JF Mezei wrote:

On 2017-10-29 02:37, Niklas Holsti wrote:

According to Wikipedia
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_9#Notable_flights, heading
"Relaunch of previously-flown first stages") there have so far been
*three* reflights of Falcon 9 boosters, not one. All successful, and all
relanded the booster, again.

Thank for clarification.

Stll not the 15 or so flight another poster claimed.


Nobody claimed 15 launches with reflown boosters. I know what you're
thinking of and the problem is your deficient language skills. You
gibbered about 'launch rate' (without qualifiers) being
'undemonstrated. Several people pointed out the current Falcon 9
launch rate. To make things clear for you (or as clear as they can be
given the fogged condition of your brain), SpaceX so far this year has
launched 14 Falcon 9 rockets; 3 were high energy GEO launches that
didn't recover the stage by design, 3 were 'used' stages, and 8 were
new stages that were recovered. For the first year of 'production'
use of reflown stages, 21% of launches being on 'used' stages is
pretty damned significant.


They note that the the first reflight resulted in the booster, despite
landing fine, was retired. I would assume SpaceX wants to figure out how
many times boosters can be re-used, and retiring after only 2 launches
isn't that great.


They retired it because it's a museum piece, you moron. It's an
historical artifact; the FIRST reflown booster.


But this is another example of being too early to draw conclusions on
just how reusable they will be.


This is another example of Mayfly seeing how far up his own ass he can
jam his head.


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn