I didn't say they wouldn't tear it down. They have tools and technicians in Florida. Shipping a booster isn't like an Amazon Prime delivery. It's expensive and it's a potential risk for the booster, not to mention the lost time, in weeks, in shipping.
Has anyone discussed the cost difference between a block 5 (say 5.1 with a few further tweaks) and a notional block 4.5 - where the changes to 4 would be to make it as cheap as possible and be strictly fully expendable? Seems like development cost and plus the full infrastructure of recovery have been discussed, but how CHEAPLY could they build a fully disposable falcon 9?
but how CHEAPLY could they build a fully disposable falcon 9?
1. What customer use case exists where a payload too heavy for a reusable Falcon 9 Block 5 can't be moved to a reusable Falcon Heavy?
Quote from: Coastal Ron on 05/20/2018 07:42 pm1. What customer use case exists where a payload too heavy for a reusable Falcon 9 Block 5 can't be moved to a reusable Falcon Heavy?Well they have 14 block 3 and block 4 rockets refurbished and will probably accumulate few more.
Quote from: johnfwhitesell on 05/20/2018 09:42 pmQuote from: Coastal Ron on 05/20/2018 07:42 pm1. What customer use case exists where a payload too heavy for a reusable Falcon 9 Block 5 can't be moved to a reusable Falcon Heavy?Well they have 14 block 3 and block 4 rockets refurbished and will probably accumulate few more. Oh no they don't. Most of those have been retired and or stripped for parts. There are 3, or at most 6 flight worthy block 3 or 4 cores left. ( see source: https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/wiki/cores ) Most of them will get a final expendable flight, but that is it.SpaceX wants to shift over to an all block 5 fleet faster than you think.Edit: Another source - https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/8jmn3e/spacex_recovery_history_preblock_5_graphic/ (image attached)
I just have to ask once the F9 is completely re-usable, booster, fairing, and US. What is the marginal cost of a F9 flight versus a BFR flight?
I just have to ask once the F9 is completely re-usable, booster, fairing, and US. What is the marginal cost of a F9 flight versus a BFR flight?If the marginal cost of the F9 is lower, then does it make sense to continue flying F9s till they wear out?I'm sure there are other costs besides the marginal cost of the launch... but it just seems like a valid question to ask.Yes, I know that the marginal cost of the BFR in terms of $/Kg will always be lower, especially for beyond LEO.But, sometimes you've got a satellite that just needs to ride alone, and it's well within the capability of the F9R.
SpaceX’s final upgrade to its Falcon 9 rocket isn’t quite finalby Tim FernholzSpaceX debuted the last major upgrade of the Falcon 9 rocket in a successful launch on May 10. But it has yet to demonstrate that a critical system in the redesigned rocket is safe enough to carry astronauts to the International Space Station for NASA.
SpaceX told Quartz the new propellant tanks for an uncrewed demonstration mission scheduled in August are now ready to go.
Oh, the new COPVs haven’t flown yet:QuoteSpaceX’s final upgrade to its Falcon 9 rocket isn’t quite finalby Tim FernholzSpaceX debuted the last major upgrade of the Falcon 9 rocket in a successful launch on May 10. But it has yet to demonstrate that a critical system in the redesigned rocket is safe enough to carry astronauts to the International Space Station for NASA.https://qz.com/1286342/spacexs-final-upgrade-to-its-falcon-9-rocket-isnt-quite-final-yet/Edit to add:QuoteSpaceX told Quartz the new propellant tanks for an uncrewed demonstration mission scheduled in August are now ready to go.
it's the COPVs my dude. most people do not understands the subtleties between the propellant tanks and the helium bottles, hence the wording, but have adjusted.
that's fair, they contain helium, but they are part of the propulsion system. SpaceX and NASA both confirmed to me that COPV 2.0 was not onboard. No one else has reported it yet because it was a scoop : )
Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 05/24/2018 01:58 pmOh, the new COPVs haven’t flown yet:QuoteSpaceX’s final upgrade to its Falcon 9 rocket isn’t quite finalby Tim FernholzSpaceX debuted the last major upgrade of the Falcon 9 rocket in a successful launch on May 10. But it has yet to demonstrate that a critical system in the redesigned rocket is safe enough to carry astronauts to the International Space Station for NASA.https://qz.com/1286342/spacexs-final-upgrade-to-its-falcon-9-rocket-isnt-quite-final-yet/Edit to add:QuoteSpaceX told Quartz the new propellant tanks for an uncrewed demonstration mission scheduled in August are now ready to go.I'm highly skeptical of any source that calls COPV's "propellant tanks".SpaceX might have been referring to the actual propellant tanks for B1051, the booster that is being built for DM-1.
While some outside advisers have critcized SpaceX’s plans to load propellant on the rocket before astronauts board, a concept known as “load ‘n go,” the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) sounded confident in the company.
Oh, the new COPVs haven’t flown yet: