Quote from: AbuSimbel on 05/09/2018 10:09 pmI prefer, quoting Eric Berger 'The end of the beginning' for the Falcon program.Yeah, both terms work. We're really in an odd, grey area of the F9 program.
I prefer, quoting Eric Berger 'The end of the beginning' for the Falcon program.
Tweets from Brendan Byrne:QuoteMusk on 'Load and Go" - The issue has been overblow. We can load the prop then load the astronauts.Musk: Load and go is not a safety issue for astronauts. Can do before astros load. But this is an overblown issue. #SpaceX #Falcon9 #Block5
Musk on 'Load and Go" - The issue has been overblow. We can load the prop then load the astronauts.Musk: Load and go is not a safety issue for astronauts. Can do before astros load. But this is an overblown issue. #SpaceX #Falcon9 #Block5
Elon said "up to 300 missions" for F9 B5.
Quote from: abaddon on 05/10/2018 08:11 pmElon said "up to 300 missions" for F9 B5.Which is not close to consistent with the 30-50 cores and 100 flights possible per core. Something/someone is off by order of magnitude.
Quote from: gongora on 05/10/2018 07:32 pmTweets from Brendan Byrne:QuoteMusk on 'Load and Go" - The issue has been overblow. We can load the prop then load the astronauts.Musk: Load and go is not a safety issue for astronauts. Can do before astros load. But this is an overblown issue. #SpaceX #Falcon9 #Block5(just putting this here for better visibility, but discussion of it is probably better in the Commercial Crew Discussion thread)
The 300 number might also be an estimate of contracted SpaceX missions, and not count self-funded ones (Starlink).
Quote from: abaddon on 05/10/2018 08:11 pmElon said "up to 300 missions" for F9 B5.Yes, I am having a hard time combining that one with the 30-50 cores...Sounds like massive overkill or still dozens of stages being expended...How will they ever get close to even 50 per core?!For now the 100 number seems purely theoretical and will never be attempted. But we all know the world hanged rapidly, paradigms are shifting and BFR is looming...Meanwhile competition with old-space seems way behind them... How long ago did Russia joke about using a trampoline?
Take 100 flights with a grain of salt. If each F9 B5 could fly up to 10 times it would be already a great achievement. Currently the most a F9 core has flown is two times with 4-5 months needed for refurbishment.
Musk: The first #Falcon9 Block 5 to achieve 10 flights will probably happen next year. "I think that's really a key milestone," he says
Quote from: IanThePineapple on 05/09/2018 10:30 pmQuote from: CuddlyRocket on 05/09/2018 10:15 pmQuote from: envy887 on 05/09/2018 09:14 pmQuote from: Alexphysics on 05/09/2018 09:11 pmWorth noting it is the same loading they were doing pre-Amos 6. This time with redesigned COPV's it will not be so risky.I don't know that the RP-1 load has even been considered risky, the temperature differentials are far more benign than the LOX load.Given that the mass of a Dragon 2 with crew and payload is far less than the capability of an F9 Block 5 to LEO, could SpaceX forego the use of super-chilled propellant for such missions? Would that result in lower perceived or actual risks to the crew and mission?The Full Thrust Merlin 1D was designed specifically to work with chilled propellants, along with all other pad and rocket systems. So it's pretty much a solid "no"Not using densified propellant would negatively affect performance.But please - we need to stop this idea that M1D's now only work with densified propellant. Whatever propellant remains as the landing burns starts is surely NOT super chilled or densified anymore. Just regular LOX and RP-1.
Quote from: CuddlyRocket on 05/09/2018 10:15 pmQuote from: envy887 on 05/09/2018 09:14 pmQuote from: Alexphysics on 05/09/2018 09:11 pmWorth noting it is the same loading they were doing pre-Amos 6. This time with redesigned COPV's it will not be so risky.I don't know that the RP-1 load has even been considered risky, the temperature differentials are far more benign than the LOX load.Given that the mass of a Dragon 2 with crew and payload is far less than the capability of an F9 Block 5 to LEO, could SpaceX forego the use of super-chilled propellant for such missions? Would that result in lower perceived or actual risks to the crew and mission?The Full Thrust Merlin 1D was designed specifically to work with chilled propellants, along with all other pad and rocket systems. So it's pretty much a solid "no"
Quote from: envy887 on 05/09/2018 09:14 pmQuote from: Alexphysics on 05/09/2018 09:11 pmWorth noting it is the same loading they were doing pre-Amos 6. This time with redesigned COPV's it will not be so risky.I don't know that the RP-1 load has even been considered risky, the temperature differentials are far more benign than the LOX load.Given that the mass of a Dragon 2 with crew and payload is far less than the capability of an F9 Block 5 to LEO, could SpaceX forego the use of super-chilled propellant for such missions? Would that result in lower perceived or actual risks to the crew and mission?
Quote from: Alexphysics on 05/09/2018 09:11 pmWorth noting it is the same loading they were doing pre-Amos 6. This time with redesigned COPV's it will not be so risky.I don't know that the RP-1 load has even been considered risky, the temperature differentials are far more benign than the LOX load.
Worth noting it is the same loading they were doing pre-Amos 6. This time with redesigned COPV's it will not be so risky.