Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

C M Edwards · 2007-03-28 11:10:56

Show me the money.

OK, ftlwright wins.

The fix is relatively simple, and I didn't see anything in that release about how SpaceX intends to call it quits before their next shot. I predict we'll see a successful launch within 14 months.

noosfractal · 2007-03-28 13:17:19

http://spacex.com/updates.php

More from Musk saying pretty much the same thing as the nasaspaceflight article (reduce shutdown transient for 1st stage, add baffles to LOX tanks of 2nd stage). Apparently they recovered telemetry through t+10:00.

...
This confirms the end of the test phase for Falcon 1 and the beginning of the operational phase. The next Falcon 1 flight will carry the TacSat 1 satellite for the US Navy, with a launch window that begins in September, followed by Razaksat for the Malaysian Space Agency in November.
...
I will be posting another DemoFlight 2 post launch update within a week, which will include a list of all subsystems color coded for status: green = good, yellow = cause for concern, red = flight failure if unchanged, black = untested. Of the hundreds of subsystems on the rocket, only the 2nd stage LOX tank slosh baffles are clearly red right now, but that could change with further analysis. As much as is reasonably possible (subject to ITAR and proprietary info), SpaceX will provide full disclosure with respect to the findings of the mission review team.
...

SpaceNut · 2007-03-28 19:44:03

SPACEX'S POSITIVE 'SPIN'

While hitting the height of 180 miles (289 kilometers) is an achievement it does fall short but still Musk has declared the end of the rocket's test phase.

Fixing the issue with the slushing will make use of that unique technical assistance that Nasa and SpaceX have agreed upon.

Some interesting comments follow the article.

John Creighton · 2007-03-28 20:31:48

SPACEX'S POSITIVE 'SPIN'
While hitting the height of 180 miles (289 kilometers) is an achievement it does fall short but still Musk has declared the end of the rocket's test phase.
Fixing the issue with the slushing will make use of that unique technical assistance that Nasa and SpaceX have agreed upon.
Some interesting comments follow the article.

There may be better then a 50% chance of success on the next flight but that is not reliable enough for important expensive payloads. I think it is great to see falcon fly and I look forward to even greater inroads of purely private enterprise into the launch market. Of course the goal of COTS is to service the international space station so we have a bit to go yet.

John Creighton · 2007-03-28 21:00:22

SPACEX'S POSITIVE 'SPIN'
While hitting the height of 180 miles (289 kilometers) is an achievement it does fall short but still Musk has declared the end of the rocket's test phase.
Fixing the issue with the slushing will make use of that unique technical assistance that Nasa and SpaceX have agreed upon.
Some interesting comments follow the article.

The flight may have been a “success” but comparing this level of testing to what is undergone in the automobile industry seems a little off the wall.

C M Edwards · 2007-03-29 06:05:17

...
This confirms the end of the test phase for Falcon 1 and the beginning of the operational phase.

Translation: "We're running out of money and/or time to fulfill our contracts."

It's understandable. They had a critical failure on the pad, too, so this is really their third total loss. There may simply be no more money in their budget for another rocket without a payload. Under the same circumstances, I'd go for the gold, too.

That doesn't make it any less risky. I wish them luck.

cIclops · 2007-03-29 07:21:12

Provided they pass the review milestones, SpaceX should be able to launch at least one Falcon 9 demo flight regardless of what happens to Falcon 1. If it works, then they get paid by NASA and can continue to fly at least one more demo flight.

SpaceX also have contracts to launch two more Falcon 1 flights this year. Despite Musk's damage control hype, those two customers (OSD/NRL & ATSB) may choose to cancel. Would you want to be next to launch a multi million dollar satellite on a Falcon 1?

C M Edwards · 2007-03-29 14:20:47

Would you want to be next to launch a multi million dollar satellite on a Falcon 1?

HELL YEAH!

I mean, er... :oops: Ahem...

I had not meant to imply that they were running out of money and time for launches, only for testing.

Yang Liwei Rocket · 2007-04-13 17:35:24

SpaceX Completes Primary Structure of the Falcon 9 First Stage Tank

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=22384

clark · 2007-04-17 06:02:56

For all the nay-sayers, and doubters, know that the testing of the Falcon-1 series is bought and paid for by DARPA via their FALCON program, which is designed to develop rapid on-demand launch capability in support of the CAV hypersonic program.

The primary objective of the launch portion of the FALCON project:

The primary objective is to develop a capability to place a small satellite weighing approximately 1,000 pounds into a reference orbit defined as circular, 100 nautical mile altitude, due east, and launched from 28.5o north latitude for a total launch cost of less than $5 million (excluding payload and payload integration costs).

Falcon-1 achieved success by demonstrating the capability to launch beyond the proscribed altitude with the required weight. Obviously some addtional work is required to improve control and release, but the timeline for deployment is 2010.

This is all part and parcel of the DOD's effort to develop global strike capability and the ability to re-deploy space based assests after a first strike on space communication sats.

cIclops · 2007-04-17 09:18:34

There are two Falcon projects:

DARPA Falcon

and the Falcon 1 & 9 being built by SpaceX for commercial launch and NASA COTS. Confusing huh.

This topic is about the SpaceX launchers.

(if nobody objects, this topic will soon move to Interplanetary transportation so it's with the other launcher topics)

clark · 2007-04-17 09:58:18

Falcon-1 is a DARPA funded project, Falcon-9 is designed to meet COTS requirements.

The DARPA FALCON project has two parts, the launch portion covered by several companies working to meet the low cost on demand launch of a 1000 lbs, and the second portion is a CAV (Common Aero vehicle) that is designed to fly at hypersonic speed to allow for a standardized platform for orbital ordanance enabiling global strike capability in in a matter of hours. The CAV is specified to weigh 1000 lbs.

Falcon-9 may have future military applications relevant to DOD, but their primary interest is in Falcon-1.

Musk just wants customers so is looking to leverage DARPA funding for his research and development pursuit related to the whole Falcon family of launch vehicles.

Believe me, I understand what this topic is about, and the projects are intertwined.

Some here are only getting part of the picture by only discussing the Falcon-1 launchers without the context of DARPA involvement.

cIclops · 2007-04-17 10:41:32

It is confusing. Yes DARPA funded the first Falcon 1 launch which failed to put the FalconSat-2, a low cost USAF microsat, into orbit. SpaceX is funding Falcon 1 itself as a cheapo $6m a pop commercial light launcher.

clark · 2007-04-18 05:40:48

SpaceX business model is predicated on the Falcon 1. The major customer is the DOD which is looking for an alternative to the Boeing/Lockheed conglomerate.

US military policy requires a secondary launch vehicle in case the alternative launch vehicle is grounded due to technical problems. This was the reason DOD gave massive subsidies to Lockheed and Boeing (per Congressional requirements).

US space policy has changed. To meet the requirements, DARPA is working with several new launch groups to develop alternatives to Boeing/Lockheed.

Musk is using the Falcon-1 as the basis for the SpaceX family of rockets- they all use similar engine types, and they all are based in one degree or another off the Falcon 1. He is using the opportunity of government funding (if you look into the DARPA FALCON project you will note that the second portion of the project covering the CAV is an unlimited time/unlimited purchase contract) for the rocket to build a serious space launch company.

The whole point is that spacex has not failed, and it is highly unlikely that it will fail. The NASA COTS and Bigelow commerical deals are secondary, and are long term projects that really have little to no impact on the companies immediate future.

The market for low cost launch, which SpaceX is hoping to expand is largely unknown. It is unknown if there is enough demand from a supposedly unserved market for what Falcon-1 can do.

What is known is the DARPA/DOD market and requirements, which Falcon-1 is designed specifically to achieve. Musk is smart since he is using it as a spring board.

Again, a better analysis of the situation and the events results from understanding this relationship.

But then I am usually wrong about this stuff anyway.

GCNRevenger · 2007-04-18 07:10:31

Lets not conflate the SpaceX Falcon-# series rockets for orbital launch with the DARPA FALCON (a capitalized acronym, not a name) suborbital missile program.

publiusr · 2007-05-04 16:10:18

Falcon cleared for the Cape.

Yang Liwei Rocket · 2007-05-26 12:53:31

Elon Musk Is Betting His Fortune on a Mission Beyond Earth's Orbit

http://www.wired.com/science/space/maga … space_musk

SpaceNut · 2007-05-28 18:55:22

Just a few notes on the Pentagon's Quick Space Launch Options which includes Falcon I and air launch systems.

cIclops · 2007-05-28 21:55:13

Interesting comment on the SpaceX price increase from $7 million to $8.5 million for a Falcon 1 - it used to be $6.7 million, that's a 26% increase in price.

noosfractal · 2007-05-28 22:10:22

Interesting comment on the SpaceX price increase from $7 million to $8.5 million for a Falcon 1 - it used to be $6.7 million, that's a 26% increase in price.

For a 30% increase in payload ...

Musk said Space Exploration plans to increase the price of Falcon 1 launches in 2009 as part of an effort to increase the rocket’s payload. While the price tag will rise to $8.5 million, the cost increase will be proportionately less than the planned increase in payload mass and volume, he said.
While the final figures for the upgrade have not yet been determined, Musk said that payload mass and volume capacity will likely increase by 30 percent.

Also ...

The Falcon 1 experienced difficulty with its second stage during a March demonstration launch, when it was unable to reach orbit. Musk said the issue was limited to a sloshing of fuel away from the sump, and baffles to address this issue have been designed and are being manufactured.

But if it is so simple, why hasn't there been an update at http://spacex.com/updates.php ?

Fledi · 2007-05-31 10:44:26

Probably because they're too busy preparing for the next launches. That reminds me I should leave here now and continue writing that game.

noosfractal · 2007-06-24 15:40:10

Finally the update ...

(PDF, 67 kB)
http://spacex.com/F1-DemoFlight2-Flight-Review.pdf

...
Stage Separation Re-contact

The nozzle of the Kestrel engine made contact with the interstage section as they separated after Main Engine Cut Off (MECO). The stage separation pyro-bolts and pneumatic pushers functioned correctly and were not a contributing factor.

The re-contact occurred due to higher than anticipated rotation rates, both of the combined vehicle stack prior to separation, and of the 2nd stage after separation. This rotation was caused partly by the Merlin engine pointing slightly off center-of-mass at shutdown. However, analysis now indicates that a majority of the rotation was caused by increased aerodynamic forces acting on the 2nd stage and fairing, due to the vehicle being lower than expected during stage separation and at a high angle of attack.

With corrections to the mixture ratio and helium pressurant margins, as well as improved thrust and Isp from the Merlin 1C engine that will be used in all future flights, the separation altitude will be considerably higher and aerodynamic forces will not be a factor. Merlin shutdown will also be initiated at a lower acceleration.

Marmon Clamp Joint Separation Anomaly at Fairing Jettison

The Marmon band that clamps the bottom of the payload fairing until jettison is retained by two redundant pyro-bolts. Telemetry indicates both bolts fired, but on board video shows that the two halves of this band appear to be joined as it falls away from the vehicle. The other bolt did fire and the fairing separately properly. This anomaly is still under investigation.

Upper Stage Control Anomaly

An oscillation appeared in the upper stage control system approximately 90 seconds into the burn. This instability grew in pitch and yaw axes initially and after about 30 seconds also induced a noticeable roll torque. This roll torque eventually overcame the 2nd stage’s roll control thrusters and centrifuged the propellants, causing flame-out of the Kestrel engine. There is high confidence that LOX slosh was the primary contributor to this instability. This conclusion has been verified by third party industry experts that have reviewed the flight telemetry.

Falcon 1 did not use slosh baffles in the second stage tanks, as simulations done prior to flight indicated the slosh instability was a low risk. Given that in space there are no gust or buffet effects, the simulations did not take into account a perturbation, as occurred due to the hard slew maneuver after stage separation. Extensive 2nd stage slosh baffles will be included in all future flights, as is currently the case with the 1st stage.
...

so, baffle fix it is - congratulations to SpaceX

noosfractal · 2007-08-18 03:10:48

Monster Progress Update (Mostly Falcon 9)
http://spacex.com/updates.php

Too much to quote here.

John Creighton · 2007-08-18 14:57:39

Monster Progress Update (Mostly Falcon 9)
http://spacex.com/updates.php
Too much to quote here.

Is it wise for them to change the engine before they demonstrated a successful flight. It seems they are pretty confident that the falcon 1 is going to work and are now focusing on the falcon 9. I hope they are right.

noosfractal · 2007-08-18 18:06:10

There are another couple of Falcon 1's to go up before the first Falcon 9. It'd be nice to get an unqualified success on the board.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#276 2007-03-28 11:10:56

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#277 2007-03-28 13:17:19

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#278 2007-03-28 19:44:03

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#279 2007-03-28 20:31:48

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#280 2007-03-28 21:00:22

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#281 2007-03-29 06:05:17

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#282 2007-03-29 07:21:12

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#283 2007-03-29 14:20:47

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#284 2007-04-13 17:35:24

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#285 2007-04-17 06:02:56

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#286 2007-04-17 09:18:34

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#287 2007-04-17 09:58:18

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#288 2007-04-17 10:41:32

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#289 2007-04-18 05:40:48

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#290 2007-04-18 07:10:31

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#291 2007-05-04 16:10:18

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#292 2007-05-26 12:53:31

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#293 2007-05-28 18:55:22

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#294 2007-05-28 21:55:13

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#295 2007-05-28 22:10:22

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#296 2007-05-31 10:44:26

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#297 2007-06-24 15:40:10

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#298 2007-08-18 03:10:48

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#299 2007-08-18 14:57:39

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#300 2007-08-18 18:06:10

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

Board footer