Andy Greene
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2013
- Messages
- 1,137
- Reaction score
- 194
Lots of rain here in the Tpa Bay area so far tonight- just rolling in and headed east..........
If SpaceX decides to make another attempt at launching the Falcon 9 rocket Thursday, there is a 90 percent chance of favorable conditions.
Mostly clear skies are predicted Thursday morning, with northerly winds of 15 to 20 mph and a temperature at launch time around 53 degrees Fahrenheit.
Keep in mind that the fees have all been for expendable flights. The successful landings have been a "bonus". And SpaceX builds their rockets so inexpensively (making as much as they can in-house, including the tanks and engines), that their total cost is far below anyone else's rockets for the same performance (payload mass to various orbit categories). The first stage is reportedly about $30 million, that may be 1/2 to 1/3 the cost of other first stage boosters (at least for US-built launch vehicles). So, if the re-use never worked out, they'd still be at a big price advantage over all the other US launch vehicle makers. Though they do need to avoid any more accidents and more big schedule delays.
The current version of F9, 1.2 FT (Block 4?), did at least three GTO flights last year, all risky landings since they did not have enough fuel to do a re-entry burn to help reduce re-entry heating. First try ran out of fuel above the ASDS barge and crashed into it, big hole in deck took 6-8 weeks before it could be used again (fortunately the flight schedule did not need it). Two others worked, but they got scorched. No official word but it seems like those two will never fly again. But they may have learned key things from those on what needed to be improved the most for the next version (block 5) to be able to be reflown more (Touted as a key upgrade of Bock 5). It is sounding like even the ones that had "gentle" re-entries and safe landings may not fly but 2 or 3 times (1 or 2 reflights), Block 5 is supposed to last for several more.
So, as to this booster being expended for a GTO launch, maybe a year ago they would have gone for it. Since the "hot" re-entries seemed to damage the boosters enough not to be practical to re-fly, little point in trying to land it and get it back. As well, they have changed the fuel loading process since then, due to the Atmos-6 Pad explosion, they cannot load it as full of superchilled propellants as before, so the vehicle is not at 100% of the capability it was before the change. Also they would be risking the ASDS barge a lot, with a big backlog of missions.
Oh, that's outrageously silly.
No such thing could ever happen.
Ever.
Well.....
Whoops.....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOAA-19
At least that happened due to a massive procedural mistake, not hardware design.
To be fair, that satellite was repaired and is currently on orbit.
An probably leaning ever so slightly to one side...To be fair, that satellite was repaired and is currently on orbit.
Never travel with Tom Hanks! He goes to the moon --- Houston we have a problem. He flies a jetliner --- ends up in the Hudson River. Passenger on a cargo jet --- ends up a castaway on a remote island talking to a volley ball.
Halle Berry, nice body, not all that cute in the face.
At least for me.
Wow. This dude's got STANDARDS.
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
And a reminder that due to the mass of this satellite, launched to GTO, it's going to need too much fuel to have enough left over for the booster to try an ASDS ocean landing. So, it does not have any of the landing equipment attached (no legs, no grid fins, etc).
The booster will crash into the ocean.
The SpaceX launch conductor is instructing the team to reset this morning's target launch time for 2 a.m. EDT (0600 GMT).
T-minus 70 minutes and counting. The countdown auto sequence has officially started, kicking off the first steps to begin pumping propellants into the 229-foot-tall Falcon 9 at launch pad 39A.
RP-1 kerosene will be pumped into the two-stage Falcon 9 rocket first, followed by liquid oxygen chilled to near minus 340 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 206 degrees Celsius) at T-minus 45 minutes.
Enter your email address to join: