Tuesday, September 19, 2017
Contact us    |    Advertise    |   Help   RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon
    Home  ·  News  ·  Forum  ·  Stories  ·  Image Gallery  ·  Columns  ·  Encyclopedia  ·  Videos
Find: in

SpaceX Grasshopper test flight successful


Posted on Monday, 14 October, 2013 | Comment icon 14 comments

The rocket is able to initiate a controlled descent back to the ground. Image Credit: SpaceX / YouTube
A remarkable new type of reusable rocket could soon revolutionize how we launch things in to space.
SpaceX's Grasshopper rocket might at first glance appear to be like any other, but what it lacks in visual uniqueness it makes up for in innovation. Unlike conventional chemical rockets, the Grasshopper will be able to launch, deliver its payload and then land again in a vertical position.

In an impressive demonstration flight this week, the rocket took off from SpaceX's test pad in McGregor, Texas and flew to a height of half a mile before returning to the ground in a controlled descent that saw it land on the exact spot from which it had launched.

While conventional first-stage rockets are simply jettisoned and can only be used once, the Grasshopper has the potential to provide a long-term reusable solution that could change the way we put things in to space.

An impressive video of the test flight taken from a remote-controlled hexacopter hovering nearby has been released online and can be viewed below.


Source: YouTube | Comments (14)

Tags: Rocket, SpaceX, Grasshopper

Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #5 Posted by Merc14 on 14 October, 2013, 17:25
While I applaud the desire to innovate, there are several major obstacles to this becoming a de facto standard for future launches. Probably the greatest of those obstacles would be cost - not just in monetary terms, but also in fuel. The rocket has no glide-flight characteristics, therefore both the ascent and descent are completely dependent on thrust from it's primary engine(s). This requires nearly (and possibly more than) double the fuel payload the launch of an expendable rocket of comparable size (minus the weight of cargo expelled before re-entry) requires. Because more fuel needs to b... [More]
Comment icon #6 Posted by keithisco on 14 October, 2013, 20:38
The question is, can the booster engine be re-used? That is in the Critical Path for cost effectiveness. Lets not forget that 744metres altitude does not equate to a re-entry burn, as ablation shielding is not required. I believe that this was just a simple Proof of Concept for the Avionics, nothing more. Apart from which the new Sabre engine is is truly designed for re-use from an HTOL viewpoint dramatically reducing the costs involved with conventional Space Delivery Systems
Comment icon #7 Posted by Merc14 on 14 October, 2013, 21:25
The question is, can the booster engine be re-used? That is in the Critical Path for cost effectiveness. Lets not forget that 744metres altitude does not equate to a re-entry burn, as ablation shielding is not required. I believe that this was just a simple Proof of Concept for the Avionics, nothing more. Apart from which the new Sabre engine is is truly designed for re-use from an HTOL viewpoint dramatically reducing the costs involved with conventional Space Delivery Systems The vehicle shown is a proof of concept and not meant to deliver payload into orbit and there must be substantial savi... [More]
Comment icon #8 Posted by Waspie_Dwarf on 14 October, 2013, 22:16
I believe that this was just a simple Proof of Concept for the Avionics, nothing more. You seem to be making the same incorrect assumption that Leonardo is (or rather one of his incorrect assumptions as there are several but I will address that later). The Grasshopper is a test bed for a modification of the existing Falcon 9 first stage. As such this represents more than a simple proof of concept for the avionics. The Grasshopper is essentially a Falcon 9 first stage with only 1 (instead of 9) Merlin 1D engines. The next version of Grasshopper will use all 9 engines and will have legs which ar... [More]
Comment icon #9 Posted by Leonardo on 15 October, 2013, 10:46
Thanks for the additional info, Waspie. I can see where the assumptions I made might have led me astray, although I still have reservations regarding the reliability of the approach. I'm glad they are experimenting in the hope of achieving their projected goal, but am skeptical they will achieve it.
Comment icon #10 Posted by Waspie_Dwarf on 15 October, 2013, 11:15
The rocket has no glide-flight characteristics, therefore both the ascent and descent are completely dependent on thrust from it's primary engine(s). Not so. No vehicle needs thrust to descend, gravity takes care of that. What you need is thrust to break the vehicle and allow it to land. This requires nearly (and possibly more than) double the fuel payload the launch of an expendable rocket of comparable size (minus the weight of cargo expelled before re-entry) requires. Where did you get that figure from? Firstly that is not the way it works. The vehicle size (and therefore fuel load) is the ... [More]
Comment icon #11 Posted by Waspie_Dwarf on 15 October, 2013, 11:27
Thanks for the additional info, Waspie. I can see where the assumptions I made might have led me astray Hi Leonardo, sorry for the post coming after yours, I wasn't intending to put the boot in, I was already in the middle of writing it and it seemed a shame to waste it. although I still have reservations regarding the reliability of the approach. I'm glad they are experimenting in the hope of achieving their projected goal, but am skeptical they will achieve it. I think the advantage they have is that they are modifying existing technologies rather than building something new and complex. The... [More]
Comment icon #12 Posted by highdesert50 on 15 October, 2013, 13:25
I am not an MechEng, so perhaps I am missing the obvious. But, wouldn't it be far less costly and simpler to use an enhanced parachute system. Or, perhaps parachute and some thrust e.g. JATO/RATO at near touchdown.
Comment icon #13 Posted by Waspie_Dwarf on 15 October, 2013, 14:14
I am not an MechEng, so perhaps I am missing the obvious. But, wouldn't it be far less costly and simpler to use an enhanced parachute system. Or, perhaps parachute and some thrust e.g. JATO/RATO at near touchdown. Parachutes still add weight. The parachutes needed to lower the speed of a Falcon 9 v1.1 first stage which weighs over 25 tons would need to be massive and therefore heavy. Unless you are planning to land at sea (like the shuttle SRBs) then you are still going to need to manoeuvre the vehicle at supersonic speed back over land, which requires engine thrust. Parachute's alone could n... [More]
Comment icon #14 Posted by Lex540 on 25 October, 2013, 14:08
Innovations distinguishes between a leader and a follower. nice job. "steve Jobs"


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


  On the forums
Forum posts:
Forum topics:
Members:

5986261
257689
169443

 
60 ancient shipwrecks found in the Black Sea
9-19-2017
Marine archaeologists unexpectedly stumbled across a goldmine of shipwrecks during a recent expedition.
Italian supervolcano's magma source found
9-18-2017
Scientists have discovered evidence of a 'hot zone' feeding a supervolcano in southern Italy.
Three planets to hide behind the Moon today
9-18-2017
Venus, Mars and Mercury will all be temporarily disappearing behind the Moon over the next few hours.
Man defends 'Gurning Championships' title
9-18-2017
50-year-old Ady Zivelonghi from Coventry has won the face-pulling contest for the second year in a row.
Featured Videos
Gallery icon 
Derren Brown and new age crystals
Posted 9-19-2017 | 0 comments
The psychological illusionist is joined by actor Martin Freeman for this remarkable trick.
 
I'll eat my hat
Posted 9-18-2017 | 0 comments
Where did the strange phrase 'I'll eat my hat' actually come from ?
 
Meet the microscopic life in your home
Posted 9-17-2017 | 0 comments
Think your home is free of meddlesome microscopic life forms ? Think again.
 
Are rats friends or foes ?
Posted 9-16-2017 | 3 comments
Rats are certainly not humanity's favorite animals, but just how bad are they really ?
 
How not to land a rocket booster
Posted 9-15-2017 | 0 comments
It took SpaceX more than a few tries to master the complicated landing process.
 
 View: More videos
Stories & Experiences
Guardian angel ?
9-13-2017 | Middle of nowhere Iowa
 
I'm not normal, but I'm not alone
9-13-2017 | South Africa
 
When I was very little
9-13-2017 | Sturgis So.Dakota
 
Weird light orbs and chills
9-13-2017 | Poland
 
Unexplained light flashes
8-30-2017 | Louisiana
 
A night that I will never forget
8-18-2017 | Massena, NY
 
Shapeshifter
8-18-2017 | Cranbrook British Columbia
 
Ghost experiences ?
8-11-2017 | United States
 
 

         More stories | Send us your story
 
Top   |  Home   |   Forum   |   News   |   Image Gallery   |  Columns   |   Encyclopedia   |   Videos   |   Polls
UM-X 10.7 Unexplained-Mysteries.com © 2001-2017
Privacy Policy and Disclaimer   |   Cookies   |   Advertise   |   Contact   |   Help/FAQ