1. That in return for re-using a pre-flown booster they have promised Matt Desch delivery to a slightly higher initial orbit, so as to reduce the time needed to raise the satellites into their final orbits, and;2. That they may indeed have traded some or all of the recovery margin to test out something else which requires adding mass to the stage, such as a further evolution of the fairing recovery, as cscott postulated, and which is made more likely by the fairing recovery ship having been switched to the west coast. It could be that they have accepted a heavier recoverable fairing design for Block 5, but want to test it now, and can only do so on a less-powerful block 3 booster by sacrificing margin somewhere else, such as removing the weight of the landing legs and grid fins.
As funny as this sounds could the reason for the expended booster be they are running out of storage?
Expend the booster to save money. Hmmmm. - Ed Kyle
Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 12/19/2017 12:35 pmQuote from: Johnnyhinbos on 12/19/2017 12:24 pmI don’t see SpaceX tossing away a booster just because they don’t need it. That runs exactly opposite of the mindset they’re trying to establish. A few $100k to recover a core is absolutely nothing in the larger framework of mission cost - compare that to the value of underscoring the important of recovery and reuse to their customers. If I understand you correctly, you're saying that SpaceX would spend a few 100k recovering a booster they don't need so that customers don't think they're going soft on re-use? After 20 previous successful recoveries, including the last 16 consecutive attempts? And on a flight using a flight proven booster?I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that one.Feel free. But I suppose with your mindset you see zero value in the returned booster. That's fine - but I see value in:- Post flight examination of entire system- Reuse of sub systems such as gimbal control system, hydraulic systems, grid fin actuators and the fins themselves (even if AL), engine control modules, Merlin components (at $1,000,000 for each M1D you say that getting parts off even a few engines won't cover the cost of recovery?)- Maintaining the path that SpaceX has worked so hard to establish.Again - disagree all you want, but I maintain it's fatally shortsighted...
Quote from: Johnnyhinbos on 12/19/2017 12:24 pmI don’t see SpaceX tossing away a booster just because they don’t need it. That runs exactly opposite of the mindset they’re trying to establish. A few $100k to recover a core is absolutely nothing in the larger framework of mission cost - compare that to the value of underscoring the important of recovery and reuse to their customers. If I understand you correctly, you're saying that SpaceX would spend a few 100k recovering a booster they don't need so that customers don't think they're going soft on re-use? After 20 previous successful recoveries, including the last 16 consecutive attempts? And on a flight using a flight proven booster?I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that one.
I don’t see SpaceX tossing away a booster just because they don’t need it. That runs exactly opposite of the mindset they’re trying to establish. A few $100k to recover a core is absolutely nothing in the larger framework of mission cost - compare that to the value of underscoring the important of recovery and reuse to their customers.
Quote from: RocketLover0119 on 12/19/2017 10:00 pmAs funny as this sounds could the reason for the expended booster be they are running out of storage?That's possible, but it's mostly to clear out the old Block III boosters to make way for Block IV and V.
QuoteSpaceX spokesperson confirms online discussions (and comments by @IridiumBoss ) there will be no attempt to land the Falcon 9 first stage on Friday’s launch. “These are case by case decisions and are based on mission requirements and the needs of our manifest.”https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/943269599302127617
SpaceX spokesperson confirms online discussions (and comments by @IridiumBoss ) there will be no attempt to land the Falcon 9 first stage on Friday’s launch. “These are case by case decisions and are based on mission requirements and the needs of our manifest.”
If there is discussion on SpaceX donating equipment for display, could someone point to it?
Quote from: AncientU on 12/19/2017 11:25 pmQuote from: edkyle99 on 12/19/2017 07:25 pmExpend the booster to save money. Hmmmm. - Ed KyleYou so want to be right about the folly of reusable boosters... but you're not.I've never called it "folly". They may well be on a path to making partial reuse pay, eventually, but what I have been saying is that they are not there yet. Throwing away a first stage on purpose during only its second flight (both lower energy LEO missions, BTW) is proof. - Ed Kyle
Quote from: edkyle99 on 12/19/2017 07:25 pmExpend the booster to save money. Hmmmm. - Ed KyleYou so want to be right about the folly of reusable boosters... but you're not.
On the flip side, i wanna hear what you all think about the new equipment added on mr. steven, i think its (obviously) for fairing recover, but the big poles that have been installed are interesting, I personally think a net will be installed and the fairing will parachute on to it, if this is the case, i hope it is shown on the webcastall credit to reddit user vshie
Quote from: RocketLover0119 on 12/20/2017 12:14 amOn the flip side, i wanna hear what you all think about the new equipment added on mr. steven, i think its (obviously) for fairing recover, but the big poles that have been installed are interesting, I personally think a net will be installed and the fairing will parachute on to it, if this is the case, i hope it is shown on the webcastall credit to reddit user vshieThe place to discuss that is the Fairing Reuse thread. http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37727
Quote from: zubenelgenubi on 12/19/2017 06:45 pmIf there is discussion on SpaceX donating equipment for display, could someone point to it?Can't provide a reference (it was some years ago) but my recollection is that when asked about donating a recovered core to the National Air and Space Museum, Musk replied along the lines of "Sure, if they pay for it".