Quote from: Comga on 06/01/2015 09:30 pm1. What about the access port,2. the hose, those wavy metal straps,3. the ball tipped long arm,4. and the short rounded arm?1. For spacecraft access2. AC ducts3. Push rod for fairing sep4. fairing sep system
1. What about the access port,2. the hose, those wavy metal straps,3. the ball tipped long arm,4. and the short rounded arm?
1. Is the "fairing step system" something that was held to a matching piece on the other half with an explosive bolt?2. Do AC ducts attach to payloads or just direct the purge flow at specific points? My assumption was that clean dry gas just flowed into the fairing and out some small port. 3. Any description of how the access port is opened or held closed in those images?
Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 06/01/2015 10:09 pmStill can't get my head around that it's worth the effort to re-use fairings!This is circumstantial evidence that cost/launch is headed way down.I know they're expending the second stage which is more expensive than a fairing, but still somehow they decided this is important enough to bother. odd.
Still can't get my head around that it's worth the effort to re-use fairings!
<snip of why fairing is jetisoned after staging, not at>Yes there is something. There is a requirement for the free molecular heating to be below a certain level. The level is determined by spacecraft requirements.
Quote from: Elmar Moelzer on 06/02/2015 04:23 amYou mean heating from the air (as minimal as it may be at that altitude)?Is there an ballpark altitude for that? Just curious.It is a function of vehicle velocity also well as air density. So, there isn't a specific altitude.
You mean heating from the air (as minimal as it may be at that altitude)?Is there an ballpark altitude for that? Just curious.
Check me on this,It looks like the thing broke up on impact with the ocean so it would seem "reuse" would be on the order of making that event survivable. That however does nothing for the range restrictions issues.Probably a "bad" idea but what about having the fairing separate along one side and then eject side-ways so that it could close up for reentry?(And what's this about a "fairing" for the MCT?)Randy
Thanks, makes sense! So how does that fit in with the suggestion by some to make the fairing part of the first stage (I think someone said that Atlas does that) which would mean fairing separation about a minute earlier?Does Atlas do the staging later in the flight envelope?
In principle, a very, very light structure - perhaps even inflated could be added inside for a shield in the minute or so afterwards.
For the 5m, the fairing comes off before 2nd stage sep.For the 4m, it comes off after 2nd stage start.Most fairings on other vehicles come off after 2nd stage start.
If the problem is landing rather than falling, how would clamming back up help? I'd think that would reduce drag, increasing the speed left at impact.
So what speaks against an F9 fairing that always comes off at or shortly before second stage separation? It is obviously possible to do it, since Atlas is doing it with the 5m fairing.
Quote from: Elmar Moelzer on 06/03/2015 02:50 pmSo what speaks against an F9 fairing that always comes off at or shortly before second stage separation? It is obviously possible to do it, since Atlas is doing it with the 5m fairing.Falcon 9R stages very early. So the payload still needs some protection, I would assume.
I think a re-usable fairing only makes economic and technical sense as part of a re-usable upper stage, maybe like the Kistler K-1. Bottom line, a re-usable fairing is a non-starter for current vehicles. The extra complexity for little economic return makes it not worth it IMHO.Since a fairing carried to orbit is going to cause a large payload hit, it only makes sense for a much larger re-usable vehicle.
Quote from: douglas100 on 06/03/2015 10:01 pmI think a re-usable fairing only makes economic and technical sense as part of a re-usable upper stage, maybe like the Kistler K-1. Bottom line, a re-usable fairing is a non-starter for current vehicles. The extra complexity for little economic return makes it not worth it IMHO.Since a fairing carried to orbit is going to cause a large payload hit, it only makes sense for a much larger re-usable vehicle.And if the initial investment in each fairing is $1M and the cost to recover and recommission is $500,000 you wouldn't do it?