Falcon 9 dimensions: measuring photos

[Jim]

We've never seen a skirt at the top of a first stage tank, only at the bottom. Although I agree with you that putting all those rivets through the bulkhead connection sounds like a bad idea, I'm interested in what the solution is.

Either a little of the tank wall extends past the domes or the domes themselves have a lip.  That is how it is done.

[Lars-J]

Here's an image from Wiki of what are likely v1.1 stages at Hawthorne in 2014, showing the top part of the first stage.  I'm starting to believe that the tank wall is right up near where the interstage begins.

 - Ed Kyle

Good image there, based on the middle core, and the visible "racetrack bump" area (without cover), it looks like the tank extends almost all the way to the interstage. So in your tank top options listed here ( http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41947.msg1647342#msg1647342 ), it looks like MIDDLE option is the accurate tank contour. Note how the red tape on the tank dome is shaded by a small tank wall lip.

[edkyle99]

Here's an image from Wiki of what are likely v1.1 stages at Hawthorne in 2014, showing the top part of the first stage.  I'm starting to believe that the tank wall is right up near where the interstage begins.

 - Ed Kyle

Good image there, based on the middle core, and the visible "racetrack bump" area (without cover), it looks like the tank extends almost all the way to the interstage. So in your tank top options listed here ( http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41947.msg1647342#msg1647342 ), it looks like MIDDLE option is the accurate tank contour. Note how the red tape on the tank dome is shaded by a small tank wall lip.

Thanks.  I've updated my original drawing accordingly, upthread.

 - Ed Kyle

[ashamedpedant]

Is the Falcon Heavy center core, photo linked below, the same length as the F9 cores? I ask because in the Red Dragon render the central core's grid fins were mounted slightly higher up.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=39181.0;attach=1343334;image

[edkyle99]

Is the Falcon Heavy center core, photo linked below, the same length as the F9 cores? I ask because in the Red Dragon render the central core's grid fins were mounted slightly higher up.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=39181.0;attach=1343334;image

For me, this is all very much TBD.  I won't know what to believe until I see good images of the rocket stacked on the pad.  What I can say is that Falcon 9 illustrations on the SpaceX web site vary in appearance from the actual hardware.

This wind tunnel model may serve as a decent predictor of Falcon Heavy appearance.
http://i.imgur.com/ZJfbZzz.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/wzy8ooH.jpg

 - Ed Kyle

[alang]

I'm building scale models of the Falcon 9, for this purpose I'm trying to get reasonably accurate dimensions of the rocket.

This has proven non-straightforward, as SpaceX doesn't publish more than the total length and diameter, so no data for the individual stages.

For what it is worth, I have been looking at this question, measuring multiple photos, looking at illustrations, etc., and have conjured the attached drawing which shows my current estimates for dimensions in inches.  Multiply by exactly 0.0254 to convert to meters.  Very much plus or minus, of course, especially on the lengths.  I've only focused on v1.2/Block 3 so far.

 - Ed Kyle

Is that a typo on the v1.2 upper stage with fairing. On the upper stage upper tank you've got the bottom as 2222 and the top as 2238 - only 16* inches. Presumably the 2222 is meant to be 2022 or something else?*

*Fixed own typos

[edkyle99]

Is that a typo on the v1.2 upper stage with fairing. On the upper stage upper tank you've got the bottom as 2222 and the top as 2238 - only 16* inches. Presumably the 2222 is meant to be 2022 or something else?*

*Fixed own typos

Thanks!  It should have been 2022 and I have updated accordingly.

 - Ed Kyle

[IanThePineapple]

I made a model from AXM paper space models, and I'm trying to add a second stage engine to it. Problem is, I can't find any good pics of the upper part of the engine, only the engine bell.

Does anyone have a good picture of the top portion of the engine?

[old_sellsword]

I made a model from AXM paper space models, and I'm trying to add a second stage engine to it. Problem is, I can't find any good pics of the upper part of the engine, only the engine bell.

Does anyone have a good picture of the top portion of the engine?

Here's the best picture of a recent version.

[IanThePineapple]

I made a model from AXM paper space models, and I'm trying to add a second stage engine to it. Problem is, I can't find any good pics of the upper part of the engine, only the engine bell.

Does anyone have a good picture of the top portion of the engine?

Here's the best picture of a recent version.

Thanks!

[edkyle99]

I made a model from AXM paper space models, and I'm trying to add a second stage engine to it. Problem is, I can't find any good pics of the upper part of the engine, only the engine bell.

Does anyone have a good picture of the top portion of the engine?

Here's the best picture of a recent version.

Thanks!

The attached SpaceX illustration seems generally consistent with the photo.  I've scaled this to 1 pixel = 1 inch, -ish.

 - Ed Kyle

[jgoldader]

Maybe OT, but I'm trying to get the "width" of the new strongback for LC-39A (thinking of building it to go with my 1/144 F9).  Is there an image showing the "back" of the strongback (see attached) while holding a Falcon 9, so I can get the width? I know it's about the diameter of the stage, but a little bigger vs. a little smaller matters.  Thanks!

[ethan829]

Maybe OT, but I'm trying to get the "width" of the new strongback for LC-39A (thinking of building it to go with my 1/144 F9).  Is there an image showing the "back" of the strongback (see attached) while holding a Falcon 9, so I can get the width? I know it's about the diameter of the stage, but a little bigger vs. a little smaller matters.  Thanks!

This is the best one I could find, but it looks like it's still at a slight angle.

[old_sellsword]

Maybe OT, but I'm trying to get the "width" of the new strongback for LC-39A (thinking of building it to go with my 1/144 F9).  Is there an image showing the "back" of the strongback (see attached) while holding a Falcon 9, so I can get the width? I know it's about the diameter of the stage, but a little bigger vs. a little smaller matters.  Thanks!

Here's a new picture from SpaceX, it appears that the rocket is just ever so slightly larger than the (bottom half of) the TE.

[Lars-J]

Maybe OT, but I'm trying to get the "width" of the new strongback for LC-39A (thinking of building it to go with my 1/144 F9).  Is there an image showing the "back" of the strongback (see attached) while holding a Falcon 9, so I can get the width? I know it's about the diameter of the stage, but a little bigger vs. a little smaller matters.  Thanks!

Here's a new picture from SpaceX, it appears that the rocket is just ever so slightly larger than the (bottom half of) the TE.

No, to me it seems like the TE is ~1 pixel wider on each edge. (most noticeable on the lighter/sunny side) So taking the perspective into account, the thin part of the TE is at least 3.75m wide, probably closer to 3.8m.

[OneSpeed]

Adding my estimated dimensions for Block 1.

This is a great resource. For the imperially challenged amongst us, I've taken the liberty of converting the diagram to metric.

[Lars-J]

Adding my estimated dimensions for Block 1.  Plus or minus about 6 inches, if not more.

SpaceX and press at the time gave all kinds of conflicting dimensions.  Height was reported as 154 feet (1,848 inches), 47 meters (1,850.4 inches), 157 feet (1,884 inches), 48.1 meters (1,893.7 inches) and even 180 feet (2,160 inches).  The latter height was obviously for the 17 foot fairing, which never flew atop a Block 1.  The 154 feet height may have been for the first launch only, which carried a straight adapter between the second stage and non-deployed capsule rather than a trunk and adapter.  I'm showing the operational CRS configuration.  I may add the inaugural flight version later.

 - Ed Kyle

That's a great job, a great reference resource! 

But I see a discrepancy... For block II the fairing is 525 inches tall, but for block III the fairing is 517 inches tall. I'm not aware of any fairing size change, how do you explain it?

[edkyle99]

But I see a discrepancy... For block II the fairing is 525 inches tall, but for block III the fairing is 517 inches tall. I'm not aware of any fairing size change, how do you explain it?

These are clearly imperfect estimates.  They're based on analysis of multiple photographs, combined with bits and pieces of published dimensional information, including illustrations.  I agree that the fairings should be the same.  In fact, I expect that they are actually longer than 525 inches (SpaceX drawings circa 2008-9 show them at 546 inches), but these are the numbers I ended up with from photos.  I hope to improve on these as more information becomes available, and I urge others to contribute their own estimates.

 - Ed Kyle

[edkyle99]

Here's an update.  I think I've corrected the fairing dimension issue.  (Updated April 21, 2017)

 - Ed Kyle

[OneSpeed]

And a metric update. One minor note, the block 2 CRS Dragon has 2331" marked as the vertical dimension in two places. Perhaps the upper one should be 2431" ?