Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

cIclops · 2008-01-28 14:33:07

McGregor TX – January 18, 2008 – Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) conducted the first multi-engine firing of its Falcon 9 medium to heavy lift rocket at its Texas Test Facility outside McGregor. The engines operated at full power, generating over 180,000 pounds of force of thrust, equivalent to a Boeing 777 at full power, and consuming 700 lbs per second of fuel and liquid oxygen during the run.
“This is a major hardware milestone for our company," said Elon Musk, CEO and CTO of SpaceX. "It marks the first time that we have simultaneously fired two engines on the same stage. No significant problems were encountered transitioning from single engine testing in November, which suggests that we will be able to ramp up rapidly to a full complement of nine Merlin engines. Our propulsion and test team has done a remarkable job.”
This two engine test was the largest to date on the BFTS (Big Falcon Test Stand). The next run, scheduled for February, will use three engines operating for a full first stage mission duty cycle of three minutes. When operating in flight, the first stage will accelerate the 180 ft long Falcon 9 vehicle to more than ten times the speed of sound in that short period of time. Following stage separation, the Falcon 9 second stage continues accelerating the payload to a final change in velocity that may be in excess of Mach 30 for missions beyond low Earth orbit.
The test series will continue with five, seven and finally the full compliment of nine engines. With all engines firing, the Falcon 9 can generate over one million pounds of thrust in vacuum or four times the maximum thrust of a 747 aircraft. SpaceX has designed its Merlin engine for rapid mounting and change-out. A new engine can be installed in a period of hours, a feature that will provide significant operational efficiency and responsiveness on the launch pad.
The Merlin 1C next generation liquid fueled rocket booster engine is among the highest performing gas generator cycle kerosene engines ever built, exceeding the Boeing Delta II main engine, the Lockheed Atlas II main engine, and on par with the Saturn V F-1 engine. It is the first new American booster engine in a decade and only the second American booster engine since the Space Shuttle Main Engine was developed thirty years ago.
Merlin 1C will power SpaceX’s next Falcon 1 mission , scheduled to lift off in Spring 2008 from the Central Pacific. The first Falcon 9 is scheduled for delivery to the SpaceX launch site at Cape Canaveral (Complex 40) by the end of 2008.

cIclops · 2008-02-28 06:43:52

Final Production Design Cleared for Next Falcon 1 Flight in Spring 2008

Hawthorne CA – February 25, 2008 – Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) announced today that it has completed the qualification testing program of its Merlin 1C next generation liquid fueled rocket booster engine for use in the Falcon 1 rocket.
Tests were conducted at the SpaceX Texas Test Facility near Waco, TX, on a Merlin 1C configured for powering the first stage of a Falcon 1 rocket. After completing development testing in November of 2007, the qualification program began to verify the final design features on an actual production engine, clearing the way for full-scale manufacturing.
“Our propulsion and test teams finished the qualification program with a record-breaking day that included four full mission duration firings on the engine,” said Tom Mueller, Vice President of Propulsion for SpaceX. “This marathon run brought the total operating time on a single engine to over 27 minutes, which is more than ten complete flights. The engine meets or exceeds all requirements for thrust, performance and durability.”
“This was the final development milestone required for the next Falcon 1 flight,” said Elon Musk, CEO and CTO of SpaceX. “In the coming weeks we’ll begin qualifying Merlin for the higher thrust and performance levels required by our Falcon 9 rocket, keeping us on track for delivering the first Falcon 9 vehicle to Cape Canaveral by year end.”
The single Merlin 1C will power SpaceX’s next Falcon 1 mission, scheduled to lift off in Spring of 2008 from the SpaceX launch complex in the Central Pacific atoll of Kwajalein. The far larger Falcon 9 uses nine Merlins on the first stage, and a single Merlin in vacuum configuration powers the Falcon 9 second stage.

louis · 2008-03-26 21:13:30

They seem a very efficient outfit - I'm their biggest fan!

Take a look at the on board video of their rocket launch on their site - fantastic! It was ultimately unsuccessful but all the space agencies have had their failures along the way. I think they are doing good.

louis · 2008-03-29 06:17:54

LATEST FROM SPACE X

"McGregor TX – Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) conducted the first three-engine firing of its Falcon 9 medium to heavy lift rocket at its Texas Test Facility outside McGregor, on March 8, 2008. At full power the engines generated over 270,000 pounds of force, and consumed 1,050 lbs of fuel and liquid oxygen per second. This three-engine test again sets the record as the most powerful test yet on the towering 235-foot tall test stand. A total of nine Merlin 1C engines will power the Falcon 9 rocket.

The test series continues with the addition of two engines for a total of five, then finally the full complement of nine engines. With all engines firing, the Falcon 9 can generate over one million pounds of thrust in vacuum - four times the maximum thrust of a 747 aircraft.

“The incremental approach to testing allows us to closely observe how each additional engine influences the entire system,” said Tom Mueller, Vice President of Propulsion for SpaceX. “This ensures that we obtain as much data, knowledge and experience as possible as we approach the full nine engine configuration. To date we have not encountered any unexpected interactions between the engines.”

The Merlin 1C next generation liquid fueled rocket booster engine is among the highest performing gas generator cycle kerosene engines ever built, exceeding the Boeing Delta II main engine, the Lockheed Atlas II main engine, and on par with the Saturn V F-1 engine. It is the first new American booster engine in a decade and only the second American booster engine since the development of the Space Shuttle Main Engine thirty years ago.

The first Falcon 9 remains on-schedule for delivery to the SpaceX launch site at Space Launch Complex 40, Cape Canaveral, Florida, by the end of 2008.

About SpaceX

SpaceX is developing a family of launch vehicles intended to increase the reliability and reduce the cost of both manned and unmanned space transportation, ultimately by a factor of ten. With its Falcon line of launch vehicles, powered by the internally developed Merlin engines, SpaceX is able to offer light, medium and heavy lift capabilities to deliver spacecraft into any inclination and altitude, from low Earth orbit to geosynchronous orbit to planetary missions.

As winner of the NASA Commercial Orbital Transportation Services competition, SpaceX will conduct three flights of its Falcon 9 launch vehicle and Dragon spacecraft for NASA. This will culminate in Dragon berthing with the International Space Station and returning safely to Earth. Falcon 9/Dragon will have the opportunity to provide crew and supply services to the Space Station, and fill the gap in US resupply capability when the Shuttle retires in 2010.

SOUNDS LIKE THEY ARE MAKING GOOD PROGRESS!

Rune · 2012-01-08 08:24:03

I just saw something funny in the public manifest over at spacex.com, check it out:

http://www.spacex.com/launch_manifest.php

It's this part, specifically:

Bigelow Aerospace 2015 Falcon 9 Cape Canaveral

Never mind the fact they are planning to launch 14 rockets that same year, 13 of them Falcon 9's... they have one booked with Bigelow! And it's no Dragon flight, so they are taking hardware up. And here I though they didn't have anything sized for spacex's rockets. It seems we get an inflatable ~10mT space hab in three years. First piece of a commercial station, or further testing of the hardware after so many years without building one? (And firing half the company that built them, too).

Rune. Hope that manifest is actually accomplished. 13 10mT launches... that's a lot of payload. More than China did this year, or anyone else for that matter (though the entire US market comes close if you count the last shuttles, I just checked).

Last edited by Rune (2012-01-08 08:24:35)

Terraformer · 2012-01-08 09:21:39

Bigelow are going ajead with Sundancer after all? I thought they'd dropped it... I'm glad they haven't though, we need an off the shelf Hab like that...

louis · 2012-01-08 11:59:02

Rune wrote:

I just saw something funny in the public manifest over at spacex.com, check it out:
http://www.spacex.com/launch_manifest.php
It's this part, specifically:
Bigelow Aerospace 2015 Falcon 9 Cape Canaveral
Never mind the fact they are planning to launch 14 rockets that same year, 13 of them Falcon 9's... they have one booked with Bigelow! And it's no Dragon flight, so they are taking hardware up. And here I though they didn't have anything sized for spacex's rockets. It seems we get an inflatable ~10mT space hab in three years. First piece of a commercial station, or further testing of the hardware after so many years without building one? (And firing half the company that built them, too).

Rune. Hope that manifest is actually accomplished. 13 10mT launches... that's a lot of payload. More than China did this year, or anyone else for that matter (though the entire US market comes close if you count the last shuttles, I just checked).

Is it going to be the MTV hab?

GW Johnson · 2012-01-08 13:01:54

Many months ago I looked over Spacex's page and investigated Falcon-Heavy. Back then, it was projected at 34 metric tons to LEO. More recently, they're projecting 53 metric tons, with an uprated Merlin engine variant. Propellant cross-feed helps squeeze out all the performance they can get. The price per launch they quote works out at $800-1000 per pound for delivering 50-53 tons to LEO, by far the cheapest in the industry.

Atlas-5 at its max capability (20-25 metric tons) looks an awful lot like Falcon-9 at 10 tons, both near $2400-2500/pound delivered. There is a scale effect here: larger rockets deliver more, but don't cost that much more to launch. That means Spacex is already doing better down in the 10-ton class by around a factor of 2.

They did it by logistics, not reusability. Smaller, leaner company, and a design that requires a village, not a major city, to support each launch. (Reusability would help lower costs further, except I seriously doubt it can ever be achieved at the 4-5% inert mass fractions in Falcon-9 stages.) That can be taken further still, if the launch folks would talk more with the missile folks about simplifying and designing for very small support crews.

My crude investigations say it would be easier to achieve reusability in 3-stage to orbit than 2-stage to orbit. With 3 stages there is a lot more room for higher inert fractions. That's what has to "cover" the structural survivability "beef", and all the added recovery gear (whatever it is).

GW

Mark Friedenbach · 2012-01-09 13:22:05

Terraformer wrote:

Bigelow are going ajead with Sundancer after all? I thought they'd dropped it... I'm glad they haven't though, we need an off the shelf Hab like that...

They removed Sundancer because it wasn't needed--they're going straight to the BA 330, which will presumably be launched on Falcon Heavy (or the Falcon 9h, if that option becomes available) It's basically done, and off-the-shelf already, which is why Bigelow laid off most of his staff back in September. They're still on the manifest for the Falcon 9 Sundancer flight, but I'm sure SpaceX will let them credit that down payment towards a 9h/Heavy flight.

Hopefully the people they laid off were relatively expendable--and I hope they've kept the core people on payroll.. I've got a lot riding on Bigelow and hate watching them flail about because they just came to market too early.

It's got to be the worst thing in the world to do--"Congratulations, you did everything right, we're way ahead of schedule and launching a product that will define the economy of the 21st and 22nd centuries. But because of the ineptitude of the rest of the industry and political infighting, we won't have any customers for years. Here's your pink slip; better luck at your next job."

Last edited by Mark Friedenbach (2012-01-09 13:27:42)

SpaceNut · 2012-01-24 20:11:27

SpaceX posts panoramic view inside space station-bound capsule

louis · 2012-01-25 02:16:36

SpaceNut wrote:

SpaceX posts panoramic view inside space station-bound capsule

The interactive panorama is great - really gives you a feel for life inside the capsule.

Hook that up to a Bigelow style habitat, supply module, lander and rocket, then fly to Mars!

Rune · 2012-01-25 06:50:17

Yup, it is very cool indeed. And, pardon me for being a bit devious, perfectly released to compensate the bad press of the latest delay for C2/3. But, you know, I did enjoy it a lot, in both ways.

Rune. Maybe even more in the devious way, because we need good PR about spaceflight.

Rune · 2012-02-01 14:15:41

I was bitching the other day about not having enough data on the SuperDracos that are going to provide the escape system and landing mode of Dragon. Well, apparently someone at SpaceX heard me and decided to post a press release on their latest full-duration test fire:

http://www.spacex.com/press.php?page=20120201

They even go as far as mentioning 120 klbs. of "axial" thrust (I assume that is to account for the slight outwards inclination) for the set of eight, and deep throttling capability, if you want to skip the link.

Rune. Because, you know, I am that important.

Rune · 2012-03-13 04:48:00

SpaceX eyes shuttle launch pad for heavy-lift rocket.

SpaceX and NASA are in advanced discussions for the private space firm to use Kennedy Space Center's pad 39A, one of the spaceport's Apollo and space shuttle launch sites, as the Florida base for its Falcon Heavy rocket, officials said.
NASA and SpaceX are studying how to assemble and launch Falcon Heavy rockets from pad 39A, including adding a facility to horizontally integrate the launcher's core stage, two strap-on boosters and upper stage, according to William Hill, assistant deputy associate administrator for NASA's exploration systems division.
With 28 liquid-fueled core, booster and upper stage engines, the Falcon Heavy rocket is a behemoth booster designed to launch human and robotic exploration missions, massive U.S. military satellites, and huge payloads for commercial clients at competitive prices. Its first demonstration launch from California is scheduled for 2013.
SpaceX plans to piece the rocket together on its side, then roll it to the launch pad and lift it vertical before liftoff. Fully fueled and assembled for launch, the Falcon Heavy will weigh 3.1 million pounds and stand 227 feet tall, according to SpaceX.

So, the Heavy could follow on a very impressive pad legacy, form Saturn V to shuttles. It also suggests to me (and thats just an informed opinion) that the beast will eventually be man-rated and put to service launching crewed Dragons all over cislunar space. Makes sense, the way I see it, and it would open up all of cislunar space the same way LEO is open to human visits. Building stations and depots will probably be left for others to fund, but they could also be launched on top of a F9h.

Rune. That is, NASA, after they have finished wasting money on SLS.

John Creighton · 2012-03-13 11:58:54

It’s nice to hear this bit of really good news. I was worried manned space flight might be dead for a bit but that test launch date is pretty soon (granted I’m sure it will first be used for cargo). I also think that it is a great idea to integrate the escape system with the landing system. It reduces the need to develop two independent systems.

Rune wrote:

SpaceX eyes shuttle launch pad for heavy-lift rocket.
SpaceX and NASA are in advanced discussions for the private space firm to use Kennedy Space Center's pad 39A, one of the spaceport's Apollo and space shuttle launch sites, as the Florida base for its Falcon Heavy rocket, officials said.
NASA and SpaceX are studying how to assemble and launch Falcon Heavy rockets from pad 39A, including adding a facility to horizontally integrate the launcher's core stage, two strap-on boosters and upper stage, according to William Hill, assistant deputy associate administrator for NASA's exploration systems division.
With 28 liquid-fueled core, booster and upper stage engines, the Falcon Heavy rocket is a behemoth booster designed to launch human and robotic exploration missions, massive U.S. military satellites, and huge payloads for commercial clients at competitive prices. Its first demonstration launch from California is scheduled for 2013.
SpaceX plans to piece the rocket together on its side, then roll it to the launch pad and lift it vertical before liftoff. Fully fueled and assembled for launch, the Falcon Heavy will weigh 3.1 million pounds and stand 227 feet tall, according to SpaceX.
So, the Heavy could follow on a very impressive pad legacy, form Saturn V to shuttles. It also suggests to me (and thats just an informed opinion) that the beast will eventually be man-rated and put to service launching crewed Dragons all over cislunar space. Makes sense, the way I see it, and it would open up all of cislunar space the same way LEO is open to human visits. Building stations and depots will probably be left for others to fund, but they could also be launched on top of a F9h.

Rune. That is, NASA, after they have finished wasting money on SLS.

GW Johnson · 2012-03-15 09:38:38

Last I heard, Spacex was already building a Falcon-Heavy pad at Vandenburg. That would be for the huge military payloads.

I knew they needed a big pad to fly from Canaveral as well. 39A makes good sense. I hope they do it.

NASA's SLS might be bigger, if it ever really flies. But I doubt it will be cheaper. It will be hard for anyone to beat the price posted on Spacex's web site for 53 metric tons to LEO from Canaveral. Around $1000/lb ($2000/kg). You just don't do that with a giant government agency and a giant complex of contractors and vendors. We've already been there and done that. Giant logistical tails are just inherently supremely expensive (as the weapons guys like me knew long ago).

Given orbital assembly (as proved by the ISS), you care a whole lot less about having a giant rocket, and a whole lot more about simple cost per unit mass. Once you hit about 25+ metric tons to LEO (the shuttle payload size), the simple unit cost is just more important than any max payload size limitations.

We can build anything of any size now, from docked modules in the 30+ to 53 metric ton class. Kinda makes 100-ton modules less important, don't it?

GW

GW Johnson · 2012-03-15 09:41:03

BTW, payloads on a Falcon-9 or Falcon-heavy do not necessarily have to fit within the standard payload shroud. They can ride "naked" on top of the rocket, if the form factor is right, and there is sufficient resistance to ascent heating and air loads. We've done that for decades with all the other rockets.

GW

SpaceNut · 2012-05-19 21:43:49

Next Falcon 9 Launch Attempt Possibly May 22
Sat, 19 May 2012 06:12:47 PM EDT

SpaceX officials issued the following statement Saturday afternoon:

Today’s launch was aborted when the flight computer detected slightly high pressure in the engine 5 combustion chamber. We have discovered root cause and repairs are underway.

During rigorous borescope inspections of the engine, SpaceX engineers discovered a faulty check valve on the Merlin engine. We are now in the process of replacing the failed valve. Those repairs should be complete tonight. We will continue to review data on Sunday. If things look good we will be ready to attempt to launch on Tuesday, May 22nd at 3:44 AM.

GW Johnson · 2012-05-20 13:36:54

I'd rather an automatic abort than a launch-and-loss. I think they "did good"

GW

louis · 2012-05-21 02:03:37

GW Johnson wrote:

I'd rather an automatic abort than a launch-and-loss. I think they "did good"
GW

I agree GW. It's not the first time they've aborted I believe. It's a good sign at this stage. A rocket engine is a complicated beast, as I am sure you can confirm.

GW Johnson · 2012-05-21 15:50:26

Yep. Sure ain't all science, either.

For most outfits, it's 40% science (written down somewhere), 50% art (learned one-on-one on the job), and 10% blind dumb luck. The better outfits (like Spacex now) have higher art %'s to skinny down the blind dumb luck %.

They didn't start out with enough old hands to have enough art. That's why Falcon-1 had flight test issues at first. But they did learn, and they did fix the art problem. I'm proud of 'em. "They done good."

GW

Rune · 2012-05-22 06:40:41

And it's off! Second time is the charm. Now to wait for the HD video to see those Merlins lighting up the night properly.

Rune. Good luck up there, Dragon, you know it is your year.

GW Johnson · 2012-05-22 07:33:19

From what I can glean from "civilian" news, it appears the orbit is right, the solar panels deployed, and all the systems appear to be working correctly.

Next nail-biter / white knuckle issue is automatic rendezvous at very short range (robot arm's length). If you remember, that failed with one Progress, leading to a collision and a depressurized module. (Does anyone know if they patched the hole and repressurized the module? I never heard.)

If this rendezvous and docking comes off flawless, Spacex is in the cargo delivery business, which is the actual reliability demonstration that man-rates the Dragon/Falcon-9. I expect in-company astronauts are already lining up.

I would, too.

GW

Mark Friedenbach · 2012-05-22 10:18:34

That incident was on Mir not ISS, I believe.

Anyway, way to go SpaceX! Ad Ares!

louis · 2012-05-22 14:16:32

GW Johnson wrote:

From what I can glean from "civilian" news, it appears the orbit is right, the solar panels deployed, and all the systems appear to be working correctly.
Next nail-biter / white knuckle issue is automatic rendezvous at very short range (robot arm's length). If you remember, that failed with one Progress, leading to a collision and a depressurized module. (Does anyone know if they patched the hole and repressurized the module? I never heard.)
If this rendezvous and docking comes off flawless, Spacex is in the cargo delivery business, which is the actual reliability demonstration that man-rates the Dragon/Falcon-9. I expect in-company astronauts are already lining up.
I would, too.
GW

Brilliant news. I will stick my neck out here and say the docking will be perfect on the basis that we've got driverless cars licensed in Nevada here on earth that travel thousands of miles and have yet to cause an accident. I imagine Space X are making full use of that sort of technology.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#301 2008-01-28 14:33:07

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#302 2008-02-28 06:43:52

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#303 2008-03-26 21:13:30

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#304 2008-03-29 06:17:54

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#305 2012-01-08 08:24:03

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#306 2012-01-08 09:21:39

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#307 2012-01-08 11:59:02

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#308 2012-01-08 13:01:54

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#309 2012-01-09 13:22:05

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#310 2012-01-24 20:11:27

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#311 2012-01-25 02:16:36

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#312 2012-01-25 06:50:17

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#313 2012-02-01 14:15:41

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#314 2012-03-13 04:48:00

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#315 2012-03-13 11:58:54

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#316 2012-03-15 09:38:38

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#317 2012-03-15 09:41:03

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#318 2012-05-19 21:43:49

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#319 2012-05-20 13:36:54

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#320 2012-05-21 02:03:37

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#321 2012-05-21 15:50:26

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#322 2012-05-22 06:40:41

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#323 2012-05-22 07:33:19

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#324 2012-05-22 10:18:34

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#325 2012-05-22 14:16:32

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

Board footer