Author Topic: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion  (Read 325322 times)

Offline Craig_VG

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 206
  • Liked: 640
  • Likes Given: 441
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #620 on: 05/04/2018 02:18 pm »
Photos taken by /u/spiel2001

High-res panorama by me

Online abaddon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1790
  • Liked: 1298
  • Likes Given: 1235
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #621 on: 05/04/2018 02:36 pm »
Nope, same diameter. (see image)  Don't be fooled by the racetracks that add apparent (but not real) diameter.

When are people going to stop doing attempted image analysis on tiny JPEGs with terrible compression?

Probably at the same time people stop using similarly terrible images for the counterpoint.  ;D

? You might want to schedule an appointment with an optician.

So you stand by your belief?
I think most people (myself included) tend to agree, it's just a little bit of the pot calling the kettle collect.  None of the images we have so far are all that definitive compared to one another.

It's possible, as an aside, that the Interstage *is* in fact a tiny bit slimmer, because it lacks the cork insulation that is used elsewhere on the stage.  I doubt that would be discernible without a very close inspection though.

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7714
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 1922
  • Likes Given: 437
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #622 on: 05/04/2018 02:47 pm »
I notice two details in the high res image, one is that the GOX vent is now directed sideways as opposed to down (as the RP-1 vent still is) and also several curious dark strips on the aluminum skin around the raceway bulging/protruding sections. Kinda looks like thermal protection for localized shockwave impingement and heating during reentry.

Offline RoboGoofers

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 449
  • NJ
  • Liked: 304
  • Likes Given: 297
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #623 on: 05/04/2018 02:48 pm »
Nope, same diameter. (see image)  Don't be fooled by the racetracks that add apparent (but not real) diameter.

When are people going to stop doing attempted image analysis on tiny JPEGs with terrible compression?

it's not always without merit...
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/06/recovering-falcon-9-ocean-landing-video-done/

Offline Craig_VG

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 206
  • Liked: 640
  • Likes Given: 441
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #624 on: 05/04/2018 03:00 pm »
Core number is under the grid fins now!

Offline GreenShrike

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 185
  • Liked: 193
  • Likes Given: 548
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #625 on: 05/04/2018 03:01 pm »
I wish SpaceX would write the core numbers more prominently and in something other than pale grey. It took a huge panorama for me to finally notice that the core numbers have been moved to the top of the stage, just under the grid fins.

Reused Dragons are now sporting mission marks. I think each core emblazoned with a serial and a neat row of comsat, security sat, science sat, Dragon etc. icons for missions flown would emphasize exactly what SpaceX wants: that these are (or will be) *veteran* cores, with their maiden flights long past, and their list of honours won painted proudly on their skins.

It intrinsically says that, yes, you've seen this exact same core before. And, yes, you'll see it many times again.

TriOptimum Corporation            Science
                                      Military /_\ Consumer

Offline 2008rlctx

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Texas, USA
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #626 on: 05/04/2018 03:54 pm »
I just noticed how very different the legs are.

Look at the high res from Tess, B1045, and high res for B1046.

I thought the legs just changed material and/or coating, and I know they made them retractable at landing.
The upper attach points are drastically different and the 6 4 triangle-shaped objects on either edge are gone as well.

We're looking at a clean slate new design folks. Let's hope all the T's were crossed and I's dotted!
« Last Edit: 05/04/2018 03:55 pm by 2008rlctx »

Offline dglow

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 881
  • Liked: 715
  • Likes Given: 1874
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #627 on: 05/04/2018 04:05 pm »
I find it curious that the raceway down the first stage is black, yet remains white on the second stage.

Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #628 on: 05/04/2018 04:12 pm »
I find it curious that the raceway down the first stage is black, yet remains white on the second stage.

There's a possibility that only the first stage is a Block 5.

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7714
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 1922
  • Likes Given: 437
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #629 on: 05/04/2018 04:15 pm »
The black color comes from thermal protection coatings for reentry. Obviously not needed for 2nd stages.

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4830
  • California
  • Liked: 4609
  • Likes Given: 2768
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #630 on: 05/04/2018 04:17 pm »
I thought the legs just changed material and/or coating, and I know they made them retractable at landing.
The upper attach points are drastically different and the 6 4 triangle-shaped objects on either edge are gone as well.

Those 'triangle' attach points are still there, just hidden by the now wider legs. (See the Block 5 test pictures from McGregor, the core leg attachment points are there, see image) Those attach points may have moved slightly as well.

So it is not completely clean sheet.
« Last Edit: 05/04/2018 04:20 pm by Lars-J »

Offline dglow

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 881
  • Liked: 715
  • Likes Given: 1874
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #631 on: 05/04/2018 04:17 pm »
The black color comes from thermal protection coatings for reentry. Obviously not needed for 2nd stages.

...yet.   ;)

Offline eweilow

Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #632 on: 05/04/2018 05:08 pm »
I thought the legs just changed material and/or coating, and I know they made them retractable at landing.
The upper attach points are drastically different and the 6 4 triangle-shaped objects on either edge are gone as well.

Those 'triangle' attach points are still there, just hidden by the now wider legs. (See the Block 5 test pictures from McGregor, the core leg attachment points are there, see image) Those attach points may have moved slightly as well.

So it is not completely clean sheet.
I'd say that the legs have not been widened significantly, just that the attach points have moved "inside" the legs instead.

Offline Svenry

  • Member
  • Posts: 28
  • Eastern Pennsylvania
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 47
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #633 on: 05/04/2018 05:43 pm »
Looking at the side profiles, the new legs don't seem quite as aerodynamic along their leading edge. I wonder if that could cause a microscopic amount of performance loss (not to imply that the loss wouldn't be made up elsewhere in the over all Block 5 design).

Offline su27k

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1447
  • Liked: 1294
  • Likes Given: 116
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #634 on: 05/04/2018 06:14 pm »
I wish SpaceX would write the core numbers more prominently and in something other than pale grey.

I think they did this for aesthetic reasons, big numbers may look good to enthusiasts, but they look ugly to normal people. Look around you, none of your widgets have its serial number displayed in big visible letters, they're all hidden somewhere in small fonts.

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4830
  • California
  • Liked: 4609
  • Likes Given: 2768
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #635 on: 05/04/2018 06:15 pm »
Looking at the side profiles, the new legs don't seem quite as aerodynamic along their leading edge. I wonder if that could cause a microscopic amount of performance loss (not to imply that the loss wouldn't be made up elsewhere in the over all Block 5 design).

That difference is probably more than made up for by removing the three triangle protrusions on each side of the legs.

Offline TomH

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2268
  • Vancouver, WA
  • Liked: 987
  • Likes Given: 359
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #636 on: 05/04/2018 06:31 pm »
Let's hope all the...I's (were) dotted!

Really?! Look closely at yours!  ;)

It doesn't matter that much in a post, but the irony is that on a rocket, such an error could cost LOV, making your meaning even that more salient!

« Last Edit: 05/04/2018 06:36 pm by TomH »

Online RDMM2081

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 169
  • Liked: 102
  • Likes Given: 259
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #637 on: 05/04/2018 06:39 pm »
It looks to me like they also reduced the size/weight of the "cap housing" - the aerodynamic blocking structure at the the very top (in the stowed/launch position) of the legs from a large-ish triangle (A & B) to a thinner curved strip (C & D).  Seems like flight proven-nes and validation of their CFD models would allow exactly this kind of modification/optimization and its very cool to spot in real life!

I won't speculate as to any material differences, but I suspect they're using something which would cut the weight (probably only a few kg if anything).

Edit:  sorry, my attempt to annotate via mspaint turned a nice image to a potato, I don't think I can do much to fix it, please accept my apologies!
« Last Edit: 05/04/2018 06:41 pm by RDMM2081 »

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4830
  • California
  • Liked: 4609
  • Likes Given: 2768
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #638 on: 05/04/2018 06:41 pm »
The final shape isn't all that different - the leg tips have been extended and rounded like the cap/fairings.

Online RDMM2081

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 169
  • Liked: 102
  • Likes Given: 259
Re: F9 Block 5 Updates and Discussion
« Reply #639 on: 05/04/2018 06:48 pm »
The final shape isn't all that different - the leg tips have been extended and rounded like the cap/fairings.

It looks like a pretty significant shape change to my non-aerospace grade eye.  Old version seems "pointy" and the newer overall shape is much more "rounded".  IMHO.

Tags: