Slashdot Mirror
SpaceX Is Planning To Launch a Falcon 9 For the Third Time (arstechnica.com)
According to the senior director of government sales for SpaceX, Lars Hoffman, the company is planning to launch a Falcon 9 first-stage booster for the third time. At the Wernher von Braun Memorial Symposium on Wednesday afternoon, Hoffman said: "We've launched Falcon 9 over 60 times. We've landed our first stage booster 30 times now. And relaunched 16 times. We're about to relaunch a booster for the third time. So we're turning this into routine access to space. High-reliability, higher-performance, lower-cost access to space; that opens it up to everybody." Ars Technica reports: The company has not officially confirmed its plans, but at present SpaceX intends to reuse a Falcon 9 rocket for the third time to launch a rideshare mission of dozens of small satellites for Spaceflight. This Spaceflight SSO-A mission currently has a launch date of November 19, according to a calendar maintained by Spaceflight Now. An earlier report in The Space Review previously indicated this mission may involve the third flight of a booster.
I don't really believe that. Since someone was going to say it anyway, I might as well get there first. Elon can smoke as many doobies on video as he wants, he's shown us a path to space that I had given up hope of seeing in my lifetime. So, I'm a fan.
Bruce Perens.
I'm actually liking the fact that SpaceX is delivering a commoditized platform for LEO delivery, they're getting the basics down and delivering. Now if they could just get their landing vids to work at the right moment..
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Headline: "SpaceX Is Planning To Launch a Falcon 9 For the Third Time".
Body: "We've launched Falcon 9 over 60 times."
Me: ??
The headline may be misunderstood as the third Falcon 9 flight ever. The news here is that a specific Falcon 9 booster is going to be reused for the second time, so it will be its third flight. Not to be confused with Falcon Heavy (Simultaneous boosters landing), which has been launched only once in a test flight.
I would not recommend that thunderf00t video, it's sloppy and full of assumptions and false comparisons at best.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
IOW, it was done in the same fashion that wall Street analysts operate on Tesla/musk.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The real challenge for SpaceX is to launch often enough that they can realize the savings of being able to launch the same rocket 100 times and of potentially being able to have 24 hour turnaround time. They've improved slightly, but they're still only averaging about 2 launches a month.
Not really because 24 launches/year at 1 launch/rocket = production of 24 rockets. At 2 launches/rocket = 12, at 3 launches/rocket = 8, at 4 launches/rocket = 6... they don't have to increase their launch rate to save massive amounts of money. Even with three month refurb a booster with 10 launches (which is the goal AFAIK, 100 is just for BFR pie-in-the-sky dreams) has less than a three year lifespan, they don't need faster turnaround to expend them in a timely fashion. Of course if you're making money then higher volume equals more money, but it's not necessary.
They probably do need to grow the market though, of 27 US launches so far this year the Falcon has had 17. Even if SpaceX steals some Soyuz launches to the ISS through the Commercial Crew program and a few more from Atlas/Delta there's not a lot of growth potential, unless China/Russia/ESA/Japan/India want to give up their own rocket programs. But no, nothing bad happens if those plans slide another year while they do their 4th-5th-6th launch of the same rocket. It's the only way SpaceX could avoid breaking their back on Starlink which is a massive investment, bigger than creating the BFR.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
How about we separate the man from the companies. Note plural. Tesla != SpaceX in any way other than sharing a bit of management.
Goals, market, ownership - all as different as it gets. Don't let the propganda confuse you, unless you just want to be dumb.
-
As to Elon being a fraud, well if that's the case, we need more Elon-type frauds instead of the usual suspects. Not many would put their entire "FU money" winnings on the line to change the world, and fewer yet succeed as well as he has - even if it isn't as good as he said or as on time. Visionaries are just like that. Gheez - show me your accomplishments and what you put at stake to get there. He could have retired and had hot women feed him drinks and cater to his every whim on the beach of his own island, but we got this instead - and you complain?
I'd expect someone that crazy to have the odd flaw. I have a few - but I deserve to get away with them less. How about you?
Why guess when you can know? Measure!
It's called "talking your order book" - it's the most shorted stock out there (or was). Since it's all about how the herd values a stock, trying to influence the herd to make your own bet pay is standard operating procedure. They don't hand out awards on the street or in the financial media for telling the truth.
Why guess when you can know? Measure!
We're about to relaunch a booster for the third time.
That would make it the fourth launch of this booster.
It would, but it's fairly obvious from TFA that it's the third launch (2nd relaunch), and that the writer and editor were unable to convey this simple fact without screwing it up. It would have been easy to clear this up just by showing a list of dates when the launcher was used. But no; that would be too straightforward and informative.
They probably do need to grow the market though, of 27 US launches so far this year the Falcon has had 17. Even if SpaceX steals some Soyuz launches to the ISS through the Commercial Crew program and a few more from Atlas/Delta there's not a lot of growth potential, unless China/Russia/ESA/Japan/India want to give up their own rocket programs.
If launch costs fall by half, the number of launches will more than double. If launch costs fall to 10% (wasn't that a SpaceX goal?), launches will increase by far more than 10x, probably 100x. We've seen that with just about every technology. Entire new industries are enabled when costs get low enough.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
SpaceX is doing so poorly that they have to resort to selling flights on used rockets. Sad. /s
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
SpaceX isn't planning on dropping their Falcon 9 launch prices any more (unless New Glenn pricing forces their hand), because they want to funnel that profit into BFR and Starlink.
There may be some increase in market as a delayed response to the drop in launch costs that SpaceX has already delivered. Furthermore, I do expect Falcon Heavy to take much of Ariane's commercial launches.
But things like >10x growth in market aren't likely to happen with the current generation of rockets.
On the gripping hand, SpaceX having its own space station isn't as far-fetched as all that, and it would be useful for preparations for Lunar or Mars voyages.
Along with a station in Lunar orbit, of course. And maybe at L4 and/or L5.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"