Author Topic: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion  (Read 323839 times)

Offline cferreir

Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #440 on: 02/10/2018 02:34 pm »
What is the current speculation/insight into the Block 5 fueling process for Crew Dragon? Has NASA agreed to continued fueling with crew in the capsule or has SpaceX relented to end fueling process of the booster before loading crew?

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4346
  • US
  • Liked: 3873
  • Likes Given: 2211
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #441 on: 02/10/2018 03:01 pm »
What is the current speculation/insight into the Block 5 fueling process for Crew Dragon? Has NASA agreed to continued fueling with crew in the capsule or has SpaceX relented to end fueling process of the booster before loading crew?

It hasn't been announced yet.  It may not have been decided yet.

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6250
  • Liked: 4116
  • Likes Given: 5631
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #442 on: 02/10/2018 04:23 pm »
I want that first reflight, then the 2nd, 3rd, 4th...  and to find out how many boosters they really need.
I wonder if they take the "self-insurance" opportunity with Starlink payloads to just run up gaudy numbers of same-core reuses and turnaround times to get real empircal results on the books to prove what they have.

Would be fun, but unfortunate certainty other customers and FAA would object to flights following the explosion, and not be willing to simply assume it was due to reuse.

What explosion?

I think they could follow this approach to run a booster up to ten launches or so and get it into refurbishment to see what they have built and provide assurance to their customers concerning repeated reuse.  Will probably be tweaks that are fed back to other boosters to improve the reliability of all to reach that first refurb.  Could run the lead booster through another ten or so after refurbishment to repeat the learning process.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Online AC in NC

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 785
  • Raleigh NC
  • Liked: 837
  • Likes Given: 530
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #443 on: 02/10/2018 04:49 pm »
Would be fun, but unfortunate certainty other customers and FAA would object to flights following the explosion, and not be willing to simply assume it was due to reuse.
What explosion?

I think they could follow this approach to run a booster up to ten launches or so and get it into refurbishment to see what they have built and provide assurance to their customers concerning repeated reuse.  Will probably be tweaks that are fed back to other boosters to improve the reliability of all to reach that first refurb.  Could run the lead booster through another ten or so after refurbishment to repeat the learning process.

Thanks for expanding on what I was sort of driving at.

At some point you have to get into rapid turnaround since you went to all that trouble to build it.  I suppose you could just doing it very incrementally all the way up the reuse proving with internal payloads.  And certainly you would take that approach the first few times.  But at some point it seems you want to pick something (eg: like a 10 launch series) and go do it and see what you've got out the back side.  You would be running a risk (of that hypothetical explosion and resultant impact) but it seems like one important to take sometime.  Moreso, if you have a decent instrumentation/inspection regime that gives you good confidence.

Online Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4431
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 3076
  • Likes Given: 4198
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #444 on: 02/10/2018 04:55 pm »
What is the current speculation/insight into the Block 5 fueling process for Crew Dragon? Has NASA agreed to continued fueling with crew in the capsule or has SpaceX relented to end fueling process of the booster before loading crew?

The last NASA ASAP report I saw said that NASA was still reviewing that, so it may be related to how confident they feel in the SpaceX COPV issue - which NASA is participating in with SpaceX
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 joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3082
  • Liked: 843
  • Likes Given: 423
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #445 on: 02/10/2018 05:02 pm »
IIRC the ASAP-NASA-whoever concern with propellant loading after crew ingress preceded the COPV issue.  Even if ASAP-NASA-whoever is comfortable that COPV issue is solved, that still leaves their concern with propellant load after crew ingress.

Online John Alan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 822
  • Central IL - USA - Earth
  • Liked: 525
  • Likes Given: 2036
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #446 on: 02/10/2018 05:09 pm »
I have thought it would be interesting if SpaceX had a spare F9 B5 S1 and a spare Dragon 2 with landing legs.
And some spare pad time and Money to burn thru... and time/money for 10 S2's

Launch the same S1 10 times in a relative hurry and prove out land landing 10 times... over say 18 months...

Does two things...
Proves out they can do for hire, non NASA, land landings and take people to non NASA space stations...
Gives them options to get people on orbit if gaining BFS human rating turn into a bureaucratic fuster cluck...

Just a thought... no more then that...  ;)

Offline speedevil

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3213
  • Fife
  • Liked: 1665
  • Likes Given: 1973
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #447 on: 02/10/2018 06:29 pm »
I want that first reflight, then the 2nd, 3rd, 4th...  and to find out how many boosters they really need.
I wonder if they take the "self-insurance" opportunity with Starlink payloads to just run up gaudy numbers of same-core reuses and turnaround times to get real empircal results on the books to prove what they have.

Would be fun, but unfortunate certainty other customers and FAA would object to flights following the explosion, and not be willing to simply assume it was due to reuse.

What explosion?

I think they could follow this approach to run a booster up to ten launches or so and get it into refurbishment to see what they have built and provide assurance to their customers concerning repeated reuse.

What I meant was that 'self insurance' has to include the costs of a whole-fleet stand-down, reputational damage, delays in approvals, ...,  it's not purely the cost of loss of vehicle and satellites.

If it was purely the latter - which is what it seemed to me the argument being made was, you would be a whole lot less concerned about issues that considered purely on the risk to the satellites and vehicle aren't concerning, as the costs are not $40M, but several hundred million.
« Last Edit: 02/10/2018 06:31 pm by speedevil »

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4346
  • US
  • Liked: 3873
  • Likes Given: 2211
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #448 on: 02/10/2018 08:28 pm »
I think they would definitely use Starlink flights to prove out a higher number of reflights with the full inspection/refurb scheme they would use for anyone's flights.  I don't think they'd just keep throwing Starlink sats on top of a booster and flying it until it blows up.
« Last Edit: 02/10/2018 10:07 pm by gongora »

Offline speedevil

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3213
  • Fife
  • Liked: 1665
  • Likes Given: 1973
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #449 on: 02/10/2018 09:32 pm »
I think they would definitely use Starlink flights to prove out a higher number of reflights will the full inspection/refurb scheme they would use for anyone's flights.  I don't think they'd just keep throwing Starlink sats on top of a booster and flying it until it blows up.

I am unsure of this - though from the other direction.
I wonder if customers will accept multiple reflights startlingly quicker than industry observers suspect.

Offline mme

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1361
  • Santa Barbara, CA, USA, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way Galaxy, Virgo Supercluster
  • Liked: 1776
  • Likes Given: 4560
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #450 on: 02/10/2018 11:50 pm »
I think they would definitely use Starlink flights to prove out a higher number of reflights will the full inspection/refurb scheme they would use for anyone's flights.  I don't think they'd just keep throwing Starlink sats on top of a booster and flying it until it blows up.

I am unsure of this - though from the other direction.
I wonder if customers will accept multiple reflights startlingly quicker than industry observers suspect.
I'm convinced that will be the case. Just like flying on a reused booster is already largely accepted by many SX customers.
Space is not Highlander.  There can, and will, be more than one.

Offline OnWithTheShow

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
  • Philadelphia, PA
  • Liked: 133
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #451 on: 02/11/2018 12:29 pm »
I have thought it would be interesting if SpaceX had a spare F9 B5 S1 and a spare Dragon 2 with landing legs.
And some spare pad time and Money to burn thru... and time/money for 10 S2's

Launch the same S1 10 times in a relative hurry and prove out land landing 10 times... over say 18 months...

Wouldnt even need a stage 2 just do suborbital flights.

What is the current speculation/insight into the Block 5 fueling process for Crew Dragon? Has NASA agreed to continued fueling with crew in the capsule or has SpaceX relented to end fueling process of the booster before loading crew?

Im still not sure I buy that sitting in a capsule with a LES while the rocket is being fueled is more dangerous than walking out unprotected and boarding said rocket while it is fully fueled.

Offline TripD

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 665
  • Waiting for longer boats
  • Liked: 551
  • Likes Given: 408
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #452 on: 02/12/2018 06:19 am »
Quote
Im still not sure I buy that sitting in a capsule with a LES while the rocket is being fueled is more dangerous than walking out unprotected and boarding said rocket while it is fully fueled.

If we assume that walking out after fueling is the safer way to go,  how quickly could the crew enter and prepare for the flight?  How much boil off would take place?

Offline Klebiano

  • Member
  • Posts: 17
  • Brazil
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 41
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #453 on: 02/12/2018 01:10 pm »
What are the improvements of the block V? They're changing components for better reusability or increase the payload capacity?

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11379
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 8430
  • Likes Given: 6777
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #454 on: 02/12/2018 01:24 pm »
What are the improvements of the block V? They're changing components for better reusability or increase the payload capacity?

Some of each, is the consensus. There is not a public list of improvements, AFAIK, as it probably is propietary. But reading this thread will give you lots of informed speculation to mull over.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3126
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 772
  • Likes Given: 1246
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #455 on: 02/12/2018 01:29 pm »
I'm trying to figure out which vehicle will be the first Block 5 launch.

Closest I could figure is Iridium 6/ Grace FO.

Anyone else have a guess on this?
Needing a copy of 'Tales of Suspense #39'

Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #456 on: 02/12/2018 02:00 pm »
What are the improvements of the block V? They're changing components for better reusability or increase the payload capacity?

There's hundreds of them and some of these include increasing the thrust of Merlin (yet again), landing legs which are retractable, as well as an external heat shield at the base that is based on Inconel. All in all, the aims are to improve performance, decrease manufacturing costs, streamline the refurbishment process and to have it ready for certification for crew flights in the near future.   

Sources:
Heat shield - https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/7p6763/block_5_booster_made_an_appearance_in_the_zuma/dsfbgvy/

Legs and reusability - https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/6b043z/tom_mueller_interview_speech_skype_call_02_may/dhiygzm/

http://spacenews.com/spacex-aims-to-follow-a-banner-year-with-an-even-faster-2018-launch-cadence/

Quote
The Block 5 Falcon rocket that we’re rolling out later this year is going to have a reusable thermal protection on it; so we don’t burn up the heat shielding on it. And it’s going to have a much better landing legs that just fold up and; just drop the rocket, fold the legs, ship it, fold the legs out when it lands.

Quote
Elon asked us to do a twelve-hour turn. And we came back and said without some major redesigns to the rocket, with just the Block 5, we can get to a 24-hour turn, and he accepted that. A 24-hour turn time. And that doesn’t mean we want to fly the rocket, you know, once a day; although we could, if we really pushed it. What it does is, limits how much labor, how much <touch?> labor we can put into it. If we can turn a rocket in 24 hours with just a few people, you’re nuts. <inaudible> low cost, low opportunity cost in getting the rocket to fly again

Quote
The Block 5 iteration has four goals, Shotwell said — meeting civil and defense requirements, increasing lift capability, simplifying manufacturability, and rapid reusability.

Link to picture: https://twitter.com/oli_braun/status/958276326372397056

Hope this helps!


Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4737
  • California
  • Liked: 4453
  • Likes Given: 2696
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #457 on: 02/13/2018 07:24 am »
Will “fairing 2.0” be a part of the block 5, or phased in separately?

Offline Eagandale4114

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 194
  • Liked: 231
  • Likes Given: 347
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #458 on: 02/17/2018 07:43 pm »
Will “fairing 2.0” be a part of the block 5, or phased in separately?

It looks like PAZ will be the first fairing 2.0 flight.

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/964937069901447168/

Quote
Team at Vandenberg is taking additional time to perform final checkouts of upgraded fairing. Payload and vehicle remain healthy. Due to mission requirements, now targeting February 21 launch of PAZ.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4737
  • California
  • Liked: 4453
  • Likes Given: 2696
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #459 on: 02/17/2018 08:46 pm »
Will “fairing 2.0” be a part of the block 5, or phased in separately?

It looks like PAZ will be the first fairing 2.0 flight.

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/964937069901447168/

Quote
Team at Vandenberg is taking additional time to perform final checkouts of upgraded fairing. Payload and vehicle remain healthy. Due to mission requirements, now targeting February 21 launch of PAZ.

It could mean that yes, or simply recovery upgrades to the existing fairing. We don't know yet.

Tags: