-
#40
by
Lar
on 13 Jan, 2014 05:21
-
Spacex may not be out of pocket by to [sic] much if they can recover the OG2 1st stage.
Is there an emoticon that has eyes rolling?
How else can one respond to this post?
There it is!
He's actually right. Except there is no way they will recover and reuse that one. Too early, the first few successes get torn down and examined. (conventional wisdom)
I think it is more likely that SpaceX won't lose much on the launch because their marginal costs are low. but who knows.
-
#41
by
Comga
on 23 Jan, 2014 17:43
-
http://www.launchphotography.com/Delta_4_Atlas_5_Falcon_9_Launch_Viewing.htmlFALCON 9
... Following (the CRS/SPX-2 launch), a Falcon 9 will launch eight small communication satellites on the Orbcomm OG2 mission in mid-late March at the earliest. ...
Does this restrict the launch date enough to change the thread from TBD to March?
The source is not cited.
edit: Shall we also start a thread for AsiaSat-8? Ben 's note continues:
That (OG-2 launch) will be followed by the launch of a Falcon 9 with Asiasat 8 as early as mid-late April.
-
#42
by
Galactic Penguin SST
on 04 Mar, 2014 09:44
-
Peter B. de Selding @pbdes
Orbcomm CEO: Our SpaceX launch, of 1st six 2nd-gen sats, sched for April 30, after SpaceX NASA CRS. 11 remaining sats set for SpaceX in Nov.
Peter B. de Selding @pbdes
Orbcomm: 17 2nd-gen sats to expnd mkt by 10x. New sats have 6x the receivers of 1st gen and 2x the speed. Add new protocol= 100x cpcty.
Peter B. de Selding @pbdes
Orbcomm CEO: 6 new sats launching April on SpaceX shld give us near-trm rev boost of 'couple of million' as coverage hole is filed.
Looks like this is indeed the next F9 launch after CRS-3!
https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/440798093290655744
-
#43
by
Ben the Space Brit
on 04 Mar, 2014 11:22
-
Let's see... That's going to be about a six-week gap between the launches? Should be doable, so long as the payloads behave!
-
#44
by
Galactic Penguin SST
on 04 Mar, 2014 16:07
-
Peter B. de Selding @pbdes
Orbcomm CEO: Our SpaceX launch, of 1st six 2nd-gen sats, sched for April 30, after SpaceX NASA CRS. 11 remaining sats set for SpaceX in Nov.
Peter B. de Selding @pbdes
Orbcomm: 17 2nd-gen sats to expnd mkt by 10x. New sats have 6x the receivers of 1st gen and 2x the speed. Add new protocol= 100x cpcty.
Peter B. de Selding @pbdes
Orbcomm CEO: 6 new sats launching April on SpaceX shld give us near-trm rev boost of 'couple of million' as coverage hole is filed.
Looks like this is indeed the next F9 launch after CRS-3!
https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/440798093290655744
The weird placement of 6 satellites on this launch and 11 in November is probably due to the fact that the 6 satellites are needed to plug in the gap of the current Orbcomm constellation:
http://www.spacenews.com/article/satellite-telecom/39706with-17-satellites-slated-to-launch-in-2014-orbcomm-eyes-larger-share
-
#45
by
DJPledger
on 04 Mar, 2014 18:30
-
Please change the thread title to show the launch date.
-
#46
by
Lar
on 04 Mar, 2014 23:38
-
Please change the thread title to show the launch date.
That should be a mod request I think? Also this date is from the customer and I'm not sure it's been independently corroborated?
-
#47
by
neoforce
on 06 Mar, 2014 20:59
-
-
#48
by
clarkeo
on 12 Mar, 2014 01:44
-
Stage one on the way to McGregor for testing https://twitter.com/Foximus05/status/441503010884042752
Very awesome tonight to watch another F9 roll out of the building and start the trek to texas. See you on the other-side F9-10!
Not sure if its just a turn of phrase but he quite literally might see this stage on the other side of the flight!!
-
#49
by
Ben the Space Brit
on 12 Mar, 2014 13:33
-
Stage one on the way to McGregor for testing https://twitter.com/Foximus05/status/441503010884042752
Very awesome tonight to watch another F9 roll out of the building and start the trek to texas. See you on the other-side F9-10!
Not sure if its just a turn of phrase but he quite literally might see this stage on the other side of the flight!!
If they get the descent and braking right on CRS-3, they might, yes.
Huh... I wonder if they might be able to recycle the stages from a soft splash-down? Not full reuse but salvage whatever they can.
-
#50
by
Elvis in Space
on 12 Mar, 2014 14:58
-
Stage one on the way to McGregor for testing https://twitter.com/Foximus05/status/441503010884042752
Very awesome tonight to watch another F9 roll out of the building and start the trek to texas. See you on the other-side F9-10!
Not sure if its just a turn of phrase but he quite literally might see this stage on the other side of the flight!!
If they get the descent and braking right on CRS-3, they might, yes.
Huh... I wonder if they might be able to recycle the stages from a soft splash-down? Not full reuse but salvage whatever they can.
They are built to resist disassembly so the process of retrieval, removal, and re-qualification, would probably work against it.
-
#51
by
Mader Levap
on 12 Mar, 2014 15:03
-
Huh... I wonder if they might be able to recycle the stages from a soft splash-down? Not full reuse but salvage whatever they can.
I could bet significant amount of money on SpaceX never, ever reusing* anything from recovered stage that was recovered first time.
In fact, I am betting against any sea-recovered stages and at least first land-recovered stage. Looks like a lot of people here unintentionally want them to have serious launch failure.
* Defined as using stage or any part of stage that was previously flown on normal launch.
-
#52
by
Galactic Penguin SST
on 12 Mar, 2014 15:04
-
I wonder how the satellites will be stacked on top of each other.
-
#53
by
Jim
on 12 Mar, 2014 15:11
-
They are built to resist disassembly so the process of retrieval, removal, and re-qualification, would probably work against it.
Wrong takeaway. A reusable system has to be serviceable. So the capability for disassembly is inherent. Maybe not at a tank or major structure level, but certainly at the subsystem level.
-
#54
by
Prober
on 12 Mar, 2014 15:41
-
They are built to resist disassembly so the process of retrieval, removal, and re-qualification, would probably work against it.
Wrong takeaway. A reusable system has to be serviceable. So the capability for disassembly is inherent. Maybe not at a tank or major structure level, but certainly at the subsystem level.
and if the "major" components are not designed from the unset to handle the rigors of corrosion; then being reusable is dead before its begun.
-
#55
by
macpacheco
on 12 Mar, 2014 15:44
-
Huh... I wonder if they might be able to recycle the stages from a soft splash-down? Not full reuse but salvage whatever they can.
I could bet significant amount of money on SpaceX never, ever reusing* anything from recovered stage that was recovered first time.
In fact, I am betting against any sea-recovered stages and at least first land-recovered stage. Looks like a lot of people here unintentionally want them to have serious launch failure.
* Defined as using stage or any part of stage that was previously flown on normal launch.
Even with a detailed check + any necessary overhaul ? You're telling us you don't believe in SpaceX ability to assess a recovered stage from being flight worthy or not ?
I was thinking about the possibility of reusing the first stage recovered in Space Port America, perhaps as a GH3 program. If SpaceX has assessed that as safe to fly without any payloads, clearly stated for the world, this is a reuse to death campaign, we would like to see if we can refly this stage dozens of times, perhaps even without a second stage.
-
#56
by
Jim
on 12 Mar, 2014 15:48
-
I was thinking about the possibility of reusing the first stage recovered in Space Port America, perhaps as a GH3 program. If SpaceX has assessed that as safe to fly without any payloads, clearly stated for the world, this is a reuse to death campaign, we would like to see if we can refly this stage dozens of times, perhaps even without a second stage.
There is no benefit to do that, they have F9R.
-
#57
by
Elvis in Space
on 12 Mar, 2014 15:50
-
They are built to resist disassembly so the process of retrieval, removal, and re-qualification, would probably work against it.
Wrong takeaway. A reusable system has to be serviceable. So the capability for disassembly is inherent. Maybe not at a tank or major structure level, but certainly at the subsystem level.
You are correct. This is a way of thinking some of us (myself) have to get used to.
-
#58
by
cambrianera
on 12 Mar, 2014 15:51
-
I was thinking about the possibility of reusing the first stage recovered in Space Port America, perhaps as a GH3 program. If SpaceX has assessed that as safe to fly without any payloads, clearly stated for the world, this is a reuse to death campaign, we would like to see if we can refly this stage dozens of times, perhaps even without a second stage.
There is no benefit to do that, they have F9R.
Having a flightworth tank complete with octaweb as spare in case of a test crash could be a good deal.
-
#59
by
llanitedave
on 12 Mar, 2014 16:18
-
Even if the tank is damaged, as long as they can recover the octoweb and engines I can see them putting those engines back on the test stand, at least.
