Electroman
Well-Known Member
Thank you. I will.To understand the history and reasons, I suggest reading Liftoff by Eric Berger.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Thank you. I will.To understand the history and reasons, I suggest reading Liftoff by Eric Berger.
Actually I see that for the whole industry and I don't see anybody adopting the kind of frenetic pace I see necessary to stay in the running with SpaceX much less outcompete.
This one traveled across the country on a flat bed. That might be a trigger for a static fire.Interesting, I hadn't realized they were skipping static fires. No info in the article about why they fired this one in particular, just random testing or due to some specific concern or measurement they're looking for? Related to how many times this booster has flown?
I've now changed my opinion slightly; now I PREFER re-used boosters (from the article).It's been a while for this thread but here's an article about the new thoughts on reused boosters:
92 re-flown boosters to date out of 144 launched boosters. Which is 64% of all boosters launched have already been launched before.NASA shifts Earth science mission to previously flown Falcon 9
NASA’s embrace of reused rockets continued with an agreement this month to switch the upcoming launch of an Earth science satellite to a reused Falcon 9.spacenews.com
"Flight proven"!I've now changed my opinion slightly; now I PREFER re-used boosters (from the article).
First time I've seen that idea in print and associated with somebody from NASA. As if that is a slight change in
And with the NROL mission that just launched from Vandenburg this morning, even the super secret military intelligence spooks have now accepted that a flight proven booster is just fine.I've now changed my opinion slightly; now I PREFER re-used boosters (from the article).
First time I've seen that idea in print and associated with somebody from NASA. As if that is a slight change in
I once suggested an edit on Wiki for "flight proven" vs "reused" on SpaceX and was shot down ( yes, pun ) by the community..."Flight proven"!
That's lame of them. Maybe they should read the Falcon 9 Users Guide where that term is officially used...I once suggested an edit on Wiki for "flight proven" vs "reused" on SpaceX and was shot down ( yes, pun ) by the community...
I once suggested an edit on Wiki for "flight proven" vs "reused" on SpaceX and was shot down ( yes, pun ) by the community...
That's lame of them. Maybe they should read the Falcon 9 Users Guide where that term is officially used...
This article was published April 29th and obviously since then there was another F9 mission.SpaceX launched its 101st mission on December 6, 2020, to supply cargo to the International Space Station. It flew its 150th on Wednesday, launching the Crew-4 mission for the US space agency, carrying four astronauts to the International Space Station.
During this period SpaceX has flown the Block 5 version of the Falcon 9 rocket exclusively, launching a booster on average every 10.1 days. Remarkably, of the company's last 50 rocket launches, 47 have used a previously flown first stage booster.
SpaceX has also learned how to rapidly turn around the vehicle. Two days after its 150th launch, the company will make its 151st as early as today, Friday, April 29. This Starlink launch will feature a booster that has flown five previous times, including most recently launching the Axiom-1 mission into orbit. That crew flight took place just 21 days ago, so SpaceX has managed to cut its refurbishment period to just three weeks.
Cool thanks... targeting 15 re-uses with consideration of what it takes to do 20!Lots of info about the latest in their reuse program later on down this article: SpaceX launches Starlink 4-15 mission, expands booster fleet - NASASpaceFlight.com