Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9 : CRS-12 : Aug 14, 2017 : DISCUSSION  (Read 71805 times)

Offline M.E.T.

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 424
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
I think there is a decent chance that OTV-5 at the end of August could be the first launch out of 40 assuming the public timeline of August holds. It's an Air Force payload and perhaps they'd like it to launch off their base.

They will install vertical integration capabilities at LC-39A. So it seems this is not a concern for the Airforce.

LC40 might not be ready for CRS-12, but maybe by August 10 SpaceX can make a safe bet on it being ready for the X37-B launch, which is scheduled for end of August. If so, they can start FH related construction work on LC39 immediately after the CRS-12 launch, which reduces the LC39A "downtime" loss by a good 3 weeks or so, compared to if they have to first launch X37-B from LC39A too, at the end of August.

So bottomline, on August 10 SpaceX will probably have to make a call on whether they have enough faith that LC40 will be up in running by end of August to take LC39A down for upgrade work. That would probably be the ideal scenario.
« Last Edit: 07/06/2017 08:27 AM by M.E.T. »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8008
  • UK
  • Liked: 1278
  • Likes Given: 168
I think there is a decent chance that OTV-5 at the end of August could be the first launch out of 40 assuming the public timeline of August holds. It's an Air Force payload and perhaps they'd like it to launch off their base.

They will install vertical integration capabilities at LC-39A. So it seems this is not a concern for the Airforce.

LC40 might not be ready for CRS-12, but maybe by August 10 SpaceX can make a safe bet on it being ready for the X37-B launch, which is scheduled for end of August. If so, they can start FH related construction work on LC39 immediately after the CRS-12 launch, which reduces the LC39A "downtime" loss by a good 3 weeks or so, compared to if they have to first launch X37-B from LC39A too, at the end of August.

So bottomline, on August 10 SpaceX will probably have to make a call on whether they have enough faith that LC40 will be up in running by end of August to take LC39A down for upgrade work. That would probably be the ideal scenario.

You haven't asked whether the Air Force would be happy for the X-37B to be the first launch off a freshly minted pad.

Offline cppetrie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 353
  • Liked: 176
  • Likes Given: 3
I think there is a decent chance that OTV-5 at the end of August could be the first launch out of 40 assuming the public timeline of August holds. It's an Air Force payload and perhaps they'd like it to launch off their base.

They will install vertical integration capabilities at LC-39A. So it seems this is not a concern for the Airforce.
OTV-5 doesn't require vertical integration. I'm not suggesting they wouldn't be ok with launching some of their birds from KSC, I'm just suggesting that when either pad will do, they might prefer LC-40. We're straying off topic though.


Offline AstroMelly

Hi Everyone,

Might be the wrong place to post this as this thread appears to be mission related but here goes!

My family and I will be in Florida from August 10th - 24th (apart from 19th-21st when we will be in Nashville for the eclipse) and I would really love to see a launch.  I just noticed that this flight is scheduled for Aug 10th so...

What would be the best resource for:

1. tracking launch manifests (I am using spaceflightnow.com at the moment which seems to be very good.
2. info about launch 'viewing areas' - do we need to find one?  Do we need tickets or what?  I reckon you'd be able to see this for many miles away so might not be necessary
3. more info - as a launch virgin I really have no idea what to expect apart from last minute scrubs and plenty of dark looks from my family...
4. Are we expecting this to be a stage 1 return mission (are they all from now on?) and if so, when do we find out where they will try and land it - it would be great to see it land back on the pad!

If this post is in the wrong place and admin want to move it to a more appropriate area I quite understand.

Cheers from the UK
Iain

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1820
  • US
  • Liked: 1236
  • Likes Given: 933
Hi Everyone,

Might be the wrong place to post this as this thread appears to be mission related but here goes!

My family and I will be in Florida from August 10th - 24th (apart from 19th-21st when we will be in Nashville for the eclipse) and I would really love to see a launch.  I just noticed that this flight is scheduled for Aug 10th so...

What would be the best resource for:

1. tracking launch manifests (I am using spaceflightnow.com at the moment which seems to be very good.
2. info about launch 'viewing areas' - do we need to find one?  Do we need tickets or what?  I reckon you'd be able to see this for many miles away so might not be necessary
3. more info - as a launch virgin I really have no idea what to expect apart from last minute scrubs and plenty of dark looks from my family...
4. Are we expecting this to be a stage 1 return mission (are they all from now on?) and if so, when do we find out where they will try and land it - it would be great to see it land back on the pad!

If this post is in the wrong place and admin want to move it to a more appropriate area I quite understand.

Cheers from the UK
Iain

Ben Cooper's site has some good tips on launch and landing viewing.  This flight should have the booster come back to the LZ-1 landing site, so that may be a factor in where you go to watch.  There are also several threads from past launches you can look at, such as this one from CRS-10.  For keeping track of the launch date, any of the major sites should work (your current source, this site, Reddit).  You may want to check in advance with Kennedy Space Center to see what viewing sites they'll have available, and whether Playalinda Beach will be open.
« Last Edit: 07/16/2017 09:13 PM by gongora »

Offline deptrai

  • Member
  • Posts: 16
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 20
Will CRS-12 be a new build or is it a Dragon that has previously flown (like CRS-11)?

Offline jpo234

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 546
  • Liked: 353
  • Likes Given: 52
Will CRS-12 be a new build or is it a Dragon that has previously flown (like CRS-11)?
It will be Dragon SN C113. This might be the last new Dragon v1 ever made. There are reports that the Dragon v1 production line is now closed.
« Last Edit: 07/17/2017 07:24 PM by jpo234 »
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline vaporcobra

Will CRS-12 be a new build or is it a Dragon that has previously flown (like CRS-11)?
It will be Dragon SN C113. This might be the last new Dragon v1 ever made. There are reports that the Dragon v1 production line is now closed.

If true, I'd assume SpaceX will thus rely on reused Dragons for the rest of CRS Phase 1? It was my understanding that Phase 1 would utilize Dragon 1 throughout all missions. SpaceX has 9 more CRS 1 missions to fly, following 2015's add-ons.

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7185
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 2795
  • Likes Given: 837
Will CRS-12 be a new build or is it a Dragon that has previously flown (like CRS-11)?
It will be Dragon SN C113. This might be the last new Dragon v1 ever made. There are reports that the Dragon v1 production line is now closed.

If true, I'd assume SpaceX will thus rely on reused Dragons for the rest of CRS Phase 1? It was my understanding that Phase 1 would utilize Dragon 1 throughout all missions. SpaceX has 9 more CRS 1 missions to fly, following 2015's add-ons.
Correct assumption. Dragon 1 will be used for the entire run of CRS 1 missions. The last all-new Dragon 1 pressure hull was constructed some time ago. Beyond CRS-12  it will be all re-used pressure hulls for CRS 1 missions.

thus, what basically has been shut down is the production line for Dragon 1 pressure hulls. This is due to SpaceX needing the tooling for the (slightly) different pressure hulls of Dragon 2 (aka Crew Dragon).

The rest of the Dragon 1 production line has NOT been shut down. Dragon 1 requires substantial refurbishment for re-use and the production lines for several components (that need replacing after each mission) are up-and-running for 8 more CRS 1 missions to come.
« Last Edit: 07/18/2017 08:13 AM by woods170 »

Offline guckyfan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6317
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1577
  • Likes Given: 1386
thus, what basically has been shut down is the production line for Dragon 1 pressure hulls. This is due to SpaceX needing the tooling for the (slightly) different pressure hulls of Dragon 2 (aka Crew Dragon).

The rest of the Dragon 1 production line has NOT been shut down. Dragon 1 requires substantial refurbishment for re-use and the production lines for several components (that need replacing after each mission) are up-and-running for 8 more CRS 1 missions to come.

The first reflown Dragon needed substantial refurbishment. Just like the first reflown F9 stage. I believe they have learned from it and subsequent refurbishments will be less substantial, though not down to just ínspection.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3391
  • California
  • Liked: 2631
  • Likes Given: 1661
thus, what basically has been shut down is the production line for Dragon 1 pressure hulls. This is due to SpaceX needing the tooling for the (slightly) different pressure hulls of Dragon 2 (aka Crew Dragon).

The rest of the Dragon 1 production line has NOT been shut down. Dragon 1 requires substantial refurbishment for re-use and the production lines for several components (that need replacing after each mission) are up-and-running for 8 more CRS 1 missions to come.

The first reflown Dragon needed substantial refurbishment. Just like the first reflown F9 stage. I believe they have learned from it and subsequent refurbishments will be less substantial, though not down to just ínspection.

It's not the same at all. Reuse of Dragon 1 will always need substantial work, since major components are replaced. (including the heat shield and all the entire exterior coverings)

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8506
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1022
  • Likes Given: 234
It's not the same at all. Reuse of Dragon 1 will always need substantial work, since major components are replaced. (including the heat shield and all the entire exterior coverings)
I thought the heat shield was good for multiple reentries.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4687
  • Liked: 2806
  • Likes Given: 3927
It's not the same at all. Reuse of Dragon 1 will always need substantial work, since major components are replaced. (including the heat shield and all the entire exterior coverings)
I thought the heat shield was good for multiple reentries.

Entries, yes.  Dips in the ocean, no.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline guckyfan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6317
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1577
  • Likes Given: 1386
It's not the same at all. Reuse of Dragon 1 will always need substantial work, since major components are replaced. (including the heat shield and all the entire exterior coverings)
I thought the heat shield was good for multiple reentries.

Probably not if dipped into water on landing. Still, installing another heatshield and outer shell are not like disassembly and reassembly with many new parts. I also think the upper shell in the future may need cleaning and repainting rather than replacing. The new position of the parachutes also seem to make it easier to retain the outer shell.

I would have loved to see Dragon landing. But as long as Elon skips a goal to replace it with a new higher goal towards Mars I will be satisfied.

Offline Karloss12

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 198
  • Liked: 28
  • Likes Given: 0
thus, what basically has been shut down is the production line for Dragon 1 pressure hulls. This is due to SpaceX needing the tooling for the (slightly) different pressure hulls of Dragon 2 (aka Crew Dragon).

The rest of the Dragon 1 production line has NOT been shut down. Dragon 1 requires substantial refurbishment for re-use and the production lines for several components (that need replacing after each mission) are up-and-running for 8 more CRS 1 missions to come.

The first reflown Dragon needed substantial refurbishment. Just like the first reflown F9 stage. I believe they have learned from it and subsequent refurbishments will be less substantial, though not down to just ínspection.

It's not the same at all. Reuse of Dragon 1 will always need substantial work, since major components are replaced. (including the heat shield and all the entire exterior coverings)

Is the need for extensive refurbishment due to water only.
I ask because if an extensive refurbishment is required for the Dragon 1 with its protective heat sheild and outer covering, then what does that say about the the asperations that SpaceX has for reusing the F9 2nd stage?

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3391
  • California
  • Liked: 2631
  • Likes Given: 1661
I ask because if an extensive refurbishment is required for the Dragon 1 with its protective heat sheild and outer covering, then what does that say about the the asperations that SpaceX has for reusing the F9 2nd stage?

That space is hard?  ;)  It depends on the technologies involved... The current Dragon 1 heat shield is ablative, and even though it could perhaps be reused, they will always fly with a new one. But a better non-ablative heatshield technology could allow for less refurbishment. SpaceX continues to improve Pica-X, and they are likely working on something even better for the future. (ITS will certainly need something better).

Offline vaporcobra

thus, what basically has been shut down is the production line for Dragon 1 pressure hulls. This is due to SpaceX needing the tooling for the (slightly) different pressure hulls of Dragon 2 (aka Crew Dragon).

The rest of the Dragon 1 production line has NOT been shut down. Dragon 1 requires substantial refurbishment for re-use and the production lines for several components (that need replacing after each mission) are up-and-running for 8 more CRS 1 missions to come.


The first reflown Dragon needed substantial refurbishment. Just like the first reflown F9 stage. I believe they have learned from it and subsequent refurbishments will be less substantial, though not down to just ínspection.

It's not the same at all. Reuse of Dragon 1 will always need substantial work, since major components are replaced. (including the heat shield and all the entire exterior coverings)

Is the need for extensive refurbishment due to water only.
I ask because if an extensive refurbishment is required for the Dragon 1 with its protective heat sheild and outer covering, then what does that say about the the asperations that SpaceX has for reusing the F9 2nd stage?

Basically. Saltwater is not kind to aerospace hardware. Saltwater intrusion and corrosion are effectively unassailable barriers to cost-effective refurbishment and rapid reuse.

Offline deptrai

  • Member
  • Posts: 16
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 20
Basically. Saltwater is not kind to aerospace hardware. Saltwater intrusion and corrosion are effectively unassailable barriers to cost-effective refurbishment and rapid reuse.
This is why I don't understand how they re-used Draco Thrusters.

Offline vaporcobra

Basically. Saltwater is not kind to aerospace hardware. Saltwater intrusion and corrosion are effectively unassailable barriers to cost-effective refurbishment and rapid reuse.
This is why I don't understand how they re-used Draco Thrusters.

Yep. It's hard to know if they actually did, but I would assume SpaceX did reuse them, as long as it was more cost effective than producing new ones.

Tags: