
SpaceX Grasshopper Takes Off and Lands Vertically [video] - po
http://www.crazyengineers.com/spacex-grasshopper-takes-off-lands-vertically-video/
======
Gravityloss
As far as I know, this is only the second turbopump fed liquid rocket to land
vertically, after DC-X (that became DC-XA).

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wv9n9Casp1o>

This is important, as in practice only turbopump rockets have enough
performance for orbital uses. If it can routinely and safely land vertically,
then it's very easy to build a reusable first stage out of this.

If everything works out, a reusable Falcon could fly every few days: Ideally
you'd just refuel and go again, like an airplane.

In this first generation though I expect a lot of maintenance and handwork by
lots of people every flight.

This will require a whole ecosystem too: low maintenance satellites that can
be slapped on the rocket and launched at any time. Otherwise very flexible
operations too like low overhead range and radar tracking sevices, safety
zones etc.

If the rocket can abort and land in case of problems, and demonstrates good
safety by flying a lot, then a lot of safety criteria can be relaxed, which
should enable better flexibility.

------
jlgreco
Similar work has been done by Armadillo, but it looks like SpaceX's
Grasshopper is a bit bigger than anything Armadillo has done. Will be exciting
to see the concept continue to scale up.

~~~
gnarbarian
Bigger but this [1] test by Armadillo was more impressive in my opinion for
the additional complexity involved in cutting the engine deploying a chute
then cutting the chute and successfully landing from a turbulent freefall.

[1]<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9u0qlIoSSkQ>

~~~
ChuckMcM
Ok, that video is just freakin' amazing. Lets count the things they show in
it:

1) Take off from the pad.

2) Loss of vehicle control (chute deploys), Loss of engine

3) Engine restart.

4) Attitude recovery after engine restart

5) Return to pad capability.

I had no ideas these guys were that far along.

~~~
snogglethorpe
> _I had no ideas these guys were that far along._

... with what, like 0.0001% of SpaceX's budget and other resources...?

Maybe SpaceX should hire Armadillo...

~~~
ChuckMcM
Its an intriguing question isn't it? Here we have two companies which together
have all the moving parts necessary for a lunar landing and return mission. It
would be fascinating if Bigelow Aerospace could put a habitat at the Lunar L1
point. Then SpaceX provides a boost to L1 capability, and Armadillo provides a
transport service from L1 to/from the surface of the Moon.

------
turing
For those interested, here is a similar video from Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin
last year.

[http://www.blueorigin.com/updates/updates-2011-11-17-video-o...](http://www.blueorigin.com/updates/updates-2011-11-17-video-
of-the-short-hop-flight-i.html)

~~~
thematt
Thanks for the plug :) Here's another one: I'm looking for some top-notch
software engineers if anyone is interested.

~~~
DVassallo
Can you tell us what the "... or otherwise able to review all export-
controlled technical information" point in the qualifications means? How would
one be able to determine if he/she is able to do that. Is it nationality
related? [I have no knowledge of this space, so excuse me if this something
obvious.]

~~~
neurotech1
A significant amount of rocket technology is covered by ITAR (International
Traffic in Arms Regulations), which means that its restricted to largely US
citizens. That means it cannot be legally shared with foreign college
students, for example. The first rockets were basically ICBMs without the
warhead. Gemini capsules were launched from a Titan II rocket, for example.

~~~
DeepDuh
In other words, say I'd like to apply to SpaceX as a European software
engineer, it won't be possible?

~~~
TeMPOraL
Unfortunately not.

------
samishxc
In what ways will this be useful? I imagine if a rocket carries a payload into
space it wouldn't be able to land vertically like this, or is that the
intention?

Either way, very interesting

~~~
dangrossman
Fly to Mars (or anywhere else in the solar system), land, unload passengers
and cargo, refuel, take off again, fly to Earth, land. Refuel and start
loading for the next flight.

That's the end goal. And since not all bodies SpaceX may want to land on have
a comparable atmosphere to Earth, parachutes are not part of the plan.

This isn't the vehicle that's going to do all that, but they have to start
somewhere to build the tech that eventually will.

~~~
dotborg
I doubt this vehicle will be used for landing on Earth(why not use
parachutes?). I would rather send it to Mars orbit and reuse it there as a
landing module, but not take it back to Earth.

~~~
JulianMorrison
Why not use chutes? Because with rockets, you can steer, and fine-tune the
rate of descent. You don't need to splash down at sea, you can land on solid
ground, and pick which bit of ground to land on (such as a spaceport). It's
less of a bumpy ride and cheaper to recover.

------
tsotha
This is great and all, but it's been done many times since the 1950s.

