SpaceX reusable launch system development program: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
copyedit of first fifth of article
copyedit of second fifth of article
Line 105:
In order to make the Falcon 9 reusable and return to the launch site, extra [[rocket propellant|propellant]] and [[landing gear]] must be carried on the first stage, requiring around a 30 percent reduction of the maximum payload to orbit in comparison with the expendable Falcon 9.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://spacenews.com/spacexs-new-price-chart-illustrates-performance-cost-of-reusability/|title=SpaceX's new price chart illustrates performance cost of reusability|date=2 May 2016|access-date=August 23, 2019|archive-date=September 5, 2021|archive-url=https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20210905065455/https://spacenews.com/spacexs%2Dnew%2Dprice%2Dchart%2Dillustrates%2Dperformance%2Dcost%2Dof%2Dreusability/|url-status=live}}</ref> [[Reusable launch system|Reflight]] of a previously used stage on a subsequent flight is dependent on the condition of the landed stage, and is a technique that has seen little use outside of the [[Space Shuttle]]'s reusable [[Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster|solid rocket boosters]].
 
Musk projected in 2015 that the reflight step of the program would be "straightforward," because of the multiple full duration firings of the engines that had been done on the ground, and the multiple engine restarts that had been demonstrated by that time, with no significant degradation seen.<ref name=presserTranscript20151222>{{cite web |title=Postlanding teleconference with Elon Musk |url=http://shitelonsays.com/transcript/postlanding-teleconference-with-elon-musk-2015-12-22# |date=December 22, 2015 |access-date=December 25, 2015 |archive-date=January 9, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160109123452/http://shitelonsays.com/transcript/postlanding-teleconference-with-elon-musk-2015-12-22 |url-status=live }}</ref> In 2015, industry analysts continued to forecast problems that could prevent economic reuse because costs to refurbish and relaunch the stage were not yet demonstrated, and the economic case for reuse would necessarily be highly dependent on launching frequently.<ref name="cbs20151222">{{cite news |author=Harwood |first=Bill |date=December 22, 2015 |title=Experts applaud SpaceX rocket landing, potential savings |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/news/experts-applaud-spacex-landing-cautious-about-outlook/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151224174932/http://www.cbsnews.com/news/experts-applaud-spacex-landing-cautious-about-outlook/ |archive-date=December 24, 2015 |access-date=December 25, 2015 |work=CBS News}}</ref>
In 2015, industry analysts continued to forecast problems that could prevent economic reuse because costs to refurbish and relaunch the stage were not yet demonstrated, and the economic case for reuse would necessarily be highly dependent on launching frequently.<ref name=cbs20151222>{{cite news |title=Experts applaud SpaceX rocket landing, potential savings |author=Bill Harwood |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/news/experts-applaud-spacex-landing-cautious-about-outlook/ |work=CBS News |date=December 22, 2015 |access-date=December 25, 2015 |archive-date=December 24, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151224174932/http://www.cbsnews.com/news/experts-applaud-spacex-landing-cautious-about-outlook/ |url-status=live }}</ref>
 
SpaceX is expected to significantly reduce the cost of access to space, and change the increasingly competitive market in space launch services.<ref name="bbc20130930">{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24331860 |title=Recycled rockets: SpaceX calls time on expendable launch vehicles |work=BBC News |last=Amos |first=Jonathan |date=September 30, 2013 |access-date=October 2, 2013 |archive-date=October 3, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131003085420/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24331860 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="tsr20140310">{{cite journal |last=Boozer |first=R. D. |date=March 10, 2014 |title=Rocket reusability: a driver of economic growth |journal=The Space Review |date=March 10, 2014 |url=http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2466/1 |accessurl-datestatus=March 25, 2014live |archive-datejournal=AprilThe 6,Space 2015Review |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150406202450/http://thespacereview.com/article/2466/1 |urlarchive-statusdate=liveApril 6, 2015 |access-date=March 25, 2014}}</ref> Michael Belfiore wrote in ''[[Foreign Policy (magazine)|Foreign Policy]]'' in 2013 that, at a published cost of {{USD|56.5 million}} per launch to [[low Earth orbit]], "Falcon 9 rockets are already the cheapest in the industry. Reusable Falcon 9s could drop the price by an [[order of magnitude]], sparking more space-based enterprise, which in turn would drop the cost of access to space still further through economies of scale."<ref name=fp20131209>{{cite news |url=https://foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/12/02/the_rocketeer_elon_musk |title=The Rocketeer |work=[[Foreign Policy (magazine)|Foreign Policy]] |last=Belfiore |first=Michael |date=December 9, 2013 |access-date=December 11, 2013 |archive-date=December 10, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131210233009/http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/12/02/the_rocketeer_elon_musk |url-status=live }}</ref> Even for military launches, which have a number of contractual requirements for additional launch services to be provided, SpaceX's price is under {{USD|100 million}}.<ref name=mit20140422>
{{cite news |last=Belfiore |first=Michael |title=SpaceX Brings a Booster Safely Back to Earth |url=http://www.technologyreview.com/news/526806/spacex-brings-a-booster-safely-back-to-earth/ |access-date=April 25, 2014 |newspaper=MIT Technology Review |date=April 22, 2014}}</ref><ref name="bi20141125">{{cite news |last1=Orwig |first1=Jessica |date=November 25, 2014 |title=Elon Musk Just Unveiled A Game-Changing Ocean Landing Pad For His Reusable Rockets |url=http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-rockets-that-land-at-sea-2014-11 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171026092835/http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-rockets-that-land-at-sea-2014-11 |archive-date=October 26, 2017 |access-date=December 11, 2014 |work=Business Insider |date=November 25, 2014 |quote=''The first successful "soft landing" of a Falcon 9 rocket happened in April of this year.'' |archive-date=October 26, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171026092835/http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-rockets-that-land-at-sea-2014-11 |url-status=live }}</ref>
 
[[File:Falcon 9 First Stage Reusability Graphic.jpg|thumb|upright=2.6|Depiction of Falcon 9 landing trajectory for some of the floating-platform recovery tests]]<!-- not all of the controlled-descent tests had three post-separation burns; e.g., some of the early ones only had two burns, and skipped the boostback burn. -->
Space industry analyst Ajay Kothari has noted that SpaceX reusable technology could do for [[space transport]] "what jet engines did for air transportation sixty years ago when people never imagined that more than 500 million passengers would travel by airplanes every year and that the cost could be reduced to the level it is—all because of passenger volume and reliable reusability."<ref name=tsr20140414>{{cite news |last=Kothari |first=Ajay P. |title=Robust and reusable? |url=http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2490/1 |access-date=April 14, 2014 |newspaper=The Space Review |date=April 14, 2014 |archive-date=April 15, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140415115822/http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2490/1 |url-status=live }}</ref> SpaceX said in January 2014 that if they are successful in developing the reusable technology, launch prices of around {{USD|5 to 7 million}} for a reusable Falcon 9 were possible,<ref name=ps20140114>{{cite news |last=Messier |first=Doug |title=Shotwell: Reusable Falcon 9 Would Cost $5 to $7 Million Per Launch |url=http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/01/14/shotwell/ |access-date=January 15, 2014 |newspaper=Parabolic Arc |date=January 14, 2014 |archive-date=February 16, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170216044345/http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/01/14/shotwell/ |url-status=live }}</ref> and following the successful first stage recovery in December 2015, Musk said that "the potential cost reduction over the long term is probably in excess of a factor of 100."<ref name=cbs20151222/>
SpaceX said in January 2014 that if they are successful in developing the reusable technology, launch prices of around {{USD|5 to 7 million}} for a reusable Falcon 9 were possible,<ref name=ps20140114>{{cite news |last=Messier |first=Doug |title=Shotwell: Reusable Falcon 9 Would Cost $5 to $7 Million Per Launch |url=http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/01/14/shotwell/ |access-date=January 15, 2014 |newspaper=Parabolic Arc |date=January 14, 2014 |archive-date=February 16, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170216044345/http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/01/14/shotwell/ |url-status=live }}</ref>
and following the successful first stage recovery in December 2015, Musk said that "the potential cost reduction over the long term is probably in excess of a factor of 100."<ref name=cbs20151222/>
 
{{asof|2014|03}} launch service providers who [[Market competition|compete]] with SpaceX were not planning to develop similar technology or offer competing reusable launcher options. Neither [[International Launch Services|ILS]], which markets launches of the Russian [[Proton rocket]]; [[Arianespace]]; nor [[SeaLaunch]] were planning on developing and marketing reusable launch vehicle services. SpaceX was the only competitor that projected a sufficiently [[Price elasticity of demand|elastic]] market on the demand side to justify the costly development of reusable rocket technology and the expenditure of [[Capital (economics)|private capital]] to develop options for that theoretical market opportunity.<ref name=tsr20140324>{{cite journal |last=Foust |first=Jeff |title=Reusability and other issues facing the launch industry |journal=The Space Review |date=March 24, 2014 |url=http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2476/1 |access-date=April 1, 2014 |archive-date=March 28, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140328020300/http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2476/1 |url-status=live }}</ref>
Line 120 ⟶ 117:
In 2014 the Falcon 9 v1.1 rocket was designed with about 30 percent more capacity than its official payload specifications; the additional performance was reserved for SpaceX to perform [[Falcon 9 first-stage landing tests|first-stage re-entry and landing tests]] towards reusability while still achieving the specified orbital payload delivery for customers.<ref name=tss20140321a>{{cite AV media|people=Gwynne Shotwell |date=March 21, 2014 |title=Broadcast 2212: Special Edition, interview with Gwynne Shotwell |medium=audio file |url=http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2212-BWB-2014-03-21.mp3 |access-date=March 22, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140322013556/http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2212-BWB-2014-03-21.mp3 |archive-date=March 22, 2014 |format=mp3 |time=08:15–11:20 |publisher=The Space Show |id=2212 |quote=[Falcon 9 v1.1] vehicle has thirty percent more performance than what we put on the web and that extra performance is reserved for us to do our reusability and recoverability [tests] ... current vehicle is sized for reuse. |url-status=dead }}</ref>
 
In order to achieve the full economic benefit of the reusable technology, it is necessary that the reuse be both rapid and complete—without the long and costly refurbishment period or partially reusable design that plagued earlier attempts at reusable launch vehicles. SpaceX has been explicit that the "huge potential to open up space flight"<ref name=nsf20140422>{{cite news |last=Bergin |first=Chris |title=Rockets that return home – SpaceX pushing the boundaries |url=http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/04/rockets-return-home-spacex-pushing-boundaries/ |access-date=April 23, 2014 |newspaper=NASAspaceflight.com |date=April 22, 2014 |archive-date=April 25, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140425204725/http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/04/rockets-return-home-spacex-pushing-boundaries/ |url-status=live }}</ref> is dependent on achieving both complete and rapid reusability.<ref name=aw20140428a/><ref name=mit20140422/> CEO Musk stated in 2014 that success with the technology development effort could reduce "the cost of spaceflight by a factor of 100"<ref name=sdc20140907>{{cite news |last1=Wall |first1=Mike |title=Dazzling SpaceX Nighttime Launch Sends AsiaSat 6 Satellite Into Orbit |url=http://www.space.com/27052-spacex-launches-asiasat6-satellite.html |access-date=September 7, 2014 |publisher=SPACE.com |date=September 7, 2014 |quote=''SpaceX's work with the F9R is part of an effort to develop fully and rapidly reusable launch systems, a key priority for the company. Such technology could slash the cost of spaceflight by a factor of 100.'' |archive-date=October 2, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151002065305/http://www.space.com/27052-spacex-launches-asiasat6-satellite.html |url-status=live }}</ref> because the cost of the propellant/oxidizer on the Falcon 9 is only 0.3 percent of the total cost of the vehicle.<ref>{{cite web |author=de Selding |first=Peter B. |date=May 31, 2013 |title=SpaceX Chief Says Reusable First Stage Will Slash Launch Costs |url=http://www.space.com/21386-spacex-reusable-rockets-cost.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150625050353/http://www.space.com/21386-spacex-reusable-rockets-cost.html |archive-date=June 25, 2015 |access-date=June 20, 2015 |work=Space.com |publisher=Space News}}</ref>
CEO Musk stated in 2014 that success with the technology development effort could reduce "the cost of spaceflight by a factor of 100"<ref name=sdc20140907>{{cite news |last1=Wall |first1=Mike |title=Dazzling SpaceX Nighttime Launch Sends AsiaSat 6 Satellite Into Orbit |url=http://www.space.com/27052-spacex-launches-asiasat6-satellite.html |access-date=September 7, 2014 |publisher=SPACE.com |date=September 7, 2014 |quote=''SpaceX's work with the F9R is part of an effort to develop fully and rapidly reusable launch systems, a key priority for the company. Such technology could slash the cost of spaceflight by a factor of 100.'' |archive-date=October 2, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151002065305/http://www.space.com/27052-spacex-launches-asiasat6-satellite.html |url-status=live }}</ref> because the cost of the propellant/oxidizer on the Falcon 9 is only 0.3 percent of the total cost of the vehicle.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.space.com/21386-spacex-reusable-rockets-cost.html |title=SpaceX Chief Says Reusable First Stage Will Slash Launch Costs |author=Peter B. de Selding, Space News |work=Space.com |date=May 31, 2013 |access-date=June 20, 2015 |archive-date=June 25, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150625050353/http://www.space.com/21386-spacex-reusable-rockets-cost.html |url-status=live }}</ref>
 
Separate from the [[Space launch market competition|market competition]] brought about by SpaceX lower launch prices and the potential future of even more radically lower launch prices if the technology can be completed successfully, ''[[Aviation Week]]'' said in 2014 that "SpaceX reusable launch work is an [[Research and development|R&D]] model"—"The audacity of the concept and speed of the program’s progress make it an exemplar. ... [the] breakneck pace of development has been almost [[Apollo program|Apollo]]-like in its execution... [even while] success is far from guaranteed."<ref name=aw20140428b>{{cite news |title=SpaceX's Plan Shows Aggressive Investment In R&D |url=http://m.aviationweek.com/space/editorial-spacex-s-plan-shows-aggressive-investment-rd |access-date=May 17, 2014 |newspaper=Aviation Week |date=April 28, 2014 |archive-date=April 13, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150413084405/http://m.aviationweek.com/space/editorial-spacex-s-plan-shows-aggressive-investment-rd |url-status=live }}</ref>
 
On March 9, 2016, SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell gave a more realistic appraisal of the potential savings of a reused launch now that attempts to reuse the second stage (of Falcon 9) had been abandoned due to cost and weight issues. She said at {{USD|1 million}} cost of refueling and {{USD|3 million}} cost of refurbishing a used first stage could potentially allow a launch to be priced as low as {{USD|40 million}}, a 30% saving. SpaceX's biggest customer, SES, said it wants to be the first to ride a reused vehicle, though it wants a launch price of {{USD|30 million}} or a 50% saving to offset the risk of pioneering the process.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://spacenews.com/spacex-says-reusable-stage-could-cut-prices-by-30-plans-first-falcon-heavy-in-november/ |title=SpaceX says reusable stage could cut prices 30 percent, plans November Falcon Heavy debut |work=SpaceNews.com |date=2016-03-10 |access-date=2017-05-27 }}</ref>
 
According to Elon Musk, almost every piece of the Falcon should be reused over 100 times. Heat shields and a few other items should be reused over 10 times before replacement.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/726216836069515264|title=Elon Musk on Twitter|access-date=April 30, 2016|archive-date=July 16, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180716111221/https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/726216836069515264|url-status=live}}</ref> In March 2017, SpaceX announced progress in their experiments to recover, and eventually reuse, the 6-million dollar [[payload fairing]]. On the [[SES-10]] mission, one of the fairing halves performed a controlled atmospheric reentry and [[splashdown]] using thrusters and a steerable parachute; fairings are eventually slated to land on a floating "bouncy castle" structure.<ref name=floridatoday_26216836069515264>{{cite news |url= http://www.floridatoday.com/story/tech/science/space/2017/03/31/things-we-learned-spacex-elon-musk-falcon9-reusability-kennedy-space-center-florida-ses10/99869966/ |title= Things we learned after SpaceX's historic Falcon 9 relaunch and landing |website= [[Florida Today]] |first= Emre |last= Kelly |date= 2017-03-31 |access-date= 2017-04-01 |archive-date= March 9, 2019 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20190309175333/https://www.floridatoday.com/story/tech/science/space/2017/03/31/things-we-learned-spacex-elon-musk-falcon9-reusability-kennedy-space-center-florida-ses10/99869966/ |url-status= live }}</ref>
 
SpaceX began re-flight of previously launched booster stages in 2017. The first re-flight was accomplished in March 2017, nearly a year after the booster's [[maiden flight]]; the second was in June 2017, only five months after its maiden flight. Both were successful, and both [[insurer]]s and launch service customers are readily supporting the newly emerging market in launch services provided by multiple-use boosters.<ref name=sir-20170626>{{cite web |url=https://www.spaceintelreport.com/spacex-cuts-flight-refurbish-reflight-time-falcon-9-first-stage/ |title=SpaceX cuts flight-to-reflight time for Falcon 9 first stage |work=Space Intel Report |first=Peter B. |last=de Selding |date=June 26, 2017 |access-date=June 27, 2017 |archive-date=November 9, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191109085157/https://www.spaceintelreport.com/spacex-cuts-flight-refurbish-reflight-time-falcon-9-first-stage/ |url-status=live }}</ref>
 
In August 2020, Elon Musk tweeted that refurbishment and reuse of a booster is done for less than 10% the price of a new booster while the payload reduction is below 40%. According to his tweet, SpaceX breaks even with a second flight per booster and saves money from the third flight on.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.inverse.com/innovation/spacex-elon-musk-falcon-9-economics|title=SpaceX: Elon Musk breaks down the cost of reusable rockets|date=21 August 2020|access-date=August 22, 2020|archive-date=August 23, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200823071213/https://www.inverse.com/innovation/spacex-elon-musk-falcon-9-economics|url-status=live}}</ref> At that time, Falcon 9 Block 5 had made 35 flights with 11 boosters.
Line 143 ⟶ 139:
 
== Falcon 9 reusability development ==
In 2013 SpaceX was testing reusable technologies both for its [[Booster (rocketry)|first-stage booster]] launch vehicle designs (with three test vehicles : [[Grasshopper (rocket)|Grasshopper]], [[F9R Dev1]], and [[F9R Dev2]]) and for its new reusable [[SpaceX Dragon 2]] [[space capsule]] (with a low-altitude test vehicle called [[DragonFly (rocket)|DragonFly]]).
 
SpaceX has publicly disclosed a multi-element, incremental test program for booster stages that includes four aspects:
Line 151 ⟶ 147:
* high-altitude ({{convert|91|km|ft|-5|disp=x|/|abbr=on}}<ref name="nbf20130323">{{cite news |url=http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/03/spacex-may-try-to-land-recover-first.html |title={{Sic |hide=y|Spacex}} May try to "land / recover" the first stage of it next Falcon 9 v1.1 launch this summer |work=Next Big Future |first=Brian |last=Wang |date=March 23, 2013 |access-date=April 6, 2013 |archive-date=March 27, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130327032635/http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/03/spacex-may-try-to-land-recover-first.html |url-status=live }}</ref>), very-high-velocity (approximately {{nowrap|2.0 km/s}}; {{nowrap|6,500 km/h; 4,100 mph; Mach 6}}<ref name="pm20120207" />) [[ballistic reentry]], [[SpaceX high-altitude controlled-descent tests|controlled-deceleration and controlled-descent tests]] of post-mission (spent) Falcon 9 booster stages following a subset of Falcon 9 launches that began in 2013.
 
Eight low-altitude booster flight tests were made by Grasshopper in 2012 and 2013. The first [[booster rocket|booster return]] controlled-descent test from high-altitude was made in September 2013, with a second test in April,<ref name="bbc20130930" /><ref name="ut20140419" /><ref name=dn20140224/> a [[Falcon 9 Flight 10|third test flight]] in July<ref name="nsf20140728">{{cite news |last1=Bergin |first1=Chris |date=July 28, 2014 |title=SpaceX Roadmap building on its rocket business revolution |url=http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/07/spacex-roadmap-rocket-business-revolution/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140730231757/http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/07/spacex-roadmap-rocket-business-revolution/ |archive-date=July 30, 2014 |access-date=July 28, 2014 |publisher=NASAspaceflight |quote=''At this point, we are highly confident of being able to land successfully on a floating launch pad or back at the launch site and refly the rocket with no required refurbishment.''}}</ref> and a [[Falcon 9 Flight 13|fourth test]] in September 2014. All four test flights to date were intended to be over-water, simulated landings.<ref name=sn20140721/> Five low-altitude booster flight tests of F9R Dev1 were flown during April–August 2014, before the vehicle self-destructed for safety reasons on the fifth flight.<ref name=wt20140417>{{cite news |last=Abbott |first=Joseph |title=Grasshopper's successor flies at SpaceX's McGregor site |url=http://www.wacotrib.com/blogs/joe_science/grasshopper-s-successor-flies-at-spacex-s-mcgregor-site/article_66310240-c67f-11e3-bf29-001a4bcf887a.html |access-date=April 18, 2014 |newspaper=Waco Tribune |date=April 17, 2014 |archive-date=June 10, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200610231802/https://www.wacotrib.com/blogs/joe_science/grasshopper-s-successor-flies-at-spacex-s-mcgregor-site/article_66310240-c67f-11e3-bf29-001a4bcf887a.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=nsj20140823>{{cite news |last1=Foust |first1=Jeff |title=Falcon 9 test vehicle destroyed in accident |url=http://www.newspacejournal.com/2014/08/23/falcon-9-test-vehicle-destroyed-in-accident/ |access-date=August 23, 2014 |publisher=NewSpace Journal |date=August 23, 2014 |archive-date=August 25, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140825232350/http://www.newspacejournal.com/2014/08/23/falcon-9-test-vehicle-destroyed-in-accident/ |url-status=live }}</ref>
Eight low-altitude booster flight tests were made by Grasshopper in 2012 and 2013.
The first [[booster rocket|booster return]] controlled-descent test from high-altitude was made in September 2013, with a second test in April,<ref name="bbc20130930" /><ref name="ut20140419" /><ref name=dn20140224/>
a [[Falcon 9 Flight 10|third test flight]] in July<ref name=nsf20140728>{{cite news |last1=Bergin |first1=Chris |title=SpaceX Roadmap building on its rocket business revolution |url=http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/07/spacex-roadmap-rocket-business-revolution/ |access-date=July 28, 2014 |publisher=NASAspaceflight |date=July 28, 2014 |quote=''At this point, we are highly confident of being able to land successfully on a floating launch pad or back at the launch site and refly the rocket with no required refurbishment'' |archive-date=July 30, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140730231757/http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/07/spacex-roadmap-rocket-business-revolution/ |url-status=live }}</ref>
and a [[Falcon 9 Flight 13|fourth test]] in September 2014. All four test flights to date were intended to be over-water, simulated landings.<ref name=sn20140721/>
Five low-altitude booster flight tests of F9R Dev1 were flown during April–August 2014, before the vehicle self-destructed for safety reasons on the fifth flight.<ref name=wt20140417>{{cite news |last=Abbott |first=Joseph |title=Grasshopper's successor flies at SpaceX's McGregor site |url=http://www.wacotrib.com/blogs/joe_science/grasshopper-s-successor-flies-at-spacex-s-mcgregor-site/article_66310240-c67f-11e3-bf29-001a4bcf887a.html |access-date=April 18, 2014 |newspaper=Waco Tribune |date=April 17, 2014 |archive-date=June 10, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200610231802/https://www.wacotrib.com/blogs/joe_science/grasshopper-s-successor-flies-at-spacex-s-mcgregor-site/article_66310240-c67f-11e3-bf29-001a4bcf887a.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=nsj20140823>{{cite news |last1=Foust |first1=Jeff |title=Falcon 9 test vehicle destroyed in accident |url=http://www.newspacejournal.com/2014/08/23/falcon-9-test-vehicle-destroyed-in-accident/ |access-date=August 23, 2014 |publisher=NewSpace Journal |date=August 23, 2014 |archive-date=August 25, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140825232350/http://www.newspacejournal.com/2014/08/23/falcon-9-test-vehicle-destroyed-in-accident/ |url-status=live }}</ref>
 
=== Flight test vehicles ===
[[File:SpaceX Grasshopper rocket midflight.png|thumb|upright=1.4|Grasshopper rocket performing a 325 meter flight followed by a soft propulsive landing in an attempt to develop technologies for a reusable launch vehicle.]]
 
SpaceX used a set of experimental technology-demonstrator, [[suborbital]] [[Reusable launch system|reusable launch vehicles]] (RLV) to begin [[flight testing]] their reusable booster technologies in 2012. Two versions of the prototype reusable test rockets were built—the {{convert|106|ft|adj=on}} tall ''Grasshopper'' (formerly designated as ''Grasshopper v1.0'') and the {{convert|160|ft|adj=on}} tall ''Falcon 9 Reusable Development Vehicle'', or ''F9R Dev1''—formerly known as ''Grasshopper v1.1''<ref name=nsf20140422/>—as well as a [[space capsule|capsule prototype]] for testing propulsive landings of the [[SpaceX Dragon 2|Dragon]] crew and cargo capsule for the Falcon 9—''DragonFly''.<ref name=nsf20140422/> Grasshopper was built in 2011–2012 for low-altitude, low-velocity hover testing that began in September 2012 and concluded in October 2013 after eight test flights.<ref name="faa20110922" /><ref name="satspot20110926" /><ref name=nsf20140422/> The second prototype vehicle design, F9R Dev1, was built on the much larger [[Falcon 9 v1.1]] booster stage which was used to further extend the low-altitude flight testing [[flight envelope|envelope]] on a vehicle that better matched the actual flight hardware. It made five test flights in 2014.<ref name=nsf20140422/><ref name="msnbc20110927">{{cite news |url=http://www.nbcnews.com/id/44692930/ |title=A rocket that lifts off—and lands—on launch pad |work=NBC News |last=Klotz |first=Irene |date=September 27, 2011 |access-date=November 23, 2011 |archive-date=December 3, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131203023523/http://www.nbcnews.com/id/44692930/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="nsw20121002" /> The low-altitude, low-speed flights of the test vehicle rockets and capsule were conducted at the [[SpaceX Rocket Development and Test Facility|SpaceX Rocket Test Facility]] in [[McGregor, Texas]]<ref name="faa20110922" /><ref name="satspot20110926" /><ref name=nsf20140422/>
Grasshopper was built in 2011–2012 for low-altitude, low-velocity hover testing that began in September 2012 and concluded in October 2013 after eight test flights.<ref name="faa20110922" /><ref name="satspot20110926" /><ref name=nsf20140422/>
The second prototype vehicle design, F9R Dev1, was built on the much larger [[Falcon 9 v1.1]] booster stage was used to further extend the low-altitude flight testing [[flight envelope|envelope]] on a vehicle that better matched the actual flight hardware, and made five test flights in 2014.<ref name=nsf20140422/><ref name="msnbc20110927">{{cite news |url=http://www.nbcnews.com/id/44692930/ |title=A rocket that lifts off—and lands—on launch pad |work=NBC News |last=Klotz |first=Irene |date=September 27, 2011 |access-date=November 23, 2011 |archive-date=December 3, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131203023523/http://www.nbcnews.com/id/44692930/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="nsw20121002" /> The low-altitude, low-speed flights of the test vehicle rockets and capsule were conducted at the [[SpaceX Rocket Development and Test Facility|SpaceX Rocket Test Facility]] in [[McGregor, Texas]]<ref name="faa20110922" /><ref name="satspot20110926" /><ref name=nsf20140422/>
 
SpaceX indicated in November 2018 that they considered testing a heavily modified Falcon 9 second stage that would look like a "mini-[[SpaceX Starship design history#Big Falcon Rocket|BFR]] Ship" and be used for [[atmospheric reentry]] [[flight testing|testing]] of a number of technologies needed for the [[Starship test flight rocket|full-scale spaceship]], including an ultra-light [[heat shield]] and high-[[Mach number|Mach]] control surfaces,<ref name="sn20181107">
{{cite news |last=Foust| |first=Jeff |date=7 November 2018 |title=SpaceX to modify Falcon 9 upper stage to test BFR technologies |url=https://spacenews.com/spacex-to-modify-falcon-9-upper-stage-to-test-bfr-technologies/ |titleaccess-date=SpaceX to modify Falcon 9 upper stage to test BFR technologies2018-11-08 |work=[[SpaceNews]] |date=7 November 2018 |access-date=2018-11-08 |quote="Falcon 9 second stage will be upgraded to be like a mini-BFR Ship," Musk said. The BFR’s upper stage is sometimes referred to as a "spaceship" .}}</ref><ref name="teslarati.com">[https://www.teslarati.com/spacex{{Cite web |last=Ralph |first=Eric |date=2018-miniature11-bfr-spaceship-falcon-9-launch-elon-musk/07 |title=SpaceX to build small version of BFR's spaceship for use on Falcon 9, says Elon Musk] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181108184520/https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-miniature-bfr-spaceship-falcon-9-launch-elon-musk/ |access-date=November2024-05-09 8, 2018|website=TESLARATI |language=en-US}}. Eric Ralph, Teslarati. 7 November 2018.</ref> but two weeks later, Musk dismissed the approach in favor of using a full-diameter BFR instead.<ref>[https://www.teslarati.com/spacex{{Cite web |last=Ralph |first=Eric |date=2018-ceo11-elon-musk-kills-mini-bfr-spaceship-two-weeks-after-announcement/20 |title=SpaceX CEO Elon Musk kills mini BFR spaceship 12 days after announcing it.] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181215022122/https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-ceo-elon-musk-kills-mini-bfr-spaceship-two-weeks-after-announcement/ |access-date=December2024-05-09 15, 2018|website=TESLARATI |language=en-US}} Eric Ralph, ''Teslarati''. 20 November 2018.</ref>
 
==== Grasshopper ====