In article , says...

(Niels Jørgen Kruse) writes:

Jochem Huhmann wrote:

It's still curious. Landing a first stage or a booster would mean having
some ground to land it on, which would mean having to launch over land.
Which SpaceX doesn't. Or they mean to land the thing on a ship or barge
out there....

Go straight up until first stage separation?

You would have to transport the stage back otherwise.

SpaceX just has published a video and some photos how this is meant to
work. They're somewhat skipping over how the stage gets back to the
launch site though...

http://www.spacex.com/npc-luncheon-elon-musk.php

From the video, it looks like the sequence is this:

1. First stage shuts down
2. First stage separates (and second stage starts)
3. First stage rotates 180 degrees
4. First stage ignites three of the nine engines and does a burn to put
it on a trajectory back to KSC
5. First lands at KSC on one engine (ala DC-X)

I don't see any big "gotcha" here. Restarting liquid fueled rocket
engines has been done since the 60's. DC-X proved step 5 two decades
ago, and its results have been recently replicated by other start-ups.

The only thing which has not been done is actually building and flying a
reusable TSTO VTVL launch vehicle. I'm sure SpaceX will start with the
first stage, since it will be far easier than the upper stage. If
successful, they can implement a reusable first stage on both Falcon 9
and Falcon Heavy.

Falcon Heavy's LEO payload capacity is 117,000 lb (53 metric tons).
Even if making a Falcon Heavy reusable ate up 1/2 of the payload, it
would still be capable of putting more payload into orbit than the space
shuttle.

Jeff
--
" Ares 1 is a prime example of the fact that NASA just can't get it
up anymore... and when they can, it doesn't stay up long. "
- tinker