SpaceX Falcon 9 historic landing thread (1st landing attempt & most recent missions)

Thanks Dave where are you finding that information?

Nick@JET said:

Thanks Dave where are you finding that information?

Click to expand...

This is pretty current
https://spaceflightnow.com/2018/05/10/falcon-9-bangabandhu-1-mission-status-center/

Now 5:47pm eastern.

Disclaimer, I did not create that information, I found it online. It was shown on the YouTube video above that George created, as well as the Spaceflightnow web page.

Confirmed in a tweet from SpaceX new T-0 is 5:47

Aborted at T-60 seconds but clock reset, still on hold.

Scrubbed

Scrubbed until tomorrow the 11th, at 4:14 PM EDT.

Scrub was due to some sort of abort criteria violation. On the webcast, it seemed like the count stopped at about the time that the F9 switched from ground to it's own onboard computers.

What a tease.
I was watching from The California Grill at Disney World.
May be able to watch from airport tomorrow..

M

Yup T minus 60 se.... aborted - once in a lifetime opportunity but I got to see a little alligator and experience the Atlantis show again.
Not going to be able to make it tomorrow.

New webcast link. Window opens at 4:14 PM EDT.

[video=youtube;rQEqKZ7CJlk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQEqKZ7CJlk[/video]

OK, a great launch and safe landing of the booster, the 25th successful landing. The booster's camera was shaking a lot, apparently they changed something about the camera system for Block 5 (Mounting, fairing, whatever) that didn't work out so well. Also apparently condensation or other source for water that started to obscure the lens. Though the lens (or rather the "window" it looks thru) did not seem to get obscured from re-entry crud as before. Maybe that's due to the Block 5's new re-entry coating system on the tanks not having nearly as much hot crud being blown back.

Second stage will refire in a few minutes to for the GTO burn.

I take note that AFAIK SpaceX hasn't yet gotten permission to show live video once in orbit, but unlike the last time this occurred for a non-NASA launch (showing Earth in orbit is OK for NASA launches) they have not cut the webcast and blamed NOAA in a snit. They are continuing the webcast, showing computer simulation of the orbital path and playing background music like they usually do (and like they should have done before). The commentary will be back in a few minutes for the 2nd burn.

Well, now a pre-taped video is on the webcast, by Bangladesh about this launch of their first satellite.

And the 2nd stage refired. They showed live video, but since it is now over the night side, no Earth visible. Good final orbit.

Bangabandhu-1 satellite deployed.

A nice launch photo posted by Craig_VG on NSF (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=45522.msg1820717#msg1820717)

I have never noticed the S1 camera shaking like that before when the cold gas thrusters fire. Did they change the camera or the mount. It is almost like they went from a fixed camera to a PTZ. Anyone notice that as well and have an explanation or did I simply miss this on all the previous launches?

Saw this in an article I was reading:

Musk also expects that a major milestone in spaceflight –*something even touted by the Air Force as a significant accomplishment when it happens –*should occur next year when SpaceX launches, lands and re-launches the same booster within 24 hours.

"That will be truly remarkable to launch the same orbital-class rocket twice in one day," he said.

Click to expand...

Not sure how they're going to load a new payload or do flight readiness testing, let alone hot fire testing in that timeframe. Thoughts?

Ravenex said:

Not sure how they're going to load a new payload or do flight readiness testing, let alone hot fire testing in that timeframe. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

I'd be willing to buy the previous flight/landing as a hotfire test, but, then again, I also like to see explosions

Ravenex said:

Not sure how they're going to load a new payload or do flight readiness testing, let alone hot fire testing in that timeframe. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Ain't gonna happen in a year, if ever. They'd need the logistical capability to quickly place a just-landed warm booster horizontally onto the wheeled transporter, take it back to the HIF, "maybe" inspect it be sure it has no problems (Crazy notion, I know), attach 2nd stage, attach payload (already inside of fairing), roll out to pad, get vertical, check-out, stop doing test firings (or do a partially fueled test firing even though the payload is onboard), and launch again.

I put that one somewhere between Falcon Heavy in "6 months" (5 years before it really happened), and "Red Dragon", a Dragon spacecraft announced in 2011 that would soft-land (propulsively) on Mars, but SpaceX cancelled the whole Red Dragon thing in 2017.

So, maybe with a lot of work and a LOT more time than claimed (real-world time, not Musk "6-month time") they can actually do a 24 hour turn-around. Or not. Also, I will assume no "stunt cheating", that if they re-launch one in 24 hours they won't make it a unique launch like not doing some minor tweaks to fix some re-entry coatings, or anything else that would cut corners and sacrifice that booster's capability to land safely and be re-used for the expected number of later flights just the same as any other Block-5 booster.

I believe the 24 hr is the refurbishment / inspection time not all the other logistical items before they get it back and not the second stage / cargo mating test fire etc. If you think about how long it takes just to prepare the rocket, 24hr from landing to relaunch is not going to be possible for quite some time.

https://www.space.com/40582-elon-musk-explains-spacex-falcon-9-block-5.html?utm_source=notification

Great read on block 5, er ver 6

For 24-hour turnaround, I think they’ll need to land it right on the launch pad, load the second stage and payload on it while it’s standing vertically, gas it up, and go! It would take a completely different support infrastructure.

I’m trying to get packed up to go to LDRS, and I feel like it’s going to take me more than 24 hours just to load my car...

they would definitely have to land on the Cape and not on OCISLY. I don't see anyway to get that turn around with OCISLY. I could see it landing on one of the landing pads, back to horizontal into the outfitting building, new payload, vertical erector to the pad, gas and go.

I had thought that the "24 hour turnaround" actually meant that the booster would take a day's worth of refurbishment, once returned to the facility. So, not counting transport times or systems integration time with the new payload, but simply "used booster" being turned into "refurbed booster ready to be mated to payload."

Marc_G said:

I had thought that the "24 hour turnaround" actually meant that the booster would take a day's worth of refurbishment, once returned to the facility. So, not counting transport times or systems integration time with the new payload, but simply "used booster" being turned into "refurbed booster ready to be mated to payload."

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure it means 24 hours or less between touchdown of the first stage and liftoff of the next rocket.

Musk really DOES mean the same rocket (first stage) launched in a 24 hour period. See this article:

https://spacenews.com/spacex-target...-in-2019-full-reusability-still-in-the-works/

Considering that it takes DAYS between a static fire test, rollback "just" to add the payload and roll it back out for launch, there's massive amounts of changes they need to make in the next 1.6 years. And I'm leaving out the other things I already mentioned before about the steps between landing from flight 1 and launch of flight 2.

Also it assumes no cheating such as flight 2 not having a real payload aboard, or as a stunt just flying the booster with no 2nd stage.

Another issue they would normally have to deal with is pad damage. But they can "cheat" that by launching from LC-40 for flight 1, then after taking the landed booster to the HIF at 39A, launch from Pad 39A for flight #2. This means of course both pads would be out of operation for awhile after (and no flights on both pads for maybe 10-14 days prior to allow for repair/refurb time on the pads).

I'd be more impressed to see them launch 4 different rockets at the Cape in 5 days (2 rockets per pad, 4 to 5 days after the first one launched). THAT would mean something they could probably routinely do for launch cadence (inventory permitting), rather than some special case.

Now if Musk wasn't talking about "BFR" to replace Falcon-9 in 5 years (yeah, right), then sure I'd expect after several years SpaceX could add the infrastructure and procedures to routinely launch a rocket twice in 24 hours. However, I expect real-world that Falcon-9 will be launching payloads for the next 10 years, and beyond. And that assumes that BFR really does work, eventually. But that upper stage (BFS) has so many unknowns about it, that it's going to make Falcon-Heavy's long delayed timetable look "fast". Which is why they are going to build and test a prototype of the upper stage FIRST, since the first stage will be relatively simple to do by comparison (I said relatively).

Meanwhile though, Musk is publicly saying that BFR will replace F-9 relatively soon, in which case despite likely reality for BFR probably taking way way longer (Falcon Heavy), I wonder if they'll devote the $$$$$ to upgrade the ground logistics enough to really truly do a fast turnaround launch of Falcon-9 boosters on a regular basis.

Iridium-6 with GRACE-FO launch is planned for tomorrow afternoon (Tuesday).

May 22, 2018 at 12:48 PM Pacific (3:48 PM Eastern) on a reused Falcon 9 (1043.2, previously used on ZUMA mission) from SLC-4E at Vandenberg. The booster will be expended (second flight of a Block-4).

"Mr Steven" has left port, to try to catch a fairing half on a new net.

Article: https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-recovery-boat-mr-steven-new-net-falcon-9-fairings/




Since GRACE-FO is a NASA satellite, the launch will be shown on the NASA Channel.
More info about the satellite:
https://gracefo.jpl.nasa.gov/

GRACE-FO being lowered to be mounted on top of the Iridium dispenser.




Assembled combo, being moved towards the standard Falcon-9 Payload Attachment Fitting (PAF).



Presskit: https://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/iridium6presskit2018521.pdf


Webcast:

[video=youtube;I_0GgKfwCSk]

I was hoping they'd show the fairing catch attempt. Good launch though.

And they just said they got close but didn’t get either fairing half, though both had ‘chutes deploy. Well....I suppose they can try again on the next Iridium launch and/or the other Vandenberg launch that’s listed for July.

The intended fairing came within "tens of meters" of the net. No photos or video.

I was surprised they said both firing halves had chutes, Mr Steven can only catch ONE (once they perfect this, then they'll obtain and equip a second ship). But since they had extra mass to burn, in a sense, then they could afford the mass of outfitting a second fairing and check out the reliability/steering of the second one even if it had no place to land dryly. And even a "ruined" wet fairing can be quite useful to them anyway, even if it never flies again. Drop tests, other analysis, and eventually probably some museums somewhere (Tax write-off). Though if this was Russia, they'd probably turn them into storage buildings or rain shelters (some leftover N-1 rocket parts were used in ways like that).

If SapceX were really on the ball today, they would have had fairing #2 steer for Mr Steven if Fairing #1 had chute/steering problems. This would presume some sort of active communication up to the fairings in order to "tell" fairing #2 to try to land where Mr Steven was (or however they do the landing navigation).

Otherwise SpaceX vehicles like Falcon-9 and the ASDS drone ships are totally autonomous, and all info I've read is there is no ground-to-vehicle communication, it's all one-way downlinked data from vehicle-to-ground (there used to be ground-to-vehicle transmissions for the F9 just for the self-destruct system but they went to a fully automatic system for that over a year ago. The RSO is "Captain Dunsel" once the F9 takes off, as far as self-destruct button pushing goes).

However the "info I've read" in this regard is more of a groupthink conclusion by experts who do NOT work for SpaceX and have no official way to know (some may have insider or off-the-record background info, dunno). SpaceX themselves don't say anything in that regard, IIRC. But just because they have F-9's and the ASDS's totally autonomous, does not mean that the fairing recovery is 100% autonomous, possibly could be 99% with 1% of "status updates" from the ground ("Go to plan B").

I’m beginning to think this method is a bit flawed. Not enough control authority from a chute. Too much interference from wind and also waves. If they could deploy/shot a tow line from the fairing then they could whinch them in. Add a little bit of boat speed so they don’t continue to descend, while they are dealing with one the other would stay aloft.

This launch pic released by VAFB is pretty neat. No info on the camera location, but probably a few miles north of SLC-4, as the Pacific coastline zig-zags (no island nearby).




And an interesting location view from NASA:

Interesting story on a NASA remote camera that got burned in a launch related grass fire: https://www.space.com/40685-spacex-rocket-launch-melts-camera.html

Video by Thrustmaster, who makes the thrusters that keep the ASDS barges OCISLY and JRTI on-station for Falcon-9 landings.

In this video, they show their ship thrusters in use. Which is notable for this thread because of the two almost identical sister ships shown, one is "Mr Steven", which has been modified with the arms and net system to catch Falcon fairings. Some impressive maneuvering shown, but for catching fairings they may be station-keeping (just as the ASDS barges do), rather than actively moving.

If they do perfect the system using Mr Steven, then perhaps the sister ship ("Captain Elliott") will be available to catch the second fairing halves (they'll need a total of 4 ships, 2 for the Cape and 2 for VAFB).

[video=youtube;JMj2WaSFZ2E]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMj2WaSFZ2E[/video]


Next F-9 launch is SES-12 from LC-40 at the Cape, NET May 31st, 12:29am EDT (after midnight Wednesday the 30th). It's a reused Block 4 booster that will be expended (only recovering Block 5's from now on)