Why doesn't Elon Musk just use a parachute?

[LEAKYSEALS951]

Impressive, to even come so close to landing a rocket in reverse in the ocean, but why not just use a big a## parachute, and perhaps a last minute burst of propellant, in a desert?
Seems simpler, about the same weight as all the fuel for deceleration, and a whole lot less to go wrong.

(I'm sure there is a good reason why, but why?)

Awesome New SpaceX Video Shows Rocket Landing Try and Crash

Okay... the desert thing I might get- the trajectory puts the rocket over the ocean- but this still seems so complex.

[carambola]

then launch from the ocean

[Scott R]

Didn't we achieve this like 60 years ago already? Real edgy.

[BReif61]

Originally Posted by Scott R

Didn't we achieve this like 60 years ago already? Real edgy.

Land a rocket so that it could be reused? Not that I can recall. Weren't all the Saturn V's just crashed into the ocean?

[cashflyer]

Americans splashed 'em in the ocean.

Russian plonked 'em in the dirt.

https://youtu.be/XyvIw_yO60w

[Scott R]

Originally Posted by BReif61

Land a rocket so that it could be reused? Not that I can recall. Weren't all the Saturn V's just crashed into the ocean?

Yes, the predecessor to the Saturn was the "Nexus" reusable platform. Then of course all of the Shuttles where reusable as well.

[Nostril Cheese]

Nexus was a concept developed after the Saturn V by General Dynamics. Never built.

Its not easy to design and build a truly reusable rocket. Hats off to the Space X people.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by LEAKYSEALS951

Impressive, to even come so close to landing a rocket in reverse in the ocean, but why not just use a big a## parachute, and perhaps a last minute burst of propellant, in a desert?
Seems simpler, about the same weight as all the fuel for deceleration, and a whole lot less to go wrong.

(I'm sure there is a good reason why, but why?)

Awesome New SpaceX Video Shows Rocket Landing Try and Crash

Okay... the desert thing I might get- the trajectory puts the rocket over the ocean- but this still seems so complex.

I'm just guessing here. Landing in water is probably much more forgiving than landing on something much harder. Also, there's A LOT of water to land on, and by comparison, not nearly as much dirt (and not all of the dirt is a good option, forests, mountains, cliffs, neighborhoods, etc...)

[Deschodt]

Also guessing but I imagine a salt water landing (while safer and softer impact wise) does a lot of damage to a rocket's components , and the goal here is reusability for lower costs. Ground landing with a parachute might do too much impact damage, more parachutes for a slower descent might mean less precision as to where it actually lands and there might be rules where you are allowed to land those things. Pretty amazing though, they came close... Looks harder than hovering an RC helicoper ;-)

I loved Elon Musk's tweet (assuming it was for real): "if this works, time for me to buy an under-volcano lair" or something to that effect. Good sense of humor...

[Jim Richards]

Originally Posted by cashflyer

Americans splashed 'em in the ocean.

Russian plonked 'em in the dirt.

https://youtu.be/XyvIw_yO60w

You're talking about capsules, not their rockets.

[IROC]

Originally Posted by Nostril Cheese

Its not easy to design and build a truly reusable rocket. Hats off to the Space X people.

We did it 20 years ago...

McDonnell Douglas DC-X - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[flipper35]

We sorta did it, but those weren't' full scale articles used for LEO delivery.

[porsche4life]

You gotta respect them for keeping at it! I think they have to be close now!

[Jim Richards]

I have to think the aspect ratio (height-to-width) of the Space X rocket is going to make successful controlled landings a lot harder to achieve than the Delta Clipper that Mike (IROC) referenced.

[IROC]

Originally Posted by Jim Richards

I have to think the aspect ratio (height-to-width) of the Space X rocket is going to make successful controlled landings a lot harder to achieve than the Delta Clipper that Mike (IROC) referenced.

Yeah, the Delta Clipper was pretty cool for it's day. Back then, one of the challenges was the incredible software required to fire the rockets to maintain the stability. These days it seems straight-forward, but when you realize this was back before internet browsers existed, it puts it in perspective.

I had no direct involvement in the Delta Clipper, but used to go to Huntington Beach (McDonnell Douglas) pretty often and actually hung out in the hangar while they worked on the DC-X after one of the flights. Very cool stuff.

[motion]

Another attempt in about 30 minutes. I think they'll do it this time.



Or

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ml1RO4IcOG0

[Tervuren]

Originally Posted by LEAKYSEALS951

(I'm sure there is a good reason why, but why?)

Precision. You land the rocket at its "hanger" rather than within a several hundred mile guess radius. This cuts a lot of time (money) on recovery and transport processes.

[Craig T]

If he can pull it off consistently, it's brilliant and qualifies as real progress and innovation. Asking Elon Musk why he doesn't just use a parachute is like asking him why he didn't just keep buying things on Ebay using his VISA card.

[Bob Kontak]

Originally Posted by Jim Richards

I have to think the aspect ratio (height-to-width) of the Space X rocket is going to make successful controlled landings a lot harder to achieve than the Delta Clipper that Mike (IROC) referenced.

He landed one on the ground successfully.

[LEAKYSEALS951]

Man- I barely remember posting this almost a year ago. Elon could probably land a rocket in my toilet seat by now if he wanted.

Such is progress (and, no- I don't want Elon's rocket in my toilet seat)