Just to confirm, both stages are indeed block 5.
Quote from: ChrisGebhardt on 05/09/2018 04:14 pmJust to confirm, both stages are indeed block 5.So this Full Block V/V7? like this is end of the line? balls to wall F9 beast we have been waiting for?
I prefer, quoting Eric Berger 'The end of the beginning' for the Falcon program.
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.
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: 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: 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.
The question I have is what configuration/propellant loading solution are they going to use for the DM-1 launch? I would expect that will be exactly what they would intend to do for DM-2, no?A complication is that if the procedure differs from a normal launch what does that do in terms of certification flights?
From the press kit:Mission Timeline (all times approximate)COUNTDOWNHour/Min/Sec Events- 00:38:00 SpaceX Launch Director verifies go for propellant load- 00:35:00 RP-1 (rocket grade kerosene) loading underway- 00:35:00 1st stage LOX (liquid oxygen) loading underway- 00:16:00 2nd stage LOX loading underwayCompared to Block 4:COUNTDOWNHour/Min/Sec Events- 01:13:00 SpaceX Launch Director verifies go for propellant load- 01:10:00 RP-1 (rocket grade kerosene) loading underway- 00:35:00 LOX (liquid oxygen) loading underwayFalcon 9 will be loaded up with RP-1 and LOX a lot faster than usual. Are they trying to keep the propellants as cold as possible before launch?
(*) Look, I adore Elon's optimism and vision as much as anyone, but I think the jump to BFR scale is going to more of a tedious technological slog and will take 3 times longer than he hopes it will. I hope to be proven wrong and will happily enjoy my plate of crow. I would like some barbecue sauce if necessary, however.
I’m not convinced they’ve shortened either fuel load times. If they have been using 35 minutes to load RP-1 starting at t-70 minutes and 35 minutes to load LOX starting at t-35 minutes, then this new timeline doesn’t represent faster fuel/oxidizer loading but rather simultaneous fuel and oxidizer loading of 35 minutes starting at t-35 minutes.
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.You’re making a leap of faith. I’d say we _hope_ it’s not so risky...
Quote from: Herb Schaltegger on 05/09/2018 11:12 pm(*) Look, I adore Elon's optimism and vision as much as anyone, but I think the jump to BFR scale is going to more of a tedious technological slog and will take 3 times longer than he hopes it will. I hope to be proven wrong and will happily enjoy my plate of crow. I would like some barbecue sauce if necessary, however.I agree and hope you're proven right, if only because F9 is such a cost-effective technical marvel, it deserves to enjoy at least a decade or more in the limelight. Seeing it superceded in a few years would be like seeing a sports superstar retire in his/her prime.
Quote from: Kabloona on 05/10/2018 03:28 amQuote from: Herb Schaltegger on 05/09/2018 11:12 pm(*) Look, I adore Elon's optimism and vision as much as anyone, but I think the jump to BFR scale is going to more of a tedious technological slog and will take 3 times longer than he hopes it will. I hope to be proven wrong and will happily enjoy my plate of crow. I would like some barbecue sauce if necessary, however.I agree and hope you're proven right, if only because F9 is such a cost-effective technical marvel, it deserves to enjoy at least a decade or more in the limelight. Seeing it superceded in a few years would be like seeing a sports superstar retire in his/her prime.Sure, but by the time it retires it will have flown more than any other rocket, right?-----ABCD: Always Be Counting Down
Quote from: Kabloona on 05/10/2018 03:28 amQuote from: Herb Schaltegger on 05/09/2018 11:12 pm(*) Look, I adore Elon's optimism and vision as much as anyone, but I think the jump to BFR scale is going to more of a tedious technological slog and will take 3 times longer than he hopes it will. I hope to be proven wrong and will happily enjoy my plate of crow. I would like some barbecue sauce if necessary, however.I agree and hope you're proven right, if only because F9 is such a cost-effective technical marvel, it deserves to enjoy at least a decade or more in the limelight. Seeing it superceded in a few years would be like seeing a sports superstar retire in his/her prime.Sure, but by the time it retires it will have flown more than any other rocket, right?