7lw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86CZQKOY7lw[/video]
 
Last edited:
Interesting article here about the SuperDraco thrusters.
https://www.spaceflightinsider.com/...ation-technologies/spacexs-superdraco-engine/

If you look at the testing photos you can see that each motor is a separate unit so a common failure would be extremely unlikely. Some other interesting points in the article, the motor can be throttled as low as 20% it also took them just over 3 months to go from concept to first hot firing.
 
Last edited:
Falcon booster on the move today, having been lowered to horizontal and put on the trailer Friday.

Short video, close-up as it rolls by, from top of booster to middle.

https://mobile.twitter.com/i/status/731499960387182593/video/1

Pics:

kjBJWJv.jpg


1cOQFZj.jpg


Tq4y1HU.jpg


gBkV9Su.jpg



Last two pics are from a small collection of more here (at original size):

https://imgur.com/gallery/2BWF8#ZkOGTTP

Yes, it got really “toasted” on that hot re-entry. Still no idea how much of that is cosmetic (remove old paint, apply new paint). And to what extent there may be actual damage, how serious, how much needs to be fixed, what needs to be upgraded to hold up better on similar hot re-entries, etc.

Why would there be more scorching of the paint "above" (to right in the pic) one of the grid fins but not the other? Because of the slight angle of attack into the airflow.....during some of the descent the grid fins are pretty much making the booster "glide" in a desired steered path. I noticed with the first booster to land successfully, the ORBCOMM-2 flight, that one side of the Falcon seemed to have more darkening on it than the other side, and figured that the angle of attack during descent would be the lkely reason. And when firing the engines at an angle of attack, that more exhaust soot would accumulate on one side than the other.

BTW - next launch, THAICOM-8 satellite, targeting for around May 26-27th.
 
Last edited:
Video of the Falcon move, posted to Instagram by SpaceX. Rocket rolls by, close-up, from nose to tail then repeats. Wish it was on Youtube so the view window would appear, you’l have to use the link below:

https://www.instagram.com/p/BFZljabl8TZ/

An image of the tail section, nozzles covered and some covering over part of the Octaweb structure

cWeloVF.jpg
 
Here are some pretty cool pics of all three boosters in the barn.

26428481444_9c8dc1a3bb_k.jpg


26428479314_381021a3f9_k-980x653.jpg


26428478544_6bc55492e3_k-980x653.jpg


26428476824_034fc1bf38_k-980x653.jpg


Here is a tweet from Musk on the latest booster.
Most recent rocket took max damage, due to v high entry velocity. Will be our life leader for ground tests to confirm others are good.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 15, 2016"
 
May 26, 3 days from now, at 5:40 pm, there's a launch scheduled from Canaveral of a Falcon 9. Anyone know if it's a return to launch site or a barge landing? I think I remember hearing barge but I'm not sure.
 
Launch @5:40 EDT tomorrow. SpaceX just posted the livestreams on YouTube:

Hosted:
[video=youtube;zBYC4f79iXc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBYC4f79iXc[/video]

Technical:
[video=youtube;wPYOtCFSLKw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPYOtCFSLKw[/video]

IMO it's best to watch them both simultaneously if you can :)

SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket will deliver THAICOM 8, a commercial communications satellite for Thaicom, to a supersynchronous transfer orbit. Thaicom is one of Asia’s leading Asian satellite operators, influencing and innovating communications on a global scale.

SpaceX is targeting launch of THAICOM 8 from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida on May 26 with a backup date of May 27. The approximately two-hour launch window opens on May 26 at 5:40 pm ET, 9:40 pm UTC. A backup launch window on May 27 opens at approximately the same time. The satellite will be deployed about 32 minutes after liftoff.
 
Last edited:
There is also a resupply launch very soon from Wallops. Not sure of the date, but they are setting up for hot fire tests today, I think.

Also, they are planning to inflate the Bigelow habitat module on the ISS tomorrow and that will have live coverage as well.
 
T-minus 50min and counting...

BTW, where's George? I would have thought he'd be all over this...

Even though a lot of us dont say much, i for one can say I really really appreciate all of the backstory that you provide George. Thanks for taking the time and effort to do so. (should have said thank you sooner than now... But, thank you! :))
 
Back
Top