DocM Posted February 19, 2015 Author Share Posted February 19, 2015 ASDS took a BEATING in those 30 foot seas! The tender crew who went on board posted a video on FB, https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=847875018602806 1) the ship name 'Just Read the Instructions' is painted on the deck. 2) thought I could see the steel shoes they'll tack down F9's legs with 3) the containers need a good body shop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unobscured Vision Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Looks like I misunderstood the context of what I had read concerning the Air Force certification stuff ... wouldn't be the first time. (Don't do illegal substances in your youth, kids. They will rob you of your high-level cognitive abilities later in life, and you'll miss important cues during discussions. That's the lesson here.) Moving right along ... The ASDS needs some TLC. Any word on whether it needs to put in for repairs now, or could it still handle a F9 Recovery/Landing if needed? Looks like it took a beating, and I'd be concerned about electrical system problems if seawater got into any of the support systems (but this is SpaceX, and they'd have redundant systems in place to take over). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted February 19, 2015 Author Share Posted February 19, 2015 It needs some repairs and will also get some enhancements, which will likely be added to ASDS Of Course I Still Love You as well. Not a problem since the next landing opportunity won't likely be until April 8-ish with Dragon CRS-6. The next two flights are GTO missions, likely with few propellant reserves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted February 19, 2015 Author Share Posted February 19, 2015 Hmmmm.... This Space Exploration Network headline caught my attention, http://sen.com/blogs/irene-klotz/spacex-bypassing-replacement-for-lost-falcon-9r-landing-test-vehicle SpaceX bypassing replacement for lost Falcon 9R landing test vehicle Sen: In 2013, SpaceX signed a three-year agreement for land and facilities at Spaceport America in New Mexico, intending to test fly an experimental rocket known as Falcon 9R Dev, which was part of program to develop reusable rockets. > Which is a paywall site, but Portal On The Universe has a more informative outtake, http://www.portaltotheuniverse.org/blogs/posts/view/368993/ > Ocean tests using operational Falcon 9 rockets have been so successful that SpaceX is not currently planning to build a replacement for the Falcon 9R development vehicle that was lost during a test flight last year. > If true, there will be no F9R Dev-2 vehicle and McGregor can move directly to flying the DragonFly Dragon 2 propulsive landing test vehicle (an FAA DragonFly requirement was that the F9R Dev program had to conclude first.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bguy_1986 Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 It needs some repairs and will also get some enhancements, which will likely be added to ASDS Of Course I Still Love You as well. Not a problem since the next landing opportunity won't likely be until April 8-ish with Dragon CRS-6. The next two flights are GTO missions, likely with few propellant reserves. Did I miss something. They are adding another ASDS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted February 19, 2015 Author Share Posted February 19, 2015 Yup, ASDS Of Course I Still Love You is for Vandenberg. Named for another Culture series Mind Ship. There will be more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Yup, ASDS Of Course I Still Love You is for Vandenberg. Named for another Culture series Mind Ship. There will be more. When will they get to try land landings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted February 19, 2015 Author Share Posted February 19, 2015 There have to prove to the USAF and the FAA (mainly the USAF) that they will have command and control of the incoming stages so as to prevent 1) injuries/deaths, 2) Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (Patrick AFB), Vandenberg AFB or KSC infrastructure damage, and 3) that they'll have control of the stages flight termination system. To prove these SpaceX is to do stage landing on ASDS with full telemetry, recordings etc. Once the telemetry shows C&C etc. they'll be cleared to land at the bases. The USAF anticipates this won't be a problem or they wouldn't have leased SpaceX both LC-13 at CCAFS and SLC-4W at Vandenberg AFB. In fact Brig. Gen. Armagnothe, the CO of the USAF 45th Space Wing, says she's pretty excited about it. Unobscured Vision 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unobscured Vision Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Glad they've got the CO of the 45th SW supporting them, as well as some of the higher-ups. SpaceX has proven they can get the job done and are ready for more. And the F9H going into production ... that brought a big smile to my face. Can't wait to see that bird take flight. How many test flights do they plan to conduct before it's first actual mission? One or two would be my guesstimate, unless something goes horribly wrong -- but I can't imagine it would be anything more severe than Acoustic Vibration and/or Stress on the Central Core, which the brains working on F9H would already account for. We already know the engines are super reliable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted February 19, 2015 Author Share Posted February 19, 2015 FH gets one successful test flight then it's straight to work. It has USAF and commercial payloads booked. Its not on the manifest, yet, but a Bigelow module is a good bet once the Commercial Crew spacecraft are certified. That's assuming the maiden flight isn't a real payload, which is possible. They're strangely silent about if it'll be a mass simulator or not. People are placing bets, with the sentimental (but unlikely) favorite being a Dragon looping around the Moon & back. Lockheed would have a cow. Unobscured Vision and SALSN 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingskippy Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 People are placing bets, with the sentimental (but unlikely) favorite being a Dragon looping around the Moon & back. Lockheed would have a cow. And I would LOVE to see Lockheed have a cow! SALSN and Unobscured Vision 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 There have to prove to the USAF and the FAA (mainly the USAF) that they will have command and control of the incoming stages so as to prevent 1) injuries/deaths, 2) Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (Patrick AFB), Vandenberg AFB or KSC infrastructure damage, and 3) that they'll have control of the stages flight termination system. To prove these SpaceX is to do stage landing on ASDS with full telemetry, recordings etc. Once the telemetry shows C&C etc. they'll be cleared to land at the bases. The USAF anticipates this won't be a problem or they wouldn't have leased SpaceX both LC-13 at CCAFS and SLC-4W at Vandenberg AFB. In fact Brig. Gen. Armagnothe, the CO of the USAF 45th Space Wing, says she's pretty excited about it. Almost there then. After all, even with that crash on the ASDS a few weeks ago, the stage was DEAD on target despite having run out of hydraulic fluid for it's grid fins... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beittil Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 Peter B. de Selding ?@pbdes 26m 26 minutes ago SES: We have decided to be inaugural customer for enhanced-version SpaceX Falcon 9 main engine, w/ our SES-9 aiming for Q2 launch. Enhanced version of the Merlin? Wut? Did I somehow totally oversee the development of a 1E? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beittil Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 Ok, found some more info over at NSF. Apparently it is a 'slight' Merlin 1D upgrade where it gets 20% more thrust? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted February 20, 2015 Author Share Posted February 20, 2015 Ok, found some more info over at NSF. Apparently it is a 'slight' Merlin 1D upgrade where it gets 20% more thrust? The Merlin upgrade happened a while ago. They've been sandbagging F9's performance by launching at only 85% throttle,.and even understating payload performance in the specs. Oops. In addition to the engine upgrade F9 itself gets a change; they'll be doing propellant densification. They've installed heat exchangers in the tanks, through which they'll pump liquid nitrogen into the RP-1 tank to chill it, increasing its density. This will let them load more fuel onboard. They'll also further chill the LOX, increasing its density as well This all lets them feed those suddenly hungrier Merlins without physically enlarging the tanks. All their pads get the new densification infrastructure. Unobscured Vision 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unobscured Vision Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Sneaky, sneaky soy sauce ... Gotta hand it to them, playing cards close to the chest like that. If we remember the Space Shuttle, the three Main Engines would ramp up to 104% during launch ... although I'm pretty sure that was an arbitrary number and it was actually closer to 95% or so. So if I remember launch physics correctly, weight-to-thrust calculations are around 25% (meaning that every four pounds of thrust a vehicle has, they can send one pound up) after accounting for gravity, dynamic pressures on the vehicle, and so on .. correct? Of course, this depends on efficiency factors, and we know those Merlins are among the most efficient ever made. Nice, can't wait to see the F9E launch. That first stage is going to look downright angry when she takes flight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted February 21, 2015 Author Share Posted February 21, 2015 Yup, and the other implication is that Falcon Heavy gets "heavier" too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unobscured Vision Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 That's okay .. it gets more powerful as well, to the tune of +15% or better, without having to change any hardware. Too bad they aren't planning a "Super" variant, with four boosters ... naaah. Ignore the seven-year-old in me. Now the 40-something "me" kicks back in, running the Engineering stuff ... "Structural stresses on the Core Stage during launch", and "the Launch Pad isn't built for that". Heh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherITguy Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Me thinks that BetaguyGZT has been playing kerbal space program a little too much lol Unobscured Vision 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unobscured Vision Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 I never touch the stuff ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted February 21, 2015 Author Share Posted February 21, 2015 AIUI, all 3 F9 cores are built to a structural margin of 1.4 vs 1.2 or 1.25 like most other cores. The 2 boosters thrust loads are born by their Octaweb engine bays, which are massively over-built due to the armor plating for engine-outs. Basically, the boosters lift the center core from the bottom. The upper booster mounts mainly bear horizontal loads, and the basic F9 structure was designed to bear it for the Heavy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unobscured Vision Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 True, but the central core would still have to be built with "Super-Heavy" payloads in mind for a "Super" variant to be needed. This, however, does not consider whether a redesign is applicable in this case; but for this discussion let's assume that it isn't necessary here. Remember, this is SpaceX and not a Government operation ... we'll work with what we have if we can. That's what Marty would do. From an Engineering perspective, this would require reinforcing the Core by 10-35% to deal with the additional payload weights and the launch stresses, depending on what the computer models and good practices dictate. Add in a safety margin (as all good Engineers do) of 5% and we're in business structurally. All that's left now is to determine where to attach the other two Boosters, add synchronization control/flight software, and build a Launch Pad to accommodate it. Of course, it's never that straightforward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted February 21, 2015 Author Share Posted February 21, 2015 Two things we know are that the F9 core was designed with Heavy in mind, and commonality is their mantra. We've already seen that a core can be morphed between landing and expendable. I wouldn't be sure surprised if recycled F9R stages end up as FH center cores.: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted February 22, 2015 Author Share Posted February 22, 2015 Norbert Br Unobscured Vision 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted February 25, 2015 Author Share Posted February 25, 2015 UXEMBOURG & HAWTHORNE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--SES (NYSE Paris:SESG) (LuxX:SESG) announced today an agreement with SpaceX to launch two new satellites in 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts