Author Topic: Progress on rapid booster reuse  (Read 134568 times)

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #320 on: 12/22/2021 05:55 pm »
Flights on NS boosters must be up around x10 mark. Not sure what flights on one carrying passengers is.

Sent from my SM-T733 using Tapatalk


Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35687
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 19829
  • Likes Given: 10345
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #321 on: 12/22/2021 07:28 pm »
Flights on NS boosters must be up around x10 mark. Not sure what flights on one carrying passengers is.

Sent from my SM-T733 using Tapatalk
I think Mastenís Xombie has done over 100 flights.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline geekesq

  • Member
  • Posts: 50
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #322 on: 12/22/2021 07:35 pm »
Flights on NS boosters must be up around x10 mark. Not sure what flights on one carrying passengers is.

I think Mastenís Xombie has done over 100 flights.
"Xombie (pictured here) is the oldest vehicle in the Masten fleet, with a world record 227 rocket powered VTVL flights." -- https://masten.aero/terrestrial-vehicles/

However, it's not a booster.

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35687
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 19829
  • Likes Given: 10345
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #323 on: 12/22/2021 07:37 pm »
Flights on NS boosters must be up around x10 mark. Not sure what flights on one carrying passengers is.

I think Mastenís Xombie has done over 100 flights.
"Xombie (pictured here) is the oldest vehicle in the Masten fleet, with a world record 227 rocket powered VTVL flights." -- https://masten.aero/terrestrial-vehicles/

However, it's not a booster.
Sure it is. Just doesnít get to space. And New Shepard is nowhere near orbital. Just keeping with the theme of boosters that have high reuses which arenít orbital class boosters. ;)
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Online whitelancer64

Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #324 on: 12/23/2021 03:08 pm »
So do we have any knowledge of engine replacements on boosters.
As far as I can tell is that it is zero. Because we never hear about them.

So if that is true then the 11th flight of a booster is amazing but it is my opinion even more amazing for a merlin.

SpaceX swaps engines, as well as various component parts, and presumably does so on a regular basis. Indeed, we do not hear about this type of activity very much, unless it is an issue that causes a launch delay.

As an example of what we know for sure, some engines and / or their components have been swapped out in order to give some of them more flight time. We explicitly know this is the case for the boot cover that failed on landing during the February 15, 2021 flight of Starlink satellites.

Quote
During a NASA press conference March 1 about the upcoming Crew-2 commercial crew flight, Benji Reed, senior director for human spaceflight programs at SpaceX, said that while the booster used on that Feb. 15 launch was making its sixth flight, some components on it were “life leaders” that had flown more often than any other in the Falcon 9 fleet.

That included “boots,” or covers around parts of the Merlin engines in the first stage. “This was the highest count number of flights that this particular boot design had seen,” he said.

https://spacenews.com/engine-shutdown-led-to-failed-falcon-9-booster-landing/

SpaceX swapped out two engines on the Falcon 9 used to launch GPS III-4

Quote
SpaceX confirms it has successfully fired up a Falcon 9 rocket after swapping two of its first stage (booster) engines, putting the company’s third US military GPS satellite launch back on track after about a month of delays.

https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-falcon-9-engine-swap-static-fire-gps-iii-sv04/

SpaceX also swapped out two engines on the Falcon 9 used to launch the NASA Crew-1 mission, as a result of the issue found on the GPS launch abort.

Quote
SpaceX is replacing two engines on its Falcon 9 rocket that will soon carry four astronauts to the International Space Station. The change is being made after SpaceX found a substance in the engines that could have caused them to start earlier than planned.

https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/28/21539060/spacex-falcon-9-rocket-merlin-engines-crew-1-nasa-swap
« Last Edit: 12/23/2021 03:15 pm by whitelancer64 »
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline jebbo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 893
  • Cambridge, UK
  • Liked: 554
  • Likes Given: 304
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #325 on: 02/02/2022 06:58 am »
Repurposing B1052 has really messed with my reuse graph :-)

--- Tony

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2448
  • California
  • Liked: 1883
  • Likes Given: 732
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #326 on: 02/02/2022 03:02 pm »
Repurposing B1052 has really messed with my reuse graph :-)

--- Tony
As an operations analyst once told me: "torture the data! it will confess!"

In this case, add a separate fudge factor for "repurposing".  Time spent "repurposing" is not counted against reuse. The "repurposing" factor shall be the actual time between the two flights minus the average reuse time of the non-repurposed boosters over the year prior to the flight. Thou shalt recompute this factor each time a booster is repurposed.  Thus thy reuse graph is redeemed, and you get to start a separate "repurposing" graph with very, very few data points.  :)

Offline jebbo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 893
  • Cambridge, UK
  • Liked: 554
  • Likes Given: 304
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #327 on: 02/02/2022 05:27 pm »
As an operations analyst once told me: "torture the data! it will confess!"

I know what I should do to torture the data properly ... just can't be bothered right now as it a lot of work to add all the auxiliary state-change data per booster. I'll get around to it eventually as it's things like time on ship, transport, refurb, etc. Oh, and in this case temporary retirement ;)

Some state changes are effectively automatic after a fixed (ish) time, others not. So a bunch of UI work as well :/

--- Tony

Online Bob Niland

  • Member
  • Posts: 61
  • Kansas
    • For Those Still On Earth
  • Liked: 67
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #328 on: 02/02/2022 06:26 pm »
Repurposing B1052 has really messed with my reuse graph :-)

--- Tony

Y-axis might need to be logarithmic.
Working for SX could be exhilarating, as long as the job description doesn't include Master PERT Chart.

Online whitelancer64

Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #329 on: 03/15/2022 04:22 pm »
It's mid-march, but SpaceX has been launching frequently enough that I think a quick update is warranted.

So far, SpaceX's launch cadence has been nothing short of spectacular. They have already flown 10 times this year, four times in both Janaury and February, twice in March (seven of these launches have been Starlink flights). The result of this rapid-fire launch cadence is that there has been an average of 7 days between launches this year. There have been two launches from Vandenberg SLC-4E, four launches from KSC LC-39A, and four launches from Cape Canaveral SLC-40.

Note: I do not expect this rapid cadence to continue unabated. There are a couple of crew launches scheduled in the upcoming month, which will slow down turnaround time due to longer pad processing. There are also several Falcon Heavy launches scheduled that also require longer pad processing times. Pad operations at LC-39B for the SLS rollout, WDR, and the Artemis I launch may also slow down some operations at KSC for SpaceX. That said, I am still anticipating 40+ launches of Falcon 9 / Falcon Heavy in 2022.

We also have a remarkable situation in that the core with the longest turnaround time EVER (951 days), also has the shortest turnaround time this year (37 days). Kudos to Booster 1052 for that achievement, and welcome back from retirement. :D

Disregarding that huge turnaround time, the current average turnaround time for this year is 61.1 days. Compared to my year-end round up, we can already see in the effect that this rapid turnaround for Starlink launches is having. Multiple launches have had turnaround times of less than 40 days, and I think that it is likely we will see a rapid decrease in the average turnaround time before the middle of this year.

Note: That massive 951 day outlier will also be discarded in my future statistical posts.

I also want to follow up on something that I made a note of in my previous post - that we'd have to watch and see if other boosters have a longer period of down time between their 10th and 11th flights - this has already been shown to not be the case. 1058.11 flew 39 days after 1058.10, and 1060.11 flew 43 days after 1060.10. I think we can safely conclude that SpaceX did not take these boosters out of service for any extended refurbishment after their 10th flights.
 
Have a nice day, everyone. Stay safe out there -- and beware the Ides of March!
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27496
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 51205
  • Likes Given: 21742
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #330 on: 04/19/2022 06:30 am »
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1516167738909249539

Quote
SpaceX Falcon team making great progress! Aiming for 5 day launch cadence with many performance & refurb improvements.

Offline AmigaClone

Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #331 on: 04/26/2022 02:32 am »
I also want to follow up on something that I made a note of in my previous post - that we'd have to watch and see if other boosters have a longer period of down time between their 10th and 11th flights - this has already been shown to not be the case. 1058.11 flew 39 days after 1058.10, and 1060.11 flew 43 days after 1060.10. I think we can safely conclude that SpaceX did not take these boosters out of service for any extended refurbishment after their 10th flights.
 
Have a nice day, everyone. Stay safe out there -- and beware the Ides of March!

Boosters 1049 has not flown since its 10th launch in mid-September - Will be expended next launch.

Booster 1051 had 228 days between its 10th and 11th launch, although that included a trip to the West Coast for one launch.
Booster 1058 had an extended time (182 days) between the 7th and 8th launches
Booster 1060 also had a extended time (155 days) between 8th and 9th launches

Granted that those three cases were somewhat in line with refurbishment times of younger boosters launched in the same period. It could be they received some additional inspections at that time.

Offline Rekt1971

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 116
  • Liked: 304
  • Likes Given: 1151
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #332 on: 04/26/2022 04:27 am »
I also want to follow up on something that I made a note of in my previous post - that we'd have to watch and see if other boosters have a longer period of down time between their 10th and 11th flights - this has already been shown to not be the case. 1058.11 flew 39 days after 1058.10, and 1060.11 flew 43 days after 1060.10. I think we can safely conclude that SpaceX did not take these boosters out of service for any extended refurbishment after their 10th flights.
 
Have a nice day, everyone. Stay safe out there -- and beware the Ides of March!

Boosters 1049 has not flown since its 10th launch in mid-September - Will be expended next launch.

Booster 1051 had 228 days between its 10th and 11th launch, although that included a trip to the West Coast for one launch.
Booster 1058 had an extended time (182 days) between the 7th and 8th launches
Booster 1060 also had a extended time (155 days) between 8th and 9th launches

Granted that those three cases were somewhat in line with refurbishment times of younger boosters launched in the same period. It could be they received some additional inspections at that time.

That "extended time" had nothing to do with booster availability though, it was caused by LOX shortages and lack of payloads (SpaceX was preparing to fly Starlink v1.5 instead of v1.0).

Online whitelancer64

Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #333 on: 04/26/2022 04:37 am »
Last year (2021) there were two long periods with no launches: 59 days between June 30 and August 29, and 54 days between September 16 and November 10.

LOX shortages, delays on customer payloads, other supply chain issues, and the Starlink redesign all contributed.

The three launches that happened in the middle of that drought were CRS-28, Starlink 2-1 (the first launch of the v1.5 Starlinks, which underwent a period of evaluation after launch), and Inspiration 4.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline AmigaClone

Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #334 on: 04/26/2022 06:33 am »
Last year (2021) there were two long periods with no launches: 59 days between June 30 and August 29, and 54 days between September 16 and November 10.

LOX shortages, delays on customer payloads, other supply chain issues, and the Starlink redesign all contributed.

The three launches that happened in the middle of that drought were CRS-28, Starlink 2-1 (the first launch of the v1.5 Starlinks, which underwent a period of evaluation after launch), and Inspiration 4.

Could SpaceX have taken advantage of those issues you mentioned and done the more detailed inspections and maintenance originally planned after the 10th launch to all four oldest boosters that had between 7 and 10 flights at the start of the first period with no launches?

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27496
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 51205
  • Likes Given: 21742
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #335 on: 04/26/2022 07:45 am »
Could SpaceX have taken advantage of those issues you mentioned and done the more detailed inspections and maintenance originally planned after the 10th launch to all four oldest boosters that had between 7 and 10 flights at the start of the first period with no launches?

Yes they could have done, but I donít think we have anything to suggest they needed to. When Elon originally talked, years ago, about extra maintenance after 10 flights, I think the 10 was just a guess / what seemed prudent at the time.

Iíd be surprised if there is a number now (be it 9, 10, 11 or more). My guess is that each booster is treated individually and based on what SpaceX see with normal inspections and data analysis they decide if more maintenance is needed. It wouldnít surprise me if none of the more recent block 5s - even those with 10+ flights - have actually had an overhaul yet.
« Last Edit: 04/26/2022 07:46 am by FutureSpaceTourist »

Online whitelancer64

Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #336 on: 04/26/2022 05:04 pm »
Last year (2021) there were two long periods with no launches: 59 days between June 30 and August 29, and 54 days between September 16 and November 10.

LOX shortages, delays on customer payloads, other supply chain issues, and the Starlink redesign all contributed.

The three launches that happened in the middle of that drought were CRS-28, Starlink 2-1 (the first launch of the v1.5 Starlinks, which underwent a period of evaluation after launch), and Inspiration 4.

Could SpaceX have taken advantage of those issues you mentioned and done the more detailed inspections and maintenance originally planned after the 10th launch to all four oldest boosters that had between 7 and 10 flights at the start of the first period with no launches?

Quite possible. It is a good idea to leverage downtime to do deferred maintenance, and things like that, though we do already know that inspections and refurbishment are an ongoing thing that are done as needed.

Also, keep in mind that boosters being reused for NASA and military flights do get more thorough inspections, and that data will inform SpaceX's decisions about the amount of inspections that boosters they are using for Starlink, or other customers, needs.

However, this is more about the idea that something like a more complete teardown / inspection and rebuild might be needed after 10 (or some set number) flights, which doesn't seem to be the case.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline Yggdrasill

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 506
  • Norway
  • Liked: 560
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #337 on: 04/29/2022 04:54 am »
https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1519795840931360770

Potentially 21 day turnaround time for B1062. That's pretty good!
« Last Edit: 04/29/2022 04:55 am by Yggdrasill »

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27496
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 51205
  • Likes Given: 21742
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #338 on: 04/29/2022 08:18 pm »
Cross-post:


SpaceX is working to make renewal times one week or less.
Quote
It is understood that this booster (B1062) is part of a special refurbishment treatment that SpaceX is experimenting with to increase its launch cadence, especially for Starlink missions. SpaceX aims to compress its booster refurbishment timeline from two or three weeks down to just five to seven days, allowing turnaround times as short as three weeks or perhaps less.
Via:NSF
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2022/04/starlink-4-16-turnaround-records/

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4248
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1266
  • Likes Given: 1131
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #339 on: 05/01/2022 09:05 am »
With the increase launch tempo SpaceX is going to need more landing barges and support ships than the current fleet size. They need some buffer for unexpected downtime for their boats. Just two drone landing barges currently on the East coast is really rolling the dice with each down range recovery attempt.

 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0