Haven't seen this posted, and this is great news as well. There was a third Objectivehttps://twitter.com/pbdes/status/679218508224401408QuotePeter B. de SeldingSpaceX confirms successful Falcon 9 Upgrade 2d stage reignition after Orbcomm sats released - key for GTO telecom missions, where $$ lie.Edit: And now a full article on this Third Obejective @SpaceNews.http://spacenews.com/falcon-9s-second-stage-restart-was-just-as-important-as-sticking-the-landing/
Peter B. de SeldingSpaceX confirms successful Falcon 9 Upgrade 2d stage reignition after Orbcomm sats released - key for GTO telecom missions, where $$ lie.
The Falcon 9 v1.1 rocket had already proved its ability to place telecommunications satellites into geostationary transfer orbit. But the energy needed to do so meant the rocket could not retain the fuel needed to return itself to a landing point. The Falcon 9 upgrade now makes that possible.
Does that mean that all GTO missions will land back at the landing site?
Quote from: Antilope7724 on 12/22/2015 03:16 pmEven if it turns out the rocket body has metal fatigue or stress cracks that might prevent reuse, they still got back 9-rocket engines they could probably use again.That's an interesting point. Elon has ruled out reusing the stage a a whole, but I would love to be able to track what happens to the engines- will they go into a pool like the SSMEs did, or will stages remain intact after assembly?
Even if it turns out the rocket body has metal fatigue or stress cracks that might prevent reuse, they still got back 9-rocket engines they could probably use again.
Should be a mix of barge and land landings. With upgrade to v1.2 a lot of expendable V1.1 GTO flights will now be recoverable.
Quote from: abaddon on 12/22/2015 04:37 pmQuote from: yg1968 on 12/22/2015 04:28 pmDoes that mean that all GTO missions will land back at the landing site?What? No. It means that SpaceX has validated that re-ignition of the S2 engine, which is required for all GTO missions, works on the upgraded FT version.The SN article seems to suggest otherwise but it might be wrong:QuoteThe Falcon 9 v1.1 rocket had already proved its ability to place telecommunications satellites into geostationary transfer orbit. But the energy needed to do so meant the rocket could not retain the fuel needed to return itself to a landing point. The Falcon 9 upgrade now makes that possible.
Quote from: yg1968 on 12/22/2015 04:28 pmDoes that mean that all GTO missions will land back at the landing site?What? No. It means that SpaceX has validated that re-ignition of the S2 engine, which is required for all GTO missions, works on the upgraded FT version.
Quote from: Comga on 12/22/2015 03:34 pmQuote from: ugordan on 12/22/2015 03:10 pmAnother image taken a short while ago:Where is this?It's doesn't look like LX-1. There is no tank there that we have seen, and little need for one.These look like the mounts from the now abandoned ASDS base at Jacksonville.SpaceX must have carried the stage via the crane. That should be great video if they show it.edit: Less certainty, more questioningWell you either have to bring the rocket to the ground mount, or the ground mount to the rocket. Since the rocket is not connected to the ground, and is only one piece, I vote for door #1.I think this answers the question of why use a lattice crane - since they are track-mounted and can move while carrying a load. Or alternatively, can have a longer reach, and thus swing the rocket to the launch mount.
Quote from: ugordan on 12/22/2015 03:10 pmAnother image taken a short while ago:Where is this?It's doesn't look like LX-1. There is no tank there that we have seen, and little need for one.These look like the mounts from the now abandoned ASDS base at Jacksonville.SpaceX must have carried the stage via the crane. That should be great video if they show it.edit: Less certainty, more questioning
Another image taken a short while ago:
New photos just posted on SpaceX's Flickr feed - https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacexphotos
Quote from: meekGee on 12/22/2015 03:56 pmQuote from: Comga on 12/22/2015 03:34 pmQuote from: ugordan on 12/22/2015 03:10 pmAnother image taken a short while ago:Where is this?It's doesn't look like LX-1. There is no tank there that we have seen, and little need for one.These look like the mounts from the now abandoned ASDS base at Jacksonville.SpaceX must have carried the stage via the crane. That should be great video if they show it.edit: Less certainty, more questioningWell you either have to bring the rocket to the ground mount, or the ground mount to the rocket. Since the rocket is not connected to the ground, and is only one piece, I vote for door #1.I think this answers the question of why use a lattice crane - since they are track-mounted and can move while carrying a load. Or alternatively, can have a longer reach, and thus swing the rocket to the launch mount.The photographer /u/jardeon on Reddit is saying it is LZ-1 and shared few other images from spot. He is on a boat full of press.http://imgur.com/a/24B8aIf SpaceX ends up with few more recovered cores where are they likely to keep them?
The heads of a few competitive launch companies are awfully quiet out there...
New photos just posted on SpaceX's Flickr feed - https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacexphotosDownloaded and clicked "Set Desktop Picture"
Well it did come as a complete surprise...
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 12/22/2015 02:44 pmShould be a mix of barge and land landings. With upgrade to v1.2 a lot of expendable V1.1 GTO flights will now be recoverable.And those that aren't will be upgraded to FHR.FHR with v1.2 upgrades will be a formidable heavy launch solution even with all 3 sticks landing at the launch site.
I wonder if it's as simple as what part of the tank is still cold from having all that LOX in it, even if it's not filled with LOX to that level.
I spoke too soon:http://www.challenges.fr/entreprise/aeronautique/20151222.CHA3140/le-lanceur-spatial-reutilisable-de-spacex-une-equation-economique-incertaine-pour-arianespace.html