Author Topic: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles  (Read 175435 times)

Online rberry

  • Member
  • Posts: 32
  • Houston
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #360 on: 06/07/2016 01:37 AM »
Mostly-shiny CRS-8 stage.

Room for one more at the Inn! :)

SpaceX ‏@SpaceX  4m4 minutes ago
Fantastic four

Nice to see one all shined back up! CRS-8?
Looks like CRS-8 to me.

If so, she's got her grid fin mounts again and her interstage has had its decals touched up.

Edit: The soot pattern on the leftmost booster seems consistent with ORBCOMM-2, though it looks as if she has been rotated since the last photo.


Actually I think it is OG-2. Based on images of JCSAT-14 entering hanger, CRS-8 should be on the left of the new picture (unless they have done some rearranging).

In the image below, the stage with no engines attached is CRS-8, and the stage with a few engines attached is OG-2. The new image is taken facing the opposite direction, so CRS-8 should be on the left of the new image. The shiny one on the right of the new image should be OG-2 (Orbcomm).
« Last Edit: 06/07/2016 01:57 AM by rberry »
-Ryan

Online rberry

  • Member
  • Posts: 32
  • Houston
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #361 on: 06/07/2016 03:08 AM »
I think you're right. I reversed the core designations in my original analysis. With correct positioning, the shiny one would be OG-2.
It doesn't seem to make sense to repaint the display unit. Maybe they have rearranged the units and painted CRS-8?

I think Chris showed that it was not painted, just cleaned. Also, why clean/repaint a stage that is just going to get dirty again on reuse?

-Ryan

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3592
  • California
  • Liked: 2836
  • Likes Given: 1787
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #362 on: 06/07/2016 03:31 AM »
It definitely looks cleaned rather than re-painted. If you look closer you can tell that the surface has some less reflective areas suggesting a cleaning.

Offline dorkmo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 664
  • Liked: 298
  • Likes Given: 792
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #363 on: 06/07/2016 04:20 AM »
looks like the inside surface of the interstage of the cleaned one is black while the others seem to be white.

Offline intrepidpursuit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 481
  • Orlando, FL
  • Liked: 286
  • Likes Given: 200
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #364 on: 06/07/2016 04:57 AM »
looks like the inside surface of the interstage of the cleaned one is black while the others seem to be white.

The others show light and shadow where that one just shows black. It looks like a black textile cover. Could be to protect newly installed or cleaned components, or it could be to cover up something that we weren't supposed to see.

Offline llanitedave

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2118
  • Nevada Desert
  • Liked: 1288
  • Likes Given: 1504
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #365 on: 06/07/2016 06:12 AM »
It definitely looks cleaned rather than re-painted. If you look closer you can tell that the surface has some less reflective areas suggesting a cleaning.

I wonder how many spray bottles of ammonia that took?
"I've just abducted an alien -- now what?"

Online docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4386
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 1507
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #366 on: 06/07/2016 06:45 AM »
Maybe just a sandblaster with cork or dry ice media.
DM

Offline JamesH65

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 676
  • Liked: 406
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #367 on: 06/07/2016 07:59 AM »
Maybe just a sandblaster with cork or dry ice media.

Just needs Jim and his jetwash. It's only soot.

Online douglas100

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2157
  • Liked: 217
  • Likes Given: 96
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #368 on: 06/07/2016 08:06 AM »
I was half convinced after the Thaicom entry video that some of it was charring. Glad it isn't.
Douglas Clark

Offline rocx

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 384
  • NL
  • Liked: 264
  • Likes Given: 145
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #369 on: 06/07/2016 08:26 AM »
I think it's a shame to wash the booster that they are going to put on their front lawn. To me the charring pattern of a landed F9 first stage is what makes it so distinctive.
Any day with a rocket landing is a fantastic day.

Online Jarnis

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1097
  • Liked: 553
  • Likes Given: 148
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #370 on: 06/07/2016 09:40 AM »
looks like the inside surface of the interstage of the cleaned one is black while the others seem to be white.

The others show light and shadow where that one just shows black. It looks like a black textile cover. Could be to protect newly installed or cleaned components, or it could be to cover up something that we weren't supposed to see.

My guess; some subtle photoshopping to cover up ITAR or "secret sauce"-relevant bits.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6418
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 873
  • Likes Given: 5539
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #371 on: 06/07/2016 11:37 AM »
I think from the high-res images of the landed stages any unbiased engineer would say that they are either already can be reused with minor refurb, or that first stage design will need only minor tweaks to make that possible.
The stages are clearly not heavily damaged.

No. An unbiased engineer with an understanding of metallurgy and aerospace structural design would say "Show me the post-flight material sample tests, the visual and NDE examinations of the structures, and the financial reports demonstrating the material and labor costs for refurbishment necessary arising from the above, plus any TPS removal and reapplication."


EDIT: Damn autocorrect; grammar.
That's fine for a first-of-its-kind-ever flight.

But to make reuse routine you have to move away from this PoV.  Yes the LV flight regime is more severe than any aircraft (except perhaps some X15 flights).

That level of T&E is appropriate for setting a baseline and making go/no go choices for stage reuse.

It should not and cannot be the test level for standard reflights. The risk needs to be "designed out" either by structural changes or additional sensors to pick up a  red line situation.
"Solids are a branch of fireworks, not rocketry. :-) :-) ", Henry Spencer 1/28/11  Averse to bold? You must be in marketing."It's all in the sequencing" K. Mattingly.  STS-Keeping most of the stakeholders happy most of the time.
So you're going to Mars to seek a better life. What does that mean to you? Always spot a fanbois by how they react to their idols failures.

Online Herb Schaltegger

Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #372 on: 06/07/2016 11:54 AM »
Of course. But there has as yet been no reflight. Therefore no unbiased engineer can possibly say the recovered stages we have seen to date will need only minor refurbishment. None of us here have access to the kind of detailed data SpaceX requires to make the determination about the degree of repair or refurbishment necessary after one flight, let alone what might be necessary after two, five, ten ... Anyone who thinks otherwise is willfully deluding himself.
Ad astra per aspirin ...

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2946
  • Liked: 1375
  • Likes Given: 915
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #373 on: 06/07/2016 01:45 PM »
Of course. But there has as yet been no reflight. Therefore no unbiased engineer can possibly say the recovered stages we have seen to date will need only minor refurbishment. None of us here have access to the kind of detailed data SpaceX requires to make the determination about the degree of repair or refurbishment necessary after one flight, let alone what might be necessary after two, five, ten ... Anyone who thinks otherwise is willfully deluding himself.

There's no evidence in the photos that the stages need significant refurbishment. There's also no evidence that they don't need significant refurbishment. It's just a picture. To prove that the design allows only minimal refurbishment requires flying, testing, re-flying, re-testing, etc. until the life-cycle of the stage is fully characterized at a component level.

Offline Doesitfloat

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 220
  • Detroit MI
  • Liked: 310
  • Likes Given: 129
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #374 on: 06/07/2016 02:17 PM »
Just my opinion.
How dare Spacex skip the test flight of a re-used booster. They've gone straight to selling them.
Then again they did no test flight of Falcon 9 1.1 or Falcon Full Thrust.
What would a test flight show on a reused booster- it already flew once.
Now they've gone and sold one maybe two flights on reused boosters,  now we don't get to speculate if customers will be interested in used boosters.

Offline mheney

  • The Next Man on the Moon
  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 758
  • Silver Spring, MD
  • Liked: 361
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #375 on: 06/07/2016 04:05 PM »
Just my opinion.
How dare Spacex skip the test flight of a re-used booster. They've gone straight to selling them.
Then again they did no test flight of Falcon 9 1.1 or Falcon Full Thrust.
What would a test flight show on a reused booster- it already flew once.
Now they've gone and sold one maybe two flights on reused boosters,  now we don't get to speculate if customers will be interested in used boosters.

I think "how dare they" is a bit strong.  There's an important point to be consider - you can't sell if no one is willing to buy.  We don't have to speculate if customers will be interested in used boosters - we know it as a cold, hard fact.

It's all about risk/reward.  And if the customer is willing to take the risk - and, more importantly, their insurance companies are willing to underwrite the risk - then why shouldn't SpaceX fly with a live payload?

Online AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5215
  • Liked: 3129
  • Likes Given: 4442
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #376 on: 06/07/2016 04:13 PM »
Of course. But there has as yet been no reflight. Therefore no unbiased engineer can possibly say the recovered stages we have seen to date will need only minor refurbishment. None of us here have access to the kind of detailed data SpaceX requires to make the determination about the degree of repair or refurbishment necessary after one flight, let alone what might be necessary after two, five, ten ... Anyone who thinks otherwise is willfully deluding himself.

The picture of the stage landing in a controlled manner (tanks pressurized, engines running, electronics obviously controlling the ASDS targeting, etc.) is quite revealing to an unbiased engineer, but far from the full picture.  A sooty stage standing on a barge, not so much.

And then there is this factiod which also should be taken into account by our generic 'unbiased engineer' (i.e., was the rocket designed to be reused by a competent engineer?):
Quote
Fuel tanks in the reusable rockets are designed to withstand thousands of uses, while the engines can be reused more than 100 times by repairing them. SpaceX will aim to reuse rockets 10 times for the time being, said Shotwell.

http://asia.nikkei.com/Tech-Science/Tech/SpaceX-to-launch-reused-rockets-by-year-end
« Last Edit: 06/07/2016 08:16 PM by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3592
  • California
  • Liked: 2836
  • Likes Given: 1787
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #377 on: 06/07/2016 04:34 PM »
Just my opinion.
How dare Spacex skip the test flight of a re-used booster. They've gone straight to selling them.
Then again they did no test flight of Falcon 9 1.1 or Falcon Full Thrust.
What would a test flight show on a reused booster- it already flew once.
Now they've gone and sold one maybe two flights on reused boosters,  now we don't get to speculate if customers will be interested in used boosters.

I think "how dare they" is a bit strong.  There's an important point to be consider - you can't sell if no one is willing to buy.  We don't have to speculate if customers will be interested in used boosters - we know it as a cold, hard fact.

It's all about risk/reward.  And if the customer is willing to take the risk - and, more importantly, their insurance companies are willing to underwrite the risk - then why shouldn't SpaceX fly with a live payload?

Presumably the customer(s) are eager because:
A) they'll get a significant discount for being the first ones to fly on a used booster
and
B) they trust SpaceX

Offline CuddlyRocket

Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #378 on: 06/07/2016 09:00 PM »
Presumably the customer(s) are eager because:
A) they'll get a significant discount for being the first ones to fly on a used booster
and
B) they trust SpaceX

And C) Bragging rights. Or put another way: Demonstrating that they are a forward looking company in touch with the cutting edge of technology!

Offline mme

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1095
  • Santa Barbara, CA, USA, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way Galaxy, Virgo Supercluster
  • Liked: 1323
  • Likes Given: 3467
Re: Refurbishment of Used Stages/Vehicles
« Reply #379 on: 06/07/2016 11:02 PM »
Just my opinion.
How dare Spacex skip the test flight of a re-used booster. They've gone straight to selling them.  ...

I think "how dare they" is a bit strong.  There's an important point to be consider - you can't sell if no one is willing to buy.  We don't have to speculate if customers will be interested in used boosters - we know it as a cold, hard fact.
...
Presumably the customer(s) are eager because:
A) they'll get a significant discount for being the first ones to fly on a used booster
and
B) they trust SpaceX
I think people seriously underestimate "B".  SpaceX has no interest in losing a customer's payload.  Also, the customer will have a lot of insight into why SpaceX believes it can safely refly the booster and you can be sure the contract will include the need to sign off on the launch.

...
And C) Bragging rights. Or put another way: Demonstrating that they are a forward looking company in touch with the cutting edge of technology!

And D) Helping to reduce future launch costs.
Space is not Highlander.  There can, and will, be more than one.

Tags: