I wonder how much of this naming confusion has come about due to deliberate avoidance of the number V2
I second Block 5 being called v1.3. So given that this is a "few months away", which core number and which launch do people think that will be?And a side thought... Does getting NASA on used cores mean SpaceX can get three flights on v1.3? Or do the changes not warrant that?
Quote from: Norm38 on 12/27/2017 10:19 pmI second Block 5 being called v1.3. So given that this is a "few months away", which core number and which launch do people think that will be?And a side thought... Does getting NASA on used cores mean SpaceX can get three flights on v1.3? Or do the changes not warrant that?Please don't call Block 5 v1.3. It's Block 5. It is quite possibly F9 v1.2 Block 5. The LAST thing we need to do is invent our own naming conventions that could conflict with future SpaceX version names.
Quote from: mme on 12/27/2017 11:31 pmQuote from: Norm38 on 12/27/2017 10:19 pmI second Block 5 being called v1.3. So given that this is a "few months away", which core number and which launch do people think that will be?And a side thought... Does getting NASA on used cores mean SpaceX can get three flights on v1.3? Or do the changes not warrant that?Please don't call Block 5 v1.3. It's Block 5. It is quite possibly F9 v1.2 Block 5. The LAST thing we need to do is invent our own naming conventions that could conflict with future SpaceX version names.True, but it has huge amounts of changes from Full Thrust
With consolidation down to a single design going forward, it will be called... wait for it... Falcon 9.
Quote from: AncientU on 12/28/2017 12:00 amWith consolidation down to a single design going forward, it will be called... wait for it... Falcon 9.As far as SpaceX’s public relations are concerned, it’s been that way since they introduced v1.2. But for most of us here, that doesn’t cut it. It’s a bit ridiculous to call this and this the same name.
Why not? We call this and this the same name...
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 12/28/2017 12:20 amQuote from: old_sellsword on 12/28/2017 12:09 amQuote from: AncientU on 12/28/2017 12:00 amWith consolidation down to a single design going forward, it will be called... wait for it... Falcon 9.As far as SpaceX’s public relations are concerned, it’s been that way since they introduced v1.2. But for most of us here, that doesn’t cut it. It’s a bit ridiculous to call this and this the same name.Why not? We call this and this the same name and they are separated by 47 years of design modifications. Falcon 9 v1.0 and Falcon 9 Block 5 are separated by only about 7 years.Falcon 9 seems appropriate.The titles of the 737 images you linked derail your argument. One is a 737-200. The other is a 737 MAX 8 or somesuch.
Quote from: old_sellsword on 12/28/2017 12:09 amQuote from: AncientU on 12/28/2017 12:00 amWith consolidation down to a single design going forward, it will be called... wait for it... Falcon 9.As far as SpaceX’s public relations are concerned, it’s been that way since they introduced v1.2. But for most of us here, that doesn’t cut it. It’s a bit ridiculous to call this and this the same name.Why not? We call this and this the same name and they are separated by 47 years of design modifications. Falcon 9 v1.0 and Falcon 9 Block 5 are separated by only about 7 years.Falcon 9 seems appropriate.
Quote from: edkyle99 on 12/28/2017 12:28 amQuote from: Coastal Ron on 12/28/2017 12:20 amQuote from: old_sellsword on 12/28/2017 12:09 amQuote from: AncientU on 12/28/2017 12:00 amWith consolidation down to a single design going forward, it will be called... wait for it... Falcon 9.As far as SpaceX’s public relations are concerned, it’s been that way since they introduced v1.2. But for most of us here, that doesn’t cut it. It’s a bit ridiculous to call this and this the same name.Why not? We call this and this the same name and they are separated by 47 years of design modifications. Falcon 9 v1.0 and Falcon 9 Block 5 are separated by only about 7 years.Falcon 9 seems appropriate.The titles of the 737 images you linked derail your argument. One is a 737-200. The other is a 737 MAX 8 or somesuch.When I see a 737 at an airport or in the air, regardless of what model it is, I still call it a 737. Same for the 747.And when I see pictures of previous Falcon 9 flights I don't say "look, a v1.0", or "look, a block 3 or 4ish". I say "look, a Falcon 9".If it looks like a Falcon 9, it's a Falcon 9.
I respectfully disagree. The shift from v1.1 to v1.2 included a second stage stretch. v1.0 to v1.1 also included fuselage stretches. Informal convention at this point would require a dimensional change in the outer mold line - especially a tank stretch - to garner a v1.3 designation. SpaceX calls it Falcon 9 Block 5. Why don't we?
Okay, it might be something like the 7th 'block' of overall F9 production, but it remains the 5th 'block' of Falcon 9 v1.2 / Falcon 9 Full Thrust production (even though the divisions between blocks are a bit negotiable).
What's currently referred to as Blocks 1 through 5 are all F9 Full Thrust (v1.2). Blocks 3-5 are obviously used on Heavy, so there are FH blocks as well. But v1.0 and v1.1 also had their own Blocks, with v1.0 having just one Block and v1.1 having two.