Author Topic: Falcon 9 (Future) speculation  (Read 50389 times)

Offline bioelectromechanic

  • Member
  • Posts: 50
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 24
Falcon 9 (Future) speculation
« on: 09/29/2016 12:11 PM »
During the recent ITS presentation, Elon mentioned an upcoming F9 upgrade, slated for "next year". What do you guys think the upgrade will be?

I'll throw out a few possibilities:
* fairing reuse
* raptor on F9
* carbon fiber tanks / structure
* removal of legs from first stage due to sufficient landing accuracy.
* s2 orbital refueling capability
« Last Edit: 10/15/2016 09:06 PM by Chris Bergin »
Carpe diem et vadem ad astra

Offline MikeAtkinson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1684
  • Bracknell, England
  • Liked: 455
  • Likes Given: 53
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #1 on: 09/29/2016 12:25 PM »
Next year is too soon for Raptor.

They have only just test fired it for the first time. There are probably a year or more of tests to come, perhaps with several versions for gradual improvements.

Then there is a qualification engine, with perhaps 3 months of qualification tests.

Then the first production engines with acceptance tests.

Then production of the first Raptor stage, qualification and/or acceptance tests.

Then integration with the other stage.

All that is 2.5 years if all goes well before the first Raptor stage is launched.

Offline Jarnis

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1085
  • Liked: 550
  • Likes Given: 143
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #2 on: 09/29/2016 12:35 PM »
My guess; just optimization for re-use. Saving weight on bits that do not need to be as sturdy (based on actual returned boosters), adding weight on bits that need to be tougher so they do not need to be replaced after flight and/or replaced so often.

All kinds of things would probably seem obvious once you can carefully study a flown booster...

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31351
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9628
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #3 on: 09/29/2016 12:36 PM »
During the recent ITS presentation, Elon mentioned an upcoming F9 upgrade, slated for "next year". What do you guys think the upgrade will be?

I'll throw out a few possibilities:
* fairing reuse


I removed the ones that are not going to happen

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31351
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9628
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #4 on: 09/29/2016 12:37 PM »
Raptor is not going to fly on F9

Offline bioelectromechanic

  • Member
  • Posts: 50
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #5 on: 09/29/2016 12:53 PM »
can you explain the rationale?

p.s
also possible that by upgrade he meant the F9H.
Carpe diem et vadem ad astra

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31351
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9628
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #6 on: 09/29/2016 12:57 PM »
can you explain the rationale?

p.s
also possible that by upgrade he meant the F9H.

Too many changes to vehicle,  launch complex and operations.   It loses all commonality with the first stage which is a selling point of the F9/FH.  And too high of thrust.

There is no need for it
« Last Edit: 09/29/2016 12:57 PM by Jim »

Offline MikeAtkinson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1684
  • Bracknell, England
  • Liked: 455
  • Likes Given: 53
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #7 on: 09/29/2016 01:01 PM »
* Max thrust Merlin 1D
* Changes to 2nd stage to allow more burns
* Changes to 2nd stage to extend duration
* Lengthen 2nd stage (possible, but I think unlikely)
* Changes to 1st stage to improve reusability

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2161
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 318
  • Likes Given: 196
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #8 on: 09/29/2016 01:05 PM »
I would think changes to second stage to avoid the problems with the helium system.   The first stage seems fine as is, with maybe some minor improvements.  The second stage lost a cargo to ISS, due to helium tank struts.  They are now looking at something that may have happened with the helium system.  They may place the helium tanks in the kerosene tanks like the first stage. 

Offline Hobbes-22

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 353
  • Acme Engineering
    • Acme Engineering shop
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 74
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #9 on: 09/29/2016 01:12 PM »
I object to the use of 'v1.2' for the next version of Falcon.

SpaceX may call the current version 'FT', but they use the moniker 'v1.2' internally. Various websites use that label as well.

The fact there will be another version of the F9 shows that the name 'Full Thrust' was not the best choice.

I suggest using 'v1.3' for the next version.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31351
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9628
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #10 on: 09/29/2016 01:14 PM »
I would think changes to second stage to avoid the problems with the helium system.   The first stage seems fine as is, with maybe some minor improvements.  The second stage lost a cargo to ISS, due to helium tank struts.  They are now looking at something that may have happened with the helium system.  They may place the helium tanks in the kerosene tanks like the first stage. 

There are already He bottles in the RP-1 tanks for both stages.

Offline Falcon H

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 204
  • Liked: 90
  • Likes Given: 132
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #11 on: 09/29/2016 02:27 PM »
Next year is too soon for Raptor.

They have only just test fired it for the first time. There are probably a year or more of tests to come, perhaps with several versions for gradual improvements.
And it was a scaled down version at that.
"Sooner or later, we must expand life beyond our little blue mud ball--or go extinct" Elon Musk

Offline TrueBlueWitt

  • Space Nut
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1977
  • Mars in my lifetime!
  • DeWitt, MI
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 69
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #12 on: 09/29/2016 02:54 PM »
Next year is too soon for Raptor.

They have only just test fired it for the first time. There are probably a year or more of tests to come, perhaps with several versions for gradual improvements.
And it was a scaled down version at that.

Has that been confirmed?
Full sized Raptor is about the same size as a Merlin.. So I can't imagine them going with a sub-scale version.
Not to mention that looks about the size  of what we saw on the test stand.

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #13 on: 09/29/2016 03:01 PM »
I object to the use of 'v1.2' for the next version of Falcon.

SpaceX may call the current version 'FT', but they use the moniker 'v1.2' internally. Various websites use that label as well.

The fact there will be another version of the F9 shows that the name 'Full Thrust' was not the best choice.

I suggest using 'v1.3' for the next version.

I concur, this would be Falcon 9 v1.3
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline The Amazing Catstronaut

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1071
  • Arsia Mons, Mars, Sol IV, Inner Solar Solar System, Sol system.
  • Liked: 755
  • Likes Given: 628
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #14 on: 09/29/2016 04:49 PM »
Next year is too soon for Raptor.

They have only just test fired it for the first time. There are probably a year or more of tests to come, perhaps with several versions for gradual improvements.
And it was a scaled down version at that.

You don't know this.
Resident feline spaceflight expert. Knows nothing of value about human spaceflight.

Online S.Paulissen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 378
  • Boston
  • Liked: 273
  • Likes Given: 422
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #15 on: 09/29/2016 04:58 PM »
In fact, most evidence so far points to it being full sized, not scaled down.

EDIT: Reworded to reflect appropriate level of certainty.
« Last Edit: 09/29/2016 05:02 PM by S.Paulissen »
"An expert is a person who has found out by his own painful experience all the mistakes that one can make in a very narrow field." -Niels Bohr
Poster previously known as Exclavion going by his real name now.

Online edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12855
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3609
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #16 on: 09/29/2016 10:15 PM »
I object to the use of 'v1.2' for the next version of Falcon.

SpaceX may call the current version 'FT', but they use the moniker 'v1.2' internally. Various websites use that label as well.

The fact there will be another version of the F9 shows that the name 'Full Thrust' was not the best choice.

I suggest using 'v1.3' for the next version.

I concur, this would be Falcon 9 v1.3
SpaceX announced a few months back that Falcon 9 would soon start flying with up-thrusted Merlins.  That may be part of what Elon was talking about, but I think that most engineering effort is going into Falcon Heavy, which may also have been what he was talking about.  The current rocket is Falcon 9 v1.2, officially.  My guess is that the ultimate improved thrust version might keep that name, because little else will have changed.  "Full Thrust" was a name initially given that has been left behind without fanfare. 

 - Ed Kyle

Offline HVM

  • Member
  • Posts: 89
  • Finland
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #17 on: 09/29/2016 11:20 PM »
And it was a scaled down version at that.
By OSHA rule 1910.23, guardrail height is 42" = ~1.1m, gives ~0.91m diameter of the Bell end/engine throat. Either it's half size or without nozzle...

Online RotoSequence

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
  • Liked: 572
  • Likes Given: 780
Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #18 on: 09/29/2016 11:22 PM »
And it was a scaled down version at that.
By OSHA rule 1910.23, guardrail height is 42" = ~1.1m, gives ~0.91m diameter of the Bell end/engine throat. Either it's half size or without nozzle...

I'd go with "nozzle-less," especially if they're starting their design and testing process with the vacuum engine. Considering their contract with the US Air Force, I'd consider it likely.

Good call with the OSHA regulations.  :D
« Last Edit: 09/29/2016 11:23 PM by RotoSequence »

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Falcon 9 v1.2 speculation
« Reply #19 on: 09/30/2016 02:21 AM »
Jim's adamant that Raptor is not fly on a F9/H US. I very much doubt Air force would help fund Raptof it if there was no possibility of it flying.

Either way it still a 1-2 years away from being flight ready.

Tags: