Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday March 29 2017, @04:29PM   Printer-friendly
from the here-we-go-again! dept.

http://www.theverge.com/2017/3/28/15071288/spacex-launch-recycled-falcon-9-rocket-landing-schedule

On Thursday, SpaceX is set to launch yet another satellite into orbit from the Florida coast — but this mission will be far from routine for the company. The Falcon 9 rocket that SpaceX is using for the launch has already flown before. Around the same time last year, it sent cargo to the International Space Station for NASA, and then came back to Earth to land upright on a floating drone ship at sea. This is the first time that SpaceX will attempt to reuse one of its rockets.

[...] In truth, only part of the Falcon 9 is being reused on this upcoming mission. After each launch, SpaceX tries to save just the first stage of its vehicles. That's the 14-story-tall main body of the Falcon 9 that contains the primary engines and most of the fuel.

[...] Not only is this Falcon 9 rocket launching for a second time, but it's landing again, too. The first stage will attempt another drone ship landing in the Atlantic Ocean after takeoff, meaning this particular vehicle could see even more flight time in the future. It's still unclear just how many times a single first stage of a Falcon 9 can be used again. In the past, Musk has boasted that parts of the Falcon 9 could be reused up to 100 times, but he expects 10 to 20 reuses out of a single vehicle.

[...] It's not known just how much launching a used rocket saves the company, but SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell estimated that customers could see a price reduction of about 30 percent for launches that use landed rockets. (In October, however, she told Space News that SpaceX is only offering 10 percent discounts for the time being.) That means the Falcon 9, which starts at a little more than $60 million, could eventually go for $40 million if it's a reused vehicle.

[...] SpaceX performed a successful static fire test of the Falcon 9 engines on Monday, and right now, takeoff of SES-10 is scheduled for 6PM ET [2200 UTC] on Thursday from Kennedy Space Center at Cape Canaveral, Florida. There's a two-and-a-half-hour launch window, so the Falcon 9 can conceivably take off anytime until 8:30PM ET [0030 UTC]. So far there's a 70 percent chance that weather conditions will be favorable, according [to] Patrick Air Force Base.

The Verge story says it will be updated 20 minutes before the scheduled launch to provide a live-stream of the launch.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 29 2017, @05:13PM (6 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 29 2017, @05:13PM (#486026)

    This event is huge for SpaceX and for space in general. It's the culmination of what they've been working on for 14 years! It's also exactly what the old dinosaurs of the industry, Boeing and company, were saying was impossible. And then later changed to economically infeasible once SpaceX showed it was very much possible. SpaceX's ultimate goal is Mars. Humans on Mars and ships moving in between regularly. This step, successful reuse, is absolutely critical. For anybody who missed their reveal of the ITS, or Interplanetary Transport System, it's really start to go from rocket to what I think we can finally start calling 'space ships.' The problem is that as the scope and scale of space projects increase exponentially so too does the cost. These things are simply not possible to operate when you're just throwing away the rockets after each launch. And for that matter, it'd be one way trips only which is more of a propelled catapult than a transport ship.

    Anyhow, cutting to the chase. If 747s were thrown away after each flight you'd be paying a million bucks a ticket. Instead you pay $50. If this succeeds can you imagine where we'll be, as far as space technology goes, a decade from today? This is historic. Oh and if it for some reason goes awry everybody will be quick to blame the reuse aspect and it will hamstring the entire vision before it even gets going. Yeah maybe just a little bit of pressure here...

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 29 2017, @07:39PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 29 2017, @07:39PM (#486127)

    Something tells me it'll blow up. And there will be much wringing of hands and "see I told you so"s.

    But I'd like to be cautiously optimistic. Everybody said that landing a rocket was insane. So they tried to land a rocket, and it crashed. So they tried to land another rocket, and it crashed. So they tried to land a 3rd rocket, and it crashed, fell over, and sank into a swamp. Well, ok, just two of those.

    Everybody said that reusing a rocket was insane. So they tried to reuse a rocket, and it blew up....

    But the FOURTH rocket! Aye, lad!

    • (Score: 0, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 30 2017, @08:01AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 30 2017, @08:01AM (#486373)

      Something tells me it'll blow up.

      So what? So did the first several attempts at landing the rocket. Nobody gets *anything* perfect on the first attempt. Learning requires trying, and in rocketry, learning tends to involve things going BOOOOM.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 31 2017, @03:54AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 31 2017, @03:54AM (#486918)

        Looks like I was wrong. :)

  • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Thursday March 30 2017, @03:48PM (2 children)

    by kaszz (4211) on Thursday March 30 2017, @03:48PM (#486532) Journal

    The big question is how Musk will get the next 10x cost reduction?

    10x - already accomplished?
    100x = Mars

    SLS = Senate Lunch System :p

    • (Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday March 30 2017, @05:26PM (1 child)

      by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Thursday March 30 2017, @05:26PM (#486615) Journal

      I think they have done a factor of 3x [npr.org] at best, not 10x, and that they don't need to get to 100x to make Mars attractive. $100/lb would be about a factor of 30x.

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
      • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Thursday March 30 2017, @05:36PM

        by kaszz (4211) on Thursday March 30 2017, @05:36PM (#486625) Journal

        But where will they make the next efficiency leap in cost per weight?