SpaceX lands a rocket

[Ns1]

O_O impressive

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2t15vP1PyoA

 

[boochi]

Awesome

 

[Red Storm]

Saw this yesterday, ridiculously awesome, especially considering that rocket is ten stories tall!

 

[NFS4]

In Elon Musk we trust!

 

[Crono]

I'm only 60% sure now that Elon Musk isn't working on thrusters for an Iron Man-like exosuit.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

I swear YouTube comments must come from some open computers sitting at Wal-Mart for people to just type random shit in.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

That's pretty badass. But it also seems woefully impractical. Wouldn't it necessitate a rocket taking up an exponentially larger quantity of fuel than is currently required to enter/break orbit? Where are you going to store it all? Or am I misunderstanding the point of the demonstration of a rocket that can land itself?

Relevant.

 

[KMFJD]

That's pretty badass. But it also seems woefully impractical. Wouldn't it necessitate a rocket taking up an exponentially larger quantity of fuel than is currently required to enter/break orbit? Where are you going to store it all? Or am I misunderstanding the point of the demonstration of a rocket that can land itself?

Relevant.

I guess that's the main problem right now, they can do these landings but the fuel needed takes up almost all of the payload.

 

[dighn]

that's pretty cool. now we need a engine technology that doesn't use up massive amounts of fuel and can still give you that much thrust.

 

[ElFenix]

meh, done it in kerbal

 

[andylawcc]

wait, the clip wasn't just played backwards after the half way point?

 

[Bacstar]

Need to figure out how to counteract gravity

 

[JulesMaximus]

That's pretty badass. But it also seems woefully impractical. Wouldn't it necessitate a rocket taking up an exponentially larger quantity of fuel than is currently required to enter/break orbit? Where are you going to store it all? Or am I misunderstanding the point of the demonstration of a rocket that can land itself?

Relevant.

Pretty much this. It just isn't practical to make landings like this because of the amount of fuel required to slow the vehicle enough for a gentle landing. You have to haul all that fuel into orbit to use for the landing which takes up so much of the payload of the rocket it just isn't practical. The more weight you add in fuel the bigger the rockets you need to get to orbit.

Edit-Awesome link by the way. I'm reading it now. :thumbsup:

 

[techs]

Best rocket landing I ever saw.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Pretty much this. It just isn't practical to make landings like this because of the amount of fuel required to slow the vehicle enough for a gentle landing. You have to haul all that fuel into orbit to use for the landing which takes up so much of the payload of the rocket it just isn't practical. The more weight you add in fuel the bigger the rockets you need to get to orbit.

Edit-Awesome link by the way. I'm reading it now. :thumbsup:

Check this one out too; more of the same, and still relevant to the OP. All of the "What-Ifs" are pretty entertaining; great way to kill a couple hours and learn while you do it.

 

[Slew Foot]

dude owns tesla, hes working on electric rockets probably

 

[ultimatebob]

I bet that there is some 80 year old NASA rocket engineer watching that video right now and gloating that he was able to do the same thing in the 60s with just a slide rule and a pencil

 

[Crono]

dude owns tesla, hes working on electric rockets probably

It wouldn't surprise me if they were working on ion propulsion right now.
That works more for deep space, though.

 

[Zeze]

Spent sooo much fuel just to land back, holy cow.

I do agree what for now, what is the point of this? Rockets are optimized for going one way. A real shuttle would've landed just fine like plane.

This thing spent so much energy just to land back upright. Stuff like this actually made me realize how primitive we are in grand scheme of space travel.

 

[dighn]

This thing spent so much energy just to land back upright. Stuff like this actually made me realize how primitive we are in grand scheme of space travel.

we are a long, long away from really utilizing space on a massive scale. the energy requirements are insane. personally i think the space elevator may be our best bet.

 

[Ns1]

Spent sooo much fuel just to land back, holy cow.

I do agree what for now, what is the point of this? Rockets are optimized for going one way. A real shuttle would've landed just fine like plane.

This thing spent so much energy just to land back upright. Stuff like this actually made me realize how primitive we are in grand scheme of space travel.

Proof of Concept? I mean, "in theory", couldn't the rocket use a combination of Parachute + Rockets for soft landing, ie Mars Lander status?

 

[Lifted]

Not taking anything away from these guys as it's one hell of a feat, but McDonnell Douglas / Uncle Sam did this 20 years ago in the early - mid 90's. Nothing came of it then, and I doubt anything will come of it now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mn6iHzcTEoA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_DC-X

 

[Zeze]

we are a long, long away from really utilizing space on a massive scale. the energy requirements are insane. personally i think the space elevator may be our best bet.

What were the biggest obstacles of space elevator?

Once established, it should be so easy to go up and down.. a fraction of cost.

 

[dighn]

What were the biggest obstacles of space elevator?

Once established, it should be so easy to go up and down.. a fraction of cost.

unobtanium for the cable, having to construct a massive anchor or haul a small asteroid to use as one, etc. definitely not easy either, but in theory the economics would actually be feasible for mass use.

 

[dud]

Unfortunately, the Chinese will probably steal their secrets and sell it back to them for a sizable profit.