Author Topic: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)  (Read 354324 times)

Online envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4625
  • Liked: 2551
  • Likes Given: 1397
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #320 on: 04/12/2017 02:41 PM »
What happened to F9R Dev 2? I know it was supposed to be used for the inflight abort test, but now it's just going to be a plain F9 first stage. So, what happened to Dev 2? Where is it specifically?

It was at VAFB as recently as the Iridium-1 launch, it's in the background of the attached picture. It's incompatible with all the current pad hardware, so it's a piece of hardware without a mission right now (or probably ever).

How is the inflight abort test vehicle going to be assembled and brought to the pad? Without a second stage it wouldn't fit right on the current TEL.

Offline Basto

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 159
  • Salt Lake City, UT
  • Liked: 145
  • Likes Given: 201
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #321 on: 04/12/2017 02:55 PM »
What happened to F9R Dev 2? I know it was supposed to be used for the inflight abort test, but now it's just going to be a plain F9 first stage. So, what happened to Dev 2? Where is it specifically?

It was at VAFB as recently as the Iridium-1 launch, it's in the background of the attached picture. It's incompatible with all the current pad hardware, so it's a piece of hardware without a mission right now (or probably ever).

How is the inflight abort test vehicle going to be assembled and brought to the pad? Without a second stage it wouldn't fit right on the current TEL.

Would they even be able to fly an F9 without the S2 avionics?  Could they put in a dummy S2 and just leave off the engine?

I too am curious how this will work.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4246
  • California
  • Liked: 3666
  • Likes Given: 2260
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #322 on: 04/12/2017 04:32 PM »
There was a stage stretch around then, too. I believe the F9 dev 2 isn't stretched, so (in addition to the chilled prop, etc) nothing lines up right on top now.

Only upper stage tanks were stretched for v1.2/block III, not the first stage. The first stage tank dimensions have not changed since "F9 dev 2".

S1 total tank length was not changed but the relative sixe of rp1 and lox tanks was changed because lox densifies more when chilled.

OK, thanks for the correction.

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3250
  • Boca Chica, Texas
  • Liked: 5391
  • Likes Given: 340
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #323 on: 04/12/2017 04:40 PM »
What happened to F9R Dev 2? I know it was supposed to be used for the inflight abort test, but now it's just going to be a plain F9 first stage. So, what happened to Dev 2? Where is it specifically?

It was at VAFB as recently as the Iridium-1 launch, it's in the background of the attached picture. It's incompatible with all the current pad hardware, so it's a piece of hardware without a mission right now (or probably ever).

How is the inflight abort test vehicle going to be assembled and brought to the pad? Without a second stage it wouldn't fit right on the current TEL.

Would they even be able to fly an F9 without the S2 avionics?  Could they put in a dummy S2 and just leave off the engine?

I too am curious how this will work.

The 1st stages have been flying themselves for quite a while now.

Online smfarmer11

  • Member
  • Posts: 73
  • Blacksburg
  • Liked: 21
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #324 on: 04/12/2017 05:33 PM »
I also imagine when they built the booster they took into account that there would not be a second stage on it, with regard to avionics.

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6558
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 6260
  • Likes Given: 1889
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #325 on: 04/15/2017 04:43 PM »
Don't know where else to post this. Gwynne Shotwell's talk at the 33rd Space Symposium shot on someone's mobile:



Seems to include most of the Q&A too.

Offline TheKutKu

  • Member
  • Posts: 17
  • France
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #326 on: 04/22/2017 07:52 AM »
Does anyone have an idea of the amount of residual fuel and oxidizer in the S2 when it burns to depletion (for example on SES-9's launch) As well as the gravity losses on the S2 burn?
« Last Edit: 04/24/2017 07:25 PM by TheKutKu »

Offline StarTracker

  • Member
  • Posts: 21
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #327 on: 04/25/2017 01:56 PM »
Apologies in advance if this has been discussed copiously elsewhere, my search-fu wasn't able to find anything: has anyone documented the change in F9 booster serial number nomenclature from the previous B10xx format to the B10xx.y format?

Is it as simple as .2 refers to FH side boosters and .1 corresponds to F9/FH-centers?

Online envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4625
  • Liked: 2551
  • Likes Given: 1397
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #328 on: 04/25/2017 02:01 PM »
Apologies in advance if this has been discussed copiously elsewhere, my search-fu wasn't able to find anything: has anyone documented the change in F9 booster serial number nomenclature from the previous B10xx format to the B10xx.y format?

Is it as simple as .2 refers to FH side boosters and .1 corresponds to F9/FH-centers?

"B10xx" refers to a specific booster serial number. The ".y" suffix indicates the flight number: for example, SES-10 flew on booster B1021.2, the 2nd flight of booster number B1021.

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2949
  • Liked: 2054
  • Likes Given: 664
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #329 on: 04/26/2017 02:21 AM »
Apologies in advance if this has been discussed copiously elsewhere, my search-fu wasn't able to find anything: has anyone documented the change in F9 booster serial number nomenclature from the previous B10xx format to the B10xx.y format?

Is it as simple as .2 refers to FH side boosters and .1 corresponds to F9/FH-centers?

"B10xx" refers to a specific booster serial number. The ".y" suffix indicates the flight number: for example, SES-10 flew on booster B1021.2, the 2nd flight of booster number B1021.
B10xx.2 isn't necessarily the "booster number".  It's probably more accurately the number identifying "something done to the booster" that has to be done for every flight.  For instance, "static fire B10xx.2" is the second time B10xx was fired.  IMNSHO -- I don't have any inside knowledge here.

Online cppetrie

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 617
  • Liked: 350
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #330 on: 04/26/2017 02:33 AM »
Apologies in advance if this has been discussed copiously elsewhere, my search-fu wasn't able to find anything: has anyone documented the change in F9 booster serial number nomenclature from the previous B10xx format to the B10xx.y format?

Is it as simple as .2 refers to FH side boosters and .1 corresponds to F9/FH-centers?

"B10xx" refers to a specific booster serial number. The ".y" suffix indicates the flight number: for example, SES-10 flew on booster B1021.2, the 2nd flight of booster number B1021.
B10xx.2 isn't necessarily the "booster number".  It's probably more accurately the number identifying "something done to the booster" that has to be done for every flight.  For instance, "static fire B10xx.2" is the second time B10xx was fired.  IMNSHO -- I don't have any inside knowledge here.
We have it on good authority that B10xx is the booster serial number and .x is the launch count where .1 is implied and only .2 and beyond uses this nomenclature. The .x number does not track firings of the rocket, only launches.

Offline old_sellsword

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 632
  • Liked: 531
  • Likes Given: 463
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #331 on: 04/26/2017 02:34 AM »
Apologies in advance if this has been discussed copiously elsewhere, my search-fu wasn't able to find anything: has anyone documented the change in F9 booster serial number nomenclature from the previous B10xx format to the B10xx.y format?

Is it as simple as .2 refers to FH side boosters and .1 corresponds to F9/FH-centers?

"B10xx" refers to a specific booster serial number. The ".y" suffix indicates the flight number: for example, SES-10 flew on booster B1021.2, the 2nd flight of booster number B1021.
B10xx.2 isn't necessarily the "booster number".  It's probably more accurately the number identifying "something done to the booster" that has to be done for every flight.  For instance, "static fire B10xx.2" is the second time B10xx was fired.  IMNSHO -- I don't have any inside knowledge here.

This quote comes directly from an employee (before dots prevailed over dashes):

Quote from: Spiiice
A stage that's set for its first reflight gets a -2 added to its number. For example, 1021 is the stage that boosted F9-23 (CRS-8). If it is reflown, it will be referred to as 1021-2.

Sounds pretty definitive to me that the actual booster itself should be (formally) referred to with the flight number included.

Offline corrodedNut

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1542
  • Liked: 213
  • Likes Given: 130
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #332 on: 04/26/2017 02:20 PM »
New Google Earth images of Vandenberg from July 2016:

Offline sojourner

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 253
  • Liked: 30
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #333 on: 05/02/2017 10:49 PM »
Quick question:

What's the time frame for the debut of the Falcon 9 block 5? Is it going to be this year or next year?

Online Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4215
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 2872
  • Likes Given: 3721
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #334 on: 05/02/2017 11:09 PM »
Quick question:

What's the time frame for the debut of the Falcon 9 block 5? Is it going to be this year or next year?

I think what we have heard is that Commercial Crew has to use Block 5, and there needs to be some launch history with Block 5 before it can carry crew.

Last I heard the SpaceX Demonstration Mission 1 was scheduled for November of this year, so Block 5 needs to be flying well before that.  Summer?
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4246
  • California
  • Liked: 3666
  • Likes Given: 2260
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #335 on: 05/02/2017 11:23 PM »
New Google Earth images of Vandenberg from July 2016:

That's going to be so awesome, seeing the landing so close to the launch pad. I foresee many interesting long or composite exposures to show the launch and landing in one shot.  8)

Online mme

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1276
  • Santa Barbara, CA, USA, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way Galaxy, Virgo Supercluster
  • Liked: 1606
  • Likes Given: 4278
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #336 on: 05/03/2017 09:01 AM »
Quick question:

What's the time frame for the debut of the Falcon 9 block 5? Is it going to be this year or next year?

I think what we have heard is that Commercial Crew has to use Block 5, and there needs to be some launch history with Block 5 before it can carry crew.

Last I heard the SpaceX Demonstration Mission 1 was scheduled for November of this year, so Block 5 needs to be flying well before that.  Summer?
I think they need 7 flights of block 5 before they fly with crew. I believe the first 2 (uncrewed) demo flights can be one of the first 7 missions.  I would put demo flight 1 as the NLT date for block 5 - though I don't know for certain that block 5 is a requirement for the demo flights.
Space is not Highlander.  There can, and will, be more than one.

Offline guckyfan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6769
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1797
  • Likes Given: 1787
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #337 on: 05/03/2017 02:54 PM »
I can see how NASA demands 7 block 5 flights before crew. But I can not see any reason at all why the unmanned test flight and the pad abort flight would need to be block 5.

They can easily have 7 flights before crew when they start flying block 5 early next year.

Online darkenfast

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 833
  • Liked: 517
  • Likes Given: 1283
Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #338 on: 05/03/2017 08:23 PM »
New Google Earth images of Vandenberg from July 2016:

That's going to be so awesome, seeing the landing so close to the launch pad. I foresee many interesting long or composite exposures to show the launch and landing in one shot.  8)
Think of the view (and sound) Nomadd will have from his yard a mile and a half away from both launch and landing at Boca Chica!

Offline DOCinCT

Re: General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 14)
« Reply #339 on: 05/03/2017 09:41 PM »
I can see how NASA demands 7 block 5 flights before crew. But I can not see any reason at all why the unmanned test flight and the pad abort flight would need to be block 5.
They can easily have 7 flights before crew when they start flying block 5 early next year.
It depends on how quickly NASA wants to start flying crew missions.  If block 5 is available in time for the test flight or abort flight then using it would shorten the time frame.

Tags: