Quote from: M.E.T. on 08/14/2017 05:17 pmQuote from: Jarnis on 08/14/2017 05:14 pmQuote from: ZachF on 08/14/2017 04:51 pmThat thing took off quick.... more thust?Yep. New uprated engines, Block 4 booster. +11% thrust or thereabouts.Is this speculation or was it confirmed that this was the first Block 4?Was quoted as "fact" from unnamed sources on Reddit prior to launch (implied it was from someone who knew someone who worked at SpaceX), but now that you question it, I haven't heard an official confirmation. I'm sure someone is already counting frames and figuring out if the rocket took off the pad any faster than previous ones...
Quote from: Jarnis on 08/14/2017 05:14 pmQuote from: ZachF on 08/14/2017 04:51 pmThat thing took off quick.... more thust?Yep. New uprated engines, Block 4 booster. +11% thrust or thereabouts.Is this speculation or was it confirmed that this was the first Block 4?
Quote from: ZachF on 08/14/2017 04:51 pmThat thing took off quick.... more thust?Yep. New uprated engines, Block 4 booster. +11% thrust or thereabouts.
That thing took off quick.... more thust?
Since this is the final CRS mission awarded in the initial contract, can we do a final accounting on how much total cargo was lifted to the ISS under CRS1? Specifically I'm curious if the original terms (minimum 20 metric tons upmass to the station, including the CRS-7) were met or, if exceeded, by how much. The first couple flights under v1.0 and v1.1 were lighter due to booster restrictions, so they would have had to make up some mass in the later flights to meet the original contractual terms.
Since this is the final CRS mission awarded in the initial contract, can we do a final accounting on how much total cargo was lifted to the ISS under CRS1? Specifically I'm curious if the original terms (minimum 20 metric tons upmass to the station, including the CRS-7) were met or, if exceeded, by how much. The first couple flights under v1.0 and v1.1 were lighter due to booster restrictions, so they would have had to make up some mass in the later flights to meet the original contractual terms. Edit: I've used the wikipedia pages for the respective missions for the following total:CRS-1: 905CRS-2: 898CRS-3: 2089CRS-4: 2216CRS-5: 2317CRS-6: 2015CRS-7: 2454CRS-8: 3136CRS-9: 2257CRS-10: 2490CRS-11: 2708CRS-12: 3310Total: ~26,800kg, although there is some contradictory data on wikipedia regarding pressurized and unpressurized payload so grain of salt on the total. Please let me know if you get a different number and I can update accordingly.
Even without CRS-7, still 20% over the required. Not too bad. CRS-12 almost doubles the average that would have been needed if they'd all been equal.
This was supposed to be the first block 4, but the grid fins were wrong...
I'm surprised that they'd put such lateral forces on one side of the stage. Is there any play between the outer skin and the internal tanks? Would this risk flexing the tanks?
There is no outer skin on Falcon 9. The tank walls make up most of what you see of the rocket. With the exception of the interstage and some covers for the octaweb.Would any modern rocket actually have an outer skin covering the tank walls?
yeah thought it was going to tumble but no. Interesting that they are trying to get some lift from the stage on the way in. Quote from: matthewkantar on 08/14/2017 04:54 pmThe view of the first stage changing angle of attack as it came in was hair raising!Matthew
The view of the first stage changing angle of attack as it came in was hair raising!Matthew
But that angle is a bit deceptive, the extreme telephoto lens makes it look like a larger angle than it is.
Quote from: Lars-J on 08/14/2017 09:15 pmBut that angle is a bit deceptive, the extreme telephoto lens makes it look like a larger angle than it is.To me, it was more the separation of the vapor/exhaust contrail from the S1 cylinder body than the photo angle that made the angle of attack look extreme. I've watched over & over how the entry burn is straight into the velocity vector of the stage, & today's video coverage shows a pretty significant attitude change within a few seconds of the entry burn shutdown.
CRS-12: 3310