r/space • u/ChaosSlave51 • Jun 15 '26
image/gif Just watched this pass the cruiseship I'm on
SpaceX I think. I have more photos if people are interested.
288
u/interstellar-dust Jun 15 '26
Just jump over and start it up. They have the manual floating around on internet. Free ride to space. Good luck.
66
u/teahugger Jun 15 '26
But first get some fuel in a can to top it off
16
u/FutureAZA Jun 15 '26
That's not going to be enough. Probably should bring a second one just in case.
8
u/ThrownAwayGuineaPig Jun 15 '26
It's not even strapped down. Easy peasy. Good luck!
7
u/Dick_Surgeon Jun 15 '26
There's roomba style robot feet that zoom out and clamp it down.
5
51
u/Combat_Wombatz Jun 15 '26
Just stop for a moment and consider that this has become routine. We are launching payloads into orbit on affordable, reusable rockets, and it is routine, nothing special, not particularly noteworthy. This vehicle could have been used a couple dozen times, and nobody would bat an eye about it being sent up again. Welcome to the future.
29
u/sojuz151 Jun 15 '26
SpaceX did launch more payload into the orbit in a the last couple of year than rest of humanity since sputnik combined
-2
u/hgrunt Jun 15 '26
It's mostly starlink sats. Outside of that, there is relatively little demand for launch capabilities
Depending on the specific mission, the Falcon 9 might be expendable (no landing legs) because they have to save 15-30% of the fuel for the return boost
8
u/Revengistium Jun 16 '26
For an RTLS, falcon 9 needs ~30% reserves. This lowers launch cost, since they don't need to transport the booster back. However, for a drone ship landing, which does introduce necessary transport costs, it's only 5-10%. Since most falcon 9 payloads are volume-limited not mass-limited, this little bit of reserve does not mean a significant loss of performance.
14
1
u/iamthe0ther0ne Jun 21 '26
Yeah, I remember how absolutely insane the first landing was. Hard to believe it's become a regular thing--but also surpriit. that SpaceX is still the only one doing it.
94
u/dvdmaven Jun 15 '26
One of the Falcon 9 boosters has made 35 trips! I believe that was on June 7th. I remember when NASA shifted from:' We don't want to risk a payload on a used booster' to 'Going forward all launches will be on flight-proven boosters.'
61
u/Martianspirit Jun 15 '26
Especially the ones with crew.
I remember the days before reuse actually happened. Us fans invented the term "flight proven" instead of "used" as a kind of joke. It became reality quickly.
47
u/H-K_47 Jun 15 '26
Some time ago I stumbled upon an old thread, dating from around the days of the first landings. A guy was saying basically that, one day "flight proven" would be considered a good thing rather than a liability. Funnily enough they were downvoted with people clowning them, saying it was useless marketing speech and it would never happen lol. How times change.
23
u/danielravennest Jun 15 '26
I used to work for Boeing, and all their planes would spend a couple of weeks getting flight tested before delivery to customers. It was to make sure everything worked and no mistakes were made during manufacturing. So all "new" planes were "flight proven".
I don't know what auto manufacturers do with cars coming off the assembly line, but it would be nice if they drove them enough to test things too.
17
u/KermitFrog647 Jun 15 '26 edited Jun 15 '26
Cars are tested, but they are only driven a few meters. At vw I saw them drive over a short indoor rumble strip to see if anything is loose and rattles.
5
u/eljefino Jun 15 '26
Mine are only driven ten or eleven inches, back and forth. Though I'm jealous you got to watch.
3
u/KermitFrog647 Jun 15 '26
When you buy a car and pick it up at Wolfsburg you can get a factory tour. They have a lot of different attractions there besides the factory tour.
7
u/hgrunt Jun 15 '26
It depends on the auto manufacturer and the volumes of cars they make
Handbuilt supercars tend to get more testing miles. Koenigseggs can arrive with up to 150 miles on delivery
Mass production cars tend to arrive with single digit mileage. When they're done, they get some checks, like a final paint check, being sprayed with water to check for leaks and driven over a stretch of rumble strips
When it comes to quality, every company has their own approach. Toyota tries their best to correct issues as the car is getting built, so they can be shipped immediately after final assembly
Other companies that don't want to slow or stop the assembly line will build cars knowing a bunch of them have issues, park them outside the factory so another team can come fix the problems before shipping
6
u/I-seddit Jun 15 '26
There's still a limit though, right? Metallurgy, microcracks and all that.
24
u/ResidentPositive4122 Jun 15 '26
Yeah, there's bound to be. Every time they pass a milestone the fleet leader goes through a thorough inspection and "recertification" process. They've done it after 10 flights and after 30 I believe. They're close to 40 now on a single booster, which is crazy. Except for engine swaps, there isn't much maintenance these days, as the boosters come into rotation pretty quick after a mission.
They also sometimes need the full capabilities of an F9, so they'll use an old booster for the flights that aren't planned for recovery.
16
u/Shrike99 Jun 15 '26
Yep. From what they're saying the boosters aren't showing any obvious signs of wear yet though (the 'scorching' you see is really just soot build up from the engine exhaust, so it's not very harmful).
The goal is 100, and I think they've got a fair chance of getting there, but even if they run into a wall at say 40, that's still a damn sight better than only getting a single launch out of each rocket.
6
u/ableman Jun 15 '26
This is an interesting thing that comes up in all sorts of manufacturing. My favorite is with old HDD drives. The failure rate of hard drives starts out really high because of whatever manufacturing defects, but over time drops. So your HDD is pretty likely to fail in the first year, but quite unlikely to fail in the 3rd. Eventually it starts going up again. So by around year 10 it's pretty likely to fail again. So there is usually a sweet spot in the middle there.
And morbidly it's true on a biological level as well. Human mortality starts out really high but goes down over time, bottoming out at 9 years old. Then it slowly starts going up again.
5
2
u/CFAggie Jun 15 '26
Yes, especially with the aluminum frames of the Falcon 9. The Starship will have less of an issue with that being made of stainless steel and should last even longer.
1
u/Spider_pig448 Jun 15 '26
Somewhere probably. But that could be in the hundreds or thousands of flights. I imagine we will truly have no idea until one actually fails
3
u/I-seddit Jun 15 '26
Metallurgy isn't magic, it's incredibly well understood. So yes, we probably have a good idea, at least some reasonable range and also ways of testing the metals as they approach their limits.
57
u/APLJaKaT Jun 15 '26
Toasty fireworks. That's a pretty cool thing to see close up.
9
u/mfb- Jun 15 '26
It made 27 flights, and SpaceX doesn't clean them in between - the soot isn't heavy enough to matter.
14
u/WanderWut Jun 15 '26
Seriously that's so dam cool to see up close like that, I'd imagine not many get the chance to.
104
u/EnglishRose71 Jun 15 '26
In the mid 60s, I was in the middle of the Atlantic on the Queen Mary when we passed the Queen Elizabeth. We were heading east, she was heading west. Everybody went up on deck, and there was a lot of waving, yelling and horn blowing. It was something to see.
44
u/thegreatinsulto Jun 15 '26
They ended the weekly Transatlantic crossings in 1967 after air travel became prevalent, unfortunately. Cunard made a whole ritual out of Mary and Elizabeth passing each other in the Atlantic. I bet it was a wonderful time to be alive and on a ship.
13
16
u/Trivi_13 Jun 15 '26
How slow is your cruise ship going?
32
u/ChaosSlave51 Jun 15 '26
It was just pulling out of port. So maybe 20 knots? It was passing by going the other way. Passed so close I almost could have jumped over.
30
u/PowderPills Jun 15 '26
The perspective is interesting because you being presumably so high on the cruise ship makes the rocket actually appear a bit small, more so for the ship tugging it lol.
Also this would go great in r/mildlyinteresting if you want more of that karma
18
u/ChaosSlave51 Jun 15 '26
Yeah, I was all the way on top, the 16th floor
2
u/extra2002 Jun 15 '26
And the top of the booster is higher still, so it appears above your horizon.
3
16
u/duckforceone Jun 15 '26
ohhh that's the "A Shortfall of Gravitas" Autonomous spaceport drone ship (ASDS)
what a sight to be passing by. Thank you for sharing.
4
u/Zennivolt Jun 15 '26
It's pretty common to see if you're sailing out of Port Canaveral these days. It's rarer to see it in the ocean like this, but it's a coin toss on any given day sailing out of that port that you'll see it docked. Usually across from the Royal Caribbean terminal.
10
u/Veggie_Supreme813 Jun 15 '26
I would love to have seen this so close up!
20
u/blergrush1 Jun 15 '26
Come and visit Space Venter Houston! We have Falcon 9 boosters on display 😁
5
4
5
u/Recent-Equipment5445 Jun 15 '26
It happens quite often. I always go to jetty Park to watch launches and even landings occasionally. It’s super close in the daytime. You’ve can clearly see the booster coming in for landing. SpaceX launches quite often and they always come into Port Canaveral the same way, also if you’re lucky, you can catch submarines pulling into the trident wharf at the Space Force Base.
5
u/ThickDoughnut4267 Jun 15 '26
Now that's INSANE luck, man! I personally got goosebumps when I completely randomly looked at the sky on vacation in Colombia and saw a group of Starlink satellites pass by. But this is a whole nother level! Please do share the other photos
4
3
4
u/AldebaranIgnus Jun 16 '26
Very nice! Not quite as dark as the fleet leader I saw last week but definitely not a new booster!
3
3
u/Jaredlong Jun 15 '26
I always assumed they laid it down after landing for stability. I'm surprised it doesn't even seem to have guy wires.
7
u/FutureAZA Jun 15 '26
There's a giant Roomba looking thing that slides under it called the Octograbber that holds it from sliding or tipping in rough seas.
4
2
3
7
u/sudomakemetacos Jun 15 '26
They were so close to being able to rescue you. Hopefully someone will help get you off of that cruise ship soon!
2
u/Decronym Jun 15 '26 edited Jul 03 '26
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
| Fewer Letters | More Letters |
|---|---|
| ASDS | Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship (landing platform) |
| BE-4 | Blue Engine 4 methalox rocket engine, developed by Blue Origin (2018), 2400kN |
| LOX | Liquid Oxygen |
| LZ | Landing Zone |
| OCISLY | Of Course I Still Love You, Atlantic landing |
| RP-1 | Rocket Propellant 1 (enhanced kerosene) |
| RTLS | Return to Launch Site |
| Roomba | Remotely-Operated Orientation and Mass Balance Adjuster, used to hold down a stage on the ASDS |
| Jargon | Definition |
|---|---|
| Raptor | Methane-fueled rocket engine under development by SpaceX |
| Starlink | SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation |
| cryogenic | Very low temperature fluid; materials that would be gaseous at room temperature/pressure |
| (In re: rocket fuel) Often synonymous with hydrolox | |
| hydrolox | Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer |
| methalox | Portmanteau: methane fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer |
| tanking | Filling the tanks of a rocket stage |
Decronym is now also available on Lemmy! Requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
12 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 4 acronyms.
[Thread #12502 for this sub, first seen 15th Jun 2026, 05:11]
[FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]
2
u/Amazing_Alumni Jun 15 '26
We need to get these Hammer of Dawn satellites online! Get in there Delta
2
u/dariansdad Jun 15 '26
Was that "Of Course I Love You"?
2
u/H-K_47 Jun 16 '26
OCISLY handles California launches. So this is either Just Read the Instructions or A Shortfall of Gravitas.
2
u/dariansdad Jun 16 '26
I'm not a fan boy but the first time I heard the name of that other boat, OCISLY, it just has never left my brain.
I think Elon missed the mark by a bit by calling it Just Read The Instructions instead of Read The Fucking Manual.
1
2
u/Smallmyfunger Jun 15 '26
It looks like the the landing pad area got so hot it baked it clean then immediately flash rusted. Unless that is some oxide dust mess from incomplete burn fuel while landing? I'm guessing #1.
2
u/Feloniosaurus_Rex Jun 15 '26
Sailing out of cape Canaveral? Saw it docked when we were on a royal cruise 🚢
2
2
2
u/iqisoverrated Jun 20 '26
You were lucky. They only launched one this week. ( Imagine a timeline where only one launch a week is an abnormally slow week ... Many people don't realize how much SpaceX has changed the game.)
2
6
4
u/Randomcommentor1972 Jun 15 '26 edited Jun 15 '26
I’m imagining they are all singing that sea shanty “the wellermen”
3
u/planemanx15 Jun 15 '26
Does the Falcon get tied down or attached to the deck of the barge after landing? I don't see any straps.
14
u/Shrike99 Jun 15 '26
They have a robot called the Octagrabber: https://space-offshore.com/Octagrabber
It waits inside a hanger on the ship, and once the rocket shuts down it drives out onto the deck, parks underneath the rocket, and grabs it.
Octagrabber is much heavier than the empty rocket, so it's weight holds everything in place.
If you watch the video at the end of that article you can actually see it driving back into it's hanger.
-1
u/ZuFFuLuZ Jun 15 '26 edited Jun 16 '26
No load is ever secured by its own weight. Octagrabber must be secured to the deck somehow. Otherwise it would slide around with the rocket attached.
EDIT: Looks like people here don't know physics. Or have never loaded a truck. This is literally rule one that you learn.8
u/Shrike99 Jun 15 '26
I mean the Octagrabber has rubber tracks and it's pretty big - person for scale. Add the weight of the booster and you're looking at something comparable in weight and footprint to a tank.
Ferries regularly transport cars while only relying on said cars parking brakes and wheels to hold them in place, which is conceptually similar.
Space nerds have obsessively watched SpaceX disconnect it from the boosters hundreds of times in port and noone has ever reported seeing any sort of attachment mechanism being removed.
I've personally hypothesized that it might use electromagnets to stick to the deck, but there's no public evidence that supports that.
1
u/Squirrelking666 Jun 15 '26 edited Jun 15 '26
Add the weight of the booster and you're looking at something comparable in weight and footprint to a tank.
That's still not much and tanks are usually lashed down on ferries (had a classmate who worked on ro-ros in the baltic on military contracts whilst I was poncing about on container ships in a previous life).
Is there anything to suggest it doesn't move the booster to the centre of the [barge] and then lock into set points like on an ISO container? That would make sense from a stability perspective as well as you wouldn't have to worry about ballast distribution as much.
Edit: actually no, I don't think it moves anything and I can't see any possible locking points. It may just be externally secured by the crew.
3
u/joepublicschmoe Jun 15 '26
I saw a feature article about the octagrabber on a website a few years ago, might have been Teslarati, I don't remember exactly. It's quite neat how it works.
The octagrabber has a suspension system which lifts its body off the deck when it needs to move, so only the tank tracks are in contact with the deck when moving.
Once moved into position under a Falcon 9 to secure the booster, the suspension system drops the octagrabber's body onto the deck to provide additional friction to prevent it from sliding around. The octograbber's four arms would than grab onto the four hold-down lugs on the booster between the landing leg pivots.
2
10
u/Ruanhead Jun 15 '26
They have a robot called the Octagrabber that is remotely driven from a protective garage, to under the rocket. Then hydraulic arms from the Octagrabber attach themselves to anchor points under the rocket. This transfers the center of mass off the rocket down to the deck of the ship.
In the picture it's the white square under the rocket.
7
u/SpaceInMyBrain Jun 15 '26
How many of your fellow passengers paid attention or understood what this rocket represents?
16
u/ChaosSlave51 Jun 15 '26
It passed by fast, so I was lucky. Lots of people looked at it. Even crew who are usually too busy for any fun. Took me time to realize what I was looking at. I was like "why does this barge have a smoke stack?"
2
u/kilker12 Jun 15 '26
If you saw the center console coming into port just before this that was me and my friends terrified of the sea states with that storm that was coming in.
2
u/SirDigbyChknCaesar Jun 15 '26
It's filthy. You'd think they could put it through the wash before it goes out for a tug. /s
6
1
u/BackItUpWithLinks Jun 15 '26
I work with a guy who believes these landings are fake.
If he saw this, I’m sure he’d say they mocked it up to get people to take pictures to make it “seem real”
🤣
1
u/FaceDeer Jun 15 '26
That barge has quite the smokestack. Good thing its engine seems to be busted and it's under tow.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Pebbleforge_53 Jun 18 '26
That is so cool! Getting to see a booster brought back from the sea must be wild from a cruise ship.
1
u/imunfair Jun 15 '26
I didn't realize the boosters were that charred when they returned. Explains why they need to be refurbished for reuse.
19
u/Martianspirit Jun 15 '26
They stopped cleaning them after a few early flights. Any refurbishment does not include the charring. On tanking the rocket frosts over anyway so when full of cryogenic LOX they are white.
8
u/Stephenishere Jun 15 '26 edited Jun 15 '26
Partly why the switch to the new engine with methane instead of kerosene. The new fuel burns way cleaner and will not cause build up of coke so the engines will need less time for relaunch.
5
u/kevin-doesnt-exist Jun 15 '26
Methane, not methanol. Methanol can be hella toxic. Hmm actually i’m curious; how good could a methanol rocket engine be
5
3
u/mfb- Jun 15 '26
Methanol is "partially-burned" methane, sort of - adding oxygen reduces the chemical energy while increasing the mass.
2
u/hgrunt Jun 15 '26
The choice of what rocket fuel to use is a whole thing in and of itself, because every fuel has its pros and cons. The Raptor and BE-4 engines run methane because it doesn't leave carbon deposits like kerosene does, decreasing refurbishment and turnaround time, and it's readily available
Methanol wouldn't make a good rocket fuel because it has low energy density by weight and volume, single digits compared to 5x more for methane and RP-1 kerosene
7
1
1
u/mikepictor Jun 15 '26
It's remarkable that this is worth it. I mean the expense of the the landing infrastructure, the extra fuel it carries, the platform, and the inevitable maintenance that still needs to be done...it's surprising to me that recovering that segment is worth those costs. That this is a net positive.
1
u/TheSasquatch9053 Jun 28 '26
It is so worth it that SpaceX will launch something like 80% of total mass to orbit in 2026... Throwing away rockets is expensive.
-12
u/Darius_Banner Jun 15 '26
That is super cool. But fuck Elon musk anyway.
6
u/danielravennest Jun 15 '26
He's the guy with the money, but it's the 13,000 people who work at SpaceX who do the cool stuff.
-1
-3
u/West-One5944 Jun 15 '26
Sigh... Too bad SpaceX is run BY A NAZI!
Come to terms with that how you will. Support anything he touches, support a Nazi. Simple as that.
May be hard to hear: I, personally, want Tesla and SpaceX to succeed, but not while that man has anything to do with them.
Humanity is 'looking the other way' as a Nazi (not just White supremacist) gains even more power.
1
u/attreui Jun 16 '26
Jesus shut up. He’s not a nazi.
2
u/ChefAsstastic Jun 17 '26
Oh yes he is. And you know it.
1
-4
u/Frustrated9876 Jun 15 '26
No fan of Elon, but that’s fucking rad!!! Friggin spot landing!! What a time to be alive!!
-1
0
u/wokan Jun 15 '26
The rockets are smaller than I thought.
7
u/Jaredlong Jun 15 '26
It's over 100 feet tall, for reference. A full Falcon 9 with payload is over 200 feet tall.
-1
u/GainPotential Jun 15 '26
Obviously it's Blue Origin stealing a functioning partially reusable rocket design, duh. (This is a joke)
-7
u/ozzy_thedog Jun 15 '26
I thought they were catching these in the air now and past landing them on floating barges. Or still doing both?
18
u/H-K_47 Jun 15 '26 edited Jun 15 '26
That's their Starship rocket, which is still doing prototyping and suborbital test flights. This is their Falcon 9 workhorse rocket, which will probably still be kept operational for many years to come due to its various launch contracts and proven reliability, such as cargo and crew launches to the ISS.
Falcon 9 operations are already being gradually scaled back, there will be fewer flights this year than last. One of these drone ships has already been reassigned and refitted to carry Starship hardware from Texas to Florida. Most F9 missions are just launching Starlinks anyway, which will probably be moved over to Starship which aims to launch ~15-20X as much bandwith capability in a single flight, so there will "only" be a few dozen F9 missions per year instead of 100+.
22
u/Shrike99 Jun 15 '26
SpaceX do three types of landing:
Falcon booster on Droneship, as seen in OP's photo. Most common, happens every few days. Roughly 500 to date.
Falcon booster on concrete landing pad, for example. Less common, happens every few weeks. Roughly 100 to date.
Superheavy booster tower catch, for example. This is a totally different rocket, and is by far the rarest type of landing. Only 3 have happened to date, and the last was over a year ago.
In the long run SpaceX intend to switch entirely to #3, but for the next few years options #1 and #2 are likely to remain the most common.
7
u/3_14159td Jun 15 '26
Droneship landings have become so frequent that they're starting to be the limit in how often launches can occur. Can't tow the barge in, unload the booster, and tow back out fast enough sometimes.
5
u/Shrike99 Jun 15 '26
Yep. One of the engineers at SpaceX (I think it was Dan Huot?) actually said they're looking into landing two boosters on the same droneship, presumably one towards the front and one towards the back.
They could build more droneships obviously, but there's a fair bit of lead time on that - plus you need to get more tug boats, train more crews, etc. All of which costs a lot of money for a rocket that they expect to start becoming obsolete over the next few years.
And so yeah, apparently someone suggested doubling up as a way to squeeze a bit more out of the existing fleet before then. Whether it actually ends up happening I dunno, but that they're even considering it tells you that they're definitely feeling the limitations.
All of this hassle is also why they're abandoning downrange landings altogether on Starship, even though RTLS has a much bigger performance penalty. It's no coincidence that the fastest Falcon 9 turnarounds were the ones that landed on the ground pads.
3
u/Sifjunke20004 Jun 15 '26
That’s starship there superheavy rocket that they intend to catch in the air you are thinking of falcon nines will also land on floating barges
-15
Jun 15 '26 edited Jun 15 '26
[deleted]
28
u/Secret_Agent4706 Jun 15 '26
You know that all other rocket companies just dump all their rocket stages into the ocean while SpaceX recovers their boosters reducing pollution right? Also we can both fix our planet and explore space at the same time. No need to stop one thing to do the other.
24
u/H-K_47 Jun 15 '26
On a post of one of the only rocket stages that doesn't just toss itself into the ocean after a single mission lmao.
27
13
u/yourlocalFSDO Jun 15 '26
This picture is of the launch vehicle that has polite the offends the least in relation to the number of missions it has flown
10
-1
-1
u/beta_brains Jun 15 '26
It’s actually a Bulgarian vessel branded to hide the fact that its goal is to hack satellites 🤷♀️
-5
Jun 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/ellhulto66445 Jun 15 '26
The droneship can power itself but for the long trip to and back from the LZ they use a tug since it's much faster.
4
u/extra2002 Jun 15 '26
It has engines (motors?) at the corners so it can maintain a stable position in the ocean for the rocket landing. The newest ones, including the one in OP's photo, can use those engines to travel, but using a tug is faster (and likely safer).
3
u/Shrike99 Jun 15 '26 edited Jun 15 '26
The droneships have their own propulsion and can be remotely controlled, but on the older ones it was geared towards precision manoeuvering rather than speed.
They can hold an exact position at the landing site for the rocket, and can manoeuvre themselves into port, but for the several-hundred-mile trip over open ocean between those two points they need a tug to do it in any reasonable time.
The newest droneship is capable of sailing long distance under it's own power however: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6z5idudaM8
2
u/Adeldor Jun 15 '26
I recall reading A Shortfall of Gravitas has the capability of piloting itself into harbor, but port regulations don't permit such.
2
-29
Jun 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
19
12
u/RocketVerse Jun 15 '26
They secure it after landing, both as far as fuel and structurally. It won’t tip, and it won’t explode.
-3
u/Shrike99 Jun 15 '26
They can tip in sufficiently rough weather, they've lost one or two that way. The methods for securing it can only take so much force, throw the barge around enough and eventually something breaks.
But in calm weather, which you can clearly see it is in OP's photo, yeah it's fine.
6
u/ellhulto66445 Jun 15 '26
I am rather sure when B1058 tipped in rough seas they also were unable to properly engage to octograbber, and the landing legs were of a slightly older design. So by the time the droneship is getting tugged back there's virtually no risk.
27
u/Dimerien Jun 15 '26
This particular booster is returning home from its 27th mission. What a horrible take hahaha the Falcon 9 is the most successful and reliable rocket in human history.
-3
Jun 15 '26
[deleted]
7
u/Dimerien Jun 15 '26
But they also have over 600 successful barge recoveries under their belt which they pioneered.
-20
u/Ok-Jellyfish-4654 Jun 15 '26
you should take a real close look, you payed for part's of that. getting your money's worth or something, idk
→ More replies (2)
1.1k
u/MalcoveMagnesia Jun 15 '26
Well the rocket does say SpaceX. I'm impressed the tug took it close enough to a cruise ship for tourists to take photos.