SpaceX Falcon 9

[Apollo13]

George ‏@gdoehne  8h8 hours ago

@elonmusk Next SpaceX flight (Echostar) has v heavy GTO payload (5500kg) Will Falcon fly expendable, or try low-margin droneship landing?

Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk  8h8 hours ago

@gdoehne Expendable. Future flights will go on Falcon Heavy or the upgraded Falcon 9.

George ‏@gdoehne  4h4 hours ago

@elonmusk When you say upgraded Falcon 9 are you referring to the Block 5 you mentioned here? Timing fits.

Elon MuskVerified account‏@elonmusk

@gdoehne @reddit Yes. Block 5 is the final upgrade of the Falcon architecture. Significantly improves performance & ease of reusability. Flies end of year.

[V.B.]

Apollo13 пишет:
Таблица пусков начиная с первой успешной посадки.

Вообще-то 01.09.2016 пуска не было  

А та ступень, которая села 14 января, была с номером 29:

[Apollo13]

Серийный номер ступени B1029, а номер пуска F9-030.

[Salo]

Deflang пишет:
Не понял, на сайте указаны цифры для Блок5 или для текущей версии?

Для Блок5

Deflang пишет:
И второе, можно ли из Маска слов сказать, что после апгрейда флакон9 сможет выводить 5500 на гпо в возвращаемой версии?

Да.

[Apollo13]

Скорее всего для блок 4. Про то что будет блок 5 когда обновлялся сайт могли еще не знать.

[Алексей]

Интересно, что изменится в Блок 5. Мои догадки:
1) Посадочные опоры - снижение веса и возможность работы в качестве воздушного тормоза на спуске для экономии топлива
2) Мощность - еще 5-7% к тяге Мерлинов
3) Многоразовость - замена материалов, технологий, но это все невозможно будет проверить

[Salo]

http://arstechnica.com/science/2017/01/spacex-may-be-about-to-launch-its-final-expendable-rocket/

A fuller thrust Falcon —
SpaceX is about to launch one of its final expendable rockets Company betting on its "Block 5" version of the Falcon 9 for easy reusability.
 Eric Berger - 1/22/2017, 7:38 PM
 
Enlarge / The landed Falcon 9 rocket that launched the Iridium satellites on Jan. 14, 2017.
SpaceX
 
After successfully returning to flight on January 14, SpaceX will make its next launch from Cape Canaveral no earlier than January 30. With this mission from a new pad at Launch Complex 39A, SpaceX will loft the EchoStar 23 communications satellite to geostationary transfer orbit.
This is a heavy satellite, weighing 5.5 metric tons, and getting it out to about 40,000 kilometers from the surface of the Earth will require pretty much all of the lift capacity of SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket. This would leave almost no propellant for the Falcon 9 rocket to fire its engines to slow down, make a controlled descent through the Earth's atmosphere, and attempt a difficult landing on a drone ship.
On Saturday, in response to a question on Twitter, SpaceX founder and chief executive Elon Musk confirmed that the upcoming EchoStar launch will therefore indeed be expendable. "Future flights will go on Falcon Heavy or the upgraded Falcon 9," he added.
In other words, in the future such heavy payloads will either be launched on the more powerful Falcon Heavy (consisting of three Falcon 9 cores, designed for return), or a slightly more powerful variant of the Falcon 9 rocket. Although SpaceX may launch one or two more expendable rockets, Musk is saying the plan here onward is to try and launch everything on reusable boosters.
 Falcon 9, Block 5
A few minutes later, Musk elaborated on the "upgraded Falcon 9" rocket, saying the "Block 5 is the final upgrade of the Falcon architecture. Significantly improves performance & ease of reusability. Flies end of year." Within this comment there are some important tidbits in here about the final version of the company's workhorse Falcon 9 rocket.
In many ways SpaceX has acted more like a startup company than a traditional aerospace company, and as such it has constantly been tinkering with the design of the Falcon 9, seeking to improve its performance. Unofficially, there have been at least four versions of the Falcon 9 booster—the Falcon 9 v1.0, Falcon 9 v1.1, Falcon 9R v1.1, and Falcon 9 Full Thrust. First flown in December, 2015, this last variant included and updated Merlin-1D rocket engine and used chilled, densified propellant. Combined, the rocket and propellant add about 30 percent to the lift performance of the previous Falcon 9.
But now SpaceX appears to be close to maximizing performance of the Falcon 9 rocket. Musk confirmed that SpaceX will make one more major improvement to its Falcon 9 rocket, which he's calling "Block 5." In a Reddit AMA in late 2015, he provided a little bit more information about this Block 5 version, saying it will increase performance (enough, such that a launch like EchoStar 23 could attempt a landing) and be designed for easy reuse.

 Easy reuse?

The latter point is potentially significant, given that in the near term one of SpaceX's primary goals is to simplify the reuse of its rockets. With seven first-stage booster landings at sea and on land, SpaceX has now shown that it can bring rockets home. The big question remains whether it has the capacity to refurbish those rockets on a timely and cost-effective basis before flying them again.
There are ample rumors in the spaceflight community about how SpaceX has struggled to make its existing, returned rockets ready for flight. Indeed, it has now been 13 months since the first landing, and the company is still at least a month away from re-flying a booster, which it plans to do with the SES-10 communications satellite launch.
It now seems likely that SpaceX will fly the landed boosters it currently has, at most, once or twice, before retiring them, instead of multiple times. Although the company hasn't elaborated on the problems with the engines, booster structure or composite materials that has challenged their attempts to re-fly its Falcon 9 first stages, Musk seems confident that changes to the Block 5 version of the rocket will solve the problem. "I think the F9 boosters could be used almost indefinitely, so long as there is scheduled maintenance and careful inspections," he said in his AMA.

Promoted Comments

[/li]
• 
   shelbystripes Ars Scholae Palatinae
   jump to post
   
  BeowulfSchaeffer wrote:
  SpaceX has proven their design can be landed, but it seems that certain assumptions must have been made initially about refurbishing time/costs that they have subsequently realized does not work. Hopefully with "Block 5" those problems can be resolved, but this does seem to put the refurbish portion of Blue Origin's launch and reuse program of their (simpler) rocket at a technological advantage.
  
  While I admire what Blue Origin has been able to do, it's likely that they've been successful with refurbishing because they use a much smaller rocket with a simpler design. The experience will be valuable for New Glenn, but what they've done so far doesn't guarantee New Glenn refurbishing will go smoothly at the start, either.
  
  Remember, SpaceX has built, launched, and relaunched reusable rockets before. They just didn't fly an orbital trajectory (or close to it). These were Grasshopper and F9Dev launches that involved relatively short hops up and down, and less than 9 engines. This is similar to what Blue Origin has done (launches with little to no horizontal delta-V), not to the same altitudes as New Shepard, but we know they're capable of relaunching simpler rocket designs too.
   1286 posts | registered 6/13/2013
  

[Max Andriyahov]

Интересно, что изменится в Блок 5. Мои догадки:

три "ноги" вместо четырех.

[Чебурашка]

Навряд ли.. Даже на лунном модуле было четыре.

Хотя курица даже на двух устойчиво стоит 

[Сергей]

Наконец то Маск дозрел.
http://forums.airbase.ru/2017/01/t35760_53--spacex.4717.html

Пост от 14.01.2017г. 

Исходя из результатов расследования аварии, произошедшей в сентябре прошлого года, предстартовая процедура заполнения баков ракеты Falcon 9 FT топливом изменена на менее «агрессивную», заправка керосином начнётся за 70 минут, а жидким кислородом — за 45 минут до старта (до этого оба компонента начинали заправлять 35 минут до запуска). Был добавлен дополнительный бак для сжатого гелия, что который позволит повысить его температуру, кроме того, гелий будет закачан в баллоны и стабилизирован под давлением до начала заправки топливных баков жидким кислородом. Напомним, причиной аварии стала именно трещина в системе подачи гелия в резервуар с жидким кислородом на второй ступени ракеты. 

В порядке значимости: 
1. Введен предварительный наддув баллонов гелием до заправки ЖК. 
2. Увеличена температура гелия и ,соответственно, добавлен 4 баллон. 
3. Увеличено время с момента начала заправки ЖК до пуска. 

Все таки кто то поправил мозги Маску личным сообщением и не так давно, возможно из тех , кто читает форум НК. 
Теперь Маск может спать спокойно, проблем с гелиевыми баллонами не будет, но интересно узнать величину давления предварительного наддува.

[silentpom]

с первоисточником проблемы

[Сергей]

silentpom пишет:
с первоисточником проблемы

http://forums.airbase.ru/2017/01/t35760_53--spacex.1952.html
Попробуйте, но первоисточники все равно придется узнавать у автора поста.
Проверил, открывается.

[silentpom]

я считаю, что на такие громкие заявы надо давать первоисточник. пробовал гуглить - не нашел

[V.B.]

Вот тут об этом пишут:

SpaceX decided to take a step back and re-fit the Falcon 9 with an older helium pressurization system that has additional tank volume and thus allows helium to be loaded at a higher temperature and earlier in the countdown – ensuring the system fully stabilizes before the supercold LOX is introduced. In the long-term, the company aims to develop COPVs that do not buckle so that Falcon 9 can revert to the newer system that increases the rocket's performance.

[silentpom]

тексты, мягко говоря, не идентичны.  нету пресловутого наддува, а есть изменение процедуры заправки

[Salo]

Peter B. de Selding ‏@pbdes
@Arianespace CEO Israel: SpaceX website prices dont exist. Real prices for export deals are lower, those for US govt higher.#spaceconference

[Vlad_hm]

Salo пишет:
Real prices for export deals are lower, those for US govt higher

А были сомнения, что иначе?

[V.B.]

silentpom пишет:
тексты, мягко говоря, не идентичны. нету пресловутого наддува, а есть изменение процедуры заправки

В данном случае слово "наддув" было использовано в значении "вдув", иными словами заправка (гелием). Человек просто хотел сказать, что сначала заправляют гелий, а уже потом ЖК.

[Зловредный]

V.B. пишет:
В данном случае слово "наддув" было использовано в значении "вдув"

-- Как бы вы решили проблему с заправкой у SpaceX?
-- Я бы вдул.

[LRV_75]

Зловредный пишет:

V.B. пишет:
В данном случае слово "наддув" было использовано в значении "вдув"

-- Как бы вы решили проблему с заправкой у SpaceX?
-- Я бы вдул.

Вот так ракета и взорвалась!

А надо с предварительным вдувом