I find that if I think about this too long, I find it comical. Not SpaceX; the rest of the launch industry and launch entities. SpaceX is launching so many rockets, so fast, they might find their cadence slowed down now, because of 2 rockets lost on recovery attempts a few months earlier. So many things in that last sentence are just 'wrong': SpaceX has this problem. Due to: - A launch cadence that is faster than anyone / everyone - And due to their rocket recovery process (nobody else in danger of joining SpaceX with this capability - SpaceX has repeated so many times that it's a Process) - And due to that rocket recovery process being sufficiently robust and reliable enough, SpaceX can plan for future production of rockets, and scheduling of launches based on that rocket recovery process that nobody else is in danger of doing for the first time. - and OMG - the plan is off now due to losses in the rocket recovery process that happened months ago, such that it might affect #1; launch cadence now. Yeah - we all want that problem
Details on the potential 4 July launches: Wednesday Starlink Launch to Kick Off Record-Setting Month for SpaceX « AmericaSpace Some good details that may benefit the individual launch threads in there. Maybe a .6 (sixth launch) booster! Maybe a record turnaround for a booster (the Crrew Demo-2 one). And for 4 launches to happen in July, an unlikely record turnaround for SLC-40?
SpaceX is preparing for the next Falcon Heavy launch: SpaceX Manifest Takes Shape as Falcon Heavy Hardware Arrives at McGregor - NASASpaceFlight.com
A crazy manifest for the beginning of November 2020. Four launches in a two week period: Nov 5 - GPS III Nov 10 - Sentinel 6 Nov 14 - Crew 1 Nov 18 - NROL-108
As of right now SpaceX has only four "workhorse" F9 boosters available: B1049 B1051 B1058 B1060 A number of boosters are pre-planned and spoken for: B1061 - Crew 2 B1062 - GPS B1063 - NASA Dart mission - just delayed to November 24th today Then there are four FH side boosters and one core being finalized.
Wow, seems kinda light. No wonder they want to make sure that B1049 isn't going to have a problem (it has been delayed quite a bit).
This article is more about launch cadence than the booster: SpaceX says “heat damage” caused landing failure on recent Falcon 9 mission – Spaceflight Now