SpaceX (general discussion)

We don't know for sure if they will land on land yet. They got GO from AF but no confirmation of GO from FAA yet. But chances are they will allow it. Either way they have a barge out at sea (very low downrange due to steep climb vs CRS missions) as a back up plan.
 
Michel Van said:
they have identified the cause
in Second stage, Inside Lox tank one of steel stud holding Helium tank, failed at 1/5 of load it design for.
it rupture it connected Helium tank, what released it entire content at once, leading to overpressure that let to burst asunder of second stage
strut.jpg


http://spacenews.com/falcon-9-failure-linked-to-upper-stage-tank-strut/

http://www.theverge.com/2015/7/20/9004463/space-x-falcon-9-rocket-explosion-cause-explained
Click to expand...

I did not realize that SpaceX was using Stargate technology in the Falcon 9.
 
Ahem, well. Yes.

It has not been generally revealed that the Falcon 9 actually uses two subscale "Chappa'ais" - one in the fuel tank and one in the oxidizer tank. Additional fuel and oxidizer is thus continually introduced into the vehicle through the dual wormholes. The result is essentially a self-licking ice cream cone, at least from the vehicle's point of view.

The reuse of the Falcon 9 first stage is driven by the economics of the dual Chappa-ai installation, not really the rocket motors which are extremely cheap by comparison. ::)
 
Falcon 9 v1.1FT first stage. Maybe the first one that will return in one piece? :)
 

Attachments

  • 23660653516_5c2d49effb_o.jpg
    23660653516_5c2d49effb_o.jpg
    1.5 MB · Views: 434
That pictures. That might very well be a shot of this centuries Wright Flyer.

Go get 'em, SpaceX!

David
 
Apparently quite a few changes made in addition to just the tank support strut.

From Florida Today
==================================
SpaceX on Wednesday hopes to test-fire the main engines on a Falcon 9 rocket that CEO Elon Musk said on Tuesday is "significantly improved" over the previous version.

"There are a number of improvements in the rocket," Musk said during a presentation at the American Geophysical Union's meeting in San Francisco.

The 230-foot rocket is a new version featuring upgrades from the previous one that was known as version 1.1. They include:

Liquid oxygen propellant sub-cooled to close to its freezing point, increasing its density "quite significantly," Musk said, enabling the rocket to carry more of it and improve thrust. Musk said he believed it was the first use of "deeply cryogenic propellant."
A "stretched" or longer upper stage that can hold more rocket-grade kerosene and liquid oxygen propellant.
Changes to the systems that separate the rocket stages, and "a number of other improvements in electronics."
The changes combine to increase the Falcon 9's thrust at sea level from 1.3 million to 1.5 million pounds, rising to nearly 1.7 million pounds in flight, according to information on SpaceX's Web site.

"So it’s I think a significantly improved rocket from the last one," said Musk.
========================================

And Florida Today still claims they may attempt to land the first stage at Cape Canaveral:
========================================
Liftoff from Launch Complex 40 would be planned between 8 p.m. and 9 p.m.

During his remarks Tuesday, Musk again discussed his belief in the importance of developing reusable rockets to lower the cost of spaceflight. SpaceX has twice attempted to land Falcon boosters on ocean barges in an effort to recover them, unsuccessfully.

Musk did not confirm if SpaceX would try to land the next booster on land at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station for the first time, as FLORIDA TODAY recently reported the company hopes to do soon
 
This is not news. CRS-7 was the second to last "v1.1" version, JASON-3 will be the last one.

OG2 and on will be v1.1 Full Thrust, sometimes called v1.2 (not official name). Changes are;

l5Ks4n9.jpg


These changes allow F9 to do GTO launches and also be reusable. And yes, fuel is densified, there is 7% more LOX and few % more RP-1.
 
flanker said:
This is not news. CRS-7 was the second to last "v1.1" version, JASON-3 will be the last one.

OG2 and on will be v1.1 Full Thrust, sometimes called v1.2 (not official name). Changes are;

l5Ks4n9.jpg


These changes allow F9 to do GTO launches and also be reusable. And yes, fuel is densified, there is 7% more LOX and few % more RP-1.
Click to expand...

Any idea if they're really going to try a landing at Cape Canaveral? Sounds like sources don't agree with each other. ???
 
SpaceX obviously wants to, AF has given green light, situation from FAA is unknown at the moment. I think it is very likely FAA will allow it, lastly it comes down to whether the weather is good. Today's forecast for 19'th looks to be 90% GO, so very good.
 
They have had issues with doing the static fire, seems to be on the ground systems side of things. (check Elon's twitter for some interesting details)

As to FAA, as expected they are cool with a landing on land;

http://spacenews.com/faa-moves-closer-to-approving-falcon-9-landings-at-cape-canaveral/

EDIT; Static fire happened. Aiming to launch on sunday but the window is now reduced from 3 hours to instantaneous for some reason. IE it will be a miracle if they launch on Sunday. 22'nd is the next attempt after that, 15min window but that is basically the same as instantaneous.
 
From the SpaceX site:

"SpaceX is currently aiming for a December 20th launch of the Falcon 9 rocket, carrying 11 satellites for ORBCOMM. The launch is part of ORBCOMM's second and final OG2 Mission and will lift off from SpaceX's launch pad at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. This mission also marks the first time SpaceX will attempt to land the first stage of the Falcon 9 rocket on land. The landing of the first stage is a secondary test objective.

The launch webcast is targeted to begin at 5:05pm PT with liftoff at 5:29pm PT. The launch webcast can be viewed at spacex.com/webcast. For updates, visit www.spacex.com and www.orbcomm.com."
 
T-12h14m

Good article about the mission and landing objective here if one isnt up to date; http://www.americaspace.com/?p=89910
 
Just reviewed mission params w SpaceX team. Monte Carlo runs show tmrw night has a 10% higher chance of a good landing. Punting 24 hrs.
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/678679083782377472

Monte Carlo is a risk sim. Think about it; a rocket launch is delayed 24h because of a rocket landing.

December 20, 2015 (4:00 pm ET)
We have an update regarding tonight’s target launch for ORBCOMM’s OG2 Mission 2. Upon further review of the static fire data, SpaceX has determined that an additional day prior to launch will allow for more analysis and time to further chill the liquid oxygen in preparation for launch. Please note that we will now be targeting launch for tomorrow, Monday, December 21 at 8:33 pm ET.
Click to expand...

http://blog.orbcomm.com/orbcomm-og2-mission-2-launch-update/

+

Delving into what Elon said, wind gusts tonight forecast at 22-24 kts. Monday night a calmer 12-15 kts. For the landing....
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/678685315238928384
 
The single most amazing thing i have ever witnessed.

What an amazing, incredibly strong comeback after CRS-7. Everything just perfect, cant make this sh!t up. I am half Russian, living in Norway, and even i started to chant USA USA USA USA USA.

And meanwhile, Bezos is kinda, sorta, is being a a$$hat; https://twitter.com/JeffBezos/status/679116636310360067
 
flanker said:
The single most amazing thing i have ever witnessed.

What an amazing, incredibly strong comeback after CRS-7. Everything just perfect, cant make this sh!t up. I am half Russian, living in Norway, and even i started to chant USA USA USA USA USA.

And meanwhile, Bezos is kinda, sorta, is being a a$$hat; https://twitter.com/JeffBezos/status/679116636310360067
Click to expand...

I hope he wakes up tomorrow and realizes how stupid his comment was.
 
Up and back again! https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWy59kAUkAEvBLa.jpg:eek:rig
 

Attachments

  • CWy59kAUkAEvBLa.jpg orig.jpg
    CWy59kAUkAEvBLa.jpg orig.jpg
    453.4 KB · Views: 182
Yes. The long one is obviously accent, the first part on the right is re-entry burn (between 70 and 40km altitude, 30seconds, 3 engines) and the last part is landing burn.
 
What kind of body lift, exactly, do you expect from a tube that is situated in no atmosphere? The remove the front velocity vector of the rocket by turning it around and doing the boostback burn. This kills off the front velocity and shortens the downrange distance. Then re-entry burn then landing burn.

Amazing video, i will argue even more so than the official one!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5pTDx-hFDc
 
flanker said:
What kind of body lift, exactly, do you expect from a tube that is situated in no atmosphere? The remove the front velocity vector of the rocket by turning it around and doing the boostback burn. This kills off the front velocity and shortens the downrange distance. Then re-entry burn then landing burn.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I figured they did. Just thought I might be missing something as it seems like it would take a bit of fuel to kill the forward velocity and bring it all the way back.

Yeah that video is pretty good. I was disappointed it was going to be a night launch but I think it turned out even better. Almost like something out of a sci-fi movie.
 
Yes, they use about 42-60 000 kg of fuel for all the recovery burns.

What a sight;

CWzMPm2U8AAca4k.jpg:orig


+ https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWzNZC_UkAEDgBv.jpg:eek:rig

As to what will happen to it;

https://twitter.com/NASAWatch/status/679129749105459200

A few weeks ago it was stated by a NASA employ they will use the booster for testing at LC-39A, fill it up etc. So glad that it wont suffer destructive testing, important piece of hardware to go into museum after examination! :D

Video of F9FT S1 back on LZ-1. :D

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/679145544673923072
 
I wonder if they'll try to bring back all 3 on their first Heavy launch.
 
Boosters to land, core to barge. (check NASAwatch twitter profile, Elon was answering media questions)

Mother of god; https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWzUJbpUkAEBOtD.jpg:eek:rig
 
I watched live outside from Fort Myers Beach. The re-entry burn for the returning first stage was awesome to see, even though I'm hundreds of miles away.
 
A Historic day for Space Flight

i guess the success of Blue shepherd and Falcon 9,
At United Launch Alliance and Arianespace the management Panic
while the there engineers start to rethink there options on stage recuperation

from Donut Argh a local living near KSC
Sorry, not trying to brag, but just wanted to say that having see Falcons and Shuttles launch from my back yard, it was the weirdest thing ever to see the light coming back down in the opposite direction. Insane.
Click to expand...
 
Video of the landing, so precise, so graceful; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCBE8ocOkAQ&feature=youtu.be&app=desktop
 
.

Reminds me of the (VERY) old arcade game "Lunar Lander" ;D

( I do wish that was available for Windows 7 or 10 )

.
 
OK, assuming the upcoming hydro shows the tank welds held tight, nothing was sprung, engine coking is not too much of an issue, and the turbine shafts swing without binding. What post-flight maintenance would this booster require before being ready for flight?

How do they light off the Merlin engine -- hypergolic, spark, bottle-rocket?

Another thing -- starting with the next re-use of the vehicle: how will they stagger the use of the two outboard engines needed for the fly-back maneuver? There's no getting away from the fact that the center engine, with each flight cycle, will rack up many more minutes/hours of run-time than the others, but what about the two used initially to push the booster back to the launch-site? Will SpaceX work to use alternative sets of outboard engines for each new flight -- in an effort to put the eight engines on the same run-time-before-overhaul clock?

I would love to be there (after things cooled down a bit) to bore-scope the turbine stator and disc. If there's a maintence issue, it's going to be the turbopumps.

What a machine!



David
 
merriman said:
OK, assuming the upcoming hydro shows the tank welds held tight, nothing was sprung, engine coking is not too much of an issue, and the turbine shafts swing without binding. What post-flight maintenance would this booster require before being ready for flight?

How do they light off the Merlin engine -- hypergolic, spark, bottle-rocket?
Click to expand...

Ignition is hypergolic with triethylaluminium and triethylborane.

SpaceX's stated goal is to refly the stage without significant refurbishment -- just flush it out, clean it up, test it, and go again.
 
TomS said:
merriman said:
OK, assuming the upcoming hydro shows the tank welds held tight, nothing was sprung, engine coking is not too much of an issue, and the turbine shafts swing without binding. What post-flight maintenance would this booster require before being ready for flight?

How do they light off the Merlin engine -- hypergolic, spark, bottle-rocket?
Click to expand...

Ignition is hypergolic with triethylaluminium and triethylborane.

SpaceX's stated goal is to refly the stage without significant refurbishment -- just flush it out, clean it up, test it, and go again.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

Here's hoping it shakes out that simple (remembering the big promises NASA made about the STS).

God bless the private sector and it's leaders not afraid to plan BIG! Leave government to do the pure-research and development and the business people to exploit those findings.

David
 
merriman said:
Here's hoping it shakes out that simple (remembering the big promises NASA made about the STS).
Click to expand...

STS sought to recover the upper stage. Falcon, so far, recovers the first stage. The gulf between the two concepts is *vast.*

Additionally, recovery of the second stage might not even be a good idea. Leave 'em in space. Cluster them to build stations or spacecraft. Melt 'em down for raw materials. Apart from human beings, there are very few things launched into space that are more valuable back on the ground than up in space.
 
Orionblamblam said:
Additionally, recovery of the second stage might not even be a good idea. Leave 'em in space. Cluster them to build stations or spacecraft. Melt 'em down for raw materials. Apart from human beings, there are very few things launched into space that are more valuable back on the ground than up in space.
Click to expand...

That an interesting idea reminiscent of all those projects to use the Space Shuttle fuel tanks for other things. I do wonder about the economics, though.

Published launch price for the Falcon 9 is $61.2 million and the specs say that the payload is 13,150 kg to Low Earth Orbit and 4,850 kg to Geostationary Transfer Orbit. By my calculations that a per kilo cost of $4,654-12,619. The empty mass of Stage 2 is 3,900 kg. How much would you pay for scrap alloys and composites and electronics and all the rest in orbit? Half the per kilo launch price? A quarter? A tenth?

At, say, $1,000 per kilo in LEO, $3,000 per kilo in GTO, that's $3.9 million or $11.7 million. How much does SpaceX save by reusing the second stage? At what point would they say, sure, sell it for scrap in orbit, and we'll just build another? I don't know, but it's an intriguing idea.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom