
Repairs taking place on SpaceX drone ship following SES-11 booster landing - johnny313
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/10/repairs-asds-ses-11-booster-landing/
======
lemoncucumber
The drone ship was quoted as having no hard feelings about the incident. When
asked to comment its only response was, "of course I still love you."

~~~
walrus01
in my opinion they really missed the opportunity to name it:

Mistake Not My Current State Of Joshing Gentle Peevishness For The Awesome And
Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Ire That Are Themselves The Mere
Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Wrath

or the Rocinante, which would be a nice meta-Expanse reference and itself a
pretty decent literary reference.

~~~
m_mueller
wouldn't Rocinante be better for one of the BFS?

------
mikeash
This used to happen a lot, when they were regularly crashing rockets into the
ship rather than landing them. There was a joke in the fan community that the
Falcon 9 was actually a really ineffective anti-ship missile. At least one of
them punched a nice hole through the deck:
[https://imgur.com/fWNb1zo](https://imgur.com/fWNb1zo)

~~~
SEJeff
Talk about RUD!

~~~
mikeash
I _almost_ miss photos of debris-covered ships coming back into port. Almost.

------
eltoozero
Intrigued by the Octograbber, haven't seen it before but here's some
discussion[0].

Looks like it scoots under the landing legs, latches on to the booster and
provides additional vertical support via hydraulic jacks until the booster can
be welded to the deck by the crew.

GIS has a bunch of pics too.

Maybe they could just leave it attached and drive around the stack on those
little tank treads.

[0]:
[http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42511.0](http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42511.0)

------
iaw
I have to hand it to them, they are doing a damn good job on safety.

I wonder how this bodes for the future of hazardous professions like offshore
oil-drilling.

~~~
SEJeff
They probably won't be landing rockets on oil rigs, so probably not very much
related.

~~~
ceejayoz
If they keep upping their launch cadence, I suspect they'll actually _need_
something similar to an oil rig permanently sited instead of running the ships
back and forth all the time.

~~~
emeraldd
There's an advantage to the ships that a fixed location couldn't provide. With
the ship, you can anchor the rocket and pull it into port without having to
move the rocket itself after landing. On a fixed platform, you'd have to have
infrastructure to relocate the rocket to bring it into port. Unless, of
course, you're going to refurbish it and launch from the platform ... Now that
would be impressive.

~~~
techdragon
At that point they would be better off using full RTLS and landing the rocket
on land back near the launchpad as much as possible.

Also based on the BFR / spaceX airways teaser video, they might be planning
this sort of offshore refurbishment / no refurbishment needed mode anyway.

------
speeq
More pics from /r/spacex:
[https://imgur.com/a/CwL5w](https://imgur.com/a/CwL5w)

------
dang
Url changed from [http://www.parabolicarc.com/2017/10/24/spacex-drone-ship-
dam...](http://www.parabolicarc.com/2017/10/24/spacex-drone-ship-damaged-
after-falcon-landing/), which points to this.

