Author Topic: Progress on rapid booster reuse  (Read 174083 times)

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5311
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4148
  • Likes Given: 1671
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #360 on: 06/30/2022 04:57 pm »
People are laboring under this false idea that starship will replace falcon 9 in a couple years - which totally ignores spaceX saying on multiple occasions that this is not true.

Falcon 9 will fly for as long as customers want it...

Almost correct.
It is in fact not up to the customers.

SpaceX fully intends to switch over to Starship, as soon as committed obligations allow it.

Outyear look: Falcon 9 will fly until roughly 2030, because NASA has committed SpaceX to flying Crew Dragon and Cargo Dragon until 2030. But with Starship operational by then, even for crewed launches, the retirement of ISS drops the sole remaining prime customer for F9 by then. Only FH will soldier on a few more years, after ISS retirement, because of running DoD and NASA commitments.
This is such a weird moment in time for Commercial LEO Destinations providers to bid on fixed-cost end-to-end service which will begin in 2030. Do they bid as if Starship crew launch/reentry by 2030 is a sure thing? Do they make a deal with SpaceX to ensure a smooth transition whether it occurs before or after station IOC? Do their design concepts even work, for example in terms of lifeboat/evac or attitude control, with a transition from small hypergolic spacecraft to a large cryogenic beast? Who knows what a 2030s space station should be like, but that question must be answered very shortly.

In other words, I'm not as optimistic that new Crew Dragon commitments will not be made stretching into the 2030s. I think there's a good chance that CLD will be the last straggling customer(s) for F9. It'll be maybe two missions per year, so forget about rapid booster reuse milestones, and it's possible that some of these station proposals (if selected) will use Dragon for their entire lifetimes. SpaceX will probably want to stockpile as many F9 upper stages as they can and have enough to ride out however long the CLD era might last. Maybe, once Starship crew launch/reentry is NASA human-rated, SpaceX could develop a Dragon Lifeboat Edition certified for several years of docked mission endurance to reduce or eliminate additional F9/Dragon launches.
Cargo Starship can carry an uncrewed Crew dragon, which can be used as a taxi and lifeboat. Each CLD can have as many as it needs. Cargo Starship can return these to earth for periodic servicing, but they mostly just stay in space. Crew will use Crewed Starship but will transfer to CLD on the taxis. This scheme works for ISS and for any CLD that is designed to use Crew Dragon.

Offline alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1469
  • Liked: 1531
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #361 on: 06/30/2022 06:30 pm »
Instead of blowing their wad on going to the moon with SLS, NASA should be working on a replacement for the ISS, which, at this point, is an albatross. 

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #362 on: 06/30/2022 07:30 pm »
Instead of blowing their wad on going to the moon with SLS, NASA should be working on a replacement for the ISS, which, at this point, is an albatross.

NASA is doing that. Have you not heard of the CLD (Commercial LEO Destinations) program?

Axiom is already under contract for space station modules that will attach to the ISS and then separate before the ISS is decommissioned.
"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 wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5366
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 3075
  • Likes Given: 3804
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #363 on: 06/30/2022 08:48 pm »
Given we are 50% of the way through 2022 this is what I think is notable:

1) The launch cadence itself, less than 7 days, stunning
2) The 100% recovery success rate
3) The accuracy of the ASDS landings, they seem to be getting more and more precise with each landing and are placing the points of each leg in nearly the identical position each time (I think this bodes well for Starship and Superheavy recovery)
Wildly optimistic prediction, Superheavy recovery on IFT-4 or IFT-5

Offline r8ix

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 293
  • Liked: 281
  • Likes Given: 91
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #364 on: 06/30/2022 08:51 pm »
Given we are 50% of the way through 2022 this is what I think is notable:

1) The launch cadence itself, less than 7 days, stunning
2) The 100% recovery success rate
3) The accuracy of the ASDS landings, they seem to be getting more and more precise with each landing and are placing the points of each leg in nearly the identical position each time (I think this bodes well for Starship and Superheavy recovery)

Thanks for bringing us back on topic!

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #365 on: 06/30/2022 09:39 pm »
Given we are 50% of the way through 2022 this is what I think is notable:

1) The launch cadence itself, less than 7 days, stunning
2) The 100% recovery success rate
3) The accuracy of the ASDS landings, they seem to be getting more and more precise with each landing and are placing the points of each leg in nearly the identical position each time (I think this bodes well for Starship and Superheavy recovery)

With respect to booster recovery, the last time a Falcon 9 booster core was intentionally expended was in January 2020, for the In-Flight Abort Test (booster 1046.4).

Since then, there have been three boosters lost:
In February 2020, the landing attempt for booster 1056.4 was aborted due to high winds in the landing zone.
In March 2020, booster 1048.5 (the first time a booster had flown 5 times) had an engine failure just before MECO.
And in February 2021, a hole in a life-leader flexible heat shield "boot" over an engine of booster 1059.6 caused its loss during descent.

Since the beginning of 2020, not counting the IFAT, the booster recovery success rate is 80 successes in 83 attempts, 96.38%

The 100% success rate dates back to March 2021, a streak of 53 landing / recovery successes.
"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 wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5366
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 3075
  • Likes Given: 3804
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #366 on: 07/05/2022 09:12 pm »
Given we are 50% of the way through 2022 this is what I think is notable:

1) The launch cadence itself, less than 7 days, stunning
2) The 100% recovery success rate
3) The accuracy of the ASDS landings, they seem to be getting more and more precise with each landing and are placing the points of each leg in nearly the identical position each time (I think this bodes well for Starship and Superheavy recovery)

Thanks for bringing us back on topic!

Sometimes I help, sometimes I wonder.

It has become common, but I still marvel at the landings and reuse.

A F9 class launch with only expending the upper stage, it's just astonishing.
Wildly optimistic prediction, Superheavy recovery on IFT-4 or IFT-5

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47313
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80124
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #367 on: 03/20/2023 10:27 am »
https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1637646885761560576

Quote
One of the keys to more rapidly reusing the Falcon 9 rocket was significantly increasing the water flowing into the pad during liftoff, reducing damage at Space Launch Complex-40 seen here. Also note the rapid "throwback" of the launch tower. Very important (and difficult to do).

twitter.com/jgottula/status/1637650141963517953

Quote
This is really neat.

I found myself wondering why they retract the T/E the way they do. (And why they never switched to the “newer” slight-retract-but-big-throwback way of doing it at VSFB SLC-4E.)

Found a fairly informative answer on the subject here.

https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/55084/tilt-of-strongback/55086#55086

https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1637650480317751296

Quote
Therein lies a major reason by SLC-40 can turn a lot faster than Vandy.

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5366
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 3075
  • Likes Given: 3804
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #368 on: 03/23/2023 07:53 pm »
https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1637646885761560576

Quote
One of the keys to more rapidly reusing the Falcon 9 rocket was significantly increasing the water flowing into the pad during liftoff, reducing damage at Space Launch Complex-40 seen here. Also note the rapid "throwback" of the launch tower. Very important (and difficult to do).

Yet they attempted to do a dry pad for Superheavy?

Seems like there maybe a couple of SpaceX GSE folks that meet over a coffee.
Wildly optimistic prediction, Superheavy recovery on IFT-4 or IFT-5

Offline alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1469
  • Liked: 1531
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #369 on: 03/23/2023 09:28 pm »
The thinking might be, that they're going to have to tear out the surface anyway in order to install the deluge manifolds, so let the first launch soften it up a little for the jack hammers.

Offline deadman1204

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1741
  • USA
  • Liked: 1452
  • Likes Given: 2458
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #370 on: 04/23/2023 07:13 pm »
The thinking might be, that they're going to have to tear out the surface anyway in order to install the deluge manifolds, so let the first launch soften it up a little for the jack hammers.
far far more than just a little concrete got damaged. Literally everything got blasted with boulders, tanks damaged, who knows what the pipelines are like. You assume that just because a structure is standing that it still works correctly and isn't damaged.

This was a catastrophe. A completely avoidable one.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39246
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25173
  • Likes Given: 12102
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #371 on: 04/24/2023 02:56 pm »
The real benefit from actual testing a bad idea is to feel the pain of the consequences.

Going too long between failures breeds hubris. There is no better teacher than feeling the pain of your own mistakes.

I am kind of sick of all the armchair complainers, though. Get a grip. They planned to be able to completely rebuild the pad and the tower. No modeling ever is a substitute for the real deal, and the sooner you get there, the better. Pouring infinite margin everywhere will solve the problem… by making the program so expensive it gets canceled unless you can buy enough Senators to pour money to keep it going even though you have no results.

If you can’t emotionally handle a hole in the ground, this business is too tough for you.
« Last Edit: 04/24/2023 03:07 pm by Robotbeat »
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 alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1469
  • Liked: 1531
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #372 on: 04/24/2023 03:56 pm »
RB, one thing about the complainers, is that many of them are stating, disguised, what they want to happen.  They're not really griping; they're gloating.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14107
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13973
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #373 on: 04/24/2023 09:31 pm »
RB, one thing about the complainers, is that many of them are stating, disguised, what they want to happen.  They're not really griping; they're gloating.

Hoping, rather.  But it's been like that since the beginning.

Every test was a disaster.  Every failed F9 landing attempt, every starship hop.

Right now the disaster du jour is "Literally all the concrete turned into murderous highway robbers that are now attacking citizens in broad daylight oh the humanity".

Everything was avoidable if only they had listened to fill in the blank.  Except of course if they had listened, they'd be somewhere in the Vulcan-SLS spectrum of stagnation.

The caravan is already moving, just let it be.
« Last Edit: 04/24/2023 09:34 pm by meekGee »
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #374 on: 04/25/2023 11:49 am »
RB, one thing about the complainers, is that many of them are stating, disguised, what they want to happen.  They're not really griping; they're gloating.

Hoping, rather.  But it's been like that since the beginning.

Every test was a disaster.  Every failed F9 landing attempt, every starship hop.

Right now the disaster du jour is "Literally all the concrete turned into murderous highway robbers that are now attacking citizens in broad daylight oh the humanity".

Everything was avoidable if only they had listened to fill in the blank.  Except of course if they had listened, they'd be somewhere in the Vulcan-SLS spectrum of stagnation.

The caravan is already moving, just let it be.
Why ?  They were lucky booster didn't lose more engines to debris and cause it fall back on pad.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14107
  • N. California
  • Liked: 13973
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #375 on: 04/25/2023 12:54 pm »
RB, one thing about the complainers, is that many of them are stating, disguised, what they want to happen.  They're not really griping; they're gloating.

Hoping, rather.  But it's been like that since the beginning.

Every test was a disaster.  Every failed F9 landing attempt, every starship hop.

Right now the disaster du jour is "Literally all the concrete turned into murderous highway robbers that are now attacking citizens in broad daylight oh the humanity".

Everything was avoidable if only they had listened to fill in the blank.  Except of course if they had listened, they'd be somewhere in the Vulcan-SLS spectrum of stagnation.

The caravan is already moving, just let it be.
Why ?  They were lucky booster didn't lose more engines to debris and cause it fall back on pad.
Why what?
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39246
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25173
  • Likes Given: 12102
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #376 on: 04/26/2023 05:35 pm »
Nice try.
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 KilroySmith

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 242
  • Phoenix, AZ, USA
  • Liked: 402
  • Likes Given: 196
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #377 on: 08/24/2023 10:18 pm »
You spent one of your 4 lifetime posts laughing at a 5 month old post, which wasn't even the funniest one on the thread? ???

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47313
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80124
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #378 on: 11/28/2023 05:46 am »
https://twitter.com/skorusark/status/1729332302675677585

Quote
Very cool to see the improvement in time it takes to reuse a Falcon 9 booster.

Decrease in time to reuse should be a good proxy for cost decline.

*it's still a work in progress and not the full data set yet

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47313
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80124
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Progress on rapid booster reuse
« Reply #379 on: 12/10/2023 06:21 pm »
I’ve moved a load of posts to the thread on the limits of how many times a booster can be reused:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=51761.0

Reminder that this thread is for how quickly a booster can be turned around for re-flight.

 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1