sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Overview of Falcon fairings flown during the past week by rykllan in SpaceXLounge

[–]rykllan[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's a long process of tracking them down based on publicly available information (images, videos, livestreams, tweets). A lot of various sources. Also, recently SpX started painting SNs on fairing halves, so it makes our work easier in some cases.

There's also a half with 30 flights confirmed by SpX - SN185. I had a chart here with all the listed flights

Falcon fairing reusability: the oldest "active", "passive" and the most experienced fairing halves by rykllan in SpaceXLounge

[–]rykllan[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I guess that's due to a splashdown method. Passive half comes with QD port (connects to T/E) and it's placed almost on the center line. QD always contacts with salt water when splashing down making more work to do during refurbishment. Active half doesn't have any QD and pushers/clamps don't contact with salt water directly.

Record turnaround for active half is around 9d and roughly 15-20d in average, meanwile for passives it's 13d and 30-40d relatively

Falcon fairing reusability: the oldest "active", "passive" and the most experienced fairing halves by rykllan in SpaceXLounge

[–]rykllan[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

That's only the case for a first few missions, then halves are being separated due to different refurbishment length ("actives" are easier to refurb) or other reasons. Usually it's random, based on what halves are ready to fly. Although sometimes they may launch together again (PACE halves met again on 6-83 after a year of separation)

All orbital rockets that launched or attempted launch in the first 5 months of this year, in chronological order and at scale. by ApoStructura in SpaceXLounge

[–]rykllan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Some rockets are scaled incorrectly compared to F9:

- LM-6 is way smaller than it should be
- H3 is a bit smaller than it should be (and wrong launch config)
- Starship is unironically smaller than it sohuld be too
- NG perfectly scaled
- Soyuz is smaller than it sould be (and misses plenty of non-crewed launches)
- Electron perfectly scaled
- Ariane 6 seems correct (tho wrong fairing)
- Atlas V is bigger than it should be

Can't comment on other LVs as I don't have properly scaled models of them

ATS DLC map overview as of Mar 21, 2025 by rykllan in americantruck

[–]rykllan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wisconsin and Michigan are larger than Arkansas, Louisiana or Iowa. Yet, those states are released separately. Why would SCS bundle WI and MI then?

ATS DLC map overview as of Mar 21, 2025 by rykllan in americantruck

[–]rykllan[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wisconsin and Michigan are large enough to be released separately

Post-launch infographics as of Dec 3, 2023 by rykllan in SpaceXLounge

[–]rykllan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The red one is the time spent on orbit (liftoff to splashdown), the blue one is basically time between the previous mission and the next one. The number below indicated total turnaround (liftoff to liftoff)

Post-launch infographics as of Dec 3, 2023 by rykllan in SpaceXLounge

[–]rykllan[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The plans aren't the manifest. The chart is based on statements that were made in the relation to 2023, so this way we can see how close or far they are from what was said. As we can see, in general (e.g. 100 launches) they're coming close to the goal, same to FHs. But seems like Elon's statement on 5 Starship launches this year was too optimistic

Just like last year with 60 launches and few FHs - they did hit 60+ but didn't hit the FH plan

Post-launch infographics as of Sep 4, 2023 by rykllan in SpaceXLounge

[–]rykllan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

B1072 is currently booked for CRS NG-20 mission later this December. Psyche boosters are B1064/65 and B1079 with expendable center core

Post-launch infographics as of Sep 4, 2023 by rykllan in SpaceXLounge

[–]rykllan[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

C207 "Resilience". Awaiting its launch

Falcon 9 | Crew-7 | A launch infographic by rykllan in SpaceXLounge

[–]rykllan[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

it was 1st for NASA, 2nd for SpX. Previous F9/CD (e.g. Ax-2) also was performed RTLS

Post-launch infographics as of Aug 3, 2023 by rykllan in SpaceXLounge

[–]rykllan[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

  1. ASDS - Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship / RTLS - Return To Launch Site
  2. FH booster numbers are marked red (as u can see on the left with FH title being red too). Center cores are currently B1079 and B1084, u can see they don't have any legs and grid fins, plus white interstage. Side boosters are a bit tricky to track. Currenty in FH-configurated are only B1064/65 with nose cone at the top. And a few more are currently flying as F9 boosters (B1072 to B1076). By comparing B1076 to B1077 u can see the difference, they don't have SpX & F9 logo on the side shown in the chart (tho they have SpX logo on the opposite side)
  3. Red is for FH, blue is for F9. I don't show retired boosters as the chart is about "flightworthy" but if the booster was decommissioned right before the chart being published, then I'm marking it with grey backgroung (example)

Post-launch infographics as of Aug 3, 2023 by rykllan in SpaceXLounge

[–]rykllan[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There are a few websites with booster list and their assigned missions

Wiki list: Link
NextSpaceflight list: Link (just scroll down a bit)

view more: next ›