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

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
From Twitter this morning:

Spaceflight Now (@SpaceflightNow)

SpaceX says engineers have resolved a pressurization issue with the payload fairing of a Falcon 9 rocket set to launch from Cape Canaveral in the coming days with the Hispasat 30W-6 communications satellite. A new target launch date has not been confirmed.
 
Hispasat launch is set for "Late Monday night".

12:33 AM Eastern Time Tuesday March 6th (just after midnight).

11:33 PM Central Time Monday March 5th.

2 hour launch window.

Weather is 90% go.

Still supposed to try doing a "Hot landing" of the booster on an ASDS. However, OCISLY needs to be towed out really soon if it's to make it into position in time.
 
Last edited:
From Spaceflight Now (@SpaceflightNow)

SpaceX says it will not attempt to recover the first stage from a Falcon 9 rocket set for launch tonight from Cape Canaveral due to unfavorable weather conditions in the Atlantic Ocean.
 
Yes, launch is still on for tonight, 12:33 AM Eastern Time

But as Peartree posted, weather in the recovery area is really bad, so they will not be attempting an ASDS landing. OCISLY never left port (Actually, turns out they came back early on purpose late last week due to the weather forecast being too bad out there to wait for this launch)

So, the NEW booster will be making only one flight, it has become an expendable launch.

This will be the 50th launch of a Falcon-9

The booster has Titanium Grid Fins on it, which are quite pricey. Unfortunately it seems like they do not have time to roll it back to remove the fins (and legs). Maybe they will at least try a simulated landing on the ocean.

Presskit: https://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/hispasat30w6_presskit.pdf

Webcast:

[video=youtube;Kpfrp-GMKKM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kpfrp-GMKKM[/video]
 
Last edited:
So, the NEW booster will be making only one flight, it has become an expendable launch.

This will be the 50th launch of a Falcon-9

The booster has Titanium Grid Fins on it, which are quite pricey. Unfortunately it seems like they do not have time to roll it back to remove the fins (and legs). Maybe they will at least try a simulated landing on the ocean.

It's amazing how quickly we got from "OMG! They landed a booster!" to "Too bad they're only getting one flight out of the booster and it's a real shame they'll lose those expensive grid fins."
 
It's amazing how quickly we got from "OMG! They landed a booster!" to "Too bad they're only getting one flight out of the booster and it's a real shame they'll lose those expensive grid fins."

Unfortunately, that's the same phenomenon that quickly took people from "OMG, they're going to land on the moon" to "why are we still bothering with that expensive moon business" in just a couple years...
 
SpaceX have been known to be resourceful in the past. It would not surprise me if they managed to swap the fins out, just as it would not surprise me if they said "Oh well, just leave them." and throw them in the drink either. Because they are a bit unconventional SpaceX are hard to guess sometimes.
 
SpaceX have been known to be resourceful in the past. It would not surprise me if they managed to swap the fins out, just as it would not surprise me if they said "Oh well, just leave them." and throw them in the drink either. Because they are a bit unconventional SpaceX are hard to guess sometimes.

If they are worth the rumoured $5 million a set then you’d think someone will want to drag it off the bottom of the ocean.
 
If true, it's all the more impressive knowing that even when launching the "heaviest to date" they still had the headroom to fly grid fins, landing legs, and a splash of landing fuel. Strip those off and they could get a few more pounds up in an expendable launch if needed.
 
Not to mention 4 (F9, plus 1 FH) in a hair over 2 months.

Yes, but then they planned 30 launches for this year. So, that would be 2.5 every month, 5 launches every 2 months.

But those plans never account for the real world. I forget what the plan was for 2017 but it may have been 22 or 24 (with FH being one of those....since....oh, 2013). Realistically, I take whatever they announce as the planned launch total for the year and convert by about 75-80%. So..... 22.5 to 24 launches this year. :) OK, 22 or 24. I'd set 23 as the over/under Vegas Betting line. :)

I think they have a good shot at 24 this year. 30? Fuhgeddabouddit.

Next 10 flights are:
March 29
April 2
April
April 16
Late April
"First Quarter" (theoretically by end of March, but its launch slot has pushed behind the "late April" launch).
May (NET)
June 9th
June
Mid 2018

So, schedule-wise some flurry of activity,and then not much for awhile. Realistically with launch dates shifting for various reasons, BUSY April might not be so busy and the single launch in May might become busy with April overflow. Whatever. Some flights planned towards the end of the year.... will become 2019 flights, just as many if not all flown this year were at one time 2017 flights (or before). One of those pushed to 2019 probably being the 3rd FH flight.

Regardless, the sure thing is no more flights for over 3 weeks, the planned March 29th launch. So that would be a launch cadence of 6 in 3 months, 2 a month, pace of 24 for the year.

FROM: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43418.0


Local LV Core Ret- . . Mass . Mis-
Est. Date, Time/UTC . S/N urn Payload(s) Orb (kg) Site sion
------------------- --- ------ --- ---------------------------- --- ----- ----- ----

2018-03-29 0719/-7 F9 1041.2 X Iridium NEXT (Flight 5) PLR 9600 V-4E 53
2018-04-02 1630/-4 F9 . L CRS SpX-14 LEO ~10k C-40 54
2018-04 F9 1046 S Bangabandhu-1 GTO ~3500 C-39A .
2018-04-16 1832/-4 F9 1045 ? NASA (TESS) HEO 325 C-40 .
2018-04-late F9 N . Iridium NEXT 6/GRACE-FO PLR ~6k V-4E .
2018-Q1 F9 . S SES-12 GTO 5300 C .
2018-05 (NET) F9 . . Telkom 4 GTO >5400 C .
2018-06-09 F9 . L CRS SpX-15 LEO ~10k C .
2018-06 F9 . . Iridium NEXT (Flight 7) PLR 9600 V-4E .
2018-mid F9 . ? Telstar 18 Vantage/Apstar-5C GTO >5400 C .
2018-06 (NET) H . LSL STP-2 (US Air Force) MEO ~8k? C-39A .
2018-H1 F9 . S Es'hail 2 GTO ~3k C .
2018-mid F9 . ? Telstar 19 Vantage GTO >5400 C .
2018-07 F9 . . Iridium NEXT (Flight 8) PLR 9600 V-4E .
2018-07 (NET) F9 . . Spaceflight SSO-A (575km) SSO . V-4E .
2018-08 F9 . ? CCtCap DM1 LEO . C-39A .
2018-08 F9 . ? SAOCOM 1A SSO 2800 V-4E .
2018-09 (NET) F9 . . USAF GPS III-1 MEO 3880 C .
2018-Q3 F9 R . RADARSAT Constellation SSO ~1.5k V-4E .
2018 F9 . . SARah 1 SSO ~2200 V-4E .
2018 H . . Arabsat 6A GTO ~6k C-39A .
2018-11 F9 . L CRS SpX-16 LEO ~10k C .
2018 F9 . . CCiCap In-Flight Abort Test SUB . C N/A
2018-Q4 (NET) F9 . . Spaceflight GTO (200x60k/km) GTO . C (70)
2018-Q4 F9 . ? PSN VI (and co-passenger?) GTO 5000 C .
 
Last edited:
Yes, but then they planned 30 launches for this year. So, that would be 2.5 every month, 5 launches every 2 months.

But those plans never account for the real world. I forget what the plan was for 2017 but it may have been 22 or 24 (with FH being one of those....since....oh, 2013). Realistically, I take whatever they announce as the planned launch total for the year and convert by about 75-80%. So..... 22.5 to 24 launches this year. :) OK, 22 or 24. I'd set 23 as the over/under Vegas Betting line. :)

I think they have a good shot at 24 this year. 30? Fuhgeddabouddit.

...

How much of the schedule is driven by SpaceX's capability and how much is by the satellite market? After all, they won't launch if they don't have something to launch. They've demonstrated that they CAN fly 5 in 2 months if they have the customers. In theory, if SpaceX passes some of the savings from re-using boosters on to their customers, it may increase the number of customers, both from stealing business from other rocket companies and making marginal projects feasible.

Regardless, 22-24 flights/year puts them at 50 flights every 2 years and change. That's a big tempo upswing from 50 flights in 10 years.
 
How much of the schedule is driven by SpaceX's capability and how much is by the satellite market?

Satellite market is prime. They had ~30 launch orders on the manifest in late 2015. With their constant innovation and improvement, I can only see that number growing steadily over the past 2 years.

As the reliability record grows and the cost remains low, more people will want to fly more stuff. Supply appears to be encouraging demand
 
A photo compilation of the first 50 Falcon-9 launches. Created by ethan829 on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/82kxzt/the_first_50_falcon_9_launches/

xyg2g0kkrfk01.jpg
 
NO POLITICS HERE - move on from the above.

Scott Manley posts a lot of videos about space, even including KSP. The beginning of most of his videos has a few musical notes played on a Ukelele. I never knew who played those notes until today and recognized the same style.

Well, he co-wrote a song with his daughter Skye, who performs it in this video.

"You Will Not Go Into Space Today".

That is a phrase for things that can go wrong during a launch (or even before). A few of the examples are SpaceX.

[video=youtube;Ayu0GsrvKQA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ayu0GsrvKQA[/video]
 
Last edited:
Back to Falcon Heavy.

Elon Musk has posted two instagram videos. I so wish he'd post them on Youtube and not instagram, can't scroll them or slow them. And these are short so I suspect Instagram has a duration limit requiring splitting into two (I avoid Instagram as much as possible). I expect someone (not me) will edit them together and post on Youtube by late tonight. [UPDATE NOTE - yep it's on Youtube, but in a surprising way. Scroll down for the complete Youtube video which is in 1080 HD]

Also, Instagram videos won't produce a preview as Youtube videos do for this forum. So you'll have to click on the links.

Falcon Heavy and Starman, Part 1: https://www.instagram.com/p/BgKXHselT7b/

Falcon Heavy and Starman, Part 2: https://www.instagram.com/p/BgKWAegl9wf/


But here's one screenshot from Part 2:

34mWbWa.jpg


I'll note it does not show much for very long, but it's there.

So, during the webcast with the robust screaming crowd of employees, responding so wildly to the dual landing of the side boosters, when they went silent SO FAST ...... they probably saw that view live on "the big screen".

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATE:

Yep, here is it as one video on Youtube. Odd thing though that it’s posted by SpaceX and was posted on March 3rd. But nobody among the SpaceX Fans or media found it, or at least publicized it in any case. Now tonight with Musk posting the inferior (lower quality) split instagram version, the internet is going wild over it - multiple posts on the SpaceX Facebook Group.

[video=youtube;A0FZIwabctw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0FZIwabctw[/video]
 
Last edited:
Yep, here is it as one video on Youtube. Odd thing though that it’s posted by SpaceX and was posted on March 3rd. But nobody among the SpaceX Fans or media found it, or at least publicized it in any case. Now tonight with Musk posting the inferior (lower quality) split instagram version, the internet is going wild over it - multiple posts on the SpaceX Facebook Group.

[video=youtube;A0FZIwabctw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0FZIwabctw[/video]
That's probably going to give me chills every single time for a while.
 
Sometime in April, the first "Block 5" Falcon 9 is expected to launch.

Tim Dodd reviews the various versions of the Falcon-9 and what Block-5 will probably have that is different.

Biggest goal of Black 5 is TEN flights without refurbishment, then an overhaul for the next ten flights, with a goal of 100 flights per booster.

Well, there is also a goal of re-flight within 48 hours, but I'm not so sure how realistic/delusional P.R. that one is. Even if they could re-launch the very first Block 5 booster 12 hours after it landed, from the booster's perspective.... they'd have to make massive changes to their infrastructure and procedures to streamline/speed up everything. And either go back to doing static tests with payloads onboard (AMOS-6 was the last), or do away with static tests entirely (not sounding like a great idea with boosters not being refurbished till after flight #10). I mean, they haven't been able to fly any two rockets less than 10 days apart from the same pad facilities, even with the second one being a brand new F9 "ready to be stacked" as soon as the TLE is rolled back to the HIF.

[video=youtube;X9A1Ny6B310]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9A1Ny6B310[/video]
 
Back
Top