JetBuddy wrote:

No fancy pants landing on this one either?

Are they expending the last of the Block 3 boosters that won't be upgraded? And if so, why are they launching them with landing legs and gridfins (expensive), only to do a simulated re-entry procedure? Why not land them?

In the stream it was said they were experimenting with a new landing procedure. I expect the risk was high enough to make it not worth attempting a recovery of the booster. The booster was also one of the older blocks and I believe the aim right now is to standardise on the Block 5 booster. So any earlier ones will be scrapped after reuse or used for these sorts of experiments.

ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:

JetBuddy wrote:

No fancy pants landing on this one either?

Are they expending the last of the Block 3 boosters that won't be upgraded? And if so, why are they launching them with landing legs and gridfins (expensive), only to do a simulated re-entry procedure? Why not land them?

In the stream it was said they were experimenting with a new landing procedure. I expect the risk was high enough to make it not worth attempting a recovery of the booster. The booster was also one of the older blocks and I believe the aim right now is to standardise on the Block 5 booster. So any earlier ones will be scrapped after reuse or used for these sorts of experiments.

Thanks for the response! I missed out of the stream up until T - 1 minute.

The new 'short,sharp' 3 engine landing manoeuvre is clearly (obviously) a very tricky one with high and late levels of deceleration.The big upside is it uses materially less precious fuel.Thus (once again) improving overall performance of the rocket,particularly in recoverable configuration.This obviously becomes key when (now) using Block5 config that is designed for up to 10 flights.
To test out clearly you need a 'proper' test which means using grid fins and landing legs.
The fact that they have released a photo of the rocket floating gently in the sea (to be towed back if poss) suggests (but not deff') that it worked ok.No point in landing it on the barge as it might destroy it if it had not worked-it was never going to be used again anyrate.
They won't use this technique on a previous bock 5 until they are confident (they may now be having done it twice).

Was also interesting to note that they brought back a second half faring even though they did not land it in 'the net'.(twisted lines).However the landing had to be soft for it to stay in one piece.

In general I find it astounding how they continue to improve the F9 ( both performance and cost) particularly at such a rate.The commercial window for the FH must be narrowing all the time.

The next (and last?) improvement will be the new more powerful second stage motor that is being developed with additional finance from the military.Again the capability of the F9 will simply go up once again.However I don't believe this is scheduled any time soon.

JetBuddy wrote:

No fancy pants landing on this one either?

Are they expending the last of the Block 3 boosters that won't be upgraded? And if so, why are they launching them with landing legs and gridfins (expensive), only to do a simulated re-entry procedure? Why not land them?

As far as I know, there are no more Block 3 boosters remaining (at least none that will be flown on missions); the last B3 flight was with Paz. The booster used on yesterday's launch was actually the very first B4 booster, first used for CRS-12. According to some of the news sites, SpaceX is in the process of clearing out B4 boosters and will be switching entirely to B5 by mid-2018, when their stock of B4 boosters is spent. If that's the case and they won't be getting reused anyway, you might as well use them for testing purposes ahead of the B5 rollout.

Trololzilla wrote:

JetBuddy wrote:

No fancy pants landing on this one either?

Are they expending the last of the Block 3 boosters that won't be upgraded? And if so, why are they launching them with landing legs and gridfins (expensive), only to do a simulated re-entry procedure? Why not land them?

As far as I know, there are no more Block 3 boosters remaining (at least none that will be flown on missions); the last B3 flight was with Paz. The booster used on yesterday's launch was actually the very first B4 booster, first used for CRS-12. According to some of the news sites, SpaceX is in the process of clearing out B4 boosters and will be switching entirely to B5 by mid-2018, when their stock of B4 boosters is spent. If that's the case and they won't be getting reused anyway, you might as well use them for testing purposes ahead of the B5 rollout.

The ArsTechnica article states SpaceX says the Block 3 and 4 boosters would only be safe for one reuse. https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/04 ... -in-a-row/

So yeah, clear out the backlog of recovered boosters taht can only be used another one or two times and use them to gather real world data on the three engine landing burn. While preparing for the full production reuse booster.

Northrop Grumman Blamed for Loss of Mysterious Zuma Spy Satellite

The blame is placed on the payload adapter which was made by Northrop Grumman. They say the release was delayed so the Zuma was dragged back down by the second stage. Of course if it was really the launch of a stealth satellite, they would say this.

https://gizmodo.com/northrop-grumman-bl ... 1825115280

A few new bits and pieces on Teslarti website.The manufacturing equipment for the BFR is now rolling in.They must have ordered it ages ago.My God its big stuff.I appreciate that is obvious but still awesome.The pace this guy moves at is incredible.
Look forward to the Block5 launch soon.Will be key to future plans.

Boeing CEO one again talking big for a space race.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... -Mars.html

He is not a stupid man clearly.Yet again he has stated that the first person on Mars will be on a Boeing rocket and also restates that he expects it to be within 10 years - which is the very ambitious Spacex time line.

I understand that Boeing is the prime contractor on the SLS so Yup he could call that a Boeing rocket.

And yes it's got a mighty throw weight.Far bigger than anything flying.And it will fly soon.
And yes a few of them would have the power to get enough 'stuff' to Mars and back.
But there is nothing.I can't believe he is remotely talking about his little space capsule that is designed to go to the ISS and that's it.
Even the Lockheed deep space capsule can't do that much - at best one small part of a Mars system.

One must come to the conclusion that either he is stupid -or- he knows something we don't.Certainly the US government has only got eyes for the Moon.And the orbiting moon station is in fact entirely unnecessary for a Mars programme.So what is he going on about?Odd.

Elon Musk announced on Twitter that they will be attempting to recover the second stage of the Falcon 9 rocket... and they will be doing so with a giant, inflatable balloon:

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/985655249745592320


Elon Musk
‏Verified account @elonmusk

This is gonna sound crazy, but …
4:01 PM - 15 Apr 2018


Elon Musk
‏Verified account @elonmusk

SpaceX will try to bring rocket upper stage back from orbital velocity using a giant party balloon
4:04 PM - 15 Apr 2018

He notes on Twitter that using a balloon is "great for creating a giant object that retains its shape across all Mach regimes & drops ballistic coefficient by 2 orders of magnitude."

He also says he will try to land the second stage on a giant bouncy castle... not sure if he was joking or was being serious...

ThePointblank wrote:

Elon Musk announced on Twitter that they will be attempting to recover the second stage of the Falcon 9 rocket... and they will be doing so with a giant, inflatable balloon:

Wooo!

And you can always help SpaceX by running some simulations.



David

It has been delayed to Wednesday evening.

David

Surprised no one's posted yet, but today's launch of TESS went off without a hitch. TESS was inserted into the correct orbit, and the B4 booster made a successful landing on OCISLY.

Yup another flawless launch.Waiting to hear if anything else was brought back!

I noticed a lot of grid fin motion as the first stage approached the ASDS. I’m guessing crosswinds - any official explanation?

I noticed a lot of grid fin motion as the first stage approached the ASDS. I’m guessing crosswinds - any official explanation?

The grid fins become less effective as the booster approaches the ground because of the slower speed through the air. Therefore they have more exaggerated motion as they get closer to the ground. I didn’t notice any movement out the ordinary.

The other possible explanation is that this booster had the smaller aluminum grid fins, so more motion is necessary to achieve the same force.

DarkKnight5 wrote:

I noticed a lot of grid fin motion as the first stage approached the ASDS. I’m guessing crosswinds - any official explanation?

The grid fins become less effective as the booster approaches the ground because of the slower speed through the air. Therefore they have more exaggerated motion as they get closer to the ground. I didn’t notice any movement out the ordinary.

The other possible explanation is that this booster had the smaller aluminum grid fins, so more motion is necessary to achieve the same force.

I've read somewhere that the booster makes some serious corrections at the very last part of the flight, so that if something goes wrong prior to that, it won't hit the landing pad / ship. Don't know if that's true?

Trololzilla wrote:

Surprised no one's posted yet, but today's launch of TESS went off without a hitch. TESS was inserted into the correct orbit, and the B4 booster made a successful landing on OCISLY.

Without a hitch ? HA !

I was out there on Monday to watch the launch and just as we were to board the bus they scrubbed the launch. Now if you're a local, no big deal, but when you've travelled from Sydney and you can't exactly change plans at a moments notice, it's a pain in the ass. Still it launched safely at that's the main thing, as we caught a fleeting glimpse on a freeway in Orlando.

Always fun to watch (and rewatch)!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mmyzj-HfPSU

Tugg

Why do they still bother broadcasting the live feed from the barge since the signal ALWAYS drops due to vibrations right when the booster lands?

By the way, does SpaceX publish the barge landings footage anywhere after they recover them? It would be nice to see it for real as opposed to that useless feed that drops off all the time.

At least they seem to have sorted that ridiculous NOAA space footage legal issue...

jupiter2 wrote:

Without a hitch ? HA !

I was out there on Monday to watch the launch and just as we were to board the bus they scrubbed the launch. Now if you're a local, no big deal, but when you've travelled from Sydney and you can't exactly change plans at a moments notice, it's a pain in the ass. Still it launched safely at that's the main thing, as we caught a fleeting glimpse on a freeway in Orlando.

Hence why I specified that it was *Wednesday's* TESS launch attempt that went off without a hitch.

Francoflier wrote:

Why do they still bother broadcasting the live feed from the barge since the signal ALWAYS drops due to vibrations right when the booster lands?

That view has worked in the past. No reason to see why it wouldn't again. At least this time we had more or less continuous footage from the booster.

No word on retrieving the 2 fairings,one assumes they tried.Shame if it didn't work.
I guess they intend to use this block4 booster one more time?

http://youtu.be/rhHP6-GGeuI

Scott Manley explains the very interesting orbit of TESS.

Vehicles used
Type Name Location First stage Falcon 9 v1.2 - Block 4 (Full Thrust) - B1045 CCAFS SLC-40 Second stage Falcon 9 v1.2 (Full Thrust) CCAFS SLC-40 ASDS Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY) Atlantic Ocean Tug boat HAWK Atlantic Ocean Support ship Go Pursuit (fairing recovery) Atlantic Ocean Support ship Go Quest (booster recovery) Atlantic Ocean Support ship Go Searcher (unknown assignment)

These are the beichles used for the last launch.There is clearly a ship put out to recover the fairing and indeed another (mission unknown) which might be for the second stage?
But no news on either unless someone has heard?

Guys, if this is too far off topic I’ll understand but I saw an article today in Aviation Week that asserted that due to Space X the Ariane 6 will be short lived and that EASA will have to start over with a reusable concept.

How important to AB finances is the Ariane program?

Planeflyer wrote:

Guys, if this is too far off topic I’ll understand but I saw an article today in Aviation Week that asserted that due to Space X the Ariane 6 will be short lived and that EASA will have to start over with a reusable concept.

How important to AB finances is the Ariane program?

I'm fairly confident part of the Ariane V program is to provide the EU with the own organic heavy lift capability. So you get into the politics of strategic capability where price becomes more a nice to have.

Now of course I'm sure Arianespace will do their best to keep costs down and find a niche that SpaceX doesn't hit. But if SpaceX get the BFR working as wanted then the commercial aspect of Arianespace could be in trouble.

Re Planeflyer.
Interesting.I can believe it.Particularly because of another article I read recently (sorry can't find link will re look).However what it was was a small announcement with enormous implications.
It was simply the Russians stating that there were getting out of the commercial launch business and concentrating instead on the satellite manufacturing business (which is much larger btw).
It appears they have recognised that they simply cannot compete with Spacex reusable rockets.Its not to say they won't continue to manufacture rockets for defence purposes or human transport,simply the global commercial launch business.
Now if that is true for them then I can Well believe it's true for Ariana.Once again Europe will want to maintain a launch capability for other governmental purposes.But head on commercial may well require a rethink.

....and if it's true for them what about ULA?This too is to be a disposable rocket.It (at present) also is relying on an engine (BE4) being built by Jeff Bezos.But he has his own plans for a reusable rocket.Using the same. Engines.What chance does the ULA have? Once again there is no doubt that the US gov't will want the ULA to have a veichle but unless they can build it Uber cheap what chance has a disposable rocket have?

BRW saw some pictures of the latest Block 4 first stage back in port.Along side it was another boat with the two fairings.Now they can't have been 'caught' as that boat wasn't out there ( sea landed then).We don't know the condition of these parts.But Spacex are clearly getting very close in being able to reuse this expensive part.
I also saw a YouTube vid' where someone was having a stab at what Elon meant by his 'party balloon' and 'bouncy castle' approach to returning the stage 2 booster.
Interestingly he suggests it was exactly what is being used for NASA Mars landings.Thus being very useful to him in the future.
The first part is a large inflated cone shape that scrubs off heat and speed followed by a 'bouncing landing' where the craft is covered by inflated balloons ( the way they landed the first 2 rovers way back).
It was only an educated guess of course.
But if (if) they end up being able to reuse everything then surely it has to be 'game over' for everybody else.

parapente wrote:

Re Planeflyer.
Interesting.I can believe it.Particularly because of another article I read recently (sorry can't find link will re look).However what it was was a small announcement with enormous implications.
It was simply the Russians stating that there were getting out of the commercial launch business and concentrating instead on the satellite manufacturing business (which is much larger btw).
It appears they have recognised that they simply cannot compete with Spacex reusable rockets.Its not to say they won't continue to manufacture rockets for defence purposes or human transport,simply the global commercial launch business.
Now if that is true for them then I can Well believe it's true for Ariana.Once again Europe will want to maintain a launch capability for other governmental purposes.But head on commercial may well require a rethink.

....and if it's true for them what about ULA?This too is to be a disposable rocket.It (at present) also is relying on an engine (BE4) being built by Jeff Bezos.But he has his own plans for a reusable rocket.Using the same. Engines.What chance does the ULA have? Once again there is no doubt that the US gov't will want the ULA to have a veichle but unless they can build it Uber cheap what chance has a disposable rocket have?

BRW saw some pictures of the latest Block 4 first stage back in port.Along side it was another boat with the two fairings.Now they can't have been 'caught' as that boat wasn't out there ( sea landed then).We don't know the condition of these parts.But Spacex are clearly getting very close in being able to reuse this expensive part.
I also saw a YouTube vid' where someone was having a stab at what Elon meant by his 'party balloon' and 'bouncy castle' approach to returning the stage 2 booster.
Interestingly he suggests it was exactly what is being used for NASA Mars landings.Thus being very useful to him in the future.
The first part is a large inflated cone shape that scrubs off heat and speed followed by a 'bouncing landing' where the craft is covered by inflated balloons ( the way they landed the first 2 rovers way back).
It was only an educated guess of course.
But if (if) they end up being able to reuse everything then surely it has to be 'game over' for everybody else.

A major difference between SpaceX and it's competitors in ULA and Ariane is that SpaceX is completely vertically integrated; it makes the engine, fairings, computers, etc.

The vast majority of the components that make it on a SpaceX rocket is built in house, versus ULA and Ariane, who integrate components from outside manufacturers into a final product. This allows SpaceX to manage costs of the various components on their rockets, and keep them to a minimum, once they have designed and started building the components.

Indeed that is very true -vertical manufacture and assembly.It just doesn't come more efficient than that!
It is also the reason for their astounding speed of development.
Next up is the 'final' block 5 booster version that (it is said) will be able to do 10-12 launches each.
They have also been told by NASA to freeze the design so there are 'x' launches with an identical version .This is required for manned flight.
It must be remembered that to date they have never flown a human.
The Military are part funding the development of a smaller Raptor engine for the upper stage (for some heavy lift requirement?).But doubt we will see it for commercial launches.I believe there are also 2 more FH launches scheduled too.Always a sight to behold!
But clearly all the future development is on the BFR going forwards (The FH is a 'nice to have' back up though).

Mind you from a commercial standpoint the thing to watch out for is their Starlink programme.LEO clusters for global internet coverage.Cant see anyone beating them to it and there is mega bucks on offer here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-43907326

Sample return to Mars back on.JV Europe and NASA
Will believe it when I see it.Shame Elon cancelled his version.Would be faster and cheaper to pay him to do it with an FH.
'Spose would be something useful one could do with the SLS perhaps?
As article says we are getting to the limits of what rovers can tell us.2 more going soon-that's enough really imho.

For those interested,Blue Shepherd completed another successful 'space' flight with the final version of the consumer capsule at the weekend.Got to 350,000 feet which is 20k feet above the Karmen space line.Looks like they definitely will be going for a commercial launch by this time next year.
Also 3 weeks ago Virgin Galactic did a rocket powered supersonic,high altitude test of their new veichle.They too are aiming for a similar launch window for consumers.
So it looks like consumer 'fun' launches will be on in 2019.If you have $250k to spare!
I don't know what others think -would be interested.Will this be a successful venture -for both of them?

I note btw that a Saudi investment fund have just bunged a huge wallop of cash into the Virgin project,Obviously Jeff doesn't need any dosh!I also note they said that those booking a ride on new shepherd get 'first dibs' on New Glen for an orbital ride in circa 3 years time.So that project will also have a consumer angle.

Personally I am not so sure loads of people (they will need loads to pay for the vast expenses so far) will want a dangerous 10 minute joy flight -in total note- with what a min or two weightless.Yes I know it's technically 'space' -but really?
I hope it is successful-for both of them but I have my doubts.
Btw -if you had the money which method would you choose?
One gives you a 'real' take off and indeed a classic NASA parachute landing.But it's all Uber quick.
The other is probably more of a total 'different' experience,but perhaps more dangerous.
There may not be enough custom for two operators.

Obviously orbital flights are a different kettle of fish.And must be more expensive.But WOW that really would be something.
I believe (under the NASAa contract) Spacex are taking their fully finished man capable Dragon space craft to the Spacestation towards the end of the year.
The idea (I believe) is that an actual maned flight to the Space station will take place next year.Assuming that is successful........

Elon has stated that 2 billionaires wanted to go round the moon and back.Well even if that's not possible he would certainly be able to take them into orbit and back by mid next year?His capsule can seat 6 people.So what's to stop Elon offering orbital flights to consumers in say 2020?
We know he is always looking for ways to make money to fund his Mars dream,(think Starlink),so why not this?
My bet is he will,why not? He's got the multi use F9 Block 5 (it flies in a few weeks time),assuming it performs well and the dragon man capsule functions as per brochure then it would be silly not to.
Frankly (on a serious note) he needs as much experience as he can get (and quickly) about humans in space if he wants to take people to Mars.This way he gets the experience -and they pay for it! Very Elon!
If he gets his pricing right the other two will be a footnote in history I fear.

parapente wrote:

For those interested,Blue Shepherd completed another successful 'space' flight with the final version of the consumer capsule at the weekend.Got to 350,000 feet which is 20k feet above the Karmen space line.Looks like they definitely will be going for a commercial launch by this time next year.

We are, and thanks for the note. In the interest of not drifting off topic and keeping the related threads alive, It might be worth posting and discussing these developments on the New Origin thread:

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1028003&p=20022355&hilit=new+shepard#p20022355

And on the most recent Virgin Galactic thread:

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1350999&p=20311053&hilit=virgin#p20311053

I Look forward to discussing these there!

Thx Francoflyer.In future I will.My problem was that (imho) we may very well see all three private ventures offering similar consumer oriented products.In the U.K. We say 'you wait for ever for a bus then three come along at the same time'.It feels a bit like that.
The speed of movement from 'big government and space' to an everyday commercial reality is staggering.All this without even mentioning Bigelow and his inflatable space hotels!

In some rather mundane (for SpaceX) news: the Dragon capsule from CRS-14 successfully detached from the ISS and deorbited today, splashing down successfully in the ocean.

https://www.space.com/40503-spacex-drag ... rs-14.html

Trololzilla wrote:

In some rather mundane (for SpaceX) news: the Dragon capsule from CRS-14 successfully detached from the ISS and deorbited today, splashing down successfully in the ocean.

https://www.space.com/40503-spacex-drag ... rs-14.html

Managed to hit the Pacific Ocean eh? Quite a feat hitting the largest target in the world! I kid; I kid.

DarkKnight5 wrote:

Trololzilla wrote:

In some rather mundane (for SpaceX) news: the Dragon capsule from CRS-14 successfully detached from the ISS and deorbited today, splashing down successfully in the ocean.

https://www.space.com/40503-spacex-drag ... rs-14.html

Managed to hit the Pacific Ocean eh? Quite a feat hitting the largest target in the world! I kid; I kid.

Just posted a response, then I saw that you are kidding!
(But doing so made me look up Dragon again, reminding me that being re-useable (mostly), is not only a stepping stone in experience, including successful recovery, for Space X but also allows cargo such as experiments to be returned. At the moment only Dragon and the veteran Soyuz can do this).

GDB wrote:

DarkKnight5 wrote:

Trololzilla wrote:

In some rather mundane (for SpaceX) news: the Dragon capsule from CRS-14 successfully detached from the ISS and deorbited today, splashing down successfully in the ocean.

https://www.space.com/40503-spacex-drag ... rs-14.html

Managed to hit the Pacific Ocean eh? Quite a feat hitting the largest target in the world! I kid; I kid.

Just posted a response, then I saw that you are kidding!
(But doing so made me look up Dragon again, reminding me that being re-useable (mostly), is not only a stepping stone in experience, including successful recovery, for Space X but also allows cargo such as experiments to be returned. At the moment only Dragon and the veteran Soyuz can do this).

Yes the Dragon returns probably do not receive the fanfair they should. Everyone in the US is racing to be the “return to human space flight company” but SpaceX appears to be the leader in that regard. I don’t really put sub-orbital providers in the same category because the velocities and thermal energies are so very different.

In terms of parts returning I noted the website Teslerati had a nice photograph of a fairing under a paraglider with additional information about those fairings so far returned.Also the catchers mitt/boat has been given a new webbing material.Perhaps the first one wasn't strong enough?
Block 5 is any day now.I wonder if it will attempt any stage 2 return with 'party balloon and bouncy castle'?

GDB wrote:

DarkKnight5 wrote:

Trololzilla wrote:

In some rather mundane (for SpaceX) news: the Dragon capsule from CRS-14 successfully detached from the ISS and deorbited today, splashing down successfully in the ocean.

https://www.space.com/40503-spacex-drag ... rs-14.html

Managed to hit the Pacific Ocean eh? Quite a feat hitting the largest target in the world! I kid; I kid.

Just posted a response, then I saw that you are kidding!
(But doing so made me look up Dragon again, reminding me that being re-useable (mostly), is not only a stepping stone in experience, including successful recovery, for Space X but also allows cargo such as experiments to be returned. At the moment only Dragon and the veteran Soyuz can do this).

The big thing is that Dragon allows return of the big racks. They don’t fit through the Soyuz door and before Dragon only the Shuttle could return with them.

ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:

GDB wrote:

DarkKnight5 wrote:

Managed to hit the Pacific Ocean eh? Quite a feat hitting the largest target in the world! I kid; I kid.

Just posted a response, then I saw that you are kidding!
(But doing so made me look up Dragon again, reminding me that being re-useable (mostly), is not only a stepping stone in experience, including successful recovery, for Space X but also allows cargo such as experiments to be returned. At the moment only Dragon and the veteran Soyuz can do this).

The big thing is that Dragon allows return of the big racks. They don’t fit through the Soyuz door and before Dragon only the Shuttle could return with them.

Soyuz is for people, Progress is for cargo, both cannot handle big racks.

Dragon for cargo and Dragon for people will not have the same hatch. Dragon for people will have automated docking and will not dock the the robot arm. I do not think the Dragon for people will have a hatch big enough for the science racks.

Crew vehicles will dock with the Pressurized Mating Adapter (PMA). Cargo vehicles are berthed to the Common Berthing Mechanism (CBM).

Racks won’t fit thru the PMA. They will fit the CBM.

Yesterday's launch of Bangabandhu-1 (and the first flight of a Block 5 booster) was postponed till at least today (Friday, May 11) between 4:14 p.m. ET and 6:21 p.m. ET "due to a standard ground system auto abort at T-1 min".

http://money.cnn.com/2018/05/10/technol ... index.html

Successful Falcon 9 Block 5 launch, and return! The satellite is on its way as well and of course while expect to be successful it won't be confirmed until later.

Congrats (again) to the whole SpaceX team!

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

Successful Falcon 9 Block 5 launch, and return! The satellite is on its way as well and of course while expect to be successful it won't be confirmed until later.

Congrats (again) to the whole SpaceX team!

Tugg

Was noticeable to me how much less scorching damage the bottom of the rocket seemed to take. Before they often looked crispy. Not the new one.

Anyone know where to find video of SpaceX's pre launch Bangabandhu press conference? I understand Musk discussed the block 5 changes.

Congrats SpaceX with another successful mission.

The Block 5 is really distinctive with the black painted landing legs and adapter. According to Elon Musk, SpaceX expects flying around 300 missions with the Block 5 before retiring it.

Musk also mentioned that each booster should be good for about 100 launches, although they aim to build 30-50 Block 5 boosters. So I doubt we'll see any booster fly more than 10 missions.

JetBuddy wrote:

Congrats SpaceX with another successful mission.

The Block 5 is really distinctive with the black painted landing legs and adapter. According to Elon Musk, SpaceX expects flying around 300 missions with the Block 5 before retiring it.

Musk also mentioned that each booster should be good for about 100 launches, although they aim to build 30-50 Block 5 boosters. So I doubt we'll see any booster fly more than 10 missions.

Guys, can someone in the know walk us through the economics of what the Block 5 rocket will mean to SpaceX and the market?

A few specific questions. what will launch costs look like one year and 5 years from now?

How about revenue impact ON SpaceX, ULA, Arianespace?

Interesting, I was watching an NBC hosted Youtube channel with the SpaceX feed for the entire Block 5 launch and late in the video just before the satellite release a bunch of "bits" suddenly appear in the field of view. I am guessing it is the final directional positioning, clearing the frozen bits that accumulate at the the thruster ports:
https://youtu.be/-X3DDJXzcxk?t=2710

Another odd thing is about 20 seconds after the time I link the video there is a bit (ice?) that passes into view then abruptly changes direction and appears to move away. It must be another directional adjustment but it sure looked weird.

Tugg

Couple of points about economics and capability,
The Russian space agency recently stated (
Sat 2 months) that they were extracting the,selves from commercial launchers and concentration on satellite builds instead (more money and profit).Simply as they cannot commercially compete with Musk.Well if the Russians can't with their old (but reliable proton rockets then frankly who can.And it will only get worse with recoverable fairings and perhaps second stages (that's all of it).

In terms of increased capability (thrust) its worth noting that not only was this Sat enormously heavy it was also sent to the hardest place (GEO Stat orbit).Not only could the F9b5 do this it could also carry its legs there and back.With enough left over fuel to land.
There really is nothing commercial this. System can't launch these days.Has Bezos gone too large I wonder?
Of course BFR is for a different purpose. Entirely.
What the F 9 has not done is put humans into space.Thats the next ( last?) key task it has to accomplish.

parapente wrote:

Couple of points about economics and capability,
The Russian space agency recently stated (
Sat 2 months) that they were extracting the,selves from commercial launchers and concentration on satellite builds instead (more money and profit).Simply as they cannot commercially compete with Musk.Well if the Russians can't with their old (but reliable proton rockets then frankly who can.And it will only get worse with recoverable fairings and perhaps second stages (that's all of it).

In terms of increased capability (thrust) its worth noting that not only was this Sat enormously heavy it was also sent to the hardest place (GEO Stat orbit).Not only could the F9b5 do this it could also carry its legs there and back.With enough left over fuel to land.
There really is nothing commercial this. System can't launch these days.Has Bezos gone too large I wonder?
Of course BFR is for a different purpose. Entirely.
What the F 9 has not done is put humans into space.Thats the next ( last?) key task it has to accomplish.

Very helpful, thank you kindly.

itchief wrote:

ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:

GDB wrote:

Just posted a response, then I saw that you are kidding!
(But doing so made me look up Dragon again, reminding me that being re-useable (mostly), is not only a stepping stone in experience, including successful recovery, for Space X but also allows cargo such as experiments to be returned. At the moment only Dragon and the veteran Soyuz can do this).

The big thing is that Dragon allows return of the big racks. They don’t fit through the Soyuz door and before Dragon only the Shuttle could return with them.

Soyuz is for people, Progress is for cargo, both cannot handle big racks.

Dragon for cargo and Dragon for people will not have the same hatch. Dragon for people will have automated docking and will not dock the the robot arm. I do not think the Dragon for people will have a hatch big enough for the science racks.

They will have the same hatch. All cargo deliveries for CRS-2 will use Dragon 2s and all of them will dock, even unmanned. None will have berthing adaptors. Dragons aren't intended to carry racks.