|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
SpaceX reusable booster experiments
I was wondering, SpaceX is flying NASA cargo to the ISS on their Falcon 9, but are at the same time experimenting with reusable booster stages. Since these experiments add risk to the flight, how does NASA feel about all this? Are they okay with the fact that SpaceX is essentially using modified, experimental versions of their rocket to loft ISS cargo? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
SpaceX reusable booster experiments
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
SpaceX reusable booster experiments
Jeff Findley wrote:
In article .at, says... I was wondering, SpaceX is flying NASA cargo to the ISS on their Falcon 9, but are at the same time experimenting with reusable booster stages. Since these experiments add risk to the flight, how does NASA feel about all this? The reusability test happened after stage separation. So, how does this adds risk to the flight? Premature landing leg deployment prior to stage separation? Regardless, since the flight went the way it did, presumably that is an existence proof of NASA at least being OK/willing to put-up with it. rick jones -- Don't anthropomorphize computers. They hate that. - Anonymous these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
SpaceX reusable booster experiments
reusability will bring lower costs, that will benefit everyone including nasa
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
SpaceX reusable booster experiments
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
... I'm sure NASA reviewed that aspect of the hardware/software and was convinced that early leg deployment wouldn't happen. As you say, the flight has flown, so they must have been o.k. with it. Jeff You know, this got me looking at their launch history and it dawned on me, they're doing decent turnaround. April 18th launch - CCLC40 May 10 (planned) Launch - CCLC40 June Launch (planned) - CCLC40 July Launch (planned) - CCLC40 August 8 (planned) - CCLC40 That's pretty much 5 launches in 5 months (planned, subject of course to change). They're definitely making this an operational system. (I consider the ability to stack and launch in such a short period of time a good sign.) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
SpaceX reusable booster experiments
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
SpaceX reusable booster experiments
"Greg \(Strider\) Moore" wrote:
You know, this got me looking at their launch history and it dawned on me, they're doing decent turnaround. April 18th launch - CCLC40 May 10 (planned) Launch - CCLC40 June Launch (planned) - CCLC40 July Launch (planned) - CCLC40 August 8 (planned) - CCLC40 That's pretty much 5 launches in 5 months (planned, subject of course to change). They're definitely making this an operational system. (I consider the ability to stack and launch in such a short period of time a good sign.) Is it all serial, or is there a degree of pipelining meaning they aren't "really" turning-around in just one month? Certainly they are turning the pad itself around in a month but I'm wondering about the rest of it. rick jones -- firebug n, the idiot who tosses a lit cigarette out his car window these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
SpaceX reusable booster experiments
"Rick Jones" wrote in message ...
"Greg \(Strider\) Moore" wrote: You know, this got me looking at their launch history and it dawned on me, they're doing decent turnaround. April 18th launch - CCLC40 May 10 (planned) Launch - CCLC40 June Launch (planned) - CCLC40 July Launch (planned) - CCLC40 August 8 (planned) - CCLC40 That's pretty much 5 launches in 5 months (planned, subject of course to change). They're definitely making this an operational system. (I consider the ability to stack and launch in such a short period of time a good sign.) Is it all serial, or is there a degree of pipelining meaning they aren't "really" turning-around in just one month? Certainly they are turning the pad itself around in a month but I'm wondering about the rest of it. rick jones Not sure what you mean. To clarify my point, I did mean the pad. This means their stacking operation (I believe they only have the one facility there to stack) is pretty efficient in my mind. They're at a rate where they can build more than 1 per month. They're definitely gearing up to be with the big-boys. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
SpaceX reusable booster experiments
On 05/08/2014 4:23 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article , says... Jeff Findley wrote: In article .at, says... I was wondering, SpaceX is flying NASA cargo to the ISS on their Falcon 9, but are at the same time experimenting with reusable booster stages. Since these experiments add risk to the flight, how does NASA feel about all this? The reusability test happened after stage separation. So, how does this adds risk to the flight? Premature landing leg deployment prior to stage separation? That's the only thing I can think of. As long as everything related to leg deployment is designed to be "fail safe" (e.g. a failure does *not* deploy the legs), then it's all good. There are other possible failure modes. For instance, when performing the fly back, the booster needs to throttle and/or cut off the engine. If the software confuses launch with fly back, it could cut off the engine right after launch. But I think everyone, including NASA, agrees that the likeliness of those failure modes are quite low. But then, what's the likeliness of confusing old fashion measure units with metric units on a spacecraft headed to Mars? Alain Fournier |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
US Air Force cancels Reusable Booster System | [email protected] | Policy | 3 | October 20th 12 04:37 PM |
U.S.A.F Plans Reusable Booster Demonstrators | [email protected] | Policy | 3 | April 15th 10 12:27 AM |
AFRL Seeks Reusable Booster X-Plane Ideas | [email protected] | Policy | 10 | May 28th 09 06:46 PM |
Reusable winged booster X-plane | Pat Flannery | History | 0 | April 4th 09 07:13 PM |
Air Force quick turnaround, reusable booster. | Tom Kent | Policy | 10 | May 7th 05 05:13 PM |