SpaceX Falcon 9 (F9-23 : S/N 1021) KSC Reuse Testing Coverage

[CorvusCorax]

Per the JCSAT-14 webcast, the testing for CRS-8 S1 is still "39A or McGregor" - so nothing finalized yet.

(t=790, 13:10 in video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0bMeDj76ig&t=790

Q to mods: how do I add a link to youtube in a forum post - with correct time stamp? every time I add a youtube URL, it actually embeds the video but without the timestamp

[Chris Bergin]

I've not yet worked it out. For now, that's the best idea. Link and add the note as to when to "fast forward it too"

[OnWithTheShow]

I would imagine that the final testing location will be determined by schedule. In the short-term 39A has a free schedule and McGregor with only 1 active F9 test stand will be quite busy. Once they satisfy the payload ready for launch backlog then maybe 39A will be busy will launch campaigns and there will be more free time at McGregor.

[Mike_1179]

I would imagine that the final testing location will be determined by schedule. In the short-term 39A has a free schedule and McGregor with only 1 active F9 test stand will be quite busy. Once they satisfy the payload ready for launch backlog then maybe 39A will be busy will launch campaigns and there will be more free time at McGregor.

And the Falcon Heavy demo requires testing three cores at McGregor in addition to everything else on the manifest. No shortage of work in Texas it would seem.

[CraigLieb]

Per the JCSAT-14 webcast, the testing for CRS-8 S1 is still "39A or McGregor" - so nothing finalized yet.

(t=790, 13:10 in video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0bMeDj76ig&t=790

Q to mods: how do I add a link to youtube in a forum post - with correct time stamp? every time I add a youtube URL, it actually embeds the video but without the timestamp

So this doesn't work?
http://www.tubetorial.com/link-to-the-middle-of-a-youtube-video/

"How to Link to the Middle of a YouTube Video

inShare

This video shows you how to link to the middle of a YouTube video.

Basically, you add the following code to the end of the video URL:

#t=1m47s

The “1m” stands for 1 minute and the “47s” stands for 47 seconds. "


Edit/Lar: no it doesn't work... see the thread here:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=32793.msg1529998 and discuss it there. Stay on topic please.

[Marslauncher]

Wasn't that the spot (the octoweb) where in previous photos the FH parts were being built?

[FutureSpaceTourist]

I've started a poll http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40254.0 to see when we think there will be a successful orbital flight re-use with a paying customer. Poll is only open a week in case SpaceX announce something soon and/or too much new info emerges from re-use testing!

[CraigLieb]

I've started a poll http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40254.0 to see when we think there will be a successful orbital flight re-use with a paying customer. Poll is only open a week in case SpaceX announce something soon and/or too much new info emerges from re-use testing!

and now a new poll how many stages will they have to store by Dec 31st 2016!
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40267.0

Edited (a bit of shameless self promotion for this excellent poll with an important question) 

Edit/Lar: Start polls because you think it's an important question, not because you want a bit of shameless self promotion. Thanks.

[dgates]

As for stage storage, while a hanger would be ideal, it would really only be needed for active reflight processing.  "Idle" stages I speculate will be post-processed, possibly the major avionics removed, shrink wrapped in a manner similar to what they use for truck transport, and just parked outside until needed.  Maybe an extra tarp staked into the ground for UV protection of the shrink wrap, and some desiccant canisters in the avionics bay. 

Now, SpaceX may indeed need another hanger, the existing one for pre-launch prep work up and a new one for the post-processing work.  Space-X won't need more than that though, I think.  We have parked airplanes outside forever, rockets aren't THAT much different.

[CraigLieb]

As for stage storage, while a hanger would be ideal, it would really only be needed for active reflight processing.  "Idle" stages I speculate will be post-processed, possibly the major avionics removed, shrink wrapped in a manner similar to what they use for truck transport, and just parked outside until needed.  Maybe an extra tarp staked into the ground for UV protection of the shrink wrap, and some desiccant canisters in the avionics bay. 

Now, SpaceX may indeed need another hanger, the existing one for pre-launch prep work up and a new one for the post-processing work.  Space-X won't need more than that though, I think.  We have parked airplanes outside forever, rockets aren't THAT much different.

Would they call that seasoning them?

[Navier–Stokes]

Tweet from Elon today stating that SpaceX still intends to refly F9-0023-S1 this summer:

Elon Musk @elonmusk
3:03 PM - 14 May 2016

@r_SpaceX @reddit will do another AMA just before reflight of the rocket in a few months

[OxCartMark]

Was he referring specifically to the stage named in the title of this thread?  Which is I think the first landed one, OG-2.?.??  That stage currently seems a bit underpowered, some assembly required.

[dorkmo]

Was he referring specifically to the stage named in the title of this thread?  Which is I think the first landed one, OG-2.?.??  That stage currently seems a bit underpowered, some assembly required.

also missing some grid fins

[ugordan]

Was he referring specifically to the stage named in the title of this thread?  Which is I think the first landed one, OG-2.?.?? 

No, 023 is the CRS-8 booster.

[tleski]

Was he referring specifically to the stage named in the title of this thread?  Which is I think the first landed one, OG-2.?.?? 

No, 023 is the CRS-8 booster.

Looks like the CRS-8 booster is missing all engines. Hopefully, they put them back in before flying again.

[Craig_VG]

I'm assuming they have been sent to McGregor for testing? Also, does this open the possibility of doing a half reuse test by putting flown engines in a new core?

[Navier–Stokes]

I'm assuming they have been sent to McGregor for testing? Also, does this open the possibility of doing a half reuse test by putting flown engines in a new core?

CRS-8 is actually the booster on the left according to Chris. It is only missing some of its engines. Likely taken off for a more thorough inspection.

Edit: Chris was mistaken. CRS-8 is indeed the booster of the right.

[eweilow]

I'm assuming they have been sent to McGregor for testing? Also, does this open the possibility of doing a half reuse test by putting flown engines in a new core?

CRS-8 is actually the booster on the left according to Chris. It is only missing some of its engines. Likely taken off for a more thorough inspection.

Judging by the soot patterns on the stage it is not, see markings in pictures below.

(Sources: https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex/26428480464/in/photostream/ and https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex/24068507662/in/photostream/)

[Navier–Stokes]

I'm assuming they have been sent to McGregor for testing? Also, does this open the possibility of doing a half reuse test by putting flown engines in a new core?

CRS-8 is actually the booster on the left according to Chris. It is only missing some of its engines. Likely taken off for a more thorough inspection.

Judging by the soot patterns on the stage it is not, see markings in pictures below.

(Sources: https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex/26428480464/in/photostream/ and https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex/24068507662/in/photostream/)

You're right, Chris was mistaken.

[Chris Bergin]

I'm assuming they have been sent to McGregor for testing? Also, does this open the possibility of doing a half reuse test by putting flown engines in a new core?

CRS-8 is actually the booster on the left according to Chris. It is only missing some of its engines. Likely taken off for a more thorough inspection.

Judging by the soot patterns on the stage it is not, see markings in pictures below.

(Sources: https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex/26428480464/in/photostream/ and https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex/24068507662/in/photostream/)

You're right, Chris was mistaken.

It's my new bio line

Good problem to have, enough recovered cores that we have to work out which one is which!