Yes, my guess is it's the hot section of the turbo pump and with new
breakthroughs in single crystal technology this should help. Maybe replace
that section.
Another 2 cents = $0.04
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 10:31 AM Carl Tedesco <ctedesco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Logically, if the F9 has a “weak-link” limiting it to about 5 flights,
wouldn’t SpaceX throw engineering resources at fixing that weak-link and
finding the next weak-link? If this is true, I do not think it can be
considered a limit yet to F9’s reuseability. My 2-cents.
Carl Tedesco
*From:* arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> *On
Behalf Of *Robert Steinke
*Sent:* Monday, March 23, 2020 7:51 AM
*To:* arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [AR] Falcon 9 lifetime of 5 flights?
From hobbyspace.com about the latest Falcon 9 launch:
" A first stage engine shut down prematurely (just before staging) but
had no effect on the mission as the other 8 engines made up the difference.
The booster also failed to make a successful landing on a sea platform.
This was the fifth flight of this booster."
That was after a previous launch attempt aborted due to slightly high
power.
Wonderful demonstration of engine-out fault tolerance, but it does look
like the rocket is showing some wear and tear after 5 flights. What does
this do to their economics if stages need an overhaul/have an increased
chance of loss of vehicle after only 5 flights?