Its interesting to note that on the very early prototypes which hovered there were no paddles. Maybe this was because they were not needed/would add nothing positive to low altitude hovers and returns. Suddenly the paddles appear.
Somewhere I saw a secondary reference asserting that SpaceX sometime stated that the grid fins reduced attempted landing miss distances from kilometers to meters.
You may recall that they did more than one sea "landing" with no barge present during the early stages. Apparently without the grid fins they could not aim accurately enough at a desired location for the cost of fuel of finishing the aiming job with thrust to be viable.
I have read speculative analyses that suggest that a Heavy which returned all three cores to land would hardly outlift a non-return single core. I don't know how well founded the analyses were. Were it true, it would take a wildly optimistic view of refurbishment costs to think using a Heavy for that mission made sense.
Personally, I think the central core for a Heavy will either recover deep downrange, most likely on a barge, or not at all. But on intermediate lift missions I think returning the side cores to land might make a lot of sense. I just don't know the world of potential manifest entries well enough to guess whether there is a significant population of missions in that category (or maybe they could synthesize them with combinations of lesser payloads).
A little paint and she will look as good as new. The blue hydraulic lift was really buffeted by wind in the 3rd video. Yet another job that I am not cut out for. Liked the musical scrore (the 1812?) in the 1st video. It enhanced the "viewing" pleasure. The restaurant will be packed for the next recovery mission. Everything you could want at a port: SpaceX recovery, cruise ships, and concrete. They used to have nukes (subs) there but I am not sure that is still true. Does it get any better? :>P
I heard Elon say, in some other interview, that the production cost of the first stage was 70 to 80 % of a given rocket ( exclusive of payload of course, which is the client's cost ). Since you don't get the interstage and above back for re-use ( at this point in development ) then by that estimate this launch's return value is over ~ $44M. Minus of course the subsequent turnaround costs gives the nett value per 1st stage at maybe $40M ??? Even if you peg it at $30M nett - I'd be surprised at that low level though - then it will certainly repay at three missions.
But not in this particular case as they are going to give it a good thrashing to see how it holds up. In time I'd guess they will have dedicated dock handling facilities for both coasts.
In general I think a cusp has been passed. There will be other failures but SpaceX as a corporation has done tremendously well to bounce back from last July. Several things I see as a real boon. Mostly their young faces and their intensity. The corporate structure is quite flat so minimises the useless human friction and diffusion of focus from layering that is so evident with deep hierarchies ie. you know who. I'd take a stab and say that any informal structure* functions as a meritocracy.
Cheers, Mike.
* People tend to create this regardless of open declarations, rather like the battle hardened sergeant whose words are preferred over the recent officer academy graduate. I had mild fame for a while as a junior hospital officer when even senior registrars would call me - bloody well wake me up to be exact - to come and do a tricky intravenous access, central lines especially. But quid pro quo, as always, and so this skill became a valuable currency of exchange especially at the height of The Wars Of The Rosters. When it came to the prospect of A Weekend Off we all had dark hearts.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
I heard Elon say, in some other interview, that the production cost of the first stage was 70 to 80 % of a given rocket ( exclusive of payload of course, which is the client's cost ). Since you don't get the interstage and above back for re-use ( at this point in development ) then by that estimate this launch's return value is over ~ $44M. Minus of course the subsequent turnaround costs gives the nett value per 1st stage at maybe $40M ??? Even if you peg it at $30M nett - I'd be surprised at that low level though - then it will certainly repay at three missions.
But not in this particular case as they are going to give it a good thrashing to see how it holds up. In time I'd guess they will have dedicated dock handling facilities for both coasts.
I don't know how much but I would think they would spend some serious money on this one doing some serious testing to ensure their idea of re-usability really is viable. Lots of things can cause problems during a launch and if just one of them goes catastrophically wrong and the thing explodes, or even fails to achieve orbit, it can ruin a whole lot of peoples day. Hopefully they will test it enough to know exactly what needs replacing and what can be reused, iow this one may never actually fly again. I'm also guessing the process will lead to new specs for some of the parts to ensure they can be used more than once. Obviously some parts are use once and replace, and that's a good thing, but you wouldn't want to replace everything as then your costs for recovery and reuse go way up.
For those interested : the detailed flight dynamics of CRS8 launch. Note the hot return terminal profile ie. no loop-back even though they had plenty of fuel for that. Talk about coming down the pipe ! ;-)
For those interested : the detailed flight dynamics of CRS8 launch. Note the hot return terminal profile ie. no loop-back even though they had plenty of fuel for that. Talk about coming down the pipe ! ;-)
Great videos. Especially liked the transport video. Gives you a different perspective of that rocket. The paddles fascinate me. Hard to believe that went up and came back down for a feet wet landing.
A compilation Kinetic -
)
A compilation Kinetic - SpaceX Falcon 9 Development Supercut has some nice footage i hadn't seen.
Its interesting to note that
)
Its interesting to note that on the very early prototypes which hovered there were no paddles. Maybe this was because they were not needed/would add nothing positive to low altitude hovers and returns. Suddenly the paddles appear.
RE: Suddenly the paddles
)
Somewhere I saw a secondary reference asserting that SpaceX sometime stated that the grid fins reduced attempted landing miss distances from kilometers to meters.
You may recall that they did more than one sea "landing" with no barge present during the early stages. Apparently without the grid fins they could not aim accurately enough at a desired location for the cost of fuel of finishing the aiming job with thrust to be viable.
I have read speculative analyses that suggest that a Heavy which returned all three cores to land would hardly outlift a non-return single core. I don't know how well founded the analyses were. Were it true, it would take a wildly optimistic view of refurbishment costs to think using a Heavy for that mission made sense.
Personally, I think the central core for a Heavy will either recover deep downrange, most likely on a barge, or not at all. But on intermediate lift missions I think returning the side cores to land might make a lot of sense. I just don't know the world of potential manifest entries well enough to guess whether there is a significant population of missions in that category (or maybe they could synthesize them with combinations of lesser payloads).
I found some footage of the
)
I found some footage of the 1st stage barrel handling when docked ( or this if you are more patient ) and removing the legs. It shows how serious is the KE ablation aspect of the return profile plus, again, how big it really is.
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
RE: I found some footage of
)
3 great videos.
A little paint and she will look as good as new. The blue hydraulic lift was really buffeted by wind in the 3rd video. Yet another job that I am not cut out for. Liked the musical scrore (the 1812?) in the 1st video. It enhanced the "viewing" pleasure. The restaurant will be packed for the next recovery mission. Everything you could want at a port: SpaceX recovery, cruise ships, and concrete. They used to have nukes (subs) there but I am not sure that is still true. Does it get any better? :>P
I heard Elon say, in some
)
I heard Elon say, in some other interview, that the production cost of the first stage was 70 to 80 % of a given rocket ( exclusive of payload of course, which is the client's cost ). Since you don't get the interstage and above back for re-use ( at this point in development ) then by that estimate this launch's return value is over ~ $44M. Minus of course the subsequent turnaround costs gives the nett value per 1st stage at maybe $40M ??? Even if you peg it at $30M nett - I'd be surprised at that low level though - then it will certainly repay at three missions.
But not in this particular case as they are going to give it a good thrashing to see how it holds up. In time I'd guess they will have dedicated dock handling facilities for both coasts.
In general I think a cusp has been passed. There will be other failures but SpaceX as a corporation has done tremendously well to bounce back from last July. Several things I see as a real boon. Mostly their young faces and their intensity. The corporate structure is quite flat so minimises the useless human friction and diffusion of focus from layering that is so evident with deep hierarchies ie. you know who. I'd take a stab and say that any informal structure* functions as a meritocracy.
Cheers, Mike.
* People tend to create this regardless of open declarations, rather like the battle hardened sergeant whose words are preferred over the recent officer academy graduate. I had mild fame for a while as a junior hospital officer when even senior registrars would call me - bloody well wake me up to be exact - to come and do a tricky intravenous access, central lines especially. But quid pro quo, as always, and so this skill became a valuable currency of exchange especially at the height of The Wars Of The Rosters. When it came to the prospect of A Weekend Off we all had dark hearts.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
RE: I heard Elon say, in
)
I don't know how much but I would think they would spend some serious money on this one doing some serious testing to ensure their idea of re-usability really is viable. Lots of things can cause problems during a launch and if just one of them goes catastrophically wrong and the thing explodes, or even fails to achieve orbit, it can ruin a whole lot of peoples day. Hopefully they will test it enough to know exactly what needs replacing and what can be reused, iow this one may never actually fly again. I'm also guessing the process will lead to new specs for some of the parts to ensure they can be used more than once. Obviously some parts are use once and replace, and that's a good thing, but you wouldn't want to replace everything as then your costs for recovery and reuse go way up.
Next launch scheduled for
)
Next launch scheduled for early May - Falcon 9 Japanese Satellite.
For those interested : the
)
For those interested : the detailed flight dynamics of CRS8 launch. Note the hot return terminal profile ie. no loop-back even though they had plenty of fuel for that. Talk about coming down the pipe ! ;-)
Also : the laydown and road transport of the 1st stage.
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
RE: For those interested :
)
Great videos. Especially liked the transport video. Gives you a different perspective of that rocket. The paddles fascinate me. Hard to believe that went up and came back down for a feet wet landing.