They might switch to an ablative coat that can be quickly applied and removed. Something that provides good thermal insulation, and protects the core from re-entry heating. Better ablative paint would allow them to try even hotter landing which use shorter re-entry burns, and in turn with the stronger titanium grid-fins allow them to glide and aerobrake.
Copying here as more appropriate on this thread:Quote from: hans_ober on 04/05/2017 02:08 amThey might switch to an ablative coat that can be quickly applied and removed. Something that provides good thermal insulation, and protects the core from re-entry heating. Better ablative paint would allow them to try even hotter landing which use shorter re-entry burns, and in turn with the stronger titanium grid-fins allow them to glide and aerobrake.Surely to get very rapid re-use there needs to be less use of ablative coatings? How else are 10 re-uses without refurbishment, and a potential 24 hrs between flights, going to be achieved?
Does anyone happen to know whether COTS spray-on ablative materials are even available? Washing the soot off the stage and spraying on a fresh coat of ablative protection probably wouldn't count as a full "refurb" and could be done after each flight.
@jeff_foust on Twiiter currently reporting on Shotwell's talk at 33SS.https://twitter.com/jeff_foust
Quote from: Flying Beaver on 04/05/2017 05:55 pm@jeff_foust on Twiiter currently reporting on Shotwell's talk at 33SS.https://twitter.com/jeff_foustFrom the tweet: "Shotwell: Refurbishment cost is substantially less than half of a new one, and will get better"What is substantially less? Is that 40%, 30%?
I find it astounding that going through that stage with a fine comb, doing things that have never been done, and finding out all that needed finding out was done with less than 50% of the cost of building a new one.It can only go way down from there.
Quote from: guckyfan on 04/05/2017 09:11 pmI find it astounding that going through that stage with a fine comb, doing things that have never been done, and finding out all that needed finding out was done with less than 50% of the cost of building a new one.It can only go way down from there.Materials cost? Labour to make the big tanks and engines? Both very time consuming I assume.
Is there an official statement about the reasons not to refly again the SES-10 first stage?
Quote from: Endeavour126 on 04/06/2017 04:30 amIs there an official statement about the reasons not to refly again the SES-10 first stage?Elon Musk thinks it is of historic value and wants to donate it to the cape as a display piece of sorts.
Don't know where else to post this. Gwynne Shotwell's talk at the 33rd Space Symposium shot on someone's mobile:Seems to include most of the Q&A too.
At about 10:30 in the video Gwynne says something about future refurbishment cost that I can't quite make out. There's a "10" and "labour" but I'm not sure what else.Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 04/15/2017 04:43 pmDon't know where else to post this. Gwynne Shotwell's talk at the 33rd Space Symposium shot on someone's mobile:Seems to include most of the Q&A too.
You could always have a door in the top of the core storage facility and install a rack system like fridge soda can dispenser...
..."It will be on the order of a tenth the work, the labor."