Author Topic: F9 Second Stage Reusability  (Read 193651 times)

Online tyrred

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 146
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 85
  • Likes Given: 357
Re: F9 Second Stage Reusability
« Reply #880 on: 07/16/2018 07:40 AM »
With the absence of information on recent S2 reusability tests, which of the upcoming missions look to be prime candidates for S2 reusability testing? 
Which missions look like S2 reusability testing would be off the table?
Fairing recovery efforts are showing much more visible progress, would it be more prudent to focus on nailing fairing recovery first and then going full steam ahead on S2 recovery techniques?
A highly orchestrated series of events has to happen for a fully recovered Falcon 9 launch to become a reality, I don't envy the people hard at work on this effort (the team in charge of orchestrating live coverage included).  I wish SpaceX the best in this effort, though, as it would be a spectacular event to witness when/if finally achieved.
« Last Edit: 07/16/2018 07:53 AM by tyrred »

Offline speedevil

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2298
  • Fife
  • Liked: 1143
  • Likes Given: 1276
Re: F9 Second Stage Reusability
« Reply #881 on: 07/16/2018 10:56 AM »
With the absence of information on recent S2 reusability tests, which of the upcoming missions look to be prime candidates for S2 reusability testing? 
Which missions look like S2 reusability testing would be off the table?
It is probably strong to say 'none' - which might be the case if they were willing to swap out FH for F9. Especially as not all customers would be willing to do that.

Payload trade is pretty much 1:1 - but it's possible initial testing may be with limited hardware with the stage not intended to survive.
For example, a trailing ballute and inflation system which might weigh 1000kg.

GTO missions are doubly questionable - they are a lot harder, and giving a near max weight satellite 300m/s less may not fly commercially.
A useful metric might be 'any mission that can do RTLS' has comfortable margin.

On the other hand - GTO missions are most missions, so not trying for those leaves a moderate amount on the table, unless it's not unreasonably decided it doesn't matter due to changing orbit mix as Starlink et al come on line.

Propellant transfer in some manner could also make GTO work with no (or negative) penalty at lower total cost to spacex, though raises its own issues.

Tags: