Falcon 9 v1.1

Falcon 9 v1.1 was the second version of SpaceX's Falcon 9 orbital launch vehicle. The rocket was developed in 2011–2013, made its maiden launch in September 2013,[7] and its final flight in January 2016.[8] The Falcon 9 rocket was fully designed, manufactured, and operated by SpaceX. Following the second Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) launch, the initial version Falcon 9 v1.0 was retired from use and replaced by the v1.1 version.

Falcon 9 v1.1
Launch of the 9th Falcon 9 v1.1 with the SpaceX CRS-5 on 10 January 2015. This rocket was equipped with landing legs and grid fins.
FunctionOrbital medium-lift launch vehicle
ManufacturerSpaceX
Country of originUnited States
Cost per launch$56.5M (2013) – 61.2M (2015)[1]
Size
Height68.4 m (224 ft)[2]
Diameter3.66 m (12.0 ft)[2]
Mass505,846 kg (1,115,200 lb)[2]
Stages2
Capacity
Payload to LEO (28.5°)
Mass13,150 kg (28,990 lb)[2]
10,886 kg (24,000 lb) (PAF structural limitation)[3]
Payload to GTO (27°)
Mass4,850 kg (10,690 lb)[2]
Associated rockets
FamilyFalcon 9
Derivative workFalcon 9 Full Thrust
Comparable
Launch history
StatusRetired
Launch sites
Total launches15
Success(es)14
Failure(s)1
Landings0 / 3 attempts
First flight29 September 2013[4]
Last flight17 January 2016
Type of passengers/cargoDragon, DSCOVR
First stage
Powered by9 Merlin 1D
Maximum thrustSea level: 5,885 kN (1,323,000 lbf)[2]
Vacuum: 6,672 kN (1,500,000 lbf)[2]
Specific impulseSea level: 282 seconds[5]
Vacuum: 311 seconds[5]
Burn time180 seconds[2]
PropellantLOX / RP-1
Second stage
Powered by1 Merlin 1D Vacuum
Maximum thrust716 kN (161,000 lbf)[6]
Specific impulse340 seconds[2]
Burn time375 seconds[2]
PropellantLOX / RP-1

Falcon 9 v1.1 was a significant evolution from Falcon 9 v1.0, with 60 percent more thrust and weight. Its maiden flight carried out a demonstration mission with the CASSIOPE satellite on 29 September 2013, the sixth overall launch of any Falcon 9.[9]

Both stages of the two-stage-to-orbit vehicle used liquid oxygen (LOX) and rocket-grade kerosene (RP-1) propellants.[10] The Falcon 9 v1.1 could lift payloads of 13,150 kilograms (28,990 lb) to low Earth orbit, and 4,850 kilograms (10,690 lb) to geostationary transfer orbit,[1] which places the Falcon 9 design in the medium-lift range of launch systems.[11]

Beginning in April 2014, the Dragon capsules were propelled by Falcon 9 v1.1 to deliver cargo to the International Space Station under the Commercial Resupply Services contract with NASA.[12] This version was also intended to ferry astronauts to the ISS under a NASA Commercial Crew Development contract signed in September 2014[13] but those missions are now scheduled to use the upgraded Falcon 9 Full Thrust version, first flown in December 2015.

Falcon 9 v1.1 was notable for pioneering the development of reusable rockets, whereby SpaceX gradually refined technologies for first-stage boostback, atmospheric re-entry, controlled descent and eventual propulsive landing. This last goal was achieved on the first flight of the successor variant Falcon 9 Full Thrust, after several near-successes with Falcon 9 v1.1.

The launch of the first Falcon 9 v1.1 from SLC-4, Vandenberg AFB (Falcon 9 Flight 6) 29 September 2013.
A Falcon 9 v1.1 rocket launching the SpaceX CRS-3 Dragon spacecraft in April 2014.

Design

The Falcon 9 v1.1 is a two-stage, LOX/RP-1–powered launch vehicle.[10]

Modifications from Falcon 9 v1.0

The original Falcon 9 flew five successful orbital launches in 2010–2013, all carrying the Dragon spacecraft or a test version of the spacecraft.[14]

The Falcon 9 v1.1 ELV was a 60 percent heavier rocket with 60 percent more thrust than the v1.0 version of the Falcon 9.[15] It includes realigned first-stage engines[16] and 60 percent longer fuel tanks, making it more susceptible to bending during flight.[15] The engines were upgraded from the Merlin 1C to the more powerful Merlin 1D engines. These improvements increased the payload capability to LEO from 10,454 kilograms (23,047 lb)[17] to 13,150 kilograms (28,990 lb).[1] The stage separation system was redesigned and reduced the number of attachment points from twelve to three,[15] and the vehicle had upgraded avionics and software as well.[15]

The v1.1 booster version arranged the engines in a structural form SpaceX called Octaweb, with eight engines arranged in a circular pattern around a single center engine. The v1.0 used a rectangular pattern of engines. The Octaweb pattern was aimed at streamlining the manufacturing process.[18] Later v1.1 vehicles include four extensible landing legs,[19] used in the controlled-descent test program.[20][21]

Following the first launch of the Falcon 9 v1.1 in September 2013, which experienced a post-mission second-stage engine restart failure, the second-stage igniter propellant lines were insulated to better support in-space restart following long coast phases for orbital trajectory maneuvers.[22] Falcon 9 Flight 6 was the first launch of the Falcon 9 configured with a jettisonable payload fairing.[14]

First stage
Falcon 9 v1.0 (left) and v1.1 (right) engine configurations

The Falcon 9 v1.1 uses a first stage powered by nine Merlin 1D engines.[23][24] Development testing of the v1.1 Falcon 9 first stage was completed in July 2013.[25][26]

The v1.1 first stage has a total sea-level thrust at liftoff of 5,885 kN (1,323,000 pounds-force), with the nine engines burning for a nominal 180 seconds, while stage thrust rises to 6,672 kN (1,500,000 pounds-force) as the booster climbs out of the atmosphere.[27] The nine first-stage engines are arranged in a structural form SpaceX calls Octaweb. This change from the v1.0 Falcon 9's square arrangement is aimed at streamlining the manufacturing process.[18]

As part of SpaceX's efforts to develop a reusable launch system, selected first stages include four extensible landing legs[19] and grid fins to control descent. Fins were first tested on the F9R Dev-1 reusable test vehicle.[28] Grid fins were implemented on the Falcon 9 v1.1 on the CRS-5 mission,[29] but ran out of hydraulic fluid before a planned landing.[30]

SpaceX ultimately intends to produce both reusable Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launch vehicles with full vertical-landing capability.[20][21] Initial atmospheric testing of prototype vehicles is being conducted on the Grasshopper experimental technology-demonstrator reusable launch vehicle (RLV), in addition to the booster controlled-descent and landing tests described above.[31]

The v1.1 first stage uses a pyrophoric mixture of triethylaluminium-triethylborane (TEA-TEB) as a first-stage ignitor, the same as was used in the v1.0 version.[32]

Like the Falcon 9 v1.0 and the Saturn series from the Apollo program, the presence of multiple first-stage engines can allow for mission completion even if one of the first-stage engines fails mid-flight.[33][34]

The main propellant supply tubes from the RP-1 and liquid oxygen tanks to the nine engines on the first stage are 10 cm (4 in) in diameter.[35]

Second stage

The upper stage is powered by a single Merlin 1D engine modified for vacuum operation.[36]

The interstage, which connects the upper and lower stage for Falcon 9, is a carbon fiber aluminum core composite structure.[37] Separation collets and a pneumatic pusher system separate the stages.[38] The Falcon 9 tank walls and domes are made from aluminium-lithium alloy.[39] SpaceX uses an all-friction stir welded tank, a technique which minimizes manufacturing defects and reduces cost, according to a NASA spokesperson.[40] The second-stage tank of Falcon 9 is simply a shorter version of the first-stage tank and uses most of the same tooling, material and manufacturing techniques. This saves money during vehicle production.[33]

Payload fairing

The fairing design was completed by SpaceX, with production of the 13 m (43 ft)-long, 5.2 m (17 ft)-diameter payload fairing in Hawthorne, California.[41]

Testing of the new fairing design was completed at NASA's Plum Brook Station facility in spring 2013 where acoustic shock, mechanical vibration, and electromagnetic electrostatic discharge conditions were simulated. Tests were done on a full-size test article in vacuum chamber. SpaceX paid NASA US$581,300 to lease test time in the $150M NASA simulation chamber facility.[42]

The first flight of a Falcon 9 v1.1 (CASSIOPE, September 2013) was the first launch of the Falcon 9 v1.1 as well as the Falcon 9 family configured with a payload fairing. The fairing separated without incident during the launch of CASSIOPE as well as the two subsequent GTO insertion missions.[42] In Dragon missions, the capsule protects any small satellites, negating the need for a fairing.[43]

Control

SpaceX uses multiple redundant flight computers in a fault-tolerant design. Each Merlin engine is controlled by three voting computers, each of which has two physical processors that constantly check each other. The software runs on Linux and is written in C++.[44]

For flexibility, commercial off-the-shelf parts and system-wide "radiation-tolerant" design are used instead of rad-hardened parts.[44] Falcon 9 v1.1 continues to utilize the triple redundant flight computers and inertial navigation—with GPS overlay for additional orbit insertion accuracy—that were originally used in the Falcon 9 v1.0.[33]

Development history
From left to right, Falcon 1, Falcon 9 v1.0, three versions of Falcon 9 v1.1, three versions of Falcon 9 v1.2 (Full Thrust), three versions of Falcon 9 Block 5, and two versions of Falcon Heavy.

Testing

A test of the ignition system for the Falcon 9 v1.1 first stage was conducted in April 2013.[45] On 1 June 2013, a ten-second firing of the Falcon 9 v1.1 first stage occurred; a full-duration, 3-minute firing was expected a few days later.[46][47]

Production

By September 2013, SpaceX total manufacturing space had increased to nearly 1,000,000 square feet (93,000 m2) and the factory had been configured to achieve a production rate of up to 40 rocket cores per year, for both the Falcon 9 v1.1 and the tri-core Falcon Heavy.[48] The November 2013 production rate for Falcon 9 vehicles was one per month. The company stated that this would increase to 18 per year in mid-2014, and would be 24 launch vehicles per year by the end of 2014.[22]

As launch manifest and launch rate increases in 2014–2016, SpaceX is looking to increase their launch processing by building dual-track parallel launch processes at the launch facility. As of March 2014, they projected that they would have this in operation sometime in 2015, and were aiming for a 2015 launch pace of about two launches per month.[49]

Launch history
Main article: List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches

The first launch of the substantially upgraded Falcon 9 v1.1 vehicle successfully flew on 29 September 2013.[10][50]

The maiden Falcon 9 v1.1 launch included a number of "firsts":[4][51]

SpaceX conducted the fifteenth and final flight of the Falcon 9 v1.1 on 17 January 2016. Fourteen of those fifteen launches have successfully delivered their primary payloads to either Low Earth orbit or Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit.

The only failed mission of the Falcon 9 v1.1 was its 14th, SpaceX CRS-7, 28 June 2015, which was lost during its first stage operation, due to an overpressure event in the second stage oxygen tank.[53] (After CRS-7 there was one final launch of V1.1, on 17 January 2016, to launch the Jason-3 payload.)

CRS-7 failure, investigation, and changes

Investigation traced the accident to the failure of a strut inside the second stage's liquid-oxygen tank. NASA concluded that the most probable cause of the strut failure was a design error: instead of using a stainless-steel eye bolt made of aerospace-grade material, SpaceX chose an industrial-grade material without adequate screening and testing and overlooked the recommended safety margin.[54]

Reusability
Main article: SpaceX reusable launch system development program

The Falcon 9 v1.1 includes several aspects of reusable launch vehicle technology included in its design, as of the initial v1.1 launch in September 2013 (throttleable and restartable engines on the first stage, a first-stage tank design that can structurally accommodate the future addition of landing legs, etc.). The Falcon 9 v1.1's launch occurred two years after SpaceX committed to a privately funded development program with the goal to obtain full and rapid reusability of both stages of the launch vehicle.[55]

Design was complete on the system for "bringing the rocket back to launchpad using only thrusters" in February 2012.[56] The reusable launch system technology is being considered for both the Falcon 9 and the Falcon Heavy, and is considered particularly well suited to the Falcon Heavy where the two outer cores separate from the rocket much earlier in the flight profile, and are therefore moving at slower velocity at stage separation.[56]

A reusable first stage is now being flight tested by SpaceX with the suborbital Grasshopper rocket.[57] By April 2013, a low-altitude, low-speed demonstration test vehicle, Grasshopper v1.0, had made seven VTVL test flights from late-2012 through August 2013, including a 61-second hover flight to an altitude of 250 metres (820 ft).

In March 2013, SpaceX announced that, beginning with the first flight of the stretch version of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle (Falcon 9 v1.1)—which flew in September 2013—every first stage would be instrumented and equipped as a controlled descent test vehicle. SpaceX intends to do propulsive-return over-water tests and "will continue doing such tests until they can do a return to the launch site and a powered landing. They "expect several failures before they 'learn how to do it right.'"[20] SpaceX completed multiple water landings that were successful and they now plan to land the first stage of the flight CRS-5 on an Autonomous drone port in the ocean.[21]

Photos of the first test of the restartable ignition system for the reusable Falcon 9—the Falcon 9-R— nine-engine v1.1 circular-engine configuration were released in April 2013.[45]

In March 2014, SpaceX announced that GTO payload of the future reusable Falcon 9 (F9-R), with only the booster reused, would be approximately 3,500 kg (7,700 lb).[58]

Post-mission test flights and landing attempts
Main article: Falcon 9 first-stage landing tests
Falcon 9 Flight 17's first stage attempting a controlled landing on the Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship following the launch of CRS-6 to the International Space Station. The stage landed hard and tipped over after landing.

Several missions of Falcon 9 v1.1 were followed by post-mission test flights calling for the first-stage booster to execute a flip around maneuver, a boostback burn to reduce the rocket's horizontal velocity, a re-entry burn to mitigate atmospheric damage at hypersonic speed, a controlled atmospheric descent with autonomous guidance to the target and finally a landing burn to cut vertical velocity to zero just before reaching the ocean or landing pad. SpaceX announced the test program in March 2013, and their intention to continue to conduct such tests until they can return to the launch site and perform a powered landing.[20]

The first stage of Falcon 9 Flight 6 performed the first test of a controlled descent and propulsive landing over water on 29 September 2013.[10] Although not a complete success, the stage was able to change direction and make a controlled entry into the atmosphere.[10] During the final landing burn, the ACS thrusters could not overcome an aerodynamically induced spin, and centrifugal force deprived the landing engine of fuel leading to early engine shutdown and a hard splashdown which destroyed the first stage. Pieces of wreckage were recovered for further study.[10]

The next test, using the first stage from SpaceX CRS-3, led to a successful soft landing in the ocean, however the booster presumably broke up in heavy seas before it could be recovered.[59]

After further ocean landing tests, the first stage of the CRS-5 launch vehicle attempted to land on a floating platform, the autonomous spaceport drone ship, in January 2015. The rocket guided itself to the ship successfully but landed too hard for survival.[60] The first stage of the CRS-6 mission managed a soft landing on the platform; however, excess lateral velocity caused it to quickly tip over and explode.[61] SpaceX CEO Elon Musk indicated that a throttle valve for the engine was stuck and did not respond quickly enough to achieve a smooth landing.[62]

Falcon 9 v1.1 was never successfully recovered or reused until its retirement. However the test program continued with Falcon 9 Full Thrust flights, which achieved both the first ground landing in December 2015 and the first ship landing in April 2016.

Launch sites
Main article: SpaceX launch facilities

Falcon 9 v1.1 rockets were launched from both Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station and Launch Complex 4E at Vandenberg Air Force Base. The Vandenberg site was used for both the v1.1 maiden flight on 29 September 2013[10] and its last mission on 17 January 2016.

Additional launch sites at Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39 pad A and Boca Chica, South Texas will launch the rocket's successor variants Falcon 9 Full Thrust and Falcon Heavy.

Launch prices

As of October 2015, the Falcon 9 v1.1 commercial launch price was US$61.2 million (up from US$56.5 million in October 2013)[1] competing for commercial launches in an increasingly competitive market.[63]

NASA resupply missions to the ISS—which include the provision of the space capsule payload, a new Dragon cargo spacecraft for each flight—have an average price of $133 million.[64] The first twelve cargo transport flights contracted to NASA were done at one time, so no price change is reflected for the v1.1 launches as opposed to the v1.0 launches. The contract was for a specific amount of cargo carried to, and returned from, the Space Station over a fixed number of flights.

SpaceX stated that due to mission assurance process costs, launches for the U.S. military would be priced about 50% more than commercial launches, so a Falcon 9 launch would sell for about $90 million to the US government, compared to an average cost to the US government of nearly $400 million for current non-SpaceX launches.[65]

Secondary payload services

Falcon 9 payload services include secondary and tertiary payload connection via an ESPA-ring, the same interstage adapter first utilized for launching secondary payloads on US DoD missions that utilize the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles (EELV) Atlas V and Delta IV. This enables secondary and even tertiary missions with minimal impact to the original mission. As of 2011, SpaceX announced pricing for ESPA-compatible payloads on the Falcon 9.[66]

See also

References
  1. "Capabilities & Services". SpaceX. 28 November 2012. Archived from the original on 7 October 2013. Retrieved 28 September 2013.
  2. "Falcon 9". SpaceX. 16 November 2012. Archived from the original on 5 August 2014.
  3. "Falcon 9 Launch Vehicle Payload User's Guide" (PDF). 21 October 2015. Archived from the original (PDF) on 14 March 2017. Retrieved 29 November 2015.
  4. Graham, Will. "SpaceX successfully launches debut Falcon 9 v1.1". NASASpaceFlight. Retrieved 29 September 2013.
  5. "Falcon 9". SpaceX. 16 November 2012. Archived from the original on 1 May 2013. Retrieved 29 September 2013.
  6. "Merlin Engines". SpaceX. 26 March 2013. Archived from the original on 11 August 2014.
  7. "SpaceX Falcon 9 v1.1 Data Sheet". Space Launch Report. Retrieved 24 October 2015.
  8. Graham, William (17 January 2016). "SpaceX Falcon 9 v1.1 set for Jason-3 launch". NASASpaceFlight.com. NASASpaceFlight.com. Retrieved 17 January 2016.
  9. "SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket launch in California". CBS News. Retrieved 29 September 2013.
  10. Graham, William (29 September 2013). "SpaceX successfully launches debut Falcon 9 v1.1". NASAspaceflight. Archived from the original on 29 September 2013. Retrieved 29 September 2013.
  11. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps - Launch Propulsion Systems, p.11: "Small: 0-2t payloads, Medium: 2-20t payloads, Heavy: 20-50t payloads, Super Heavy: >50t payloads"
  12. Graham, William (18 April 2014). "SpaceX Falcon 9 successfully launches CRS-3 Dragon". NASASpaceFlight. Retrieved 24 October 2015.
  13. Foust, Jeff (19 September 2014). "NASA Commercial Crew Awards Leave Unanswered Questions". Space News. Archived from the original on 21 September 2014. Retrieved 21 September 2014.
  14. Bergin, Chris (29 September 2015). "SpaceX successfully launches debut Falcon 9 v1.1". Retrieved 22 October 2015.
  15. Klotz, Irene (6 September 2013). "Musk Says SpaceX Being "Extremely Paranoid" as It Readies for Falcon 9's California Debut". Space News. Retrieved 13 September 2013.
  16. "Falcon 9's commercial promise to be tested in 2013". Spaceflight Now. Retrieved 17 November 2012.
  17. "Falcon 9 Launch Vehicle Payload User's Guide Rev. 1" (PDF). p. 19.
  18. "Octaweb". SpaceX. 29 July 2013. Retrieved 30 July 2013.
  19. "Landing Legs". SpaceX. 29 July 2013. Retrieved 30 July 2013.
  20. Lindsey, Clark (28 March 2013). "SpaceX moving quickly towards fly-back first stage". NewSpace Watch. Archived from the original on 16 April 2013. Retrieved 29 March 2013.
  21. Messier, Doug (28 March 2013). "Dragon Post-Mission Press Conference Notes". Parabolic Arc. Retrieved 30 March 2013.
  22. Svitak, Amy (24 November 2013). "Musk: Falcon 9 Will Capture Market Share". Aviation Week. Archived from the original on 28 November 2013. Retrieved 2 December 2013.
  23. "The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2012" (PDF). Federal Aviation Administration. February 2013. Retrieved 17 February 2013.
  24. Clark, Stephen (18 May 2012). "Q&A with SpaceX founder and chief designer Elon Musk". SpaceFlightNow. Retrieved 5 March 2013.
  25. "SpaceX Test-fires Upgraded Falcon 9 Core for Three Minutes". Space News. Archived from the original on 13 August 2013. Retrieved 11 August 2013.
  26. Bergin, Chris (20 June 2013). "Reducing risk via ground testing is a recipe for SpaceX success". NASASpaceFlight (not affiliated with NASA). Retrieved 21 June 2013.
  27. "Falcon 9". SpaceX. Archived from the original on 29 November 2013. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
  28. "F9R 1000m Fin Flight | Onboard Cam and Wide Shot". Youtube. 19 June 2014. Retrieved 18 February 2015.
  29. Johnson, Scott (25 November 2014). "SpaceX CRS-5: Grid Fins and a Barge". SpaceFlight Insider. Retrieved 18 February 2015.
  30. Thompson, Amy (1 February 2015). "SpaceX Successfully Conducts Static Fire Test in Preparation for DSCOVR Launch". SpaceFlight Insider. Retrieved 18 February 2015.
  31. "SpaceX's reusable rocket testbed takes first hop". 24 September 2012. Retrieved 7 November 2012.
  32. Mission Status Center, June 2, 2010, 1905 GMT, SpaceflightNow, accessed 2010-06-02, Quotation: "The flanges will link the rocket with ground storage tanks containing liquid oxygen, kerosene fuel, helium, gaserous nitrogen and the first stage ignitor source called triethylaluminum-triethylborane, better known as TEA-TAB."
  33. "Falcon 9 Overview". SpaceX. 8 May 2010. Archived from the original on 23 March 2012.
  34. Behind the Scenes With the World's Most Ambitious Rocket Makers, Popular Mechanics, 2009-09-01, accessed 11 December 2012. "It is the first since the Saturn series from the Apollo program to incorporate engine-out capability—that is, one or more engines can fail and the rocket will still make it to orbit."
  35. "Servo Motors Survive Space X Launch Conditions". MICROMO/Faulhabler. 2015. Retrieved 14 August 2015.
  36. Clark, Stephen (22 February 2015). "100th Merlin 1D engine flies on Falcon 9 rocket". Spaceflight Now. Retrieved 24 October 2015.
  37. Young, Anthony (1 June 2015). The Twenty-First Century Commercial Space Imperative. SpringerBriefs in Space Development. p. 92. ISBN 9783319189291. Retrieved 24 October 2015.
  38. "SpaceX achieves Milestone in successful GEO Transfer Launch". Spaceflight 101. 3 December 2013. Archived from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 24 October 2015.
  39. Xu, Suzzane (5 March 2015). "How to Save a Rocket: SpaceX's plan for rocket recovery hits a few bumps". Yale Scientific. Yale. Retrieved 24 October 2015.
  40. Stanfield, Jennifer (21 May 2015). "Friction stir welding unites reliability, affordability". Phys.org. Retrieved 24 October 2015.
  41. Bergin, Chris (14 June 2013). "Testing times for SpaceX's new Falcon 9 v.1.1". NASASpaceflight. Retrieved 24 October 2015.
  42. Mangels, John (25 May 2013). "NASA's Plum Brook Station tests rocket fairing for SpaceX". Cleveland Plain Dealer. Retrieved 27 May 2013.
  43. Leone, Dan (3 June 2015). "SpaceX to Retrieve Fairing that Washed Up in Bahamas". SpaceNews. Retrieved 24 October 2015.
  44. Svitak, Amy (18 November 2012). "Dragon's "Radiation-Tolerant" Design". Aviation Week. Archived from the original on 3 December 2013. Retrieved 22 November 2012.
  45. First test of the Falcon 9-R (reusable) ignition system, 28 April 2013
  46. Abbott, Joseph (3 June 2013). "SpaceX finally tests new rocket". WacoTrib. Retrieved 4 June 2013.
  47. Abbot, Joseph (26 April 2013). "Heads up: SpaceX testing is about to get louder". Waco Tribune. Retrieved 28 April 2013.
  48. "Production at SpaceX". SpaceX. 24 September 2013. Retrieved 29 September 2013.
  49. Gwynne Shotwell (21 March 2014). Broadcast 2212: Special Edition, interview with Gwynne Shotwell (audio file). The Space Show. Event occurs at 36:35–37:00 and 56:05–56:10. 2212. Archived from the original (mp3) on 22 March 2014. Retrieved 22 March 2014.
  50. "Spaceflight Now - Worldwide launch schedule". Spaceflight Now Inc. 1 June 2013. Archived from the original on 30 May 2010. Retrieved 24 June 2013.
  51. Foust, Jeff (27 March 2013). "After Dragon, SpaceX's focus returns to Falcon". NewSpace Journal. Retrieved 5 April 2013.
  52. Ferster, Warren (29 September 2015). "Upgraded Falcon 9 Rocket Successfully Debuts from Vandenberg". SpaceNews. Retrieved 22 October 2015.
  53. Elon Musk [@elonmusk] (28 June 2015). "There was an overpressure event in the upper stage liquid oxygen tank. Data suggests counterintuitive cause" (Tweet) – via Twitter.
  54. "NASA Independent Review Team SpaceX CRS-7 Accident Investigation Report Public Summary" (PDF). NASA. 12 March 2018. Retrieved 23 March 2018.
  55. Bergin, Chris (11 January 2012). "Home Forums L2 Sign Up ISS Commercial Shuttle SLS/Orion Russian European Chinese Unmanned Other SpaceX to begin testing on Reusable Falcon 9 technology this year". NASASpaceFlight. Retrieved 22 October 2015.
  56. Simberg, Rand (8 February 2012). "Elon Musk on SpaceX's Reusable Rocket Plans". Popular Mechanics. Retrieved 8 March 2013.
  57. Boyle, Alan (24 December 2012). "SpaceX launches its Grasshopper rocket on 12-story-high hop in Texas". MSNBC Cosmic Log. Archived from the original on 10 May 2019. Retrieved 25 December 2012.
  58. Svitak, Amy (5 March 2013). "Falcon 9 Performance: Mid-size GEO?". Aviation Week. Archived from the original on 10 March 2014. Retrieved 9 March 2013. "Falcon 9 will do satellites up to roughly 3.5 tonnes, with full reusability of the boost stage, and Falcon Heavy will do satellites up to 7 tonnes with full reusability of the all three boost stages," [Musk] said, referring to the three Falcon 9 booster cores that will comprise the Falcon Heavy's first stage. He also said Falcon Heavy could double its payload performance to GTO "if, for example, we went expendable on the center core."
  59. Norris, Guy (28 April 2014). "SpaceX Plans For Multiple Reusable Booster Tests". Aviation Week. Retrieved 28 April 2014.
  60. Clark, Stephen (10 January 2015). "Dragon successfully launched, rocket recovery demo crash lands". Retrieved 5 May 2015.
  61. "CRS-6 First Stage Landing". video. Retrieved 16 April 2015.
  62. "Elon Musk on Twitter". Twitter. Archived from the original on 15 April 2015. Retrieved 14 April 2015.
  63. Amos, Jonathan (3 December 2013). "SpaceX launches SES commercial TV satellite for Asia". BBC News. Retrieved 4 January 2015.
  64. "Why the US Can Beat China: The Facts About SpaceX Costs". Archived from the original on 28 March 2013. Retrieved 7 October 2013.
  65. William Harwood (5 March 2014). "SpaceX, ULA spar over military contracting". Spaceflight Now. Retrieved 7 March 2014.
  66. Foust, Jeff (22 August 2011). "New opportunities for smallsat launches". The Space Review. Retrieved 27 September 2011. SpaceX ... developed prices for flying those secondary payloads ... A P-POD would cost between $200,000 and $325,000 for missions to LEO, or $350,000 to $575,000 for missions to geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO). An ESPA-class satellite weighing up to 180 kilograms would cost $4–5 million for LEO missions and $7–9 million for GTO missions, he said.
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Falcon 9 v1.1.
Wikinews has related news:
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.