by Jeff Cunningham
Earlier today, SpaceX posted the following to their Twitter feed and other social media sites:
Posted just before 6 PM, EST, Jan. 16
Okay, so it’s not exactly a formal poll–but that doesn’t mean that a throng of Browncoats loudly proclaiming “a Dragon named Serenity!” won’t be heard or noticed. Now is the time for all of you to strike while the iron is hot and exercise the power of Ridiculously Large Numbers of People on the Internet (the scientific effect observed when Nathan Fillion tweets something) and be heard.
We admit, this alone won’t get our beloved ship into the Black, but it’s just too good an opportunity to pass up. So, reply to SpaceX’s tweet or to their Facebook status to say “A Dragon named Serenity!” or something to that effect, followed by the hashtag #takebackthesky .
Good luck, and we’ll keep you posted.
Take Back the Sky 
Your other suggestion box appears to not be working. This is for the booster landing rocket landing.
SpaceX Booster Rocket Landing Platform Assist Redesign. The current platform appears to be a flat, floating, platform that does not actively assist in the landing other than to provide a landing surface.
Problem: Booster Rocket has diffulty achieving a stable vertical position on the platform with all three legs of the landing gear.
Result of Problem: Booster Rocket tips beyond a recoverable angle and explodes.
Solution: Create an active landing platform with the following characteristics:
1. Active Landing Platform: Add a raised landing surface of 10′ 20’+ on a compressable (e.g. accordion style scissor lift that will compress during landing) to provide a cushion in that the platform will lower under the weight of the rocket when it makes contact in landing. This will grant a greater amount of time and distance for the rocket to correct position while in contact with the platform and reduce the impact of the first leg to make contact.
2. Landing Gear Capture System: Add a capture system to the platform to “grab” the legs of the rocket as they make contact to assist in stabilization. This would be a grid system that would not rely on the leg to hit a specific spot on the platform.
3. Sliding Suface Platform: Make the surface of the raised platform movable and powered in the horizontal so that it will actively slide in the direction of the first landing gear leg to be captured and “push” the bottom of the rocket in the direction of vertical. Requires addition of various sensors on rocket booster so platform can detect orientation and motion to know how it should move. This will reduce the amount of correction required of the maneuvering rockets located at the top of the rocket and give a bottom of rocket maneuverability that will shift the axis of rotation of the rocket closer to the center of the rocket.
Thank you and all the best,
Scott Reid
scottreid1@cox.net
(949) 375-8463
Great ideas!
…But we’re not SpaceX, which is why we didn’t have a “suggestion box.” This was an informal poll they did through Twitter, as you’ll see in the links we put in this article.
I have an idea for Space X reusable rockets. Instead of a platform in the ocean, have a landing site in Africa where the first stage can land. There it will be refueled and launched from that African base so that it can be flown in space back to home base in California, Texas, or Florida. It would land there and be ready for reuse. No floating platforms would be needed. The African base would be a space port just like in Texas.
New post, last one didn’t take:
I have an idea for Space X reusable rockets. Instead of a platform in the ocean, have a landing site in Africa where the first stage can land. There it will be refueled and launched from that African base so that it can be flown in space back to home base in California, Texas, or Florida. It would land there and be ready for reuse. No floating platforms would be needed. The African base would be a space port just like in Texas.
Sorry, our comments are set to be approved by one of the administrators before it can be seen by others, in order to weed out the trolls.
That’s not a bad idea, Gene! Though, for my money (Jeff speaking), I think that would hurt the “made in America” image that SpaceX tries to use to appeal to congressmen. From an engineering standpoint, though, you may have a valid point as far as being “easier” to land. Getting those stages back to HQ might be an adventure, though.